How To Talk To Climate Change Deniers
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 7 มิ.ย. 2024
- Australian bushfires, flooding, hurricanes. We need to COMBAT CLIMATE CHANGE DENIAL so this video explains how!
Listen to the Sidenote podcast episode here:
podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast...
FOLLOW GREG:
Instagram: / whalewatchmeplz
Twitter: / whalewatchmeplz
ASAPScience
Instagram: / asapscience
Facebook: / asapscience
Twitter: / asapscience
Tumblr: / asapscience
Created by Mitchell Moffit and Gregory Brown
PO BOX
ASAPSCIENCE INC.
P.O. Box 93, Toronto P
Toronto, ON, M5S2S6
References:
www.theguardian.com/environme...
www.nature.com/articles/d4158...
www.nature.com/articles/d4158...
www.nature.com/articles/s4156...
www.nationalgeographic.com/en...
www.snopes.com/1998-trump-peop...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrick...)
science.howstuffworks.com/env...
www.newscientist.com/article/...
www.sciencedaily.com/releases...
voxdotcom/status/...
skepticalscience.com/humlum-a...
skepticalscience.com/richards...
www.theguardian.com/environme...
www.theguardian.com/environme...
www.theguardian.com/environme...
www.nytimes.com/2019/10/12/wo...
podcasts.apple.com/ca/podcast...
“It is hard to win an argument with a smart person, but it’s damn near impossible to win an argument with a stupid person”
-Bill Murray
Not saying that all climate-deniers are straight up stupid, but sticking to pseudo-facts and denying the massive amount of evidence for global warming is stupid. So no matter how smart and well versed they are on other aspects, they are not smart
Sigmund Trutt there is no stopping climate change when other countries are the leading cause of it and laugh at the idea and kids like Greta
@@oxipolin6832 other countries? *Practically every country is what you meant right?
Sigmund Trutt not every country as India emits far more pollutants than New Zealand. My point is that even if every soul in America stopped existing, the climate would still degrade from the growing populations in developed countries which would outnumber America’s population in a matter of decades. And if an American were truly against climate change then they would bike to work and stop eating burgers given how methane and other byproducts of the human quotidian is the leading cause of the greenhouse effect. Tbh complaining about it does nothing as industrial countries will never care.
@@oxipolin6832 I was never talking only about the U.S, and I don't get why you phrase it like that. The U.S is a huge reason for emitting greenhouse-gasses, but by far the only one and I am not that ignorant. There are climate-deniers in other countries than U.S, and all of them tend to use the same arguments and straight up reject science.
Well when you start a conversation off with an 'I'm smarter than you attitude' good luck getting anywhere at all bro lol for people that are so smart you all have a very difficult time understanding basic psychology.
Going as co2 for halloween would be hilarious
*Co2 makes the Earth GREEN.We are not going to all die because we breath and fart* 🌎
I was CO2 for Halloween. TIS' a SCARY MOLECULE RN!
CO would be creapy but O3 (close to the ground) kills most, puppies and children may have to suffer such costumes if I had the opportunity.
@Tommy Nobody is denying that the climate has always been changing, but the problem now is that the climate is changing at a much more rapid pace than it used to. It's naive to think human activity doesn't affect it.
Kennet Right now CO2 is only at 400 ppm and although it increased recently to that level, it is still well within the regular range, there was a time when we were at 2500 parts per million And the plants and animals were thriving at that time. They pump CO2 in the green houses to increase the level nearly 3 times what we find in the atmosphere to help the plants. We have been dangerously close to the 130 ppm bottom line that would kill all of humanity and all of life. We don’t want to go down. CO2 was not pollution, focus on pollution.
“That rainbow is just light through water babe” IM DYING😂😂😂
"that's just light through water, babe" lmaooo
If someone didn't logic themselves into an idea, you can't logic them out of it
I agree there is change I just don't think it's that bad.
Depends on the person, if they're intellectually honest enough to admit they were wrong about it, even if they didn't initially logic themselves into it, it is possible to logic them out.
The problem is many climate change deniers aren't intellectually honest.
@Parker Landry Nice spam bro.
Kabir Basu You are a climate change hoaxer. I think that’s much worse than a denier.
@@justaguy6216 why then no one wants to debate or talk about the issue? /watch?v=b8JZo6PzpCU I would love to hear both sides of this.
Step 1. Find common ground/values
Step 2. Listen to be heard. Don't dismiss their concerns.
Step 3: Validate the way they feel and then teach, don't shame.
Step 4: Have an ask ready. There is no point in having the conversation, unless you have a very specific, doable ask for them, to get the ball rolling.
Step 5: Congratulate them when/if they complete the simple ask and make them feel good about taking a positive step towards a better future.
Often times people just want to be right so badly that they alienate others and defeat their own purpose. Be kind.
This is a good guide to discussion in general
Won't work, moron. We, GOP, do things base don FACT, not "feelings" so your approach to our "feelings" will not work, since in fact what you are saying is you will try to change our FACTS to your FEELINGS.
I must say I've experienced this vulnerable part not so long ago. I live in Poland, where energy comes mostly from coal - when heating season comes around the corner, we start to get smoged pretty bad - sometimes more than 300% of norms of PM2.5. And I have asthma. A few weeks ago, my 11 yo brother called me asking if I took my pollution mask with me. When I said I didn't, he actually yelled at me, that I need to take care of my health, that maybe we can meet up so he can give me his.
I am 23 yo. I am the one that has to take care of it. When I was 11, my biggest concern was far from worrying about a family member that might suffocate while walking around the city...
When I want to speak of climate change, I just point out that we are half into november and that it is 11 degrees Celsius outside. We used to have snow at that time, now we didn't have a proper snow day for two years. What gets on my nerves is when people go saying "oh yeah but I don't like the cold, so it's actually cool". That's pretty much the same as saying you wont try to stop the fire from burning your house, because "you dont like the cold" -.-
True bro. People are selfish and too short sighted. They don't see the damage in long terms
What has this to do with CO2? You are talking about smog and smoke here.
@@nyoodmono4681 CO2 is one of the products released burning coal. So with smog and smoke comes other carbon products that is harmful for the environment.
@@sivaprasadwarrier3171 So you need better filters which are already developed, again Asthma has nothing to do with CO2, it is colourless. Smog and smoke ARE the harmfull products, ashes and sulfur, what other carbon products are you talking about?
@@nyoodmono4681Products released with carbon compound burnings like radical elements O3, sulfur groups, hydroxyl groups, carbon dioxide, monoxide and hell lot of other gases specific to the combustion process or machination. Filters can help you with low level of air pollution. When the smog, smoke , ashes degrades the quality of life of every organism then it is detrimental. To be true we can't have filters set on as we move around in our city and transportation. Don't you think this stuff is unhealthy in general conscience for our planet? How are this animals and plants gonna live in such polluted environment? If it disrupts the food chain it is slowly gonna kill humans too.
I have bronchitis which is a milder version of Asthama and i can safely say that even smelling some type of perfumes or incense can trigger it. It is easily triggered by monoxide, nitrogen oxide compounds released in even automobiles.
I would like to end my case my saying a clean air, water and soil is the basic human needs for growth of a healthy humankind as well as of other organisms. Through and through we have found in various researches that humankind's ignorant behaviour is causing destruction of living nature. See earth doesn't concern itself with all this stuff. It is us who gonna die in mass extinction. The day humans die in a mass extinction earth will be back to its course. Maybe millions of years later once again a new species will grow and rule earth. In the long term it's for the proper stability of our own species and food chain. So we can start small and make this world a better place to live.
"To argue with a man who has renounced the use and authority of reason, and whose philosophy consists in holding humanity in contempt, is like administering medicine to the dead" -Thomas Paine
@SHEISTER CAM what crap can you please explain the fact that why was I taught fifteen years ago in my geography lessons that all polar ice caps will melt by 2030 and all costal areas will be drowned ,it's 2021 if I go to the beach the beach line has not moved an inch why?Then why was I taught that?who is wrong here?
@SHEISTER CAM th-cam.com/video/iSnYnXuCm_8/w-d-xo.html
@SHEISTER CAM if they keep tampering with data and manipulate science to suit political agenda how am I supposed to trust the establishment?
@SHEISTER CAM where it's been debunked my question is simple why there has not been an alteration in the coastline a sine inch?.The scaremongering was so much in 2000s that costal districts will submerge by 2030 then why the costal line has not moved single inch it's already 2021? I think this deserves an explanation explain why js this happening.?why cost line has not moved an Inch?
@SHEISTER CAM no I am asking you a question why there is zero change in the coastline? Any there is no technical answer from you.You are just asking me to believe something without questioning it like religion and if don't bieleve it it's heresey.Give the scientific answer explanation for my question
“Human activity causes climate change”
*humans die*
“We did it boys, climate change is no more”
Not one doomsday prediction has ever come true, it's pseudoscience.
@@TheAmazingJimmy
what doomsdays predictions have been made and what exactly were the dates involved
be specific, include sources and links
@@deathgatedeathstar9259 I'm not going to track down all the links, but there's been over 40 of them.
In 2000 an East Anglian climatologist said that Britain would never see snow again.
@@deathgatedeathstar9259 Florida and New York were supposed to be under water by 2000 and Arctic sea ice was supposed to be gone by 2013 and there was supposed to be 50 million "climate refugees" by now and there's none, islands were supposed to sink into the ocean and that didn't happen, sea level was supposed to rise 1 to 2 feet by now, that didn't happen, polar bears are supposed to be going extinct but instead the population is booming despite polar bear hunting being legal.. should I go on ?
@@deathgatedeathstar9259 And now the world will come to an end in 12 years. Yea, there's no bullshit doomsday predictions going around.
I got a Donald Trump ad on this video, it’s amazing
Me too
And what does that tell us about your political leanings. Erm?
i can’t believe that’s legal in america!
@@memeju1ce Whats that?
@@gilian2587 having ads about politicians and stuff, i was surprised that you guys also have ads for medication! even prescription meds (if that’s true lol)
Glad to know i'm not the only one who feels the pressure to do this. I'm a teacher my self and a saw a monarch butterfly. I stopped the class and told them that because of Climate Change, we have seen a 90% decline here in Pacific Grove,CA. But I ended in a good note saying that they'll just migrate to the Midwest and survive (for now).
We have to write a blog for language arts and I was so happy for this video because I choose climate change, we could choose anything we wanted. This video made it a LOT EASIER! Especially all the sources.
Most people don’t deny that human activity is warming our planet. Where they disagree is to what extent this warming is effecting our planet, and to what extent should we limit out innovation to fix such problems. We need oil and gas for literally EVERYTHING we use every single day and to think the answer to this problem is as ez as switching to sustainable energy is absurd. No sustainable energy source right now is capable of keeping up with energy demands
In the medium term fossil fuels can't keep up with demands either so any delay in changing to renewables is just actually retarded.
So then let's RESEARCH AND DEVELOPE some better green energy sources. Making the decision to do R&D is not rocket science.
Mastikator the medium term is really different compared to short term, the reason why he’s talking about no sustainable energy source being able to keep up with energy demand right now is because there are congressmen trying to pass legislation to end the use of fossil fuels
@@Vitamin_jp Namely AOC right?
Nuclear energy is the best answer we have so far. I used to be scared of nuclear energy but now I find it to be a feasible solution. It's much safer than we think.
As a Canadian you should read Oil's Deep State! As an environmental scientist in Alberta it was really interesting the industry ties with government no matter which party was in power.
if you would like more eye opening .. I suggest " How big oil conquered the world " th-cam.com/video/ySnk-f2ThpE/w-d-xo.html one of many chilling documentaries by James Corbett , a fellow Canadian .
2:50 someone please make a meme with that
It has been done
Carbon DIOxide
Nobody denies climate change, however there are people who doubt that climate change is caused by human activity.
You can thank 40 years of being lied to for that.
Agenda 2030
The disagreement seems to be more about how much and what to do about it. Might be a better start.
Exactly. Governments never have solutions, just more taxes. Climate change, true or false, will not be saved by a tax.
@@hutchisonmichael1 Exactly. If they tell you that they lie.
Trust me in rural America the majority of people firmly believe climate change is a myth
Yeah taxes won't do shit, we gotta trust in the private sector and human ingenuity to solve this problem. Nevermind the fact that the problem has been caused by greed and all efforts to spread lies and climate denial come from the private sector, namely the Koch brothers by funding grifters like Dennis Prager and his garbage misinformation TH-cam channel. woops
@@chickenfarmer296 It depends on what you're talking about. The story that climate change is going to cause armageddon and we have 12 years to do something or we all die actually is a myth.
What has happened to the old draw my life format?
@@alexkuzlov9447
Yeah I'm unsubscribing, what a disappointment.
Frank Zappa LMAOOOOOO BYE
Alex Kuzlov
cringe
@@iamwhatieat9639
Calm down soya milk.
Frank Zappa I can’t tell if that’s sarcasm or not (remember Poe’s law)...
The Australian bushfires were not caused by climate change, they were caused by arsonists and the drought which was caused by the climate drives La Niña and El Nino. Also, bushfires have been a common occurrence in Australia for centuries.
You can't reason someone out of a position they weren't reasoned into.
@@shaunpatrick8345 It was in the description of the video
@@Username-ky3lr people won't accept that they weren't caused by climate change, because it wasn't reason that made them believe it in the first place.
I love how y’all list your sources in the description 😌
Alternate title: a guide to starting shit over the holidays
Awesome vid tho lol!
😂😂😂😂
I'll never take any of this seriously until China and India get on board. However climate change people only ever talk to other countries that share climate change concern. Literally can't even see across a river in China lol
B K USA is in second place right behind China, no India in the top three. Greetings from Belgium 🇧🇪 ✌️
@@90210bryan
before telling others to clean their room, maybe clean our own room first
crazy i know!
This was great! Thank you for compiling all this advice. As an environmental scientist working in sustainability and green business, I struggle to connect with the people who refuse my wealth of stats / evidence. (I live in Northern Nevada, and we still can't say "climate change" in our city meetings.) This is super helpful.
As a physical scientist I struggle not to laugh at people that call themselves "environmental scientists" and anyone that disagrees with them "science deniers". When I ask these "scientists" what is IR absorption cross-section for a CO2 molecule? How does IR absorption change with CO2 concentration? What are the vibrational and rotational density of states for a CO2 molecule? They are completely ignorant.
Environmental science needs to be required course in school.
boosti_ alex it is it’s called ecology and it’s a part of the curriculum of countries all around the world. So is geology, chemistry, ect that all have concerns with these types of things
Zach B ecology and environmental science are two different things. I’ve taken both courses. Maybe you happen to be from a country outside the US that teaches things differently?
they ram climate change down kids throats.. thats why there are kids screaming about it.... they dont teach about weapons of climate destruction.. and the fact that humans can and are controlling the weather and blaming it on .. yeah... climate change... so there is no climate change denier.. there is weather war deniers.. more pertinently
boosti_ alex im taking AP environmental right now. this does NOT need to be a required course, we learn a lot different things than you’d think and all but 2 kids don’t care. they just want a good grade and to leave the class. this won’t just magically change society
Theres something called Geology (earth science)
The debate that asks the question "is the global climate changing" is over. The global climate is changing, but the actual question of whether or not man's industrial and fossil fuel burning activities have contributed towards 'causing' the global climate to undergo the changes we are now experiencing is not an easy question to answer, but I think the evidence does point towards them doing so.
We have been burning fossil fuels intensely since the dawn of the industrial revolution almost 300 years ago, and over that period of time, we have increased our CO2 production exponentially year on year, especially as other countries began their own industrial revolution. We have not stopped increasing our CO2 production with each passing year. All that CO2 is not from natural occurrences, but from man's manufactured occurrences. All of it is 'extra' to natural phases of CO2 production, so of course, it cannot be denied that we have contributed (300 years worth) to the current levels of CO2.
With having so much CO2 around, the earth's natural carbon sinks are quite saturated and are unable to take in CO2 at levels that make much of a difference, so more CO2 is in the atmosphere than what is normally present. This warms the air, and along with the sun's constant solar radiation, the energy in the atmosphere increases which leads to more intense weather systems propagating stronger storms and greater precipitation, especially in areas where the climate tends to be more 'moderate'. What we are experiencing and witnessing today are changes to local weather systems that normally worked pretty clock-work like, that were stable and moderate within a fine-tuning. It is the fine-tuning that is breaking down, and is the first symptom of climate change.
I predict that as the atmosphere warms further, leading to greater land ice melting and finding its way into the sea, not only will there be loss of coastal regions as the seas rise, but we should be able to detect the sea rises at geographical places where the seas are channelled (bottle-necked) between landmasses, rises in sea levels will be focused at these points around the world first. Sea level rises will lead to greater amounts of precipitation over land masses, where more frequent flooding will be experienced each year.
