Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 18 submissions in the queue.
posted by CoolHand on Sunday April 26 2015, @01:33PM   Printer-friendly
from the denial-is-a-river-in-egypt dept.

So, it has come to this! Universities are now offering courses on how to argue against climate change denialists! (Note, even mentioning such courses could be illegal in Florida, but fortunately this is in Australia.)

Starting 28 April, 2015, the University of Queensland is offering a free Massive Open Online Course (MOOC) aimed at “Making Sense of Climate Science Denial”.

You know you've made it when they start teaching about you in college! Well done, climate change deniers!!!
And a MOOC? Hmmm, is there a "certificate" one might earn?

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Troll) by VLM on Sunday April 26 2015, @04:46PM

    by VLM (445) on Sunday April 26 2015, @04:46PM (#175372)

    recognize which authorities can be most trusted on any particular topic

    The believers misunderstand at least some of the disbelievers.

    They hear I'm an unbeliever and its immediately all "don't you want Jesus to save you" oh no wait thats the other disbelief I have. No they "I don't believe the atmosphere changes over time" "I don't believe the sea level changes over time" "I don't believe the earth can be (microscopically) modified by humans." and such.

    However what I actually disbelieve in is putting awareness ribbons and bumper stickers will have any effect, politicians making speeches but not actually changing anything will have any effect, anything I do will have any effect (in a zero sum economic sense the steak I don't buy will lower steak demand and thus price by a millionth of a percent thus some poor dude who couldn't afford my steak will now afford it and eat it for me, so why don't I just eat the damn steak myself, especially since I can afford it and its delicious and who eats it won't affect the environment). Also I don't believe any of it happens fast enough to matter, at least not to intelligent people who live in intelligent locations with a dose of dumb people in dumb geography will always find a dumb way to F themselves up without climate change.

    I know a large fraction of disbelievers simply troll, and once anything from the color of the sky to the smell of a flower is politicized to one side it becomes socially / politically impossible for the "other guys" not to self identify as the other side out of pure political spite (and probably a little fear of being labeled as a sympathizer to the other political party).

    But semi-anonymously its safe enough for me to say that the supporters are pretty much a giant chat roulette sausage rubbing festival in terms of real world effect even in their wildest dreams, and I feel too much ridicule toward self important yet impotent folks like that to support their activity. So sure I deny the whole thing.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Troll=1, Insightful=1, Interesting=1, Total=3
    Extra 'Troll' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 27 2015, @02:25PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 27 2015, @02:25PM (#175717)

    I don't buy will lower steak demand and thus price by a millionth of a percent thus some poor dude who couldn't afford my steak will now afford it and eat it for me, so why don't I just eat the damn steak myself

    I'll accept that the affect of one person individually choosing to not have a steak will have an insignificant effect, but surely you aren't suggesting that it will have literally 0 effect.

    With basic economic analysis of supply-demand curves you can see this is not true. Assuming infinitely precise increments, if the demand drops .0000000001%, the price will drop $.0000000001 but the number sold will also drop by .0000000001.

    Incidentally, by the same argument you propose, you can't hunt a species to extinction. If you hunt one tiger, a second tiger which would otherwise have starved will be able to eat and thus live. Hunting a second one won't matter either, by the same argument. Continue as long as you like, as there will always be another tiger.