Let the wailing begin: 'Moral values influence level of climate change action'

From CORNELL UNIVERSITY and the “we have compassion and fairness and you don’t” department comes this eye-roller. One wonders how they might rate the compassion and fairness of this statement:

“We are not morally bad people for taking carbon and turning it into the energy that offers life to humanity…” Carbon-based energy, which is “the most affordable and reliable source of energy in demand today, liberates people from poverty,”  “Without energy, life is brutal and short.” – Dr. John Christy Source


Moral values influence level of climate change action

ITHACA, N.Y. – Two moral values highly rated by liberals — compassion and fairness — influence willingness to make personal choices to mitigate climate change’s impact in the future, according to a new multidisciplinary study by Cornell University researchers.

The findings also suggest that a moral value rated more highly by conservatives – purity – also appears to have a positive effect, though not as pronounced as compassion and fairness.

Those insights from a group of four researchers at Cornell – Janis Dickinson, professor of natural resources; Poppy McLeod, professor of communication; Robert Bloomfield, professor of management and professor of accounting; and Shorna Allred, professor of natural resources – were published in PLOS ONE. While prior research has investigated the relationship between moral values and environmental attitudes, this work extends this investigation to intentionality with respect to changes in environmental behavior.

The authors’ work is based on Jonathan Haidt’s moral foundations theory. A professor at New York University, Haidt identifies five “moral axes” around which humans develop individual moral reasoning: compassion/harming, fairness/cheating, in-group loyalty/betrayal, authority/subversion and purity/degradation.

Previous research using Haidt’s moral foundations has found that those who identify as liberal prize the values of compassion and fairness most highly. Those who consider themselves conservative place nearly as high a value on compassion and fairness, but place a substantially higher value on in-group loyalty, authority and purity.

The Cornell researchers also found that belief in climate change was significantly associated with increased willingness to act, while those who identified as politically conservative, and who were older and male, were less inclined to act.

Given that liberal attitudes tend to favor action on climate change, Dickinson was not surprised that compassion and fairness correlated strongly with individual willingness to make lifestyle changes.

“Compassion and fairness make perfect sense, because climate change is an environmental justice issue, and being willing to do something about climate change also requires that we care about future generations. Both of those things require compassion and a sense of fairness,” said Dickinson, the study’s lead author. “But it’s not as clear why purity would be important. It may be because within the religious community, leaders have been focusing on the ideas that we are stewards of the earth and that there’s something impure about destroying natural systems.”

The association between the valuation of purity and a willingness to make personal lifestyle changes, while not as strong as for compassion and fairness, indicates the potential for alternative pathways to climate change action for liberals and conservatives.

“Our finding that willingness to take action on climate change was related to moral values embraced by both liberals and conservatives suggests that it is too simplistic to use political ideology alone to predict support for climate change action,” said McLeod.

“As we learn what’s important to different kinds of people with respect to climate change, that information can help us communicate in ways where the problem can be heard,” said Dickinson. “And I think we may be missing arguments that are important to people if we ignore moral diversity.”

###

Advertisements

  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Joel Snider

You have to remember – what’s important here is the ‘warm fuzzy’. It’s sort of like a narcotic buzz these types get from their moral exhibitionism – and there is absolutely no necessity for value to their actions – or even that the cause is just. But the ‘fix’ requires ever more intense actions – just like the same dose of crack doesn’t get you as high this week as last, THIS week, you need MORE than last week.
And really, this is the same ‘Holier than Thou’ crowd that were the judgmental, puritan ‘church lady’ types that felt so superior to the rest of us before they were painted over with day-glow green.
It’s not really altruism at all – it’s self-indulgence. And elitism.

DALE P MUNCIE

Well said, may I quote you?

Joel Snider

Feel free. Any contribution helps.

Curious George

A historical note: In 1935, two years after the Nazionalsozialists rose to power, the German government passed a Reich law for the protection of the natural environment, a law whose scope was unprecedented at the time and whose goal was to protect and care for the homeland’s natural environment. The law included regulations for the protection of flora and fauna, as well as for the conservation of unique natural phenomena of scientific importance and of aesthetic and cultural value. These natural phenomena included Germany’s celebrated forests, which were considered a central component of the German national identity.
read more: http://www.haaretz.com/jewish/features/brown-and-green-were-the-nazis-forerunners-of-environmental-movements-1.513354

Joel Snider

Yep. Ol’ Adolf was a big Greenie. Environmentalism is historically one of the most exploitable ways to get the population to forsake their rights and prosperity, ‘for the greater good’, because ‘what harm can it do?’ – ‘it’s for the environment’.
There’s no other cause I’ve seen that is so effective in getting people flocking to put the noose around their own necks.

Roger Graves

I would use a different term. What these people are really doing is indulging in spiritual masturbation. On the one hand they feel guilty (never mind what they feel guilty about, they just get a thrill from feeling guilty). This leads up to the climactic moment at which they decide to do something about it, which usually involves spending a lot of their money and even more of other peoples’ money. Having done this, they then have a warm post-coital glow of achievement.

François GM

“I would use a different term. What these people are really doing is indulging in spiritual masturbation. On the one hand they feel guilty (never mind what they feel guilty about, …”
—————————————-
“I would use a different term. What these people are really doing is indulging in spiritual masturbation. On the one hand they feel guilty (never mind what they do with their other hand …”

Latitude

I don’t completely agree……self-indulgence and elitism I do 100% agree…but for a different reason
compassion and fairness is a judgement call…someone has to choose who is the winner of that compassion and fairness..and who is the loser…they get to choose who’s right and wrong…right out of the liberal play book…and perfect example of self-indulgence and elitism
purity..is the polar opposite of that….inward looking…and a judgement on self…not a projection

That is perfect! As most liberals/greens are sure of their purity and feel the need to inflict in upon others!

I think they left out what to me is the biggest moral issue – TRUTH!
The way I started out considering the pros and cons of CAGW, I said to myself, “If their case is so strong, then why do they have to lie?” Once you lie to me, then every other of your moral issues fall by the wayside. If you lie to me, then I even may work against you.
Mann, Briffa, Steig, East Anglia, Hansen & Schmidt at GISS, and others – why would I support the opinions of a bunch of liars?

John MacDonald

Joel, I agree with your analysis. I was thinking similarly as I read the piece…that none of the research addressed the correctness or completeness of the science and the economics.

Bob Denby

John, exactly!! It’s convenient, in fact essential, for the ‘students’ to take industrial man’s influence over climate as a given. This is not unlike studying how conservatives and liberals might feel about the damage caused by gravity.

compassion and fairness
====================
what about truth and honesty? are these not moral values?
are compassion and fairness moral? for example, someone does poorly on an exam because they didn’t pay attention in class and didn’t bother to do their homework.
should we take compassion on that person and in the interest of fairness artificially increase their exam marks to match the rest of the class?
after all they must have a good reason why they didn’t pay attention or do their homework, maybe they were breast fed too long/short as a child, or potty training was to authoritarian/lax, so it wouldn’t be fair to give them a poor mark.