You can argue all you want about causes of climate change, but the fact is...it is happening, and it will only become more intense. If the industrial revolution had never occurred, there would not be 300 years worth of 'extra' CO2 in the natural carbon sinks and atmosphere.
If there is one statement that really pisses me off is the 'we have to save the planet' bullshit. We are not saving the planet, we are looking to save the environments of our current habitats from being overwhelmed by events rapid in their occurrence. We can deal with slow catastrophic events, and also catastrophic events that occur in small local regions, but fast, wider-ranging events can knock us for six, and put great stressors upon our social and technological infrastructures. Just bear in mind that our greatest fragility is being dependent on electricity always available at the press of a switch, and that means that every single one of us who have commented on this thread could not handle the loss of electricity for up to just six months, let alone it disappearing forever.
Elysiumfire I admire how educated you are. If only everyone was as educated as you are
Not sure if "save the planet" was ever meant to be taken quite that literally but okay
Harry Willmore probably just a simple way to put what your man said really, a quick and simple saying
It's a fraud. Pure and simple. They've been predicting catastrophe for fifty years. It use to be that an ICE AGE was coming. The data they use comes from the UN, and it's a fraud.
300 Years ago we were in the depths of the little Ice Age and even though we were heading towards the industrial revolution the addition of CO2 to the atmosphere from Human activities was almost non-existent and for the next 150 years the planet warmed approx. 1.2 deg C on its own till about 1850 AD with CO2 at under 300 PPM , and even up to 1945 it was only just over 300 PPM.
From 1945 to now CO2 has risen from just over 300 PPM to 410 PPM approx and there has been NO acceleration in the warming trend since 1945 if anything the warming trend has slowed a little.
In conclusion there is still no solid connection between CO2 and the warming of the last 300 years. Regards Peter Guest Australia
Well the comment section is going to fun in this.
It's cancerous. I'm noping out. Maybe I'll come back on the weekend.
@@pranavarvind4281 gonna be good
@@pranavarvind4281 it's not though? You have to set the comments to newest first to find anynegarive comments and it's not even that much. Your drawing attention to something that isnt as big as you are maning it our to be for attention for yourself
@@greenkidd529 and you responded. So Whos giving the attention ya flog.
@@greenkidd529 I commented a few minutes after the video was uploaded. It was *way* worse them.
Edit: That's why I said, " I'll come back on the weekend". The comments normally clear up in a day or two.
"They need to be sued!"
I'm thinking a little more than just suing them lol
I have not laughed out loud during a video in a while! Great video, you make it funny and interesting.
watch this fully th-cam.com/video/-peWWeRV71Y/w-d-xo.html
In many cases it's not about trying to convince them that it is real, they've already made up their mind and no amount of evidence will change it. It's just about making them look stupid in front of everyone else.
Ok I really need help:
So my teen cousin (whom I love very much) pretty much just told me that she doesn’t really believe in climate change. She holds doubts about wether climate change really is man-made and doesn’t really believe that climate change really is the cause for all these things we’re facing. Like the storms and shit. The reason for this is that she’s not really interested in science and she doesn’t really want to inform herself excessively, reading all these studies, dedicate a lot of time to it. (-> Teenager) She admits that she neither has the information to prove or disprove climate change, but it seems made up. I want to talk to her about this, and like show her the data and so on, but I‘m scared it’ll seem condescending and boring and panicky and thus driving her even further away. I really need a way to discuss this with her in way that is neither exzessive in time or hard data, that still gives believable proof of man-made climate change. I am sooo open for suggestions!
:)
Make her look at the data, the charts. That way she can find out there is no unnatural co2 global warming, that life & civilisation has always peaked when co2 was at its highest, and thinking by yourself looking at the facts allows you not to fall for idiotic propaganda.
@Bruce Sanders
Hey, I appreciate that it looks like you put in some effort, but I didn't find this very helpful.
Could you use sources that are a bit more readable? You shouldn't expect people to do the analysis of data without explanation, how would a human actually use this?
And why did you use completely arbitrary stretches of years? From 25 to 2 to whatever? That doesn't seem very honest, especially when you then mention a lack of a linear relationship between CO2 and temperatures. Even taking a linear relationship for granted, you wouldn't be able to see that with arbitrary amounts of time while also showing percentage changes rather than linear changes.
Even if you're completely right, this is no way to show that's the case. If you want to convince people with data honestly, you have to present your data honestly. If you don't know how to analyze and show data you should probably leave that to scientists who's job that literally is.
If I'm just misunderstanding though, I'd love to see some more accessible and rigorous sources supporting your arguments.
no one thinks that climates never change. of course climates changing over time is a documented thing. however saying she doesnt know if humans are causing the all the problems leads me to believe she is smarter than you, who is someone that blindly follows the bullshit they hear on cnn and spouted by an antifa marxist child.
@@iainburge the earth is fine that guy is just a russian bot
@@parkerhaynes4913 Oh, don't worry, I believe in Science, we cool. Thanks though. But like, actually a Russian bot? Does that mean AI, or someone paid like 3$ an hour?
Or you can just go “ok boomer”
Plenty of non-boomers don't believe in climate change.
Also, it's ageist, like saying "ok, whitey" or "ok, woman". Better not to be a bigot and just ignore them or prove them wrong.
@@WhatIsItToBurn ok boomer
@@WhatIsItToBurn (I really am terribly sorry but that was the best way of demonstrating the point and comedic intent of going "ok boomer")
@Tommy well you're wrong. Man-made climate change is as sound as gravity. Where is your evidence that backs up your claim???
