The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > On ‘belief’ and ‘denial’ > Comments

On ‘belief’ and ‘denial’ : Comments

By Don Aitkin, published 27/12/2012

Further, the doomsayers accuse old-fashioned empiricists like me of being 'deniers' or 'denialists' because we do not accept their faith.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 43
  7. 44
  8. 45
  9. Page 46
  10. 47
  11. All
Poirot. "Bob Cormack is a retired senior research associate and professor at the University of Colorado. He completed a BS in Math and Physics in 1969 and a MS in Electrical Engineering in 1987."

Hmm, I guess you are right about sources of information, scientist etcetera, I figure that, like you, I should take the word of the specialist climate science organisations like.. Hmmm. 'The World Bank' for example.
Posted by Prompete, Friday, 18 January 2013 3:51:30 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
er..Prompete...the World Bank don't pretend to do the science. They take advice from climate scientists. My critique was of people who aren't qualified in a field, writing papers on it.

Fair enough if they want to - and yes, they'll get an airing on blogs like this and various "skeptic" sites, but these are not peer reviewed papers.
Posted by Poirot, Friday, 18 January 2013 6:41:33 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
qanda, Poirot and other believers should know by now that pseudo-science is not science; that scientific consenus is not evidence; that models are not evidence; and that no one has been able to measure the influence of anthropogenic GHGs as it is of such little significance.

Yet, defence of their AGW belief is so desperate, that they resort to character assassination to repel sceptic attacks.

qanda turns to psychiatry to denigrate AGW 'deniers' by inferring that they use the following psychoanalytical defence mechanisms (after George Eman Vaillant):
• Level I - pathological defences (i.e. psychotic denial, delusional projection)
• Level II - immature defences (i.e. fantasy, projection, passive aggression, acting out)
• Level III - neurotic defences (i.e. intellectualization, reaction formation, dissociation, displacement, repression)

The irony is that the above defences are the very ones used by AGW believers. Some examples: former Greens candidate Professor Clive Hamilton denounced 'denialist' websites as a "stew of paranoia"; the supposedly impartial ABC's science presenter Robyn Williams linked AGW denial to advocacy of paedophilia.

Poirot even alludes to a "disturbing confluence between evangelical Christian views and climate change", -- subsequently qualified to "Christian 'evangelical' religion ... the Vatican's Pontifical Academy of Sciences is supporting AGW (probably because it employs the services of climate scientists)".

The Vatican has been misled by the Academy which, like other academies, unquestionably accepts AGW. Whether this is due to employing the services of climate scientists is immaterial, as the latter are not infallible as Poirot makes out. On the other hand, unlike some of his Vatican colleagues, Cardinal Pell correctly observed that there is no scientific evidence to back up the AGW hypothesis.
(to be cont.)
Posted by Raycom, Sunday, 20 January 2013 10:54:40 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Poirot displays blind faith by then referring to the prophesies of arch believer (and scientific advisor to the Government's AGW propaganda agency), Professor David Karoly, made in the AGW-biased ABC news story, " Heatwave exacerbated by climate change: Climate Commission". The arrogant professor asserts a link between heatwaves and AGW, despite there being no supporting scientific evidence of a causal link.

( For the Weekend Australian's timely publication of an edited Don Aitkin essay, 'Someone please tell the ABC it's not all doom and gloom out here', which deals with the ABC's AGW crusade, see:

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/media/opinion/someone-please-tell-the-abc-its-not-all-doom-and-gloom-out-here/story-e6frg99o-1226556989384 )
Posted by Raycom, Sunday, 20 January 2013 10:57:24 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Well looky there....a "skeptic" piece in the Murdoch Press - how unusual : )

I'm taking a hiatus from here, but I'll leave you with this trailer....which sums things up fairly well

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AZdCfoDiMDg
Posted by Poirot, Sunday, 20 January 2013 2:18:51 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Believe what you want to believe Raycom.

It does not negate the fact that so called 'deniers' are becoming more shrill and psychologists (not psychiatrists) are having a field day with 'climate change denialism'.

I accept the author is sitting on the fence, as in - agnostic.

ps: it's not all doom and gloom.
Posted by qanda, Thursday, 24 January 2013 5:54:05 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 43
  7. 44
  8. 45
  9. Page 46
  10. 47
  11. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy