View Single Post
Old 11-02-2018, 12:59 PM
Kimstu is offline
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 22,850
Originally Posted by doorhinge View Post
What I am pointing out is that the MMCO2IE side has failed to convince enough voters to change the status quo.
What you mean is that not enough voters have been willing to pay attention to the science on this issue. There are a number of reasons for that, including deliberate disinformation campaigns by science deniers. Trying to chalk the whole phenomenon up to a mere failure of persuasion on the climate-science side is merely passing the buck.

Originally Posted by doorhinge
What your side has not been able to do for the last 30 years is CONVINCE the opposition, and the fence-sitters, that you're right and they're wrong.
Actually, it appears that plenty of the "opposition" (i.e., organized science deniers) are indeed quite convinced by the facts of climate science. (Look, for example, at efforts by fossil-fuel companies to take advantage of opportunities offered by reductions in Arctic ice, which would be a completely idiotic move if they expected the Arctic ice to come back any time soon.)

But the science deniers are not letting their conviction of the scientific facts stand in the way of their profit-motivated efforts to keep foisting science denial on ignorant, lazy and gullible members of the public.

Originally Posted by doorhinge
You can take my advice, and change your tactics/strategy
Except that you keep on refusing to tell us what "change" of "tactics/strategy" you are supposedly "advising". Even though you've been repeatedly asked to tell us:
Originally Posted by BPC
What would convince you that anthropogenic climate change is :

A) real,
B) a bad thing, and
C) something we should take steps to mitigate?
Originally Posted by Kimstu
So if you won't listen to facts and reason, and you won't listen to reproach and criticism, what WILL you listen to? Should we start ad campaigns claiming that learning the facts about climate change will make your penis bigger, or something? Do you want to be lied to, since you are evidently determined not to be persuaded by the truth?
Originally Posted by wolfpup
You willfully ignore evidence and then claim that the science is not persuasive enough.
Basically, doorhinge, you keep telling us that you're determined to ignore all arguments to convince you, and then criticizing the arguments for not being sufficiently convincing. "It's all YOUR fault that you haven't persuaded me even though I've already made up my mind not to listen to anything you say!"