@@emmaallman4678 The way you think "ok boomer" is supposed to be used makes you seem like a Boomer lmao
And if u ever lose an argument about it remember that it’s hard to argue with a smart person but almost impossible to argue with an idiot
watch this fully th-cam.com/video/-peWWeRV71Y/w-d-xo.html
Thank you for showing me Skeptical Science, what a great site!
Great video. Indeed some advice on talking about this sensitive topic is needed. I've always associated discussing climate change with a plant-based diet. The research is there, and has been there for a while now. But there are many interests and political hindrances at play that makes it hard to navigate and enlighten people. Let's keep the discussion alive and fight for a better future.
3:1 Like to dislike ratio.
*Me:* Oh, the comments are going to be interesting!
@@limited3502 he's talking about the _comments_ not the video.
Kinda what I expected... I kinda knew that 1 in 3 people are stupid. It matches up.
@@limited3502 i see you're projecting your butthurt leftism, kiddo. also your wacko conspiracy idiocy. do you understand that by assuming everyone who understands basic facts is a liberal, you're insulting conservatives and libertarians like me. I would guess you're also one, which makes it ironic how you insult your own intelligence. But surely you're too stupid to notice.
Climate Change UN Agenda, here is the all Truth > th-cam.com/video/3PrY7nFbwAY/w-d-xo.html
@@jonbowman7686 But no one who is able to understand basic facts believes in the CO2 climate change.
@asapscience what is the best way to deal with tear gas?
I took notes, learned quite a bit, and giggled all the way through with some scattered genuine LOLs. Thanks! :)
watch this fully th-cam.com/video/-peWWeRV71Y/w-d-xo.html
I dont think classing normal people as modern day sinners helps, because it seems if you are naturally a sceptical person and ask even one or two questions.......your labeled a denier
There's no room for nuance anymore, especially on the left.
Wrong. You are labeled a science denier when you deny the science, plain and simple.
@@MohamedAdelSci not in my experience, just look up Canadian professor force out of university because her data on polar bears didn't fit the narrative
Depends if you ask questions like "Maybe the scientist's are just trying to make money?" and "Are you sure it isn't a conspiracy?"
Those will generally get you labelled pretty hard, and not just as a science denialist.
@@HippopotamusPencil isn't that the claim against any scientist that doesn't agree though - "they are being paid by big oil!!"
"No amount of evidence will ever persuade an idiot."
-Mark Twain
Albert Einstein Quote: “Genius abhors consensus because when consensus is reached, thinking stops. Stop nodding your head.”
100 Authors Against Einstein - Scientific 'Consensus' and Scepticism
Why 100 authors? If I were wrong, then one would have been enough! - Albert Einstein
Bruce Sanders A thickening layer of C02 traps heat and stops it from escaping into space. It’s why it’s called the greenhouse effect. More heat is stored while less and less escapes into space.
This form of climate change is separate from the natural occurrences that contribute to changing temperatures such as the Milankovitch cycles and S.A.M.
Overall in the long term it will contribute to higher temperatures and we have seen this in places like Scotland that has seen record breaking temperatures. However these rates are not static and climate change isn’t a singular consequence. The polar vortex is an example of this. Sea currents are also a major factor that complicate the immediate effects of human caused climate change
Bruce Sanders
The solar radiation pass through the greenhouse and traps thermal energy inside emitted by the plants inside
Solar radiation falls on earth (ie plants grown in the greenhouse) and gasses(like the glass in green houses) does not allow the heat to escape
The gasses are called greenhouse since they absorb infrared light as the molecules change their symmetry when light falls upon them (Infrared active molecules)
Now they both block heat from escaping in different ways, as the greenhouse blocks convection, the thickening atmosphere keeps the planet warm by preventing wavelengths of infrared radiation from escaping, but the metaphor is similar in principle and commonly used for familiarity with wider audiences.
Bruce Sanders The Greenhouse blocks heat from escaping through convection, aided by the glass storing solar radiation within the framework. C02 acts as the glass blocking solar radiation from escaping into space. As I have explained these two methods are different but the concept is similar if not entirely accurate
The comments prove the point. Termometers and countries getting warmer. Glaciers melting is not enough. Impirical evidence with logic makes the most sensible science. If that isnt proof then nothing is.
Hi, I like the work you're doing in trying to give a little guideline for a talk with one of the many climate change deniers. But to me it was a little bit to loose. I was missing a red line and the three basic stept of storytelling 1. Introduction + Hook (get inside your listiners head, what moves them) 2, Plot and challenges and 3. How this changed everything for the better.
You were asking for recommendations to read upon and the most single book I can recommend is "Out of the wreckage" by George Monbiot. This guy makes it so clear what is wrong (climate change is not the problem but just the symptom), how to change it and how a better word could look like. And man does it look good if we want to. This book really gives me hope.
Bushfires are not any different than previous centuries. Flooding is less than previous centuries. Hurricanes are the same with MAYBE a little decrease.
Love the video! Go Greg!
Another important point is to not be confrontational because they will get defensive and shut down
(my opinion)
watch this fully th-cam.com/video/-peWWeRV71Y/w-d-xo.html
Flamboyantly yells "orange man bad!"
This video is inspiring! Keep up the excellent work. Changing the world is a huge task. Just go with it!
Why do you need rhetorical training or why are you excited? Not a single argument was discussed here, this is just some pseudo psycholgie guide.
You directed me to visit the video when trying to talk to Australian politicians about climate change. The unfortunate issue however is that in their narrative, the coal and oil executives are the ones who line their pockets. And that perpetuates the denialism seen so virulent amongst our Aussie politicians. It’s not that they don’t believe in climate change, it’s just that it suits their agenda do deny it. They have short term goals that they’re keen on reaching
Can you guys make a video on string theory? Also on the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th dimension.
