Tom Toles- Just a difference of opinion, except for the dying part

[n2doc]

People don't like being called stupid, but let's face it. One side or the other is sometimes being stupid. Let's see if we can decide which.

On the climate change side we have:

Plausible theory:
-Carbon Dioxide, a long-acknowledged heat-trapping gas, is increasing in the atmosphere due to human activity.
-Scientists measure this, and do their best with imperfect data to model and predict consequences.
-The measuring of CO2 levels throughout history and the effect on climate is tabulated. The effects of current increases are predicted and confirming/refuting evidence is accumulated, analyzed, reported and discussed.
-A range of possible outcomes is forecast. They range from not good to catastrophic.
-A suggestion that, as a precautionary step at least, carbon emissions be reduced is made.
-After DECADES of study, the data solidifies, the range of predicted outcomes becomes more dire, and the speed of observable current changes accelerates.
-Leaders in BOTH parties acknowledge the problem and start discussing legislative responses.
-The responses will include a shift from conventional burning of fossil fuels to alternatives. An interesting, difficult political discussion is underway.

The opponents' side:

-A realization that some familiar consumption patterns will need to change and that there will be some costs.
-The conversation suddenly goes backward from "what is the best way to deal with this?" to "the whole problem is just made up."
-The only way to get around the science is to construct a theory that all the scientists in the world have gotten together in a deliberate conspiracy to subvert their field of study, and hoax the world for personal gain. Virtually ALL of them. Pay attention ONLY to the tiny tiny minority.
-The threat of climate change is no longer discussed as a range of possibilities, but is recalibrated down to ZERO, or next to it.
-If the deniers are right, then they may have saved themselves a few dollars and some personal convenience in doing things the way they have become comfortable with.
-If the climate science is correct, vast destruction may ensue, up to and including millions of deaths. But let's not even CONTEMPLATE that as a possibility, because maybe, just maybe, it's all a conspiracy. In fact, not maybe. It's definitely a conspiracy. We're sure of it.
-So sure we will bet the whole planet on that supposition.

Nobody likes being called stupid. What would you call this? --Tom Toles
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/tomtoles/2011/02/circular_reasoning.html

[Dogmudgeon]

1. The talking point

"Global Warming does not exist, and it's coming from nature."

--d!

[phantom power]

2. It never happened, and also it wasn't my fault, dammit.

:rofl:

[Nederland]

3. Binary Thinking

We need to rid ourselves of the simplistic either/or thinking that dominates this debate. There are not just two sides, in reality there is a broad range of possibilities held by numerous factions.