rejection of climate change theory closely linked to conspiracy ideation

I don't care if it's true, because the real issue is that the left-wing uses the issue of climate change to justify unnessary regulations and taxes - which have no benefit, even if it is true.

Sure it's true that smoking causes lung cancer, but that doesn't mean that it's necessary to ban private restaurants and bars from voluntarily allowing smoking.

Sure it's true that excessive fast food consumption is unhealthy, but that doesn't mean it's necessary for San Fransisco to ban happy meals.

etc etc

Sure, it's true that excessive carbon emissions may cause the global temperature to rise, but that doesn't mean we need to start taxing cow farts.

---

Most people who aren't versed on the subject of climate change, and may deny the theory as a whole - are primarily concerned with the absurd regulations being imposed by left-wingers, not whether or not the theory in and of itself is "true or false", so it's a moot point.

 

Yep! Let's do away with ALL regulations!! Let's let Bhopal happen again - this time in AMERICA!!

http://www.abc.net.au/environment/articles/2012/07/23/3549975.htm

 

Once again, going over the top and making claims that were not said.

He stated unnessary regulations, not to remove all regulations.

Then you wonder why we find having a dabate with such extremists so annoying.

 

Now you know why I get annoyed at the "they want us to stop ALL CO2 claims"

turn about is fair play!

 

why?

what is your definition of pseudo science?

what is bad science?

last time I checked, people who conducted research such as this used proper scientific principles, unlike the blogs that denialists get their information from.

I work in a Univeristy too.

I understand that people in some research areas tend to stay within their own discipline, and not get out and talk to people in other research areas, but since you are so interested in the subject of climate science, you should pobably have a chat to the people in the Utah Climate Center. here is their August newsletter, which probably has some great contacts:

http://climate.usurf.usu.edu/news/081512Climate_News_46_Aug_12.pdf

 

really?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passive_smoking

 

I'm not really sure why saying I don't see the point in arguing with ignorance is not on topic.

The op identifies that scientists have found there is a correlation between conspiracy ideation and climate change denial.

conspiracy ideation suggests reliance on non factual information, and a preference for ignoring factual information.

that constitutes ignorance.

 

Yes really. No one is forced to eat at a restaurant that allows smoking - liberals just don't get the concept of personal responsibility. They're like the parent who'd shelter their kid from school if he encountered bullies - instead of teach him to defend himself cause that'd be too "cruel', and they carry that maternal instinct into adulthood. They think that people aren't resilient enough to make their own decisions, so they need big mommy/daddy govt to do it for them. That's why they suck, and why women tend to lean liberal more than men, cause it's that maternal instinct speaking.

 

misogynist too?

well, i guess you wouldn't mind if someone moved in next to you and started doing something which impinged on your quality of life, too.

after all - you'd be free to sell your house and move somewhere else.

 

You hit the nail on the head....right wing logic in a nutshell.

 

I'll have the filet mignon with a side-dish of passive tobacco tar...YUM!!

 

Trying to classify who is more likely not to believe in climate change is not quantifiable nor is it science. This study clearly has political intentions and no actual content that furthers progress in the scientific community. It's pointless. You people just love to argue and arguing doesn't solve problems.

 

And that is not a critique it is an opinion

 

No, you'll choose to go into a restaurant which you know allows smoking (while there are dozens of others which don't), then act shocked when you inhale some smoke.

No concept of personal accountability - that's the way of the left wing.

 

No I love women, they're great fun in bed.

It doesn't impinge on your quality of life - you voluntarily choosing to visit the restaurant knowing that there are smoke fumes is what impinges on your quality of life. You do it to yourself, but don't want to take responsibility for your own laziness.

It would be like me willingly choosing to go over to a friend's house knowing he is a smoker, then demanding that he quit smoking (or quit smoking pot, assuming it was pot instead of tobacco) in his own house just because I don't like it.

You'd be free to choose one of a dozen other restaurants which doesn't allow smoking - if you're too lazy to find somewhere else to eat, it's your problem.

 

Well, I guess you better never come to Australia!!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_smoking_bans_in_Australia

But then we are serious about making it socially unacceptable to smoke!!

 

No desire to. Talk about useless red tape.

Aye, that's why France and Germany have double the smokers that the US does, despite higher taxes and more restrictions - sure worked out well didn't it?

 

I guess liberals would find nothing wrong with some Christian pastor demanding that strip clubs or gay bars be shut down just cause they're 'morally offensive to him', even though no one's forcing him to go there.

 

actually it is.

To do a study like the one cited in the OP, and get it published in a reputable journal, you have to be very rigourous in how you conduct research. If you aren't, it won't be published.

Have you ever published a scientific paper?

If so - you will know what I mean ...

if you haven't, maybe you won't.

 

generally, its the conservatives who are obsessed with morals.

usually other peoples morals.

 

cigarettes are incredibly cheap in europe ... so cheap that when I am there I almost feel inclined to take it up again - it seems like such a bargain tcompared to the price of (*)(*)(*)(*) here!

 

The price of cigarettes in Germany is about $8 a pack, which is much higher than in the US - and Germany has more than Double the number of smokers that the US does - go figure.

 

proves my point if thats your defence against me calling you a misogynist.

ever heard of Occ health and safety?

strange.

are people's homes considered to be public places in the US?

I can tell you don't eat out much.

 

yep. $8 is cheap. I think its almost double that here.

and our smoking rates are the lowest in the world.

most smokers here are poor, poorly educated, or have mental health issues.

 

Or (((((((sigh))))))))) rural or indigenous

(*)(*)(*)(*)!! But I would like to have a really really good campaign going out here! !@#!@# QLD gov in the latest cuts in their infinite - have decided to disband a LOT of public health!!