As someone who leans to right but believes climate change, I can say right now if you mention Greta in your persuasion you'll be laughed at
Why? Just interested as she is simply trying her hardest to push the understanding of climate disaster cause by climate change. Let me know why so many people hate her coz I am really confused
@@libbyford6765 They don't like being challenged by a kid, it's that simple. These are the same people who believe in physically disciplining children.
@@libbyford6765 to us on the right Greta is just another little girl, with the same talking points as any adult left winger. If you really think about it nothing new has been said from her, and the reason we'd find it kind of funny is that, you can get kids to say just about anything, i ,mean i grew up catholic and in those times i actually believed in all that stuff unlike today.
They're big grown up macho men (and or women) they don't want to think that a teenager can be smarter than them. Though on this area , she absolutely is
@@ziemayet if they dont believe in it to begin with they wont see her as smarter. They ,and to an extent me, dont care how old she is it's the same message in a different pack age
thank you for this, a failed debate today brought me here haha
One thing that should always be done in an argument is to immediately put yourself on the other person's level: find one thing you both agree upon, even the stupidest, stick to it and make the discussion orbit around it. It is hard to do for sure, but constantly going back to a point where the two opinions meet is for sure a way to bond to the other. They feel less under attack, so you can slightly start putting in you agument in a very subtle way, using his or her values as a lever, to push forward your ideas. So then very gently they will begin to "surrender" to your polite and soft manners and end up agreeing with you. But again, it's really difficoult to do that efficiently and not freak out .
“And theeeeeey need to be sued” yes ma’am
Do the old videos
2:35 😂😂😂 I swallowed spit up my nose LOL
Could you make a video on what happens to the gym we throw away on the floor? Does it melt away or does it become soil r stay the same? 🤔I really want to know
My mother thinks climate change is a hoax, I've tried everything, but she just says I'm brainwashed 😑 it's impossible to change someones mind if they're unwilling to understand or learn.
Correct, and you are a great example of that......
Climate change deniers are beyond stupid. They don't understand the difference between weather and climate. They will even reject hard annual average temperature numbers from first-hand sources if it doesn't agree with what it FELT like to them individually in their own place they live at. Stupidity knows no boundaries.
@@devolution1310 What are you insinuating, do you believe it's a hoax too?
@@vitaminb4869 Exactly, they don't care how many facts or studies you show them, they just ignore it all and you can't have a discussion with someone who is that close-minded, doesn't help that most of them get defensive and rude too.
@@doesntreply Absolutely....
Such an informative video guys please...we want more sustainability related videos💝
Yeah, and swamp land in FL to build your next house on
You're so chaotic and I love it.
“Caring For Creation” is an amazing book for climate change deniers who are Christians to read. It actually changed my super conservative grandmothers mind!
It's hard to change your mind when Nasa took a picture of Antarctica in 2015 "more ice than ever" "Antarctica reaches new record maximum" tell me does global warming really exist?
Rhys Aguirre yeah dude a quick google search proves that overall the world is loosing ice. Yes ice is growing in some spots but overall the ice is melting. One tiny anomaly doesn’t disprove climate change lmao
@@EverHillsRanch tiny? Have you seen it? Does record maximum mean anything?
Rhys Aguirre yes buddy I did see it
Rhys Aguirre but it expands every winter so yes stuff would obviously freeze
This is important topic: Knowing Your audience.
I love the topic You choose, I like the Exxon angle. Other than that You tend to vilify or make a fun of the deniers too much.
First we need to understand them, respect them. For that we need to understand their angle - asking questions! - and that IS as much important as the emotional connection you emphasize on question thing. (If you ask questions without actually trying to understand, you will not connect anyway)
why not, they don't give a shit about their own planet in the long run. They should be made fun of.
@@user-mt4bk4ml7t yeah but we need them to give a shit soo.....
gotta suck up to those asses
I changed my flatmate's opinion on climate change a couple months ago.
He thought it was all fake and exaggeration, after actually explaining it to him he realised it was real
Sometimes u just gotta explain it to them
Could you explain the Milankovitch cycles and the geological movements of earth on the impact of global warming? I am interested in hearing your explaination.
Can you explain gentrification and if it’s bad or good? Who does it ultimately help and harm?
Agree or disagree, the most important thing is civil, productive conversation.
but if you are a racist nazi climate change denier you deserve to be thrown in jail..... or atleast murdered by the authoritarian leftist state.
That's cool and all but what happened to the old video formats? I honestly subbed because it was quite simple just looking at the cartoonish drawings and I kinda miss them...
Yeah this is garbage.
Do you have any suggestions for when the person accepts climate change but denies doing anything about it and discourage you from that too? Like, if you are trying to save electricity or water or trying not to use plastic bags they try to discourage you saying that these actions are insignificant and the big corporations are doing much much worse so my actions won't matter?
Love this video. Sending it to all my friends 👍🏽
watch this fully th-cam.com/video/-peWWeRV71Y/w-d-xo.html
I think you hit the nail on the head in the fact that conservatives do not want to accept the consensus of climate change because the solution of climate change generally leads to corporate regulation, higher taxes (carbon tax), etc.
One study I read showed that calling climate change deniers out, and showing the facts, and arguing with them actually just pushed them more to their beliefs further to their ideology.
Psychology is very complex so it is hard to say a specific strategy in changing minds on this. One thing I think is helpful is mass public education on the topic. The more Ads, TH-cam videos, Teachers, Journalists, educating the public the better.
Thank you for making these videos on Climate Change.
1.1M views on the "Biggest Lie About Climate Change" had to have alteast changed some minds...
Agenda 2030
You dumb asf
Why do the banks continue to invest in real estate in coastal cities when climate change is happening?
