قالب وردپرس درنا توس
Home https://server7.kproxy.com/servlet/redirect.srv/sruj/smyrwpoii/p2/ Science https://server7.kproxy.com/servlet/redirect.srv/sruj/smyrwpoii/p2/ 11 things that change the climate "reject" people say to social media

11 things that change the climate "reject" people say to social media




<div _ngcontent-c14 = "" innerhtml = "

It is clear that the climate is changing and at the top of the naturally changing system there is a human component The fourth national report on climate assessment is a good place for (19459039) Rejects. " According to the authors of the study

they are very sure (climate change) and they are not actively involved as opponents of national efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

At present, is about nine percent . Persian tent, aggressive and vibrant in social media. Over time I noticed 1

1 "tactics" in the social media.

2018 Sixth Outcomes of America Yale Communication

The Ice Age. and some statements about natural cycles. This is fairly stunning, because most climate scientists are very aware of the different ways in which the climate changes naturally. The discussion on climate change is neither a discussion nor a "nor". This is a "and" discussion. The grass grows naturally "and" grows differently with fertilized soil. Trees fall naturally in the woods, "and" they can be cut off by a chainsaw.

This magazine from 1970 & nbsp; a story about a cooling world. "It's fun to see how often this is quoted in social media, as written earlier in Forbes,

No, an article in the magazine, some people, and some literature says it's not is the majority of scientists or research The author of this article even has self-effacing this

Referring to a random study I call this obsession for 1 study. Over the years, I've seen people criticize the literature for review, which speaks of how it is unreliable or biased . security has problems with literature, it's still an important gatekeeper against bad science in the same way that the FDA is for bad food or drugs, here's a kicker. "As soon as a study that supports the point of view of" confirmation "they quickly refer to the study to support their point of view.

" The effect of Grand Poobah is often seen in social media. One does not necessarily have a strong experience in climatology but relies on a scientist or personality for speaking points or validating their positions. They often even mention or mark that person in their social media post. I call it "the effect of Grand Pobahah and I wrote about it earlier."

Doubt and Its Merchants There is usually a sample of comments on scholars and money-giving. understanding is a good "101" of this relationship There are rigorous processes for obtaining grants based on research and review of science There are other "funding models and grays literary publications intended to protect certain positions or desks nformation. This is the age in which one "Tweet" is supposed to bear as much weight as the degree or years of research. The effect "Dunning – Kruger" is in full effect in social media. A commonly used strategy is "I have a degree (fill a favorite discipline that is not climate science or climatology)" or "I'm studying this in my free time while in the basement I eat cookies."

Deviation Another tactic that I notice , is the lobbying of diversion issues, usually a random, seemingly intellectual, provocative, or inappropriate matter that the public goth intends to address to climatologists. This winter I'm sure you've seen this: " It's cold or snowy, so global warming does not have to exist." No, that means day or week is a manifestation of time. It's not where you live warming. "This is not my small part of the planet on this particular day."

They changed the name. Talking about global warming, there are always a handful of people who find treacherous intentions in the use of climate change or global warming. I have discussed the reasons why this is another smoke and mirror tactic "in the previous piece Forbes

No profile and few followers. From Multiple Followers (Less Than 10) or no profile photo, I guess these are bots. "& nbsp; I suppose this is not technically" telling "whatever the title of the article, but you understand

Storms always happen This is a very common phenomenon. the trees that fall in the forest or the relationship between grass and grass refer to such claims. ] ">

It is clear that the climate is changing and there is a human component at the top of a naturally changing and system Most scientists on climate issues and understand what most reasonable people also do. Every year, Yale Climate Communication and university scientists George Mason ask the American public about their views on climate change. According to the authors of the study

the refusal is very sure that (climate change) is not happening and actively involved as opponents of national efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

is about nine percent . Though their numbers are small, they are often very strong, stubborn, aggressive, and saliva in social media. Over time, I have noticed 11 tactics of "rejecting" social media.

2018 Sixth Outcomes of America Yale Climate Communication

Ice Age. It seems that glacial ages always appear and some statement about natural cycles. This is fairly stunning, because most climate scientists are very aware of the different ways in which the climate changes naturally. The debate on climate change is neither "nor" or "discussion." This is "and" discussion. The grass grows naturally, "and" it grows differently with fertilized soil

This 70s magazine Obviously, in Newsweek there was an article in 1975 about a "cooling world." It's fun to see how often it is Like it says in Forbes

No, an article in the magazine, several people and some literatures say that this is not the majority of scientists or research.

Referring to a random study. I call this obsession for one study Over the years, I've seen people criticize peer review literature that they say is unreliable or biased Literature It's still an important gatekeeper against bad science Likewise, the FDA is for bad food or drugs, and here is a kicker: As soon as a study that supports the "confirmation deviation perspective" appears, they quickly rely on the study to support their point of view.

"Grand Poobah" Effect I see this often in social media. One does not necessarily have a strong experience in climatology, but relies on a scientist or personality for speaking points or to confirm their positions. They often even mention or mark that person in their social media post. I call it the "effect of Grand Poobah" and I wrote about it before

Doubt and its merchants . Usually there is a sample of comments about the scientists and money supply. This statement illustrates the lack of understanding of the scientific scholarship process. Here's a good "101" on this link. There are rigorous processes for obtaining grants based on a study and review of science. There are also "other" funding models and gray literary publications designed to protect certain positions or disinformation. Traders of Doubts by Naomi Oreskes and Eric Conway is a good book to dig deeper into the last.

Crediting. This is the age in which "tweet" is supposed to be as serious as a degree or years of scientific research. "Dunning – Kruger Effect" is full of action in social media. A commonly used strategy is "I have a diploma (fill out a favorite discipline that is not climate science or climatology)" or "I'm studying this in my spare time while I'm in the basement by eating cookies."

Another tactic that I notice is lobbying the issues of deviation. Normally, this is a random, "seemingly" intellectual, provocative or inappropriate issue that has the intention of "public thought" about climate scientists. This winter I'm sure you saw this: "It's cold or snow, so global warming does not have to exist." No, it means that day or week is a manifestation of time. It is not "the place where you live", the warming. This is not "my small part of the planet on this particular day".

They changed the name. Talking about global warming, there are always a handful of people who find treacherous intentions in the use of climate change or global warming. I discussed the reasons why this is another "smoke and mirror" tactic in the previous part of Forbes.

There was no profile and no followers. Many of the rejection comments come from accounts with few followers (less than 10) or no profile photo. I guess these are "bots". I suppose it's technically not "saying" anything, as the title says in the article, but you understand.

Storms always happen . This is a very common phenomenon. The above-mentioned comments about the trees that fall in the forest or the relationship between grasses and grasses refer to such statements.

Enough of the Time to Watch Some College Hoops

The Six Americas on Climate Change Yale Climate Communication


Source link