Forum Post: Noam Chomsky: How Climate Change Became a "Liberal Hoax"
Posted 12 years ago on Jan. 24, 2012, 5 p.m. EST by struggleforfreedom80
(6584)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
Public Forum
0 comments 2 weeks ago by agkaiser
6 comments 2 weeks ago by grapes
0 comments 3 weeks ago by agkaiser
0 comments 4 weeks ago by agkaiser
0 comments 1 month ago by agkaiser
0 comments 1 month ago by agkaiser
0 comments 1 month ago by agkaiser
2 comments 1 month ago by agkaiser
0 comments 1 month ago by agkaiser
1 comments 2 months ago by agkaiser
0 comments 2 months ago by agkaiser
1 comments 2 months ago by agkaiser
0 comments 2 months ago by agkaiser
1 comments 3 months ago by agkaiser
0 comments 4 months ago by factsrfun
7 comments 4 months ago by factsrfun
4 comments 4 months ago by factsrfun
6 comments 4 months ago by factsrfun
4 comments 5 months ago by gsw
7 comments 5 months ago by factsrfun
3 comments 5 months ago by agkaiser
2 comments 6 months ago by agkaiser
1 comments 6 months ago by grapes
2 comments 6 months ago by agkaiser
Just remember Carbon Credits will fix everything lol
Yes! Give money to the climate corporations and all your environmental sins will be washed away!
Wow, he says US investment has fallen as investmests go to China.
This man is well read. This should be a new topic: US Investment falling. Could it be that investors prefer a "Wild West" to invest in?
Classic downfall of group think, mass conformity, and buttloads of bullshit propaganda from a corporate state established on greed.
I just ordered a book by Chomsky. Looking forward to reading it. People over profit.
Great post!
Glad you liked it. Good, Chomsky should definitely be read more.
Two days ago in Pennsylvania, I saw three Canada Geese flying north, as we close out a rainy January. Little by little the climate change seems to strike ever closer to home.
what is really shocking is the claim he makes about the top executives that are implementing this hoax know that global warming is real and they do it anyway, just for money!!!!!
They have to do it. If they dont somebody elso who do will replace them. Capitalism must be replaced. Our end goal should be Libertarian Socialism
http://struggleforfreedom.blogg.no/1320873951_the_society_we_should.html
i understand that but the lack of morals is what's unbelievable.
But thats the point: they could be the nicest most moral guys in the world, but if they choose to do something moral they will be replaced by someone else who dont. So it´s the system that is awful, not necessarily the individuals involved. In their institutional role they must do immoral acts, although they might be very moral as individuals.
yes, unfortunately true
There really isn't much new to say about climate change. Temperatures are rising. I am a bit surprised Chomsky dismisses Meteorologists as "pretty faces reading scripts telling you whether it's going to rain tomorrow". Most television stations hire people with actual degrees in the field of meteorology.
If he believes they are parroting what their bosses want them to say fine, just say so. The typical meteorologist would probably have more knowledge about weather, climate, and computer modeling then Chomsky does. It makes him look either ignorant about what a meteorologist is or like he's deviously belittling them because some disagree with him.
The ones actually doing the research on climate change have much more qualifications than "ordinary" meteorologists do. They have specialized in climate change research. Chomsky has read wht the qualified ones have written, thats what his talking about.
Certainly, I know there is a difference between the two fields. A strong case has been made for arthrogenic warming. It's his method, not the message I find fault with. It's simply an ad hominem attack for Chomsky to compare the knowledge or opinion of a meteorologist to that of his barber on climate, and write them off as pretty faces only capable of reading reports. An intellectually weak attack like that only hurts his position.
As I said, if he thinks they are corporate or media shills fine, say so, but they do have some experience with the limits of computer models and the complexity of weather. Many meteorologists would have more experience with climate than unrelated disciplines such as chemistry or linguistics. I'm primarily interested in the opinion of climatologists on the subject for the final analysis. He should have stuck to facts about a meteorologist's area of expertise on climate being limited and not attacked their appearance or intellect.
still buying into the algore global warming myth?