Joe Crawford

Ferd,
They didn’t include us po’ ol’ engineers where your ‘truth and honesty’ is the top requirement of the job. ‘Compassion and fairness’ don’t keep the bridge afloat.

Hivemind

+1000
I also noticed that and wondered about it. It’s often what is left out that is most important. And I notice that you learn more about the predetermined biases of the report authors, than about the people they studied.

jayhd

Joe, correct me if I’m wrong, unless the bridge is a pontoon bridge, it ain’t supposed to float. It’s supposed to span the water.

Mkks

Lunacy cubed = sanity. It’s proved in common core curriculum.

Greg

Too bad they are not so concerned about moral values like honesty and integrity.

Add responsibility and self reliance.

Tom O

The problem with the “warm and fuzzy” is that they are not willing to make a change in THEIR lifestyles, only in others. If they did want to make a difference, they wouldn’t jet off to the next COPxx, they would teleconference it. They would give up their million dollar yachts, private planes, and mansions, and lower their standard of living to that of the abysmally poor in Africa. If they were to do that, I would have a far greater respect for them and their position.
Of course, I would also, like them, view the facts and data and realize that it is still an elaborate con, thus not make changes in my own lifestyle which is far closer to the abysmally poor in Africa then to the one enjoyed by those having the “warm and fuzzy.”

It is mostly a willingness for others to have “lifestyle changes”. The most rabid greens are not that ascetic 🙂

Bill P.

Whether they are or are not isn’t the point. If you are a militant vegan, do you have the right to demand minimum vegan standards of everyone else?
This is just human behavior 101: religious dogma must be forced on the rest of us by the dogmatists. “You WILL care about what I care about! You will be MADE to care!”

auto

Bill,
Can I help
“You WILL care about what I care about! You will be MADE to care!”
“You WILL care about what I care about! You will be MADE to care! Or you will die – possibly painfully. . . . .”
I hope this helps.
Auto

What pile of BS. I have had it up to here with the Liberal/Progressives lie that only THEY are caring and compassionate. I would say we all are but that conservatives go about trying to do something about it in a pragmatic and more realistic way. On the other hand liberals believe that you just have to tap the magic money trees and faery dust to provide for the poor.

MarkW

The leftist feels his obligation to the poor is satisfied when they vote for a politician who promises to raise someone else’s taxes so that the money can be given to the poor.

That and add one more jobs program to the 40 something we have now.

‘Caring compassion’ from the left is just the bait in the bait and switch progressive use to coerce a belief in their agenda. It’s the same with climate science, where the the bait they use to make the sacrifice seem necessary is the illusion of saving the planet from destruction by man coupled with a false sense of urgency. The switch is a one world government where freedom has been displaced with conformance to narratives beneficial to an even further detached and elite ruling class.

Peter Sable

‘Caring compassion’ from the left is just the bait in the bait and switch progressive use to coerce a belief in their agenda.

That same technique is used across many cultures world wide as a tool of oppression. I’m not sure what a good term for it but ‘fascism’ comes close. The technique makes use of the in-group-out-group human tendency towards tribalism. It is notorious in American middle schools, especially by girls (at least in our popular culture it’s seen this way)
I’ve had this same discussion with Pakistani professor about the Islamists inserting themselves into universities in the 70s and 80s, from eastern European college students during and after the post WW2 occupation by the Soviet Union, read similar stories about Nazi Germany, fascist Italy, and the Soviet Union, culminating in the modern Western University.
The psychological trick is slimy and abusive and needs to be fought no matter what culture it appears in and which side is using it.
Peter

Joe Crawford

I seem to remember that someone did a study of conservative and liberal charity donations several years ago that reinforced you statement. The liberals as you say would vote for spending other peoples (tax) money while the conservatives gave more to charity. Here is an article that mentions several similar studies (with conflicting results): http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/2014/10/17/Who-s-More-Generous-Liberals-or-Conservatives.

What is kind and fair about shackling our future generations as debt slaves to this liberal generation’s largess at chasing after the renewable energy unicorn.

MarkW

Or any of the other left wing unicorns.

Tim Hammond

An example of the now very common fallacy – begging the question. I don’t think climate change is a big deal for future generations, so I don’t support taking action now. Its not that I don’t care, its that you haven’t convinced me about your basic assumption.
Trump, Brexit, climate change, inequality- lots of claims being made that just beg the question.

Don Gleason

How many angels can fit on that pin??

Jon

Fewer than can fit on the tip of a unicorn’s horn

MarkW

Asian or European unicorn?

African unicorn, what else?

Bill P.

“You can’t legislate morality.” – many Leftsrds online over the years (they really meant “your morality”)

gnomish

morality is the science of choice in the face of alternatives based on a standard of value.
obedience is the self immolation of a conscious entity
force and mind are opposites
commandments demand submission.
this was celebrated at jonestown and produced the meme ‘koolaid’.

Alec aka Daffy Duck

Off topic, because I can’t get the “tip” page to open:
Hathaway: “Cycle 25 will be similar in strength to the current cycle. ”
Predicting the Amplitude and Hemispheric Asymmetry of Solar Cycle 25 with Surface Flux Transport†
David H. Hathaway , Lisa A. Upton
†This article has been accepted for publication and undergone full peer review but has not been through the copyediting, typesetting, pagination and proofreading process, which may lead to differences between this version and the Version of Record. Please cite this article as doi: 10.1002/2016JA023190
Abstract
Evidence strongly indicates that the strength of the Sun’s polar fields near the time of a sunspot cycle minimum determines the strength of the following solar activity cycle. We use our Advective Flux Transport (AFT) code, with flows well constrained by observations, to simulate the evolution of the Sun’s polar magnetic fields from early 2016 to the end of 2019 — near the expected time of Cycle 24/25 minimum. We run a series of simulations in which the uncertain conditions (convective motion details, active region tilt, and meridional flow profile) are varied within expected ranges. We find that the average strength of the polar fields near the end of Cycle 24 will be similar to that measured near the end of Cycle 23, indicating that Cycle 25 will be similar in strength to the current cycle. In all cases the polar fields are asymmetric with fields in the south stronger than those in the north. This asymmetry would be more pronounced if not for the predicted weakening of the southern polar fields in late 2016 and through 2017. After just four years of simulation the variability across our ensemble indicates an accumulated uncertainty of about 15%. This accumulated uncertainty arises from stochastic variations in the convective motion details, the active region tilt, and changes in the meridional flow profile. These variations limit the ultimate predictability of the solar cycle.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016JA023190/full
Sent from my iPhone

Quelgeek

Yesterday on the radio I heard an extended interview with someone extolling the virtues of a vegan diet as a way to reduce carbon emissions. Towards the end the guest said that if the whole family embraces a vegan diet that is equivalent to taking a car off the road.
It was clear the guest’s real agenda was to discourage people from eating meat. Otherwise he could have pointed out how easy it is to telecommute now. Seven or eight years ago I was driving to the airport sometime three days a week and flying to see clients. This year—with more clients—I’ve not flown once and I’ve put barely 2,000 miles on my car.
Steak. Bring it.