Because they aren’t doing it with THEIR money
@@amp04222 ... So who's money?
because those plots of land are super valuable and their rise in value just keeps increasing
juhotuho10 how can it be valuable when sea levels are projected to rise 4ft due to climate change?
J S it’s still valuable land in the short term and honestly it depends where your talking about . Some coastal areas will suffer greatly where other costs will be reasonably safe for a while.
Can you tell me what the problem is with climate change if there is one?
I know it’s not necessarily an asapScience topic, but how about how to convince people they should vote?
I think the biggest thing holding you back from changing minds is the sheer amount of condescension towards those who don't agree with you; it's pretty gross. I also find it ironic most people like this are also usually against nuclear energy even though it's BY FAR the cleanest energy source and the only realistic way we can shake off our dependency on fossil fuels like France or Germany (with the assistance of great renewables of course like hydro or wind). Also you can't propose people throw aside their views and follow "scientific consensus" when you refuse to throw aside your views and follow "economic consensus" on most of your economic views. FYI among economists (who have worked closely with climate scientists) it's highly agreed upon that a Carbon Tax would go a long way to addressing the issue without destroying our economy or too badly hurting the poor in other countries; who frankly have much bigger problems to worry about right now like not dying from disease or malnutrition. And speaking of it's insane to me you don't dedicate the same amount of time to resource depletion as you do to Global Warming when it's a FAR more important environmental issue. And for the record, the great majority of Americans agree that Global Warming is real and has been accelerated by humans; the debate is over what / how much we should do to fight it. So please stop talking down to those more pragmatic people like they don't understand. Stop with the alarmism or nitpicked sources; just persuade them with solid simple objective data showing that spending money now to fight climate change is far more cost effective then spending it later trying to clean it up. And NOT in a condescending way.
Facts right here.
Amen
MurderedByWords?
I honestly am disappointed with this video. He encourages us to use scientific data and all but half of the video is jokes, clips and sarcasm. I used to view AsapScience as a reliable TH-cam channel dedicated to science but now it seems like they are getting into the social and political aspects of things. Definitely would of loved a more structured video that was straight to the point.
Inspiringer science cannot be untied from political and social issues, and it never has been
The thing about the ideological issue is that, climate change is the biggest area where we see capitalism failing. You can't have infinite growth on a planet with limited resources. The consumerism that capitalism has brought with it has led to so much waste.
(I'm sorry if I'm not commercially viable now lol)
Even though i believe all this is true, and that this makes it really hard to make rightwingers believe in climate change, i think it's really important to at least pull them out of climate denial as it is right now.
The climate crisis is gonna affect everyone, no matter your ideology.
I just do #1 and go on to discuss how much cheaper/hassle-free it is to go for the greener option to fix their problem.
This is a darn good video. I am gonna follow every word
Painting everyone with this broad brush (and giving Trump the middle finger) is a good way to politicize and partisanize an important issue and is counter productive. As a Republican just because someone disagrees with your solutions to climate change does not mean that we are "climate change deniers." We've made great technological advancements in agriculture in the past to mitigate the threat of overpopulation. Stalling the US economy with proposals such as the "Green New Deal" will inadvertently stifle innovation and may destroy any prospect of a realistic solution. We need to OPEN up the dialogue not shut it down.
This was a great video 💕 thank you for this!
Sarcasm will get you nowhere.
@@hejla4524 I wasn't being sarcastic. Bye.
@@joanneharker3358 Hello, you look old enough to see how insufferable this guy was in his presentation and argument. For a 'denier ' who has ten times more intelligence look up Dr. Judith Curry.
@@hejla4524 Thanks for passing your judgments, but I don't take advice from youtube commenters. I also try to always refer to multiple credible, sources to form an opinion. So you're one resource doesn't really hold up to the 97% of climate scientists who would argue climate change is influenced by human behaviours.
@@joanneharker3358 Don't listen to me, just look up videos with Patrick Moore, William Happer or Judith Curry - climate experts who argue far more in depth than this patronizing know all.
Omg y'all should partner with The Sunrise Movement !
so simple, thanks for contributing to the popularization of this issue
Are these the same scientists who said a few decades ago that the world was going to go through a global cooling?
Yesssss! 🤣🤣
gasp! Science is hard and it’s impossible to 1000% predict the future! What a profound discovery, you must be proud of yourself. Very big brain indeed. Fortunately, when you take the easy way out and believe easy stories that feel good, you don’t have to challenge yourself or ever require critical thinking. Thinking is hard, and that’s all that science is, so I don’t blame you for taking the easy way out. Unfortunately, the world is hard and we all have to adjust at some point. Good luck with that, I hope you figure it out eventually!
@@MrCarl760th-cam.com/video/mioDAKACre8/w-d-xo.html
No. That was one study, picked up by Time magazine, and not a widely accepted idea nor one borne out by further research.
You talk to them like you would to a regular person. Discrimination is not okay
watch this fully th-cam.com/video/-peWWeRV71Y/w-d-xo.html
LMAO DISCRIMINATION??? IM SORRY 💀💀💀💀💀
I’m a kid rn and it hurts a lot that my dad doesn’t believe. But I’m glad I follow u guys cause this might help!
Listen to your father.
Listen to your dad not this guy
Loved the video, and the thumbnail
Him: carbon DIE-oxide
Plants: 💀
Feather Plants be like “Woo! CO2! Let’s get photosynthesisin’, boys!”
When you brought up Greta that definitely didn't help.
HOW DARE YOU's
Exacly what i thought, She is paid to read scripts.
climate girl bad
Will you make video about Myristicin?
The pennywise got me off guard
I think that old regulations must adapt to the changes in our modern society; modern problems require modern solutions.
Old regulations are hindering the changes that brought our own society to this damning resolution “Climate Change”.