Temperatures are going up that is a fact. The debate has been over such things as rate of change and cause. Some believe the increase is part of a natural cycle, others say it's the CO2 emissions caused by burning fossil fuels. Al Gore does more harm then good, even if he is right about the cause, when he overstates the dangers.
Personally I'm fatalistic on the issue, it doesn't matter what I believe or what the US does or doesn't do. There is no point in reducing emissions unless the entire world does it. The Asian nations are growing and are not about to stop burning fossil fuels. In a hundred years people will either be laughing at how foolish Gore and his ilk were, or they'll have a shorter drive to the beach.
do you know the difference between climate and weather? The only thing that has a lasting effect on climate and weather is the sun.
False, as usual. Planetary dynamics (precession, orbital variation, speed of rotation, etc.) Geological effects (vulcanism), biological effects (primordial slime molds, forestation, etc.) are all proven and well knows force that directly effect the climate.
Keep making shit up, it makes you look smart.
The sun makes the climate. a volcanic eruption delivers a temporary effect. how is life for you on mars?
You are an idiot, my son. The Lord makes the climate.
I may just have to sign up for Christianity after that one.
Yes I do know the difference. I've had just a little experience with the field, enough to know it's very complex. The sun's energy output can vary and the earth's orbit changes its eccentricity (how elliptical it is). The atmosphere also has an impact, water vapor is the primary greenhouse gas that keeps the planet warm through the night. CO2 and CH4 can also act as greenhouse gasses. You can also have major volcanic events or asteroid impacts that can result in enough particulate matter in the atmosphere to block solar energy.
i said that volcanic eruptions will produce a temporary change, the sun will go burning on for a very long time. an asteroid impact that would produce a change in the climate is a rare event.
Certainly temporary for the earth, a small eruption might produce a couple of below average summers, like 1816. Supervolcanos are on the short list of possible causes for ice ages, possibly lasting thousands to maybe millions of years, still a short time period for earth.
Yes you are correct, both asteroid impacts and supervolcanos are rare events, so are orbital changes. The sun isn't truly consistent though, it too varies and has been suggested as a cause of ice ages by some. There have also been times when temperatures were higher then they are now. It's the speed of change that worries the climate change scientists, not always the amount of change.
the sun is consistent enough to provide life on earth. No sun = No life.
All life won't be eradicated whether climate change is caused by man or not. The sun is consistent enough for the earth, but not for all life. Change can and does happen.
sure change happens , its called evolution.
[Removed]
What did Chomsky say on Global Warming?
The chamber of commerce, the main business lobby, the American Petroleum Industry, other business lobbies have publicly proclaimed, in fact with enthusiasm that they are carrying out a campaign to try to convince the population that global warming is a liberal hoax.
and it's succeeded, unfortunately, the latest polls I've seen show maybe a third of the population believes in anthropogenic global warming . . .
. . . substantial number of climate scientists who believe taht consensus predictions are much to optimistic . . .
. . . the effort to manufacture consent to the beleif that it doesn't mean anything is pretty successful . . . those same ceos and managers who are trying to convince the public that its a liberal hoax know perfectly well that it's extremely dangerous . . .
The Oil Industry's multi-billion dollar quarterly profits at work. Shame and disgust.
Whatever happened to truth in advertizing?
What ever happened to truth?
Fucking FCC.
Fucking Oil industry.
Its amazing how many issues go exactly back to this foundation:
http://corporationsarenotpeople.webuda.com
as long as
corporations are people &
corporations have free speech &
citizens united stands
this IS where we will be
what can we do about this?
What we are - support campaigns like Move to Amend - get more and more people educated and - so - on-board. This is a key 1st step to ending the insanity in our world.
That was a great video. Democrats are essentially moderate Republicans and the Repelicans are off the map. Refusing to allow the country to run.
Also FYI : "Beyond the Brink -- A Climate Change Investigation" ;
The Trailer : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OcmakdstupM ,
Part 1 of 3 : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lSyhbDtG4kc ,
Part 2 of 3 : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CZjzhKy5NBw &
Part 3 of 3 : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=57QhB1kS26M .
ad iudicium ...
great links!
The Excellent 2007 Australian Doc. Film "Crude" :
Glad that you liked 'Beyond The Brink' Trev & wishing a very good 2013 to you and yours.
fiat lux ...