Respond to such negativity and biased inferences, with your so called questions? That also brings your honesty into question.and:
Your response seems like an embracement of willful ignorance to me....
perspective?
Respond to such negativity and biased inferences, with your so called questions? That also brings your honesty into question.and:
Your response seems like an embracement of willful ignorance to me....
perspective?
So doctors who warn you about diet and exercise are "catastrophizers?" As are architects, traffic engineers, self defense experts, gun safety instructors, aerospace engineers and flight instructors? Fair enough. Awful lot of them out there, though.Catastrophizing has two parts: Part 1: Predicting a negative outcome. Part 2: Jumping to the conclusion that if the negative outcome did in fact happen, it would be a catastrophe.
noSo doctors who warn you about diet and exercise are "catastrophizers?" As are architects, traffic engineers, self defense experts, gun safety instructors, aerospace engineers and flight instructors? Fair enough. Awful lot of them out there, though.
and, nowRespond to such negativity and biased inferences, with your so called questions? That also brings your honesty into question.
Really? Maybe they just don't want to get shot.no
however, geese that give up their peaceful feeding and flee loudly when I walk down to the inlet of the lake, certainly are-------and, I think to myself---silly geese....
yeh, that would be my guessReally? Maybe they just don't want to get shot.
"deniers" / "alarmist"
2 sides of the same coin
black vs white
most people live in the unmentioned grey area.
Sure - as a species.Need I point out that our ancestors/we have survived many climate changes?
The bottleneck of which you posted was most likely caused by a volcanic eruption(Toba) which may have lowered the global temperature by 6 degrees C during a period of glaciation during which the climate was already 5 degrees colder than current. After which: It is believed that the neanderthals never regained enough of their population to remain viable.Sure - as a species.
There was at least one bottleneck in civilization - a point where a large fraction of extant humanoids died, leaving a small gene pool from which we all descended. So, sure the species lived on, but the people did not.
While your and my life will end long before we experience mass death form starvation, would you not agree that - as a civilization - this counts as a catastrophe to be avoided at virtually any cost?
OK, so you acknowledge climate change on a global scale resulting in mass die off.The bottleneck of which you posted was most likely caused by a volcanic eruption(Toba) which may have lowered the global temperature by 6 degrees C during a period of glaciation during which the climate was already 5 degrees colder than current. After which: It is believed that the neanderthals never regained enough of their population to remain viable.
There was also a mass die-off during the extreme cold weather of the year without a summer(1816), which was also a result of volcanism. Estonia was claimed to have lost about 70% of her population..............
The cold is the killer!
Assuming that anthropogenic atmospheric forcing will have the same result seems to be catastrophizing.
You put it far gentler then I didThis is why I waited until your motives came out. You've moved the goalposts since your OP. You haven't been transparent with us.
Respond to such negativity and biased inferences, with your so called questions? That also brings your honesty into question.
Sour grapes? All I have done is highlighted your expressing that same old attitude, "stuff you, I'm alright Jack"and, now
we get the "sour grapes"
and the personal attack
...............
not altogether unexpected
Why are you seeing "jumping to conclusions" where other people see more or less straightforward description of physical circumstances?Ok: That's what I'm seeing.
Mostly by staying out or range of the rapid stuff. Not like this.Need I point out that our ancestors/we have survived many climate changes?
But you are seeing "catastrophizing" in even the sober and underplayed research reports, IPCC forecasts, etc. So all the AGW researchers - all the people with the most information and experience and knowledge of paleoclimate circumstances - are being "silly" together?my position is simple---I believe that catastrophizing is silly and is usually done by people who are ignorant of the effects of paleoclimate changes.
Schmelzer posts crap like that - a sort of willful refusal to acknowledge content and issues.B) Have I ever claimed that anthropogenic atmospheric forcing had no effect on the ice caps?
They aren't dealing in assumptions - they're forecasting from analysis of research.Assuming that anthropogenic atmospheric forcing will have the same result seems to be catastrophizing.
Yes. I don't see Sculptor as a foe.You put it far gentler then I did
But, something drives the denying of climate change as a pervasive threat, is it the idea of tax dollars going towards research and climate change initiatives?
That is only unanswered if you dismiss the obvious answer: that climate change is going to be a catastrophe.But, something drives the alarmist catastrophizing of climate change as a pervasive threat
Why?
Yes. I don't see Sculptor as a foe.
I have a policy to maintain a very low setting on my radar and and have it refresh frequently*. If the OP has employed dishonest tactics in the past it hasn't left an after image on my radar....what is one supposed to do when dealing with a poster who repeatedly and consistently employs dishonest tactics?
But, something drives the denying of climate change as a pervasive threat, is it the idea of tax dollars going towards research and climate change initiatives?
What you, and climate change deniers, tend to skip over (in the latter case deliberately) is the rate of change.Need I point out that our ancestors/we have survived many climate changes?
my position is simple---I believe that catastrophizing is silly and is usually done by people who are ignorant of the effects of paleoclimate changes.
...............
beyond that:
I suspect that the climate changes brought on by our entering into this current ice age was instrumental to our evolution into the genus Homo.
Though, that could just be coincidental?
Yes. All those people are on record predicting negative outcomes, then jumping to the conclusion that if the negative outcome did in fact happen, it would be a catastrophe.