SMC

“This year—with more clients—I’ve not flown once and I’ve put barely 2,000 miles on my car.”
Must be nice.

Steve Fraser

I flew to Houston almost every week for 3.5 years, and then switched to telecommuting. I can telecommute to Saudi A, NYC and Shreveport in the same day.
Mo betta, this!

SMC

Sigh… I wish I could. Regulatory requirements require a licensed, competent, qualified person to do the job I do. It pays the bills but, one of these days I’m going to stop traveling. And, when I do stop traveling, it’s probably going to be darn difficult, nigh on impossible, to get me on another commercial airline.

How can you believe anything they say? They make up their numbers all the time on renewable energy, especially costs. They think their sense of moral superiority gives them the right to lie to everyone. It seems very improbable that a family, giving up meat, will save that much energy. I have no axe to grind here. I’m practically a vegetarian myself. If this is based on projections from herbivore methane emissions, then we can give herbivores inexpensive feed supplements to reduce methane emissions by almost 99%. I bet the vegan did not mention that.

PiperPaul

sense of moral superiority
I think “social license” is the new preferred term for forcing others to do what you want them to.

Do you use Skype or some other video media ? What communications tools do you find useful ?
Kin’a off topic , but I’m really interested in what community support tools are effective .

I use GOTO meetings for almost daily meetings with my clients. They have a video feature but no one really wants to use it so we just talk, I keep notes on the screen which they can comment on as we go, and everyone gets minutes immediately after the meeting. Also works great for editing documents together.

Roger , Thanks for the info . You’ll see on my http://CoSy.com that my product is a computer linguistic environment which deals with the mundane but imperative tasks of a day-timer but built from the chip up in open language in which you command and customize the environment which at the same time is capable of the APL level succinct expression of computation which got me involved in this battle to return this climate nonscience to a quantitative classical physical foundation . It can use a lot of instructional interaction even the building of a user/programmer community . So screen sharing is more important that faces . Certainly for demoing and teaching language , it’s an incredible new tool .
Thanks

MarkW

Leftists have so much compassion that they are willing to spend unlimited amounts of other people’s money on problems that don’t even exist.

Latitude

exactly…..this is a university using the word “justice”
Climate Justice = reparations = get paid = IPCC = Paris = this whole s c a m is about justice and someone getting paid

MarkW

To a leftist fairness is defined as nobody having more than the leftist. No matter how hard they may have worked for it. Since the leftist has, in his opinion, worked, the leftist is therefore entitled to just as much as everyone else has.

MarkW

Conservatives place a higher value on group loyalty?
Is that why leftists define any black who isn’t a liberal as an “Uncle Tom” or race traitor?

Latitude
SMC

Ah. The Paragons of American Leftist Virtue. True Heroes to The Cause.

MarkW

I notice that the store they are destroying has absolutely nothing to do with Trump.
Like most leftists they hate those that have more than they do, and thus they strike at any signs of wealth.

Jer0me

To me, they appear to be professional and well prepared looters. They all have bags and sticks.

Latitude

Mark I googled “liberal compassion fairness” and that’s what came up…….. 🙂

Gunga Din
MarkW

Jer0me: Add to the fact that they seem to be wearing identical “uniforms”, none of which appear to be either worn or faded.

Steve Fraser

Looks like a uniform….

Mike the Morlock

MarkW November 16, 2016 at 1:56 pm
Jer0me November 16, 2016 at 2:17 pm makes a very good point. Progressives tend to protest more, and thrie protest same to attract opportunistic criminals. There is also some evidence that many of the “activists” are only active if they are well payed.
Note there is some joking in my house hold about answering the ad and getting paid for a night on the town.
Do note this is happening in places like Portand OR. Who won Portland? Most of those arrested in Portland it turns out were not registered to vote anywhere in Oregon. Go figure.
http://truthfeed.com/breaking-most-of-the-arrested-portland-rioters-didnt-vote/35853/
there are many other sources for this.
michael ….

Mike the Morlock

Arrg need new keyboard
and their protests seem to…
sorry
michael

MarkW

Mike, new keyboards are cheap. They have also been improving over time.

Mike the Morlock

Gunga Din November 16, 2016 at 2:37 pm
sorry did not see your link
But L agree this is orchestrated. I think once you dig a bit you will find different groups with different agendas.
I think there are some real protesters who are afraid of Mr Trump, the other side did so much demonizing it should be expected.
Then there are the for hire crowd that may be under instruction to provoke the police so real protesters get hurt.
Nothing like a actual real non-law breaking protester getting clubbed by the police in the the confusion.
Then of course the thugs and thieves who know at a Liberal Progressive protest no one will stand up to them out of fear.
michael

Mike the Morlock

MarkW November 16, 2016 at 3:22 pm
I know And in my last post to Gunga Din I hit the L instead of the I
The key board came with two nice gaming computers I got for #1 son and me
other than the keyboard letters disappearing as I type, they are great computers. I have extra keyboards in the garage need to dig one out.
michael

Greg

“Mike, new keyboards are cheap. They have also been improving over time.”
Don’t you believe it. I have a couple of old IBM keyboards and you could drive a truck over them. The sort that still plug into the little round “keyboard” socket on the back of the desktop PC. Good, clean feel and designed to last a life time. Paid a dollar or two at the flea market.

Mike the Morlock

Greg November 16, 2016 at 4:51 pm
Yes that is what I have in the garage and the keys still have the letters on them. But my “new” computer does not have the round plug in.
michael

MarkW

They make adapters for the round plug (straight serial) to USB. May cost as much as a new keyboard though.
As to the improving over time comment, I was trying to make a small joke based on our conversation on another thread.

Mumbles McGuirck

“Loons Hate Trump”
There I fixed it for ya.

troe

Right on the money. Hate is all they have ever had. Apologies to our European friends for having to listen to the moralizing drivel of our repudiated soon to be ex president.

TonyL

What am I looking at here?
They all have black hooded sweatshirts or black hooded raincoats. They all have black pants and black sneakers. They all have the same sticks, looks like 1 inch X 3 ft. dowels. They all have black lightweight backpacks.
A coordinated assault?
An organized criminal activity?
I wonder if anybody would be interested in finding out who would be behind such a thing.

