SoylentNews

Google Will Stop Supporting Climate Change Science Deniers, Calls Them Liars

posted by n1 on Tuesday September 23 2014, @08:56PM   
from the trying-not-to-be-evil? dept.

AnonTechie writes:

Google Executive Chairman Eric Schmidt today said it was a “mistake” to support the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), a group that has said human-created climate change could be “beneficial” and opposes environmental regulations. Schmidt said groups trying to cast doubt on climate change science are "just literally lying."

Google’s membership in ALEC has been criticized because of the group’s stance on climate change and its opposition to network neutrality rules and municipal broadband. Earlier this month, Google refused to comment after 50 advocacy groups called on the company to end its affiliation with ALEC.

• That's a pretty hefty accusation That's a pretty hefty accusation (Score: 4, Insightful) by Leebert on Tuesday September 23 2014, @10:15PM

  by Leebert (3511) on Tuesday September 23 2014, @10:15PM (#97366)

  Quoting Schmidt in the article:

  "Everyone understands that climate change is occurring, and the people who oppose it are really hurting our children and grandchildren and making the world a much worse place. And so we should not be aligned with such people. They’re just literally lying."

  "Just literally lying" means that they actually know and believe the opposite but actively are claiming otherwise in a deliberate act of deceit. That's a rough accusation to make. Why isn't it possible that this is a sincerely held belief? He doesn't provide any reasoning as to why it couldn't possibly be a position that, correct or incorrect, they hold in good faith as a result of self-deceit or some sort of cognitive bias. "Everyone understands" it? Hogwash; I've had great discussions with lots of people who genuinely believe otherwise. Those conversations ALWAYS go better when I recognize that it's a sincerely held belief, let them explain it, ask questions to make sure I understand their position, and explain why I think it's incorrect. And I've learned that doing such is good for me, also: Self delusion can go either way; I'm certainly not immune and I'm happy to be convinced that I'm wrong. Maybe not in the moment, but in the long term.

  This is the problem with modern public discourse. We're always demonizing the opposition. For example, pro-lifers never voice a recognition that they understand that pro-choicers truly believe that they are protecting the rights of women, and pro-choicers never voice a recognition that pro-lifers truly believe that they are protecting unborn babies. Nodoby's gonna win anybody over that way. Yeah, sure, you're posturing for the people watching who might not have decided, but even then I still think that people are more likely to more likely to gravitate toward the side of the people who demonstrate an understanding and respect for the opposing position but still hold their own position.

  Now, it could well be that this is a group of Dr. Evils sitting around in their volcanic lair plotting the destruction of the Earth whilst enriching themselves, but you need more than hand-waving assertion to convince me of that. Hanlon's Razor is popular for a reason.

  Starting Score:	1		point
  Moderation		+2
  Insightful=2, Total=2
  Extra 'Insightful' Modifier		0
  Karma-Bonus Modifier		+1
  Total Score:		4

• Re:That's a pretty hefty accusation (Score: 4, Insightful) by richtopia on Tuesday September 23 2014, @10:35PM

  by richtopia (3160) on Tuesday September 23 2014, @10:35PM (#97376) Homepage Journal

  The argument could be made that the evidence is conclusive enough that any non-biased person should draw the same conclusion, hence the lying remark. Anyway, belief is probably the wrong term for this argument, as we are not discussing a moral question, but interpreting scientific observations.

  Parent

• Re:That's a pretty hefty accusation Re:That's a pretty hefty accusation (Score: 2) by n1 on Tuesday September 23 2014, @11:10PM

  by n1 (993) on Tuesday September 23 2014, @11:10PM (#97391) Journal

  I had the same thoughts as you on this, that it's a harsh accusation to say they're lying. However, thinking about it a bit more, ALEC could well be lying, because the truth is counter-productive to their interests and their obligation is to their agenda, not to the truth as such. The motto for ALEC is apparently "Limited Government, Free Markets, Federalism", acknowledging the truth of climate change would be against that ideology so lies are the only option, for the greater good of "free markets" and "limited government". Saying that, willful ignorance is probably the term I would have used.

  Now the people that listen to and agree with ALEC may well believe it in their heart and could not be seen as lying or willfully ignorant.

  Parent

  • Re:That's a pretty hefty accusation (Score: 2) by cafebabe on Wednesday September 24 2014, @03:11AM

    by cafebabe (894) on Wednesday September 24 2014, @03:11AM (#97462) Journal

    If ALEC was really concerned about free markets and limited government, they'd concentrate on repealing laws rather than drafting them.

    --
    1702845791×2

    Parent