Ocean acidifcation .

[Marc1]

If the number and size of available articles supporting the scaremongering campaign about sea level rising versus the number of articles denouncing it's falsehood was used as indication of truth or false, the sea level rising 2, 9 or 44 meters would win hands down.

And does not matter that this forum has members who have been on the water for 20,30,40 years, and know of sea level data being stable for the last 100 years.
The "consensus" is oh so attractive, and the virtue signalling when arising "awareness" is too attractive to pass.

Yet when talking one opinion vs the other, if you just scratch the surface you will find that it is an unfair competition.

The statement that the world is going to end tomorrow has a prize attached. Yes not a spelling mistake ... write an article that Miami is going to be the new Atlantis and you will be guaranteed publishing and your article will be shared by millions of readers, viewers, listeners and may be part of the next catastrophe movie, and if you are lucky even politician will quote you and spew bile against their opponent, and if in power throw you taxpayers money up in the air for whoever wants it.

Write something that proves this to be a fraud, a scam, a race to confiscate taxpayers dollars towards an imaginary foe, and you will be the bad guy, regardless of any scientific proof you may supply. And when it goes to finding a scientist that wants to be the whistleblower, you will need to look among retired professors who no longer fear dismissal and who's pension is out of their ex employer's reach.

This is like declaring oneself agnostic during the Spanish inquisition. Guaranteed death sentence.
Eppur si muove ...

When it comes to consensus, masses beliefs, common held notions, populist discourse... nothing better than what we used to say during election campaigns in Argentina, the land of the crook and the fraudster:
"Eat [dung] ... millions of flies can not be wrong"

[GordMay]

Exile said, in part: " land subsidence is predicted to be 2.5x more to blame for future sea level rise than CC "

Gord said, in part: " In some regions subsidence may account for more than half of the relative sea level rise (RSLR), in others much less.
In other areas, rebound will reduce the relative sea level rise. "

[Exile]

Originally Posted by GordMay

Exile said, in part: " land subsidence is predicted to be 2.5x more to blame for future sea level rise than CC "

Gord said, in part: " In some regions subsidence may account for more than half of the relative sea level rise (RSLR), in others much less.
In other areas, rebound will reduce the relative sea level rise. "

OK, I see now. I should have been more careful to limit my comment to the US e. coast regions we had been discussing earlier. It obviously does vary so generalized statements are inapplicable. But in the region under discussion, there is science that believes subsidence actually counts for quite a bit more than just half of relative sea level rise, no?

I was frankly surprised to learn there are significant factors other than GW/AGW that influence relative sea level rise, particularly on the US e. coast where much of the initial and ongoing alarmism was and is focused on. This doesn't look to me like a problem within the science, but rather in what is being communicated to the public and why. I think if you want citizens to make sacrifices, it's important to be honest with them or credibility is lost which is difficult to regain. Imo, this is the crux of the problem, and blaming other parties is merely an excuse and a distraction.

[Marc1]

Illusory truth effect
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The illusory truth effect (also known as the validity effect, truth effect or the reiteration effect) is the tendency to believe information to be correct after repeated exposure.[1]

This phenomenon was first identified in a 1977 study at Villanova University and Temple University.[2][3] When truth is assessed, people rely on whether the information is in line with their understanding or if it feels familiar. The first condition is logical as people compare new information with what they already know to be true. Repetition makes statements easier to process relative to new, unrepeated statements, leading people to believe that the repeated conclusion is more truthful.

The illusory truth effect has also been linked to "hindsight bias", in which the recollection of confidence is skewed after the truth has been received.

In a 2015 study, researchers discovered that familiarity can overpower rationality and that repetitively hearing that a certain fact is wrong can affect the hearer's beliefs.[4] Researchers attributed the illusory truth effect's impact on participants who knew the correct answer to begin with, but were persuaded to believe otherwise through the repetition of a falsehood, to "processing fluency".

The illusory truth effect plays a significant role in such fields as election campaigns, advertising, news media, and political propaganda.

