Psychological Ploys of the Climate ‘Science’ Cult
You would really have to search far and wide to find a group more clueless than the Climate Alarmist Cult. Skeptics are skeptics because they don’t join the herd, they aren’t part of the Consensus, they took the time to actually look at the data and research and reach their own conclusion.
That is why they are attacked with arguments based upon Science by Authority, Consensus, and Peer Review. Those are arguments used by herd followers and climate-dogma true believers. Not real independent-thinking scientists.
Because the Climate Alarmist Cult are herd animals, we found it humorous that one of them would publish an article claiming that Climate Skeptics would join the Climate Alarmist Cult if only their party leadership would tell them to.
Skeptics are free-thinking individuals, not collectivist sheep. Tactics that work on Progressives will certainly not work to persuade Conservative Skeptics. There is a reason that belief in man-made climate change splits down the party line.
Read more at CO2 is Life
Trackback from your site.
tom0mason
| #
These sheeple are the ones that believe that nature and life is a static paradigm, restrained by well ordered and known scientific rules and laws.
If anyone believes, as these people do, that all this planet has, is known and calculable, then please tell how many bacteria is there on each grain of sand in the Namib desert? You could start here https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs12275-008-0007-4 and work your way out.
Or explain why the oceans, are such an unknown area, and doesn’t this huge watery region of our planet not play an important part in the climate we experience?
Now if you can pretend all is known, then you too can believe everything about the climate is known, that it is all settled and we can predict it all accurately. If you believe this is so, then please explain why so many predictions and projections about climate have been so very wrong. And why we can not accurately forecast the weather much beyond 10 day maximum?
Nature holds far more surprises yet than human imagination can contemplate.
Reply
jerry krause
| #
Hi Whomever,
“they took the time to actually look at the data” Where is the evidence that anyone has done this? Or, What is the data about which you are referring?
Have a good day, Jerry
Reply
David Wieland
| #
One of the best sources of climate data that I’ve looked at in becoming better informed is Climate4you.com. Like many CAGW skeptics, I initially struggled to understand some of the more arcane GHE discussions and weed out unfounded assertions (and attacks) both pro and con. But it was when I saw that the CO2 “thermostat” principle underlying the CAGW models gave results that clearly did not fit real world measurements (http://www.climate4you.com/GreenhouseGasses.htm#Temperature%20records%20versus%20atmospheric%20CO2) that I realized the models and their projections are truly false. Unfortunately my provincial and federal governments haven’t been looking at the data and persist in economy-damaging policies.
Reply