How long to you think before climate change deniers are completely marginalized?
Seriously. This is not a troll question or an academic exercise. I think we can agree that there are no more true climate change skeptics, those who think they can prove it's not happening or that it doesn't matter. Sure there are unknowns but the fact that it is happening, that humans are causing it and that it will have a major impact is no longer in dispute. Considering Mr. Obama's clear intent to push new policy, how long do you think it will be before we have a tipping point in public opinion? If you think we won't reach a tipping point soon or that it doesn't matter, how can any policy initiative succeed, let alone survive? http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/22/science/earth/seeking-clues-about-sea-level-from-fossil- beaches.html?partner=EXCITE&ei=5043 “At every point, as our knowledge increases,” Dr. Raymo said, “we’ve always discovered that the climate system is more sensitive than we thought it could be, not less.” Let’s not forget who started this. Environmentalists simply took to heart the results brought to us by scientific observation, as this new scientific data confirmed the obvious. The next step, as a concerned and moral citizen, was to spread this information and warn of the consequences of ignoring the early warning that science has given us. They were immediately vilified, discredited and demonized in every way possible, from accused of being Communists bent on destroying the God Given Free Market American Way of Life to Dope Smoking Hippy Degenerate Atheist Anarchists whose real wish is to exterminate Gaia’s Human Infestation. What have reactionary conservatives done for us in the last 50 years except for enable the delay of environmental and equal rights progress by an entire generation, enable the creation an entire media-propaganda industry to inculcate and foment ignorance and hatred, enable three massive capitol destroying bubbles in the last three decades enabling an enabling another a massive transfer of wealth from the middle and least protected classes to the already wealthy top 2%, that we having seen in nearly 100 years? Now, I’m not concerned for my own welfare, as I realized decades ago that real progress in time to make a difference on major environmental problems is likely hopeless. What I fear is that when fanatical reactionaries come to realize that their time has come and gone that they will lash out, as they did to Lincoln, the Kennedy’s, MLK, Dr. Tiller and myriad others. Who knows what they are capable of. Who is more dangerous, one who states his intentions clearly and stands for his convictions, as for example Mr. Obama did on Monday - or one who coats his lies with the sugary syrup of obfuscatory disingenuous pseudoscientific gobbledygook and presents them in the conciliatory language of reasoned debate, where really there is no honest debate and hasn’t been for decades. The right does not now and has never wanted an honest debate. They would lose and they know it. And so they do stealth warfare that continues to this day. So do I think that fanatical reactionaries should be marginalized? These people will never change, they cannot be reasoned with. The damage they have done is incalculable. What do you think and how should we proceed? We’ll just have to wait for the tipping point? I guess we’ll know by the end of this presidential term. It's healthy to have an honest debate. A carbon tax redistributed to consumers would both accelerate the conversion to non-polluting sources (I'm all for nuclear, specifically the thorium molten salt reactor) and protect consumers and the economy from price shocks. And the tax would be self limiting as fossil fuel use diminished over time. The problem with regulatory schemes is not that they are inherently wrong, but that they are gamed. We don't need to starve the beast, that only enables the corporatists through privatization. We need to fix the government and eliminate corruption by abolishing unlimited contributions and the entire revolving door lobby industry, and establish total public funding of truly free, fair and open elections. What we have now in the US may be the least worst in the world, but it is still a sham run by corporate interests. Reactionary conservatives and anti-environmentalists are one in the same. Climate change may be the number one threat to the our world, but it is just one symptom of a larger problem.
Asked By: Mr. Blob - 1/22/2013
Best Answer - Chosen by Asker
We already reached a tipping point in public opinion -- but that's a long way from marginalizing "skeptics." They'll soon shift their rants to "it's not a problem" and "scientists are exaggerating" and similar propaganda... More
Answered By: Hobbit - 1/22/2013
Additional Answers (15)
longer than you think
Answered By: Tuco Salamanca - 1/22/2013
The skeptics like myself will always have this thing called REALITY. Reality will prevail in the end. It will take awhile but after years where the global temperatures are NOT increasing as predicted people will realize that CAGW was a load of horse manure.