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by Marc1

Illusory truth effect
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The illusory truth effect (also known as the validity effect, truth effect or the reiteration effect) is the tendency to believe information to be correct after repeated exposure.[1]

This phenomenon was first identified in a 1977 study at Villanova University and Temple University.[2][3] When truth is assessed, people rely on whether the information is in line with their understanding or if it feels familiar. The first condition is logical as people compare new information with what they already know to be true. Repetition makes statements easier to process relative to new, unrepeated statements, leading people to believe that the repeated conclusion is more truthful.

The illusory truth effect has also been linked to "hindsight bias", in which the recollection of confidence is skewed after the truth has been received.

In a 2015 study, researchers discovered that familiarity can overpower rationality and that repetitively hearing that a certain fact is wrong can affect the hearer's beliefs.[4] Researchers attributed the illusory truth effect's impact on participants who knew the correct answer to begin with, but were persuaded to believe otherwise through the repetition of a falsehood, to "processing fluency".

The illusory truth effect plays a significant role in such fields as election campaigns, advertising, news media, and political propaganda.

here this should help

[Marc1]

Cognitive bias is a fascinating subject, lets read about two more that are very relevant in the current climate ... err ... changing climate? ... current climatic condition?
Anyway
By Kendra Cherry
Updated May 10, 2019

While we might all like to believe that we are rational and logical, the sad fact is that we are constantly under the influence of cognitive biases that distort our thinking, influence our beliefs, and sway the decisions and judgments we make each and every day.

Sometimes these biases are fairly obvious, and you might even find that you recognize these predispositions. Others are so subtle that they are almost impossible to notice.

Since our attention is a limited resource and we can't possibly evaluate every possible detail and event ​in forming our thoughts and opinions, there is ample room for these biases to enter our thought process and affect our decisions. The following are just a few of the different cognitive biases that have a powerful influence on how you think, how you feel, and how you behave.

1
The Confirmation Bias

The confirmation bias is based on finding that people tend to listen more often to information that confirms the beliefs they already have. Through this bias, people tend to favor information that confirms their previously held beliefs.

This bias can be particularly evident when it comes to issues like gun control and global warming. Instead of listening to the opposing side and considering all of the facts in a logical and rational manner, people tend simply to look for things that reinforce what they already think is true.

In many cases, people on two sides of an issue can listen to the same story, and each will walk away with a different interpretation that they feel validates their existing point of view. This is often indicative that the confirmation bias is working to "bias" their opinions.


The False-Consensus Effect

People also have a surprising tendency to overestimate how much other people agree with their own beliefs, behaviors, attitudes, and values, an inclination known as the false consensus effect. This can lead people not only to incorrectly think that everyone else agrees with them—it can sometimes lead them to overvalue their own opinions.

Researchers believe that the false consensus effect happens for a variety of reasons. First, the people we spend the most time with, our family and friends, do often tend to share very similar opinions and beliefs. Because of this, we start to think that this way of thinking is the majority opinion even when we are with people who are not among our group of family and friends.

Another key reason this cognitive bias trips us up so easily is that believing that other people are just like us is good for our self-esteem. It allows us to feel "normal" and maintain a positive view of ourselves in relation to other people.

PS
I like your signature Newhaul ... but i believe it should be : "Illegitimi non carborundum", not that there is a right or wrong way to mock using Latin

i like this better: "Aut inveniam viam aut faciam"

[GordMay]

Originally Posted by Marc1

Illusory truth effect
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The illusory truth effect (also known as the validity effect, truth effect or the reiteration effect) is the tendency to believe information to be correct after repeated exposure.[1]
This phenomenon was first identified in a 1977 study at Villanova University and Temple University.[2][3] ...

The reiteration effect is hardly new (1977).
Roughly twenty-two hundred years ago, Cato the Elder utilized the tactic of “repetitive messaging”, when he repeatedly ended his Senate speeches (votes?*) with the phrase: "Carthago delenda est", or "Carthage must be destroyed." (according to Plutarch*: "In my opinion, Carthage must be destroyed.")