Latitude

Soros….who’s having meetings in New York right now….planning on ways to undermine our president.

Mike the Morlock

Your local planned parenthood?
Perhaps they are trying to send a message. I will drop it there.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/11/15/is-planned-parenthood-affiliate-fueling-anti-trump-protests.html
michael

MarkW

For planned parenthood, it’s considered an investment.
If Trump cuts back on the subsidies they receive it will hurt their business model.

TonyL

Five looters lined up at the American Apparel store.
At the upper right of the photo, there is a large “A” in a circle drawn on the window.
Perhaps a mark by an “activity coordinator” to hit this store and not another?
I wonder why American Apparel would be singled out? I wonder what the answer to this question would reveal?

D. J. Hawkins

This photo has nothing to do with Trump or the election. It’s from the May Day riots in Seattle.

Agent Weebley

You see the “A” spray painted on the door? That’s obviously the Anarchy symbol. I thought they were just paid goons hired by the Dems. It should be a “L” in that circle.

It saddens me to see this kind of insanity coming from my alma mater. At least its coming from the liberal arts side of campus and not the science side …

Paul Westhaver

Quid est veritas?
In today’s society I would think that it would be difficult to establish a common moral framework that works for both liberals and conservatives. So attempts at science without commonly accepted definition of the key terms is nonsense.
Amoral progressives are very quick to claim that they are morally superior… to everyone. And in service to nobody other than themselves. Well, I have a bone to pick with the elite progressives on that.

The LEFTS “compassion and fairness” is a false compassion and is only fair when compared to themselves. For example if 1 person has $1 Million and a lefty loser has $1 then it is fair to redistribute otherwise they don’t care. False compassion is a seeming type of compassion which is used to push an agenda. Then there’s the kind of false compassion that leads you to give ‘help’ that doesn’t help but only makes you feel better. When you indulge your compassionate feelings at the expense of someone else, that’s false compassion, too.

Thomas Homer

Vegans consume vegetables
vegetables consume CO2
And vegans find virtue in reducing carbon emissions? Sounds more like biting the hand that feeds you.

John M. Ware

Quote from the article: “. . . climate change is an environmental justice issue.” No. It is a scientific issue, in the original sense (i.e., verifiable, repeatable where experiments are possible, dependent upon reliable and stable data). Trying to cast this as a justice issue (=fairness, likely compassion) takes it out of the verifiable realm and into the touchy-feely realm; a totally false viewpoint. If the alarmists want to be credible, they must return to verifiable science, from which they departed a generation or more ago.

Latitude

John…..justice = reparations = money = right out of the liberal play book

rocketscientist

Intrinsically there is nothing wrong with compassion and fairness. The issue is that in regards climate change, the compassionate crowd has allowed themselves and their passions to become misappropriated.

joelobryan

Who judges fairness? Who decides what is compassionate?
Do we embrace Progressive’s ultimate compassion, that is compassionate euthanasia, because it is compassionate even if it is it forced on the elderly, say after age 80, as typified by the movie Soylent Green?
Do we embrace equal opportunity as fair, or should we embrace liberal equality of outcomes, and forced seizure of private wealth to benefit all those without? We know that system as socialism come communism.

schitzree

In Soylent Green it was still voluntary, though promoted. I believe you’re thinking of Logan’s Run, where they had a mandatory ‘End Day’. And just 30 years old to.
Must be a lot easier to run a green utopia when no one lives long enough to see all your predictions fail. ○¿●

Peter Miller

Wailing?
BBC journalists have been going nuts over the fact that those in the Global Warming Industry, mostly overpaid bureaucrats with little real purpose in life, could be about to be thrown out onto the street.
They are quite rightly scared, as they may well be next. The Trump presidential victory scares far more pointless bureaucrats than it does illegal immigrants.
As for Obama’s much publicised legacy, it now looks like it is about to be on par with that of Jimmy Carter.

I don’t agree with Jimmy Carter’s politics, but he is one of my heroes for what he has done since leaving office “…A major accomplishment of The Carter Center has been the elimination of more than 99 percent of cases of Guinea worm disease, from an estimated 3.5 million cases in 1986 to 148 reported cases in 2013 to 23 in 2015…” [Wikipedia]

Monna Manhas

… and of course his work with Habitat For Humanity.

MarkW

Let’s not forget his becoming a mouth piece for any Palestinian cause and his willingness to visit any left wing dictator in order to bad mouth the US and any Republican.

DredNicolson

John Quincy Adams was a distinguished diplomat but a lackluster executive. The Presidency is not always the high point of an American citizen’s political career, or lifetime achievements.

D. J. Hawkins

@ Mona
I won’t have anything to do with Habitat for Humanity until that wanker is in the ground.

Monna Manhas

MarkW, I didn’t know about that. I do admire his work for HFH though.

troe

Thanks to the professors for telling us what we already know. People generally try to make decisions that square with their sense of morality. It takes years of intense immersion in academia to spin such cotton candy into a meal. You hit McDonald’s on the way home.
That climate BS offends our morals is not news to us. It’s why we continue to fight when the most powerful people in the world tell us the debate is over. It’s why we defend science from the pollution of politics. We are idealists. And we just got our hands on the controls of the green gravy train. Clear the track.

hunter

The (im)morality of rent seeking academics would be interesting to study.

whiten

All these guys and gals or people who claim and believe that humanity is a “plague”, do not in principle “deserve” to be part of it at all, but never the less there where we are, with the most strangeness of nature, and reality, we all are part of it, for better or worse……..is the way it always being, and the way it always going a be…:) The only way to weight and measure up our worth, I think.:)

Freedom Monger

Haidt’s list does not include the Greatest Moral Value of them all – a Passionate Regard for the Sanctity of Human Life beginning at Conception. Why is that? Without a Passionate Regard for the Sanctity of Human Life beginning at Conception, a person has no Morality.
A Passionate Regard for the Sanctity of Human Life beginning at Conception is the Core Belief of a truly Moral Human Being. Just as the Love of Money is the Root of all Evil, Love for the Right to Life is the Foundation of all Righteousness. No one can say that they are Moral or Righteous without first possessing a Passionate Regard for the Sanctity of Human Life beginning at Conception; it is impossible.

What utter nonsense. If you want to see naked authoritarianism in action, look at all the calls by liberals to punish or execute climate “deniers”, repudiate Brexit or the election of Trump, praise the Communist Chinese, and even lots of calls to assassinate Trump, to deny people the president they elected.

imamenz

“Two moral values highly rated by liberals — compassion and fairness — influence willingness to make personal choices to mitigate climate change’s impact in the future”
Correction: it influences their willingness to say they will make those personal choices. Following through is another thing. Reference Al Gore, John Kerry, and really almost every liberal who thinks driving a prius means they get to fly 100k miles a year with a clear conscience. But saying you are willing to do something is all that is needed to acquire the desired level of smugness anyway.