We must change this regulation to par for 21st-century changes and add more regulations that will save nature of our planet as a society, as a whole.
The US and China, mostly, needs to step up their regulation game, yep. And every undeveloped polluter.
Modern problems only appear because of modern solutions
Can't regulate it. We are living marginal lives. You cannot increase any area of anyone's life by more than 30% essentially. Water, heat, power, groceries, etc. We have no ability to absorb the regulation needed. Meanwhile, China and India simply do not care.
@@dylandawson585 With support and pressure from the developed world, they certainly can.
Climate Change UN Agenda, here is the all Truth > youtu.be/3PrY7nF
You're going to read ALL comments?
Yeeeees that's what I planned to do
In Galileo's time there were commentators writing about "How to talk to geocentric solar system deniers".
What about volcanoes? They put a ton in the air all the time. Also... I’m all for cutting back, but... we can’t control other countries... soo what do you do?
I found that being as unconfrontational as possible was key. Asking what they thought, listening and then putting the blame where most of it belongs: big cooperations.
A pixelated middle finger to Trump. Stuning and brave!
@@Capade
Ok boomer.
Phuck Durmph
@@ansh6370 Ok Zoomer
Imagine getting triggered that someone insulted Trump
@@hannibalburgers477 offended boomer
I cannot begin to explain how I want to do something about this rn but I'm a 12 year old kid from England and I have no idea whats going on.
2:50 made me laugh so hard!!! LMAO
LOL that Co² costume scene 😂😂😂
a good question to ask is "what proof would you need to accept that climate change is real?"
another one is "does it not make you uncomfortable that you need these grand conspiracies to justify your worldview, while i don't?"
Agenda 2030
1. Climate change is not "denied", climate always changes, there will never be a flat line, it is the human share that is doubted.
2. I would accept that humans are significantly causing warming, when the next cooling period is skipped, since we "just" (1900) left a very strong mini ice age, this can take still take a while.
3. I do not need any conspiracy. There is a reproduction crisis and the IPCC is the best example, pretty much the incarnation and institutionalisation of the reproduction crisis.
The politics just follow a green trend, in the end they are just lays like you and me. No conspiracy needed, only some jerks that simulate sound science.
@@nyoodmono4681 1. climate change deniers come in different breeds. some deny it altogether, while some only deny human involvement.
2. the earth has been cooling off since the start of the subatlantic era, around 2 500 years ago - a trend that was quickly reversed by human-made global warming. overall however, the earth's temperature has been fairly stable since the start of the holocene. if the current trend of cooling that was projected to continue, being interrupted by severe warming due to no other discernable event than human-made climate change and you literally need the earth to skip a projected ice age to accept that human-made global warming is true, then i can't help you buddy.
3. you're ridiculously underselling the scientific consensus, which is at about 97-100%. if you're making the claim that all of these papers are filled with lies, either through maliciousness or ignorance, you need a MASSIVE conspiracy to explain how this has happened. you can deny it all you want, you're either a massive hypocrite or a massive conspiracy theorist.
@@GabZonY 2. Nope: Earth has been cooling off since Antarctica went back to the pole, this marks the dawn of the cenozoic and the end of the cretateous. 2500 years ago document a change between warm periods and cold periods, where the last mini ice age was exceptional strong.
3. It does not need a conspiracy and it is not 97%. What it needs is a reproduction crisis, a super institution (IPCC) with a mandate, a blind love for complex models that will never be accurate enough (climate uncertanty relation) and usefull idiots like you. The fact that we are guessing with a forcing originally of 1,5°C till 4,5°C is in itself proof that there is uncertainty. If you take a closer look, the UN is anything but a majority, every bigger country has its own research, the russians, chinese, USA and India are obviously not buying it. The russians seems to get it right btw, their model meets the observations and what they do is they neglect CO2. This pseudo consensus might be your sharpest argument, in the end it is blunt.
The papers are not "filled with" lies, they reproduce axiomatical errors. It is not about lying, it is about not knowing (uncertanty), yet pretending that everything is settled.What does this lead to? Probably to saturation aka opacity, since here the discussions are endless and not solved.
@@nyoodmono4681 "actually there is no consensus, and all the scientific research that doesn't support my conclusion is filled with errors, and the people who write them just pretend that the data is there and that there's no uncertainty" you are literally feeding me grand conspiracy here while pretending that you're not s conspiracy theorist. why has nobody realised that these vast flaws exist? why is it only you? are you willing to accept this line of thinking for any scientific consensus, or is it just the climate change one? if not, why did this happen specifically with climate change research? what's to gain here? just admit that you're a conspiracy theorist, it's fine dude. it's the only way to have this all fit together.
also, our numbers don't contradict each other - you're speaking on a time scale of millions of years while i was talking about thousands.
potholer has the best explaining-series on his youtube channel on the matter including debunks of common myths
Potholer thinks Manns Hockey stick is accurate so why do you think he has any idea!!!
I think energy freedom is a big one because it packages conflict in the Middle East surrounding oil, keeping markets healthy with real competition, and self-sufficiency (sustainability), as a contained narrative
I’m pretty conservative in my views but the data is pretty clear about climate change. Although, I don’t think that taxation is the answer..
Taxing alone isn't the answer. You need to provide less-costly alternatives.
@Rion I don't see what that has to do with taxation ...
@Rion Yes you did not talk about taxation. This thread is about whether taxation is the right approach to curb emissions. You're free to talk off-topic if you want though.
@Rion No I think he said that there is evidence. He's discussing what's the best way to address the problem.
I disagree that that the data is clear. GGL climategate
Giddens, Sociology
Has a part where he talks about ideology
I invest in Exxon. Is there any booming green company out there?
You look like a scientist for ExxonMobil too!
Can someone tell me y they stopped for 3 months