The APA Says Denying AGW IS A MENTAL DISORDER!!!

Oh, guess what? The Chair of this little APA committee, Janet Swim, (Who produced this "Finding"), is from Penn State University. This is also where a one "Michael Mann" (AKA the "Hockey Stick Manufacturer") is also a well known Professor.

Dr. Swim was awarded a "Presidential Citation" for this "Amazing Finding". A year ago she was also tasked (By PSU) with "creating new opportunities for people to make a difference in improving the environment."

Employees urged to think outside box for sustainable strategies

Your thread title is entirely misleading and inappropriate.

The study you looked at is actually apporpriate because the people who did the study believed they could trust the data. Turns out they're wrong and this will be one of the millions of researchs bits that doesn't get quoted. It just happens to be a big subject that people "go crazy" over

I could do the same study and say people who don't believe in UFOs could fit into those categories, it could get published because I BELIEVE the videos of UFOs are proof...

This study should not implicate the APA AT ALL - they are totally unrelated to the findings.

Originally posted by December_Rain
reply to post by Bob Sholtz

 

Yes it is. If you don't see the climate going worse around you with each passing year, extinction of species, depletion of natural resources, growth in population and pollution then there is something really very wrong with you my friend.

[edit on 17-12-2009 by December_Rain]

Funny, this is another topic that has much debate; however, the debate is led in many directions and there is no true path for that direction. Global warming through man made co2 is bunk, so I am sorry to inform you, but that is the topic people are fighting against. Nobody is claiming the climates are not changing, but why are they changing?

1. c02 is consumed in a much larger scale then we can produce, research what the ocean effect is on co2.

2. if it is methane, which is the next likely culprit people run to, is not heavy enough to sustain in our atmosphere long enough to cause massive damage.

The thing is, Climate change is occuring but it is a natural cycle and it scares the hell out of people. Naturally, human nature is to find something to point the finger at. So actually the crazies are the ones pointing fingers in ignorant directions, and ontop of that, ONTOP OF THAT, they are inventing/creating the problem out of thin air, much like most the topics on this website. Maybe they need to perscribe our government entities (across the world) more prosac, and to top that off, how crazy are we for the amount of money we have spent on it? I can only imagine it is competing with the money we toss for the drug wars.

I am sorry folks, the bandwagon gore was driving rode in, he tried to sell his snake oils to the world. Guess what? its snake oil.

reply to post by TheAgentNineteen


Nice find, its funny how his name keeps poping up everywhere in reguards to climate change.

This paper may stem from more of the "the debate is over" thinking. While the debate is far from over, now we have shrinks trying to cite legitamate psychological reasons for people not believing. This allows them to say "If you don't believe in AGW, its because of "x" psychological reasons" and one person's psychologically motivated sillyness shouldn't stop us from saving the polar bears.

reply to post by Hastobemoretolife


You make a good point BUT if a person's non-belief in AGW has no basis in the facts, in the evidence, then that can be a sign of denial. They would be denying AGW not because of the evidence but out of some quasi-religious faith, belief without proof, that AGW is not happening.

I can think of an example of some people being in denial about climate change that doesn't mean climate change is due to AGW. The arctic sea ice is retreating studies have shown that to be the case and countries are positioning themselves to take advantage of the new trade routes.

So a person can be in denial about that aspect of climate change irregardless of the merits of AGW.


I think the APA press release was merely trying to identify the psychological processes that would cause a person to not believe in AGW in order to help individual psychologists work with their patients and identify why their patients don't believe in it.

reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux


In the example you gave, yes denial is just a coping mechanism and in and of itself is not bad. But I would argue the reason it is not bad in this specific case is that the consequences of this "dying" person being in denial is born but that person alone.

The military leaders, officers, and enlisted men were in denial about there being actual cross the line torture at Abu Ghraib, that had very real consequences for the Iraqi inmates. In that case denial was very bad.

I guess I would argue that denial is very bad when it allows a person to violate a principle I came up with: "your body, your property, your choice".

When that principle is violated you are doing direct physical or financial harm to another person or their property against there will.

Most of the evil done in this world is done by people who think of themselves as being good not by people who think they are in league with satan. These "good" people are in denial about their actions and consequences.

Originally posted by Bob Sholtz
It is very sad that this is true, but it seems to be. (i am not the autor of the video and do not claim any rights to it)



www.youtube.com...

Link to the Article: www.apa.org...


Scary stuff. It seems that disagreeing with AGW is now deemed a "psychological issue", and if followed through to its logical conclusion, people could be detained indefinetly against their will, labeled "crazies".

Please keep the discussion on the paper and its ramifications ONLY, this isn't the place for debate on climate change, just lively conversation on this sad happening.

Then I'm completely nuts and need locking up ! This is real scary stuff !

It's the old 'Either your with us or your against us' thing all over again remember Bush after 9/11 ? Everything it seems boils down to this nowadays !

[edit on 023131p://12America/Chicago18 by ProRipp]

When politics and baseless rhetoric from ANY supposedly authoritrian
community (remember the key syllables referring directly to commune)
become united in a common agenda, you get this. Propoganda doesn't work
on an informed subject. Looks like the Great Culling is close now.... it appears
more obvious with the more previously normal behaviors being 'characterized'.