“Two moral values highly rated by liberals ” This is odd, but true. They claim to value them, but will endlessly warp them to further their ends – they call it moral relativism. Of course, when it comes to climate they turn into fire and brimstone preachers

Logoswrench

How is it compassionate and fair to deny the poorest and most vulnerable people of the world cheap available energy?
What am I missing here?

whiten

Logoswrench
November 16, 2016 at 2:18 pm
What am I missing here?
————–
The real meaning of insanity and idiocracy, I think….
Hopefully this is not too harsh.
cheers

Oldseadog

+ 1

Anne Ominous

First they create their own definition of “success”, then find that personal attributes they most associate with themselves promote that success!
What could possibly go wrong?

TonyL

Nice.

commieBob

They say liberals value compassion and fairness. Liberals will say that.
People lie. They will say all kinds of crap to make themselves seem more worthy. It’s called virtue signalling. Why did the polls get it so wrong about the election? People lied because they didn’t want the poll taker to think poorly of them.
Liberals only think they’re compassionate and fair.

Liberals tend to believe they’re brilliant, compassionate, moral, enlightened, perceptive, and courageous, not because of anything they’ve actually done, but just because they’re liberal. When you completely divorce a person’s self image from his behavior, it produces terrible results — like liberals who hurl abuse at conservative women while believing that they’re feminists or selfish left-wingers who’ve never given a dime to charity, but believe themselves to be much more compassionate than people who tithe 10% of their income. link

They’re actually pretty sanctimonious and nasty.

Paul Penrose

You nailed it.

Gunga Din

The Cornell researchers also found that belief in climate change was significantly associated with increased willingness to act, while those who identified as politically conservative, and who were older and male, were less inclined to act.

Hmmm….”Act”? What does that mean? Protest? Riot? Throw public temper tantrums if they don’t get their way?
For me, I believe you are free to be an idiot if you want. Just don’t try to force me to “act” like an idiot also.

In my native land there is an old tradition of admiration for the men of power
http://novorossia.today/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/putin-trump.jpg
caption reads: “Let’s make the world great again” both in English and Russian
http://novorossia.today/149234-2/

Latitude

WOOT!!!!!!!!!……….

R u sure u want one? If so you can print it from this link

Toneb

Yep, in Putin’s case anyway, it involves rigging the system by eliminating opposition and swapping between President and Prime Minister every few years to make sure you can stay in power indefinitely.
Oh, and by rigging elections and making noises such that anyone who criticises you is anti-Russian, not just anti-Putin, always gets the *voting* on your side eh?
Let’s hope that “admiration” never extends to Trump.
Christ would we be in trouble.

“…..make sure you can stay in power indefinitely.”
No problem, Donald Snr,, Donald Jr., Ivanka, Baron, etc.; eight years each, not exactly indefinitely but close enough.

Latitude

I see it as Putin taking a swipe at Obama and Hillary….I like his sense of humor

staspeterson BSME, MSMa, MBA

When is Mankind going to reward the preservation of life on Earth by avoiding the death of the Plant Kingdom due to CO2 atmospheric depletion. By far that is the most important ecology action ever undertaken, and is still not returned to levels that plants evolved in around 1000-1200 ppm. Liberating CO2 is a positive contribution!

Toneb

“We are not morally bad people for taking carbon and turning it into the energy that offers life to humanity”
Indeed not
However *you* are short-sighted.
Fossil has had it’s day.
Thatcher saw that 30 years ago in the UK.
Thousands suffered because of her, with comunities decimated.
Those same communities suffer still with social dependency, drugs and crime.
Nothing really replaced the mines as jobs for the unskilled.
Lost out to “Globalism” – same as the US voted against last week.
New tech is coming, resist if you like but it’s got to the point now that gainsaying AGW is not only scientifically and logically daft, but also financially daft as well (as a long-term strategy).
The World has moved on and will continue that course with or with the US (for a while at least with Trump at the helm).
The US will eventually have to “cotton-on”, but by then the Chinese will have cornered the market.
Your loss.
BUT: Trump is a business-man. We shall see if that impulse overcomes the ideological rejection of AGW science (if he has – does anyone know beyond “It’s a hoax by the chinese”.. ..”I may have said that”?)
The likes of Elon Musk should be given support, especially if Trump wants to renew infrastructure. Musk plans to build the “Hyperloop” after all.
New infrastructure needs money, and if Trump plans to cut taxes …. well something/one has to pay for it.

Bruce Cobb

“Fossil has had it’s day.” Nothing could be further from the truth. New sources such as the discovery of vast quantities of shale oil and gas in Texas are continually being discovered. Vast sources of coal are still waiting to be mined. Wind and solar are laughable as sources of energy – hideously expensive and unreliable, swallowing huge tracts of land, just to name a few of their serious drawbacks. They only make sense to those like yourself who have swallowed the CAGW ideology whole.

MarkW

What killed the mines was first the unions, and then cheaper over seas coal.

MarkW

Just how are technologies that don’t work, going to replace fossil energy?

troe

Musks hyperloop should be built with private capital. Full stop. It is becoming increasingly evident that Elon Musk is a “super salesman” in the sense that he keeps the customers focused on a possible future rather than the disappointing present. He is a living Viagra commercial.
I recently caught sight of musician Jack Whites Tesla outside a Nashville venue with two expensive large fellows guarding it. A perfect visual of what is wrong with the subsidy sucking Tesla motor car company. Of course it would be impolite to mention his failed solar enterprise.

Janus100

Our dear Elon is a sharlatan, a snake oil salesman and an illusionist.
He will do nothing like that “hyperloop” you mentioned.
His funding will get cut soon and all his ventures will end up like Solyndra.
Short Tesla at will.
EOM

Chimp

Shorted at $250. Haven’t covered yet. It’s a great short, since there is no dividend to pay!

imamenz

There are a lot of things wrong, confusing, and nonsensical in your post, but I will point out just one: tax cuts don’t have to be “paid for”. Tax cuts allow people who earned the money to keep it. Sure spending has to be cut (depending on where we are on the Laffer curve), but I disagree with the subtle liberal slant on tax cuts needing to be “paid for”. In actuality it is the big gov’t spending that needs to be paid for.

markl

Unable to win the legal, rational, or scientific arguments leaves them with the last option….. the moral high ground. Supported and aided by a willing biased MSM their voice is heard. The attacks have only begun and I believe will do them more damage than good. Anarchists of any stripe are not appreciated.

joelobryan

The Progressive Superhighway leading to a short, brutish lifespan for the peasant working class is paved with climate change lies.

