Registered On: April 2, 2014
As chairman of the 10% club, it’s clear that climate scepticism is BI’s ‘special interest’. As such, it means that we are not in the realms of rational scientific argument about climate, but more in the world of deeply held personal beliefs.
We see this in others. It could be beliefs about religion, politics, or space aliens, or even that the Queen is a lizard! The holder draws conclusions so manifestly bonkers that it would be silly to just say they are merely ‘wrong’.
The problem is that when arguing with these people, no amount of scientific evidence will be enough convince them otherwise. It’s like trying to convince a Christian fundamentalist about evolution – practically impossible.
That’s because, for such folk, any denial of their beliefs means the denial of the holder himself. They find the belief to be emotionally satisfying, comforting even. So, they are hermetically sealed to persuasion, and will shift ground, change the topic, claim things have been said which haven’t, evade, deny and gaslight, rather than change their minds and accept evidence to the contrary.
We see examples of this in BI’s last post – he says that because Koonin was in the Obama administration, it’s difficult to point the finger of political bias. I point out that Koonin was chosen by Obama precisely because his views were different to those of others, and this promoted good decision-making. Bi then says I’m claiming Koonin can’t be trusted – none of which is in my post.
Similarly with the analogy about safety. BI – you claim that I say the stat. of 97% is about probability. I never said any such thing. Check back now. I said if 97% of engineers said the plane was unsafe, would you be happy sending off the kids in it? That’s quite different to a 97% probability of an accident.
As someone who has difficulty comprehending even a short simple post on a football messageboard, I’d doubt your ability to analyse anything more complex than a league table. Or maybe a wooden one.
The thing is this – those with a special beliefs take disagreement over them as a personal affront – if you don’t agree with them, you’re agin’ them, and acrimony inevitably follows.
Sadly, you’re neither intelligent nor empathetic enough to realise this, which must make life uncomfortable.
It’s a strange thing, but that’s what we’re dealing with here.