Hey but it worked for Trotsky, and it's been keeping me in an electronic prison
for the last 20 years. Calling dissidents crazy is a favorite in the Zionist play
book... and they invented Trotsky as well as co-opted the pseudoscience of
psychology over 110 years ago into the chillin-ist control mechanism ever.

Wait till they get the bill, after a couple of affadavits and a writ. Why do I know
what I'm talking about-- I'm the one on the site with a shirttail grand uncle that
invented the lobotomy, and I'd like to hear from you in a U2U if you do too.
I'm a voracious reader, that's my problem. And this thread's priceless.

Should we call it academic nepotism, scholastic inbreeding, or best of all--
how about the flavor, congenital megalomania with a paranoid swirl? Door#3, please.

Originally posted by Bobbox1980


Most of the evil done in this world is done by people who think of themselves as being good not by people who think they are in league with satan. These "good" people are in denial about their actions and consequences.

Including statists who think they're saving the planet by incarcerating people who disagree with them in psychological gulags.

"Climate Change"-- do we even have a defintion? Not really.

If we even did, could a definite judgement be made at this point whether any particular overall change is/will be good or bad for humanity in general?? I think not.

AGW/Climate Change advocacy has always been about the control/limitation of use of energy by individuals.

This sub-group of the APA is attacking "the Problem"(energy usuage). AGW is just the current method employed by TPTB.

It's going to get worse than this, I think. All conspiracy theories will be pushed into the "mentally ill" category in the not too distant future. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if they fabricated a bunch of new mental illnesses and used them to "treat" any kind of heresy at all .

Think about it. Why would that be the slightest bit surprising? It's one of the oldest dirty tricks in the playbook of dirty tricks.

Well, although I see that man's effect on the environment is definitely degrading it I wouldn't go so far as to say that the people who don't believe that we can destroy the environment are crazy. They are just blind in one eye and can't see out of the other.

You what is crazy? That the OP can just make up a title and story when the link they provide not does not support what they claim but, does not even cover it. You what is even more crazy? The sheep who just run with story without bothering to check and see if any of it is true. This place is just getting sad.

Originally posted by Bob Sholtz
It is very sad that this is true, but it seems to be. (i am not the autor of the video and do not claim any rights to it)

www.youtube.com...

Link to the Article: www.apa.org...

I read the article. It does not say that denying AGW is a mental disorder. Nor does it say that the APA has defined AGW denial as a mental disorder. This is what it says:

Despite warnings from scientists and environmental experts that limiting the effects of climate change means humans need to make some severe changes now, people don’t feel a sense of urgency. The task force said numerous psychological barriers are to blame, including:

Uncertainty – Research has shown that uncertainty over climate change reduces the frequency of “green” behavior.

Mistrust – Evidence shows that most people don’t believe the risk messages of scientists or government officials.

Denial – A substantial minority of people believe climate change is not occurring or that human activity has little or nothing to do with it, according to various polls.

Undervaluing Risks – A study of more than 3,000 people in 18 countries showed that many people believe environmental conditions will worsen in 25 years. While this may be true, this thinking could lead people to believe that changes can be made later.

Lack of Control – People believe their actions would be too small to make a difference and choose to do nothing.

Habit – Ingrained behaviors are extremely resistant to permanent change while others change slowly. Habit is the most important obstacle to pro-environment behavior, according to the report.

(Source).

The title of this thread is a lie.

Originally posted by Sankari

Originally posted by Bob Sholtz
It is very sad that this is true, but it seems to be. (i am not the autor of the video and do not claim any rights to it)

www.youtube.com...

Link to the Article: www.apa.org...

I read the article. It does not say that denying AGW is a mental disorder. Nor does it say that the APA has defined AGW denial as a mental disorder. This is what it says:


The title of this thread is a lie.

Nor did Obama say there would be an individual mandate for insurance in Obamacare. In fact, he insinuated that there wouldn't be (and that this was a key difference between himself and Hitlary). He skirted the issue as much as possible. He mealy mouthed as much as he could.

And then when he got elected, guess what? The individual mandate suddenly reappeared and we were informed that he had simply been persuaded to change his mind.

No longer do I believe anything that man (and the left in general) has anything to do with is as innocuous as it might appear. Playing word games isn't going to throw me off what these people are about. It's plain to see where they're going. These people will use psychiatry as a political battering ram. Psychiatrists have been favorite tools of oppression in the past because it's just so damn easy. Everyone believes their political adversaries must be crazy to disagree with them.

reply to post by Bob Sholtz


Makes you wonder what kind of drug they can give you that will make you see things differently.

Must be some kind of Hallucinogenic.

They should have made that when I was young like there wasn't enough crap going around in the 70's.

Originally posted by BrianFlanders

Originally posted by Sankari

Originally posted by Bob Sholtz
It is very sad that this is true, but it seems to be. (i am not the autor of the video and do not claim any rights to it)

www.youtube.com...

Link to the Article: www.apa.org...

I read the article. It does not say that denying AGW is a mental disorder. Nor does it say that the APA has defined AGW denial as a mental disorder. This is what it says:


The title of this thread is a lie.

Nor did Obama say

*snip*

Irrelevant and off topic.

Address the facts please, don't just spam the thread with nonsense.