AstroGeek wrote:
undefineable wrote:
As to climate science, the hard left -like the hard right- would be keen to deny it if it still existed to pass judgement - Both emphasise large-scale industry. Also, I can't see how the 'CO2 from industry=warmer air' kind of equation could have parallels in the social sciences or indeed psychology, where there's far more variables to play into any trends, and no irrefutable understanding of how they might work.
I think you misunderstood the analogy I was trying to make. Global warming is obviously something that can be shown a lot more conclusively than anything from social sciences. But in America (and to a degree Canada) climate science is considered left-wing (well, "liberal" in the United States, which they mistakenly associate with being left-wing) because the Republicans and libertarians tend to deny climate science while the Democrats tend to be more vocal about the issues (of course, actions speak louder than words, and in terms of actions they are silent). Some people seem to view climate change as a left-wing conspiracy so that government can justify intervening in people's daily lives. The only parallel with social sciences is that they'd also be viewed as left-wing as they tend to support those kinds of policies. What I was suggesting (of course, it's by no means something I'm certain of) is that it's just that the left is more willing to listen and so tend to adopt the policies that the social sciences recommend. This parallel doesn't hold true to the same extent in Europe because environmental issues haven't become quite so politicized there, so I can see where the confusion would come from.
If by hard-left you mean Soviet style communism, you'd be quite right. The Soviet Union was an environmental nightmare, presumably because there was no democratic accountability. However, that's not what I'm referring to when I speak of the left. I'm talking about a range from social liberals to democratic socialists and maybe even left communists (communists that denounced the Soviet Union and its lack of democracy). Socialism is really all about democracy. The main idea is that the people should have democratic control over the economy. Since the USSR was not democratic it can not be called truly socialist and it was only a very perverted form of leftism. When you look at modern leftist parties, including the radical revolutionary ones like the Danish Red-Green Alliance, they do tend to be very concerned about climate change and other environmental issues. If you look at the voting patterns in European Parliament, the European United Left/Nordic Green Left group (communist and democratic socialist parties) is second only to The Greens when it comes to environmental issues. And the Greens are the second most left-wing group after the European United Left/Nordic Green Left.
global warming is bs, besides for all the winters i have gone through, things were pretty normal, it was warm in the warm months and the snow started falling toward the end of october, during this time fossil fuels were dominantly used. now that the green movement has come, the climate has been broken. this is the first winter in pa that we've had in years that i could walk outside from october to december in shorts and a t shirt because it was to hot for pants and a jacket. this whole time the only thing going through my head is WTF. all the years beforehand we had snow a few inches deep toward the end of october beginning of november. if this is defending global warming then that is why science is demonized.
it's just a con to make al gore rich. and besides judging by the past few years, the green movement has only hurt things rather then fixing anything. screw going green and piss poor hybrids that can't climb a 20 degree hill. excluding the escalde by caddy of course. 8,000 pounds of towing strength and a real v8 with 400+ hp now that's a decent hybrid.
_________________
"It's the song of destruction a requiem of the end" jr in xenosaga III
26 Jan 2012, 1:31 am