Answered By: Ian - 1/22/2013
How long did it take to convince the masses that the world was round, and not flat? About that long.
Answered By: A.A. - 1/22/2013
Luckily we have scientific bodies like the UK Met who despite their involvement with the IPCC take global averages and reluctantly admit global warming stopped 16 years ago... More
Answered By: Pindar - 1/22/2013
We will out last your taunting... More
Answered By: Sagebrush - 1/22/2013
Obozo says we gotta reduce carbon but not debt. The guys a geenyus.
Answered By: Cyclops - 1/22/2013
Your link didn't work but I found it on Google using your quote... More
Answered By: jim z - 1/22/2013
This looks like the missing link: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/22/science/earth/seeking-clues-about-sea-level-from-fossil-beaches.html... More
Answered By: Hey Dook - 1/22/2013
Does it give you pleasure to see people marginalized... More
Answered By: Ottawa Mike - 1/22/2013
I wish that enough people would see through their plant food for them to be completely marginalized. But I am sure that once sea levels rise by 1 metre, that denialists will be running from villagers who have torches and pitch forks. Until then, I do not have much hope, because denialists tell a large segment of... More
Answered By: Climate Realist - 1/22/2013
Let us suppose, for the sake of argument, that AGW is actually solidly based. This still does not address my stock answer... More
Answered By: Veidt - 1/22/2013
The NY times is pure liberal rubbish its not a source . Its still a hoax and a way to redistribute wealth .
Answered By: MIKE L - 1/22/2013
I really hope you don't k***********f when you realize how wrong you have been about this.
Answered By: Tomcat - 1/22/2013
It depends entirely on the paths these two trends take. http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8091/8391413378_b0e71e5cc1_b_d.jpg
Answered By: DaveH - 1/22/2013
"How long to you think before climate change deniers are completely marginalized?" After the evolution deniers are completely marginalised. The scientifically illiterate demographic provide lots of votes if you keep them scared, angry & very stupid
Answered By: Jungle Jim - 1/23/2013
Over 483 Local Jobs Now Hiring In Your Area. $18-$87/Hr - Apply Today!
Legitimate Survey for Cash.Extra Money for You,Join Here!
Become An AVON Representative or Shop Our Online Store Now!
$21/hr Start, Avg Pay $72K/yr No Experience Needed! Get Started.
Other Career Questions
Do most mechanical engineering jobs offer job security?
What is your current job? Why did you choose this job? What do you enjoy about your job? What do you dislike about your job? What would be your perfect job? Would you rather have this j...
Where are the jobs? Is productivity and globalization creating a permanent “recession” of jobs? My main issue is I am doing a paper for school and have no idea where to begin. I was hoping suggestions...
Content is not owned or controlled by Monster. Any content concerns should be addressed with Yahoo!
Yahoo! Does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any Yahoo! Answers content. Yahoo! Disclaimer.
Best-Paying Work-from-Home Jobs
It’s easier than ever to work from home. Of course, not every job is a mobile job, and some companies aren’t interested in having their employees work from home.
2013 Marketing Jobs Outlook
The US may be facing another year of anemic hiring overall, but that won't be the case in the high-orbit world of multichannel, digital media marketing.
2013 Engineering Jobs Outlook
Engineers will find job opportunities in select disciplines in 2013, with candidates who are all-around, client-oriented businesspeople in demand.
Best-Paying Jobs by Major
What could you earn with a particular four-year degree? Find out by checking out this list of the top-paying jobs for 20 of the most common majors.
Eight High-Paying, Secure Jobs
Want to earn a good salary and enjoy a measure of job security as well? Check out these well-paying jobs on tap for fast growth in the coming years.