Hey look, it's a climate change thread!

[hollodero]

(01-17-2017, 01:45 PM)PhilHos Wrote: I don't think people deny climate change, per se (I mean, there will ALWAYS be kooks who believe the weirdest and/or dumbest thinigs), so much as they deny that humanity has an effect on climate change.

Yeah that's what I meant.
People who acknowledge rising temperatures but claim it's solely because of sun eruptions or solar spots are deniers to me, too.

(01-17-2017, 01:45 PM)PhilHos Wrote: I'm not a denier, but I'm not so positive man has a HUGE effect on the climate. I accept that mankind does have an effect on climate, but how much effect is what I'm not sold on either way (though admittedly, I lean towards lesser effect).
With that said, I don't think people have issues with recycling or cleaner-running vehicles, etc. I think the issue that many people have is with forced (i.e. outlawing gas guzzling vehicles) and/or ineffectual solutions (i.e. carbon offsets).
The problem, IMO, is this trend we have in America of arguing in the extremes and demonizing those from the opposing side of an issue.

The problem... well, many Americans, as I see it, are not the most nuanced people, more the black and white fraction. Which comes with advantages and disadvantages; as does our European way of compromising. Regarding climate change, our compromises are rotten to me. You either acknowledge there's a problem or you don't. Acknowledging it and fighting it with hollow phrases and avoiding any responsibility is pointless; flatout deniers are more honest as I said.
But that's the issue. If you see man-made climate change as a problem, you need to take measures. Gas guzzling vehicles are part of the problem, and I have no problem taxing those who drive it with the highest amounts. Carbon offsets might be a good idea in principle, too (although being highly compromised in reality, I figure). But accepting climate change comes with accepting policies and measures addressing climate change, or it's not worth accepting in the first place. And the energy saving lamp might not be quite enough.
And if you're on that side of the argument, you do not have much wiggle room to accept the stances of the "other side" - so addressing it also comes with opposing those who don't. Or else you compromise in doing just very little, which is quite meaningless.