http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com/2010/06/physicist-co2-greenhouse-effect-is.html

They’ll either come over or become unimportant.

1)Greed
2)Don’t understand and don’t want to learn
3)Genuinely just don’t understand

Yeah… That about sums it up. At least we can change group 3.

1) Those with money in the fossil fuel game. Obviously.

2) Those who are treating it as a contest between their team and the other side. Must support fossil fuels and nuclear against the left/hippies/commies. It doesn’t matter what the facts are, ya gotta support your side.

3) Some people who are simply afraid of change. They hear someone say that their lives are going to be different and it sets them all aquiver. Solar won’t power their electric blankets at night, ergo, renewables will send us packing to the caves.

—

I think this third group are the ones we should be trying harder to educate. Help them see why nothing that matters to them will change. In a bad way….

Second, even if you throw the whole Global Warming thing out the window, we have undisputed evidence that burning FFs if bad for the health of the surrounding populace. Fine particulate matter, NOx, SOx, Hg, and many other heavy metals.

Then there’s the environmental impact of extracting these FFs. How many of these FF supporters have seen the destruction of strip-mining? Or Mountain top removal? Water pollution?

Or how about talked to the workers that produce these fuels – Coal miners that are significantly more likely to have health issues (although the conditions are getting better, it’s still a fairly bad job). Or Oil workers who spend weeks at a time on the rigs away from their families is semi-hazardous conditions… (More dangerous than unhealthy)

All of this, and in short order, Renewables will be cheaper… yet people fight against it. It just doesn’t make sense. Ok, they want to argue about climate change… I’m not even going to bother because they’re not going to change their mind no matter what you say, but regardless – we can be on the same team for utterly different reasons. And I honestly don’t see a reason to be on the other team… for anyone… (Except for the greed factor). Sure we need some FFs now for the transition, but if you’re not working away from that, you’re missing something…

Thanks for the support. But, unfortunately, I must point out that I am not always polite. I sometimes have trouble controlling my inner 13 year old…

Climate scientists have been telling us that we are almost certainly going to very badly hurt ourselves if we keep pumping greenhouse gases into the atmosphere.

In laypersons language “We are fucking ourselves very, very badly and if we don’t quit using fossil fuels very quickly we can kiss our asses goodbye.”.

Is that clear enough for you?

You may still be around when the first couple of million people dies and it becomes obvious that delayed action killed them.

Secondly saying that science must prove there’ll be an immediate catastrophe (e.g. all the permafrost melting tomorrow) as the only way of justifying corrective action for the global warming and climate change we’re observing is too high a bar. We need to act now to prevent an escalating series of increasingly bad catastrophes.

To end the debate instantly all science has to do is say their catastrophic climate crisis is “inevitable” not just “possible” and “could be” and……..
How close to the point of no return from complete unstoppable warming of the planet will science take us before they say their catastrophic climate crisis is as real as they like to say comet hits are? A catastrophic climate crisis IS a comet hit of an emergency and 28 years of science only saying “maybe” a crisis proves it “won’t be” a crisis.