*27 ➥ Plutarch ? Life of Cato the Elder

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by Marc1

Cognitive bias is a fascinating subject, lets read about two more that are very relevant in the current climate ... err ... changing climate? ... current climatic condition?
Anyway
By Kendra Cherry
Updated May 10, 2019

While we might all like to believe that we are rational and logical, the sad fact is that we are constantly under the influence of cognitive biases that distort our thinking, influence our beliefs, and sway the decisions and judgments we make each and every day.

Sometimes these biases are fairly obvious, and you might even find that you recognize these predispositions. Others are so subtle that they are almost impossible to notice.

Since our attention is a limited resource and we can't possibly evaluate every possible detail and event ​in forming our thoughts and opinions, there is ample room for these biases to enter our thought process and affect our decisions. The following are just a few of the different cognitive biases that have a powerful influence on how you think, how you feel, and how you behave.

1
The Confirmation Bias

The confirmation bias is based on finding that people tend to listen more often to information that confirms the beliefs they already have. Through this bias, people tend to favor information that confirms their previously held beliefs.

This bias can be particularly evident when it comes to issues like gun control and global warming. Instead of listening to the opposing side and considering all of the facts in a logical and rational manner, people tend simply to look for things that reinforce what they already think is true.

In many cases, people on two sides of an issue can listen to the same story, and each will walk away with a different interpretation that they feel validates their existing point of view. This is often indicative that the confirmation bias is working to "bias" their opinions.


The False-Consensus Effect

People also have a surprising tendency to overestimate how much other people agree with their own beliefs, behaviors, attitudes, and values, an inclination known as the false consensus effect. This can lead people not only to incorrectly think that everyone else agrees with them—it can sometimes lead them to overvalue their own opinions.

Researchers believe that the false consensus effect happens for a variety of reasons. First, the people we spend the most time with, our family and friends, do often tend to share very similar opinions and beliefs. Because of this, we start to think that this way of thinking is the majority opinion even when we are with people who are not among our group of family and friends.

Another key reason this cognitive bias trips us up so easily is that believing that other people are just like us is good for our self-esteem. It allows us to feel "normal" and maintain a positive view of ourselves in relation to other people.

PS
I like your signature Newhaul ... but i believe it should be : "Illegitimi non carborundum", not that there is a right or wrong way to mock using Latin

i like this better: "Aut inveniam viam aut faciam"

thank you for the compliment . I had to word it in a certain way that was acceptable to the moderator team. They had a big discussion a long time ago about it . As it is they took almost 2 weeks to decide it was allowable . Iirc there were 10 or 12 mods involved in the discussions.

[GordMay]

Originally Posted by newhaul

thank you for the compliment . I had to word it in a certain way that was acceptable to the moderator team. They had a big discussion a long time ago about it . As it is they took almost 2 weeks to decide it was allowable . Iirc there were 10 or 12 mods involved in the discussions.

I like it too, but you could have substituted "planeta est calefacientem".

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by GordMay

I like it too, but you could have substituted "planeta est calefacientem".

I have had that on a coffee cup since it was given to me by the director of police services in my hometown in the late 1970's

[Exile]

Originally Posted by GordMay

I like it too, but you could have substituted "planeta est calefacientem".

So passé Gord. To stay up on things, you really want it to be "climate mutatio." And remember . . . repeat, repeat repeat.

[GordMay]

Originally Posted by Exile

So passé Gord. To stay up on things, you really want it to be "climate mutatio." And remember . . . repeat, repeat repeat.

You got me!
Perhaps: "Negare, nego, negare."

[Exile]

Originally Posted by GordMay

You got me!
Perhaps: "Negare, nego, negare."

HA! And touché! (along with a good excuse to use Google translate).

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by Exile

HA! And touché! (along with a good excuse to use Google translate).

you don't read Latin :-):-) for shame

[Exile]

Originally Posted by newhaul

you don't read Latin :-):-) for shame

I vaguely recall having to sit through a Latin class at one of the secondary schools I had not yet been thrown out of yet. But like chemistry class, somebody thought it best that I spend the time in the Ass't Principal's Office instead.