This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

The psychology of climate change

Jump to new
well gg, why not put your money where your mouth is -
become a bookie / insurance company. - give the best premiums by gambling that it won't happen -
you'll be rich when it all turns out to be a fizzer.
 
Julia said:
Ah, Kennas, thank you for reminding me of this facility.
In my entire time on ASF, there is only one person who prompts me to engage it.
Click to expand...

gee whiz julia - that's pretty mean.
How would you have learnt how to edit photos if you had me on ignore?

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?p=372157

PS I usually charge "significant" consultancy fees, but in your case, I'll settle for a smile. - second thoughts - forget it.
 
2020hindsight said:
well gg, why not put your money where your mouth is -
become a bookie / insurance company. - give the best premiums by gambling that it won't happen -
you'll be rich when it all turns out to be a fizzer.
Click to expand...

Mate , I just go with the science, I don't bet on religious prophesies, like climate change.

gg
 
Garpal Gumnut said:
Mate , I just go with the science, I don't bet on religious prophesies, like climate change.

gg
Click to expand...
lol - what you're saying is you don't bet against so-called "religious prophesies" either - go for it.
Let me know when yuo work out where you really stand with this lol.
 

What proof?
 

2020, there are many Australians who struggle financially to feed themselves/their families, struggle emotionally, mentally and are under extreme stress. Farmers aren't the only ones. Why aren't other stressed Australians committing suicide at a similar rate to farmers?

It is their lack of ability to cope with the stress psychologically that is the problem, not the factor causing the stress. I was merely pointing out factors that I believe contribute to the farmers inability to cope with the stress.
 
Smurf1976 said:
Now I don't know about you, but whenever someone trys to stop me from thinking and says "trust me", I'm immediately suspicious. Even moreso when they are proposing that I part with significant sums of money or permanently hand over my rights.
Click to expand...

Yes. It's almost as bad as those dreaded words "I'm from the Government and I here to help you." Recently a bloke flogging roof insulation door to door said very similar words to me. I told him my roof had been insulated during construction. He said "That's all right this time we will lay it on the ceiling, and it will cost you nothing"

The relevant bit is that this crook said he was from the Government, and in a way, he was. Kevin had given these predators carte blanche to waste millions of dollars and no questions asked, as long as it was done quickly.

So I guess the psychology of greed is bound up with the psychology of climate change.
 
wayneL said:
Still waiting.....
Click to expand...

what?
that insurance is rising ?
so if I post evidence you'll agree that you were wrong?
here's one of countless articles ...
http://www.smh.com.au/environment/insurance-to-rise-with-sea-levels-20091027-hj2u.html

and some locations in Vic are apparently uninsurable ( after Black Saturday)
http://wapedia.mobi/en/Black_Saturday_bushfires?t=13.
"Australia's worst natural disaster"
or as I think you called it - "so it got hot and someone lit a fire?"
 
Great thread 2020

Having a look at the psychology of climate change and started to explore the feelings that many people have (and in a number of cases climate scientists) as they come to realise what is happening to the climate is powerful stuff. It is very confronting to watch more and more pieces of the puzzle fall into place with the answer being a disaster. Certainly that was Greame Pearmans (CSIRO) public comment and I'm aware that many scientists in the field share similar private views.

I can't offer a simple antidote but for what it's worth, a couple of points.

1) Taking actual constructive action to reducing ones impact on the environment and simplifying ones lifestyle offers some relief. Whether it's planting a vegetable garden, working with others to redirect their lives (see Permablitzes( http://www.permablitz.net/ ) or just planting trees with environment groups - they all help

2) Trying to recognise that we can only live the day that is ahead of us. It is too easy to look ahead and imagine the possible outcomes of where we are going. Not good....

Another possibility of course is outright denial. Just try and say that all these scientists with all their theories and models and measurements are misguided, ignorant or just in it for the money. That it simply isn't happening or that we will (magically) get over it because , "we're White, Bright and Proud to be Right" And if you say it it loud enough and often enough -- well a lot of people who don't want to hear uncomfortable realities will accept a comfortable lie.

And perhaps that is good. One could ask the question just what would be the mental health of our society if most people did consciously understand and accept what our scientific community has been saying about global warming for the last 20 years.
 
Comfortable lies versus uncomfortable truths. I dropped this line in my earlier post on the psychology of climate change. Just to explore it a bit further consider the following thoughts.

Perhaps much of our society and current economy is based on comfortable lies being accepted before uncomfortable realities. And perhaps because we see this consciously and unconsciously much of the time we desperately wish that all this climate change nonsense will simply go away and never happen. After all this approach seems to be working elsewhere.

Some examples? For decades and decades companies selling dangerous and poisonous products like tobacco and asbestos managed to lie to their staff, customers and the community about the likely effects of these products. Fact is that as far as I can tell the industries made out like bandits and the punters have paid the price.

Similarly does anyone seriously believe that poker machines aren’t designed to create a host of addicts to feed the pockets of the manufactures and casinos ? The best psychologists in the world work to create pleasurable worlds of addiction through these machines which inevitably destroy the lives of tens of thousands of people. But we as a society accept the comfortable lie of allowing the free market to reign versus questioning the effects of this decision.

More recently wasn’t it just a bit crazy to have every man and their dog in America and elsewhere buying homes with 105% loans no income, no jobs and having this all approved by financial institutions? How about simply using the “rapidly appreciating value of your home” as an ATM where you could draw extra loan money for that holiday, car or new spa? Wasn’t this last boom just the biggest lie we have lived for a long time?

