How To Debate Climate Change Deniers Or Something

The first thing would probably to avoid using the word “deniers”, meant to equate people who do not believe every weather event and temperature change is caused mostly/solely by Mankind with those who say the Holocaust never happened.

How to debate climate change deniers (without scaring them off)

If you want to see an expression of pure despair, ask a college freshman to parse Rachel Carson’s rhetorical choices at 8:00 in the morning. That’s what I’m doing this semester for a composition class I’m teaching at the University of Virginia. The course is called “Representing Climate Change,” and our collective goal is to discover and deploy effective methods of talking and writing about our looming environmental crisis. The task is daunting. Climate change is at once really easy and really hard to write about. It’s easy because there is so much to say, and hard because progress toward a solution is so slow.

I can understand their despair…or, really, the despair of those who saw the effects of effectively banning the use of DDT, which has resulted in millions and millions of deaths that didn’t need to occur. But, then, this mostly happens in 3rd world nations, and Warmists are more than happy to decrease their lifestyles and lives. Anyhow, maybe the special snowflakes despair over the shoddy science in the book. Na, they’re brainwashed, else, why would their be a course called “Representing Climate Change”, which will provide lots of help in obtaining a job in the fast food and coffee service industries?

Would you believe the class is in the English department? Yes, this is what they’re teaching now. Hence, so many kids exit college unable to speak and write in Adult

My students are trying to figure out how their writing can contribute to the climate conversation. One tactic they love is finger pointing. In class discussion and in their papers, I come across a lot of “greedy corporations” and “soulless” oil companies and “people who just don’t care.” But is blame rhetorically effective? How should we use it? Working answers: sometimes, and its usefulness depends on the audience.

Essentially, there is little about how to debate, beyond a cautious “careful with the finger wagging and Blamestorming”. And they want to “change the message” to one of “positivity” to attempt to convince Other People to Do Something. There is an acknowledgement that the writer and the students are complete hypocrites, but, hey, they are searching for a better world or something.

But, don’t ever expect anything to change. Warmists are primarily Lefties, who use insults and personal attacks as their main weapons. Mostly because their so-called science is shoddy, they are complete hypocrites, and being nasty in righteous indignation is who they are.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

4 Responses to “How To Debate Climate Change Deniers Or Something”

  1. david7134 says:

    Carson is an excellent analogy. She wrote a purely factious book about the effect of pesticides and as a result the nutty liberal environmentalist reacted and banned them. The result, millions dead.

  2. Jeffery says:

    dave,

    I agree with you that the topic of the post isn’t worthy of comment.

    Millions dead because of Rachel Carson’s book? Her book was “factious” but I had no idea how factious.

    Are you talking about the 1972 US ban of using DDT for agricultural purposes? Is that what you claim killed millions? It’s still used for vector control globally (and even in the US!), although many mosquito populations seem to have developed resistance.

    And before you ask, [H+] ~ 10 nMol/L in seawater

  3. david7134 says:

    Jeff,
    Your response to my continued question is wrong and obviously shows your inability to understand chemistry. Now, tell me the specific acid that is causing the acidification of the oceans. Your response to the DDT statement is dead on for coming from the liberal play book. In fact, it is word for word, showing obfuscation and thus lying.

  4. Butt-Frozen_Gumballs says:

    Thus another example of why cost of (higher-ed) education is soaring, mostly unnecessary, ill-advised, and damaging to our children.

    But then, college is a business and they offer up any course that stupid people are willing to fork money over for. And for most, it’s not their money. Some see it as an easy A. College sees it as easy income. The liberal professors see it that way as well.

    Sadly we have too many idiots going to college and giving them tax dollars instead of real students going to real colleges to learn something of real import.

Bad Behavior has blocked 5375 access attempts in the last 7 days.