http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;...
Or it could be when they accuse scientists of forecasting an active hurricane season, but when shown that it's denier favorites making those forecasts, they ignore that:
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;...
Or it could be when they come up with some really insane thing as a forcing of climate change (variation of the cosmic background radiation), then refuse to accept that it's too small to matter:
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;...
Or it could be they're just illogical and dumb, and they don't notice that their beliefs are in conflict with reality.
"What is Cognitive dissonance?"
When a person believes that a loving G.d will send all non-evangelical christians to burn in hell for eternity. That would be a good example, would it not? Well? Is it or is it not a good example?
There is a lot of inconsistency here in this section. Yes, I have seen some claim that it is getting colder and that the warming is natural, it makes so much sense!!
But, I have also seen someone in particular, someone that is really scared and that works in the field, not admit publicly how scared he is. And I have seen this user try to use cognitive dissonance in the form of ridicule to vainly attempt to persuade other users that they are wrong, but he does not seem to see that it only creates more antagony by strengthening the division between parties. This user has once complained that there is a dearth of competency in this section, but his lack of diplomacy has prevents competent users who are real scientists like physicists and mathematicians to come and provide good answers relating to science.
Another example is acknowledging overpopulation is a giant problem and still have a moral dilemma about what to do about it. While most people do not even want to acknowledge it, because they are utopian dreamers that extols the glories of vertical living in an artificial tomorrow.
Saying "I am not particularly interested in that subject" and talking about it everyday is utterly consistent, huh?
Oh I commited blasphemy!
-----
What you say to me does not make any sense. See, you asked "what is cognitive dissonance" I gave you examples. And my first example is valid, but you did not like my detailed answer, even though I answered your question in my second paragraph. But my first example struck a nerve, you try to reduce dissonance by justifying why you believe in eternal hell. Now, I know that you are a good person, but your reply to me does not make any sense. Sorry, but it sounds like the same rhetoric as fundies.
Big Gryph gave you a copy and paste answer, yet it kind of fits with your reaction to my first comments. But you don't like my answer, because what I said about evangelicals is true. They send everyone, except them, to a non existant place.
I believe it is the phenomenon of getting so used to a situation that it barely catches your attention any longer and you just tune it out, kind of the frog in the pot syndrome.
Cognitive dissonance for a climate skeptic is claiming that climate scientists are only interested in doing research for the money, and then claiming that climate skeptics and think tanks like The Heartland Institute take money from the oil industry with the noble goal of protecting the common citizen from big government.
Cognitive dissonance is the distressing mental state that people feel when they "find themselves doing things that don't fit with what they know, or having opinions that do not fit with other opinions they hold."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_d...
Concerned distance? Back off! Let's keep it simple an not try and complicate things when it comes to Global Warming. Thanks!
The IPCC has overestimated the effect of CO2. Basic physics says the doubling of CO2 levels will cause about 1 degree of warming. They use computer models and guesses about positive cloud feedback to create projections of much higher amounts of warming. But if the planet will produce negative feedback in response to warming, then the overall level of warming will be much less. One such negative feedback is acknowledged in Stefan's law.
Believing your predictions will come true eventually, that natural variation is preventing them from happening, the heat is hiding, contradiction reinforces the science, bad weather is proof, stead lastly believing climate scientist are Gods prophets...
Try using a dictionary soft lad, I'm sure Al Gore won't mind.