Leo Smith

In the absence of belief in God, or some other abstract external moral arbiter, no moral judgement in absolute terms is possible.
This is why Marxism appeals to the selfishness of the individual, and disguises it as concern for society.
Left people – what you call Liberals – are inherently selfish and antisocial, which is why they project it onto ‘capitalists’ and other organisations that actually do benefit society in the whole..
This massive selfishness is what leads to the need to crate moral compasses and spend their whole lives virtue-signalling – it’s simply their way of expiating the guilt they feel for being such selfish amoral Cnuts…
In fact the whole Liberal movement is based on generating guilt and selling products and politics on the back of it.

gnomish

“In the absence of belief in God, or some other abstract external moral arbiter, no moral judgement in absolute terms is possible.”
heh- so your divine revelation puts you on the throne of judgement, eh?
i bet your inability to define the word ‘morality’ helps you work that sleight of mind.
what else do you talk about on that direct line to supernatural invisibles?

Stevan Reddish

Gnomish,
I notice you do not offer any rational or philosophical rebuttal to Leo Smith’s point. Instead you attempt what you presume is witty sarcasm. By doing so, you demonstrate a lack of morality, as an honest person will admit it when they have no reasonable reply.
SR

gnomish

stevan
i’m the only one here who defined the word and proved he knows what it means.
perhaps you had your head in an awkward position and missed it.
you don’t get a trophy for participating, you special flake, you.
go tweet a selfie or something

JohnKnight

gnomish,
“morality is the science of choice in the face of alternatives based on a standard of value.”
So, raping little kids is moral to your mind, IF one conducts some sort of scientific testing that demonstrates the rapist gets pleasure from it, and that’s what they value?
(And folks wonder why God will let some go . . )

gnomish

John, you are one twisted sob.
It’s no wonder you can’t tell right from wrong.

gnomish

seriously- scrub your skull out with bleach.
and don’t post any more of you sick ideas.

JohnKnight

Perhaps not, but I think I can tell word salad from a meaningful definition, kid.

gnomish

john, you have no idea how much you reveal about yourself when your thoughts about morality are how to justify child molestation and when you use the word ‘kid’ as a deprecatory term.
these are red flags that call for an intervention. i only hope these thoughts that fill your mind have not led to overt acts.
unless your special fetish is blind, retarded kids, you will be caught.

JohnKnight

I get it, you’ve got an imagination . .

JohnKnight

PS ~ What you don’t seem to have, is any explanation for why raping children is not moral, according to your “definition” of morality. It really seems to me that you base your judgments about what is moral on something(s) else, but are not self aware enough to realize that.

Chimp

Belief in God justifies the most horrific crimes against humanity, as we see today with ISIS:
Hosea 13:16
“The people of Samaria must bear their guilt, because they have rebelled against their God. They will fall by the sword; their little ones will be dashed to the ground, their pregnant women ripped open.”
Atheists have also committed similar atrocities. Neither theism nor atheism are the bases of morality, but the choices made by individuals based upon their own inherent codes of conduct.
But the truly righteous can chose to disobey the barbaric commandments of God. Witness the case of the Amalekites, whom Saul spared, against the express orders of the Most High:
1 Samuel 15:1 Samuel also said unto Saul, The LORD sent me to anoint thee to be king over his people, over Israel: now therefore hearken thou unto the voice of the words of the LORD.
1 Samuel 15:2 Thus saith the LORD of hosts, I remember that which Amalek did to Israel, how he laid wait for him in the way, when he came up from Egypt.
1 Samuel 15:3 Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.
1 Samuel 15:4 And Saul gathered the people together, and numbered them in Telaim, two hundred thousand footmen, and ten thousand men of Judah.
1 Samuel 15:5 And Saul came to a city of Amalek, and laid wait in the valley.
1 Samuel 15:6 And Saul said unto the Kenites, Go, depart, get you down from among the Amalekites, lest I destroy you with them: for ye showed kindness to all the children of Israel, when they came up out of Egypt. So the Kenites departed from among the Amalekites.
1 Samuel 15:7 And Saul smote the Amalekites from Havilah until thou comest to Shur, that is over against Egypt.
1 Samuel 15:8 And he took Agag the king of the Amalekites alive, and utterly destroyed all the people with the edge of the sword.
1 Samuel 15:9 But Saul and the people spared Agag, and the best of the sheep, and of the oxen, and of the fatlings, and the lambs, and all that was good, and would not utterly destroy them: but every thing that was vile and refuse, that they destroyed utterly.

JohnKnight

Chimp,
“Hosea 13:16
“The people of Samaria must bear their guilt, because they have rebelled against their God. They will fall by the sword; their little ones will be dashed to the ground, their pregnant women ripped open.” ”
That is not God telling anyone to do that, it’s Him saying (in essence) that He will not protect the people of Samaria from those who will do it . . . There were (according to that Book you quote), some truly viscous people around those parts, which is why He sent “the sword of Israel” there to “surgically” remove them, rather than destroy the whole world like He did with the great flood.
If you omit the justification He gives for removing certain “tribes”, which is that they were descendants of what are called “fallen angels”, and therefore were not actually just human in the biological/genetic sense, it can seem like an “atrocity”. But in actuality (according to the Book) it was to spare mankind from being savaged by what we now might call a psychopathic “invasive species” that would eventually take over the planet again . . Which is to say prevent a great many atrocities . .

gnomish

i am aware of your obsession with child rape, for damn sure. conjuring up these images gets you wet, does it?
there’s no way in hell i’m going to help you justify your perversion on moral grounds
that’s because i have a standard of values that is consistent with human nature – something you clearly do not.
maybe your buddies can help you at the next nambla meeting.

gnomish

“(they)were not actually just human… But … what we now might call a psychopathic “invasive species””
that’s how it’s done.
anybody you don’t like, you define them as inhuman.
then nothing you do to them matters.
you are a freakin monster.

Chimp

No one needs the Good Behavior Seal of Approval of a supernatural entity to define morality.
In the pagan Plato’s dialogue “Euthyphro,” the eponymous character tries to explain his conception of piety to Socrates: “the pious acts,” Euthyphro says, are those which are loved by the gods.” But Socrates finds this definition ambiguous, and asks Euthyphro: “are the pious acts pious because they are loved by the gods, or are the pious acts loved by the gods because they are pious?”
Non-religious bases for morality are infinitely more sound than basing moral precepts upon a hypothetical supreme or at least superior being. Moral behavior can be derived from philosophical first principles rather than from the dictates of a stern, righteous punishing daddy in the sky. Or wherever.