And the biggest lie of all? That our whole political system believes we must have perpetual increase in economic growth with perpetual increases in resource use to keep the economy afloat. We have one limited earth with certain real limits to resources. You can’t have unlimited growth in a limited ecosystem. You simply run out of resources.

So perhaps it is not that strange that the main movers and shakers in our society pay only lip service to what a bunch of pointy headed scientists might say. After they buy and sell these guys. So they must know more…

The whole point is that simply laying out the facts doesn’t cut any ice with people who routinely deal in lies.
 
Basilio, you make some good points, especially that above.

If we accept that climate change exists, and we further accept human beings' activities are contributing to it, could you then comment on the usefulness of Australia's proposed ETS, particularly if the rest of the world (as looks likely) fails to commit to anything similar at Copenhagen?

I imagine, from your comment above, that you won't be worried if some of our big companies move their operations offshore to enable them to avoid the costs of the ETS in Australia, and the subsequent effect on our economy?

If you consider the ETS will "work", could you say to what extent it will alter the rate of climate change? How will this be measured?

How can you be assured that Australia - in adopting the ETS - will not be implementing what even Ross Garnaut says is a deeply flawed scheme, and in the process imposing an additional tax on everything we buy, sell and make, without making any appreciable difference to global emissions?
 


You make the straight out out claim that rising insurance premiums are proof of anthropogenic climate change.

Your first link was a scare story, an if-then hypothesis from a politician.

The second link was about bushfires which happen irrespective of climate change. Insurers do the same thing with flood prone areas.

That doesn't even approach the standard of proof required. How Exxon-Mobil became involved in this particular passage leaves me puzzled/amused.

Aside from that, insurance premiums are rising through a number of other reasons which are purely structural. It is not just weather prone endeavours.

Do you have any actual scientific proof that insurance premiums are rising due to MMCC, rather than ludicrous logical fallacies?
 
I agree with Julia. This is a good post on the psychology of major issues. I kave a bunch of comments about the perpetual growth issue, ut that is off topic.

But unfortunately the facts in the case of CC have become obfuscated by politics and VIs. In this case the facts are not being laid out in an open honest manner. The science is being cherrypicked by both sides of the debate.

Representing the increase in CO2 as causing AGW as "the facts" and all else as psychologically expedient denial is not at all scientifically honest. I just wish people would stop defending sacred cows and address the real issues that I have detailed ad nauseaum.

This is in fact the real denial. eg the North Pacific garbage vortex )and hundreds of other similar real time current and addressable environmental disasters gets a simple shrug of the shoulders and ignored while the politically motivated IPCC dominates the agenda.

This is in fact the biggest problem of all and the source of real denial. Who wants a world with purportedly "normal" co2 levels that has been trashed in a million other ways?
 
wayneL said:
I

This is in fact the biggest problem of all and the source of real denial. Who wants a world with purportedly "normal" co2 levels that has been trashed in a million other ways?
Click to expand...

It will be the first step. If we can fix one problem, then we can fix others. Nations acting together for the common good can only be a good thing.

Of course we will have the hysterical extremists screaming from the sidelines about how wrong it is to have effectively a world UN government, conspiracy theories et all.
 
It is not extremist to be suspicious of a one world government. That is a rather repulsive straw man argument there Knobby.

As far as fixing one problem, the problem is one that is low on the agenda.

For instance building Priuses purportedly addresses carbon, but creates far more obnoxious environmental problems. Same with corn ethanol, etc etc

co2 is a minor issue. Let's fix real problems.
 
The psychology of climate change apparently dictates that the alarmists adopt a sneering and holier than thou attitude to those disagree with them. Local alarmists take their lead from their Dear Leader who gave GW sceptics a nasty spray recently.

But what about the psychology of apology. Today Rudd is going to apologise to the 500,000 Australians who grew up in institutions. (The Forgotten Australians) It should be noted that Rudd only apologises as a symbolic gesture and then on behalf of all of us. He never makes personal apologies.

He puts his spin doctors to work to justify his errors of judgement. You will never hear an apology for his slur on sceptics, when he eventually has to eat crow.
 
well I invite anyone - Wayne, Calliope included - to put all your money into the insurance game - and make NO ADJUSTMENT whatsoever for
rising temperatures and bushfire threat (some relevant areas)
rising sealevels (ditto)
more frequent flooding (ditto).

Of course drought effects are partly "insured" by the Aussie taxpayer, who picks up the tab for drought relief - not that I don't think the bushies need and deserve it - just that the cost of rising insurance due to drought is hidden by that system. .

PS Wayne, I'm still waiting for you to confirm that I posted you scientific evidence that the rate of seal level rise has increased from mean of 1.7mm per year ( approx 1900 to 1975 ) to 3mm per year since then. (going from memory here - it's on the "is it ok to jest about GW" thread - as you will recall). Jason 1 and Jason 2 - all seriously scientific stuff!!

Hell there are plenty of articles on the IPCC website -

but then they aren't scientific enough for you as I recall
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

M
WEF corrupts countries
Replies
6
Views
1K
SirRumpole
"Wives wives, kitchen knives" How long/how many times have you been married?!
2
Replies
29
Views
2K
farmerge
Fun with ChatGPT
2
Replies
24
Views
4K
SirRumpole
Canada the Brave
2 3
Replies
55
Views
6K
mullokintyre
4 reasons why the ASX 200 will struggle in September
Replies
8
Views
642
DannyB0000
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...