JohnKnight

It is fascinating to me to see atheists

Chimp

I note that the behavior throughout history of atheists is no worse than that of alleged Christians, so obviously belief in an imaginary supernatural character grading people’s performance on earth, while counting head hairs and falling sparrows, doesn’t improve morality.
In the 20th century mass murdering atheists Stalin and Mao and pagan Hitler began to catch up with Christians’ centuries of genocide, but Christian atrocities continued, as for example in the Congo under its owner, the Catholic King of Belgium, and in the Croatian extermination camps.
Nothing to chose from between the behavior of believers and unbelievers. In everyday life, atheists behave better than do Christians. Nations with similar cultures but higher rates of atheism are more peaceful than more Christian states, let alone Muslim. The atheist violent crime rate is a lot lower than Christians in every country for which there are data.
Which is not surprising, since atheists and agnostics are smarter, richer, more productive and useful to society than the credulous, often criminal faithful.

JohnKnight

(Oops, hit the ‘post’ button by accident ; )
It is fascinating to me to see atheists struggling to justify treating themselves as superior to a Creator God . . an Entity that (hypothetically) MADE our consciousnesses (and everything else), somehow not being as knowledgeable/intelligent as they . . I don’t know how this level of rationalizing is even possible . .
“No one needs the Good Behavior Seal of Approval of a supernatural entity to define morality.”
Says what worm? Such an Entity is OBVIOUSLY out of our league entirely, if real. I didn’t believe for most of life that such an Entity was real, but at no point did the idea that if real, I might be His moral (or any other form of) superior . . There seems to be an inability in some to think within the hypothetical of His existence AT ALL . . and they just keep treating what they can imagine as if a realistic approximation of what such an Entity could actually be like. It’s so childish, to me . .

Chimp

John,
The problem is that there is no evidence whatsoever supporting the existence of an entity which judges the moral behavior of people. It’s possible scientifically to be agnostic as to some kind of creator of the universe, but there is no rational basis for imaging a fairy sky judge.
Besides which, the behavior of the mythical biblical God of Abraham is appalling, by any possible moral standard. He is so vile that even those who worshiped Him refused to obey his genocidal commandments. The repulsive Sicko Perv happily admits to creating evil. Not to mention that still today, any omnipotent, omniscient being that might exist must obviously be unspeakably deceitful, deceptive and sadistically cruel.
Religious faith may be of some use to society, but for me, no thanks to such a celestial stinker.

gnomish

comment image
timor domini principium mortis

TA

“Our finding that willingness to take action on climate change was related to moral values embraced by both liberals and conservatives suggests that it is too simplistic to use political ideology alone to predict support for climate change action,” said McLeod.”
Well, there you go.

Bruce Cobb

Colleges and universities have the art of virtue signaling down to a science.

Steamboat McGoo

“Moral values…”, said the External Moral Imperative, in a deep, resonant James Earl Jones-esque Voice.
I guffaw in its general direction.

D. Carroll

Climate justice. The mary robinson foundition
http://www.mrfcj.org/principles-of-climate-justice/
She used the Irish presidency as a stepping stone to her higher agenda of spreading the wealth of the world evenly amongst the all the people.
But, guess what she’s seeking a €2,000,000 tax credit for the donation of her memoirs to the state.
All previous presidents gave them for free.
http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/diarmaid-ferriter-mary-robinson-s-legacy-in-no-need-of-a-vanity-project-1.2838667

Major Meteor

“Compassion and fairness make perfect sense, because climate change is an environmental justice issue, and being willing to do something about climate change also requires that we care about future generations.”
They don’t seem to care that future generations will have to pay triple the cost for electricity and saddle them with more debt all to reduce the global temperature by .2 Deg C as if that matters one bit in the grand scheme of things.

lee_jack01

I wonder how moral it is to enslave future generations of minorities as well as all Americans currently hovering around the poverty line. It reminds me when the Black Chamber of Commerce’s commission a study of the EPA carbon regulation and it impacts to minorities. The alarmist and the liberal elite have attempted to falsify the findings with a lot of misinformation and mud slinging. Its no wonder that minorities are slowly realizing what liberalism currently stand for. Attached is the article, within the attachment, you can hear Alford’s opening statements to the US senate sub committee. And yes, it’s the same Alford who was against the Kyoto Protocol, so Desmog probably has a dossier on him.
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/ali-meyer/black-chamber-commerce-epa-clean-air-plan-will-increase-black-poverty-23

lee_jack01

I wonder how moral it is to enslave future generations of minorities as well as all Americans currently hovering around the poverty line. It reminds me when the Black Chamber of Commerce’s commission a study of the EPA carbon regulation and it impacts to minorities. The alarmist and the liberal elite have attempted to falsify the findings with a lot of misinformation and mud slinging. Its no wonder that minorities are slowly realizing what liberalism currently stand for. Attached is the article, within the attachment, you can hear Alford’s opening statements to the US senate sub committee. And yes, it’s the same Alford who was against the Kyoto Protocol, so Desmog probably has a dossier on him.
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/ali-meyer/black-chamber-commerce-epa-clean-air-plan-will-increase-black-poverty-23

Warren Latham

Let me see; hmmm, errr … Cornell University – moral values – climate change … got it in one !
OTHER PEOPLE’s MONEY and the Great GW Gravy Train.
So, with this so-called “study”, they are just milking the system whilst they can. The gravy train will be stopping pretty soon if and when President Trump decides to close their railroad line.
Hey ho ! Let the wailing begin.
WL

the fairness and morality argument would hold if i could be convinced that they are right about climate change but still refused to take climate action. it does not apply to the debate on how fossil fuel emissions affect climate.

joelobryan

As for moral high ground, Progressives adopt “relative moralism.”
What is relative moralism?
First, relative moralism is in stark contrast to absolute moralism. Absolute moralism is embodied in the 10 Commandments from the Old Testament. The 10 Commandments offer a common absolute moral framework in Judeaism and Christianity, the key examples being: thou shalt not kill, and thou shalt not bear false witness (lie about your neighbor). In the New Testament, we see the ultimate example of absolute morals as Jesus accepted crucifixtion for himself at the hands of the Roman soldiers rather than allow others to suffer his fate.
The Progressive orthodoxy has relative moralism as its core tenant. It is essentially “the ends justifies the means.” Moral values only are judged against other moral values for their virtue. A seniority ranking then emerges between morals.
An example is that “it is okay to keep Africa and the millions of people there in energy poverty if it means helping to save the planet.” The premature deaths of African babies, the wide-spread poverty, and the disease are rationalized as necessary in the War on Climate Change.
When you hear of Progressives (usually calling themselves Atheists) wanting governments to get rid of public displays of the 10 Commandments, the real intent is to breakdown society’s absolute moralism and thereby further the societal acceptance of relative moralism.
Islam embraces relative morals. In Islamic societies murder is not justified or condoned,… unless it is an infidel who blasphemed their prophet, or if a cleric had issed a Fatwa against the murdered, then murder is okay. That’s Relative moralism in action.
In the Climate Change religion, relative moralism is on full display. Thus it is okay to fudge climate data to keep the faithful unquestioning of the church orthodoxy with “hottest year evah! claims. It becomes okay and necessary to destroy the lives of coal miners and their communities in order to “fight climate change.”
And the list of relative moralism atrocities continue, with the real end goal that wealth and political power are slowly accumulated in the hands of the Progressive elite ruling class.

gnomish

you are so confused…
so you preach…
how quintessentially progressive.
hunchbrain.

joelobryan

no, I don’t tell others how to live their lives. I do not advocate the seizure of personal property to further equality in outcomes. Equal opportunity is all that the state should impose. Different Outcomes are thus inevitable in a society, with the result be an unequal distribution of wealth.

joelobryan

Furthermore, I do not hide behind a childish screen name to hurl insults.
When I hurl insults, everyone knows whence they came.

gnomish

it is your right to confuse yourself.
it is your right to abuse language by debasing it to semiotics.
it is your right to submit and obey and exhort others to do the same.
there is no 11th commandment ordering that ‘thou shalt think for thyself’
it seems you wouldn’t understand the irony if there were… lol

joelobryan

gnome
nōm/
noun
1. a legendary dwarfish creature supposed to guard the earth’s treasures underground.
informal
2. a small ugly person.
informal
3. a person regarded as having secret or sinister influence, especially in financial matters.
“the gnomes of Zurich”
==========================
I’m inclined to put you down as #2.

gnomish

oh, i’m so triggered…lol
joel, you are the moral relativist because you have no standard of values.
that makes your entire jeremiad a shining example of progressive hypocrisy.
of course, if you did have a standard of values you could define it in a single sentence.
then you could properly lay claim to some glimmer of understanding of the nature of morality.
that was lobbed easy over the net, preacher. ball’s in your court.
morality is the science of choice in the face of alternatives based on a standard of value.*
*that’s the answer in the back of the book- so you have no excuse now.

joelobryan

I know immorality when I see it, just as one does not need to be an MD to see someone is sick and in need to medical care.
I know honesty matters above all else.
The dishonesty of the Progressives is the result of a relative moralism that allows them to establish “climate justice” virtues over social justice. And SJ over economic justice. And thus econic justice over honesty and integrity.
Maybe their heirarchy is:
CJ > SJ > EJ > truth. IOW, truth be damned if needed for the cause.
Hence we have fiddled and fudged climate data, circular climate models, as a means justified by a desired end. And that is immoral when it also is used to prevent the economic development of developing countries using affordable carbon-based energy.
Good night small ugly person.

gnomish

you know what you can’t conceive when you feel it, because metaphorz! therefore you preach like the iconic liberal.
and your winning argument in any debate is to divert, insult and run away.
more iconic liberal. the species could be described using joel as the holotype.
it’s displacement behavior and cognitive dissonance on display in all its exopthalmic, hyperventilating impotence.

joelobryan

SUP (aka Gnomish),
You are very much the Monty Python Black Knight, and all wanting to pass a moral checkpoint must get by you. Now having lost both arms and legs, you continue to blather on about your superiority (with obtuse words to feign righteousness).
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=mjEcj8KpuJw

gnomish

i thought you were going to bed, joelo.
qui consolatur canem consolationis?

Coeur de Lion

How do you get rated Professor in that establishment?

com21bat

This paper appears to be one of the many that won’t be replicable. Just a few gripes with the basic premise:
“The authors’ work is based on Jonathan Haidt’s moral foundations theory. A professor at New York University, Haidt identifies five “moral axes” around which humans develop individual moral reasoning: compassion/harming, fairness/cheating, in-group loyalty/betrayal, authority/subversion and purity/degradation.”
Apparently Mr. Haidt makes things up, or had a useless research plan to begin with. I very much doubt that he came up with these by testing how effective the several hundred possible antonyms or opposites there are. His moral axes are skewed. Compassion/harming? When I show compassion for someone I try to help. The opposite would be indifference. Fairness/cheating. Interesting skew, I think most people would say fairness/unfair- as in not paying equal pay for equal work. In-group loyalty/betrayal another case of polar opposites that are 75degrees or so off. There are many opposites for loyalty depending on the situation. A common on-line thesaurus doesn’t even include subversion. Purity/degradation- again there are a lot of possible opposites- impurity comes to mind, foul, dirty, depraved, evil, licentious, etc.
Like almost all ‘science’ related to human behavior and thinking getting a clear cut result without bias or confusion is extremely difficult. Coming up with useful terms that mean the same thing to both the investigators and the subject is highly subject to bias on both sides of the experiment. Using Trump terror to caption a picture of paid demonstrators vandalizing and looting is one example.

Steven Hales

The above is couched in terms of “life style changes” which is a fuzzy way of saying sacrifice. But without some kind of group loyalty a significant sacrifice is not possible. But the free market is continually forcing us to make life style changes which have the same effect as sacrifices. For instance if technology had stopped changing in 1900 Americans would emit 3 times more CO2 than they do today. (Johan Norberg, Progress, 2016 p 123) It seems every effort to frame this as a moral issue side-steps the data that show that progress is the best substitute for sacrifice ever invented. The invisible hand of environmental improvement.

willhaas

Ok, let us play their game. The climate sensivity of a gas is temperature gain that would result if the amount of that gas in the Earth’s atmosphere were doubled. According to their reports, the IPCC does not really know what the climate sensivity of CO2 really is but a mean value of their range of guesses might be around 3 degrees C. But CO2 is not the most climate sensitive gas in the Earth’s atmosphere. That would be N2 which also holds more heat energy than the rest of the Earth’s atmosphere combined. N2 is also not a good LWIR radiator like the greenhouse gases are so it holds heat energy a lot longer yet it gains it quite readily via conduction and convection.. The climate sensivity of N2 is at least 25 degrees C. Getting rid of all N2 in the atmosphere will definately cool the planet down. So instead of campaigning to get rid of all CO2 in the Earth’s atmosphere it would be much more effective, in turms of curbing global warming, to get rid of all the N2 in the Earth’s atmosphere instead.

joelobryan

To maintain 1 bar SLP, what mole for mole gas should we replace it with?

willhaas

That is the point, the average pressure will change. When one burns fossil fuel, O2 is taken from the atmosphere to form mostly H2O and CO2. Most of the H2O is returned to the surface as some form of precipitation so there is little change in the mass of the atmosphere but trying to double or half the amount of N2 is another matter. Doubling or halving the amount of N2 in our atmosphere would cause a huge chahge in surface pressure and with it a very significant change in surface temperature. The 33 degrees C that the Earth is warmer because of the atmosphgere is all a function of the heat capacity of the atmosphere and the pressure gradient caused by gravity. There is no additional warming caused by the LWIR absorption properties of so called greenhouse gases. The burning of fossil fuels would cause a significant change in the average surface temperature of the Earth if it resulted in a significant change in surface pressure but it does not.