TheBitcoinChemist,
Please share with me exactly where you have received your information on climate change. Because while it appears that you do have some understanding of climate science and its effects, there are certain distinct gaps in your knowledge, and a lot of it sounds like it came right out of a libertarian playbook, which naturally raises suspicions.
If you could share specific books you've read, or specific websites in which you collect information from, I would appreciate it.
It's easier to refer them to
this. If they don't bother reading it, don't bother arguing. People oblivious to science will remain in their religious bubble no matter how much persuasion attacks them.
This entire site is well written bunk. Let me just address the first 20...
I've got some extra time. Here are my responses.
"Climate's changed before" Climate reacts to whatever forces it to change at the time; humans are now the dominant forcing.
Based upon what assumptions? Their links don't really say, the larger link is just more conjecture.
Climate has changed before, which the argument does not deny. There is, however, an undeniable correlation between temperatures and the industrial revolution.
2 "It's the sun" In the last 35 years of global warming, sun and climate have been going in opposite directions
Again, they produce no evidence for this statement, and it's provablely false. Long distance IR measurements of Mars by NASA says that the surface of Mars has warmed over the past 30 years or so also. Did we do that too?
Mars's climate is likely to vary greatly when compared to other planets, especially Earth. Dust storms seem to cool down surface temperature, but increase upper atmosphere temperature. While Mars's surface temperature decreased in 2001 during a planet-wide dust storm, the upper atmosphere heated by 30 °C. This "dust storm" effect indicates that some unknown Martian cycles are likely present that dwarf solar activity in Martian climate change.
3 "It's not bad" Negative impacts of global warming on agriculture, health & environment far outweigh any positives.
"The economic impacts of climate change may be catastrophic, while there have been very few benefits projected at all. "
Yes, the impact of climate change
may be catastrophic, but very few scientists consider the effects of climate change on the economy. It's simply not their field. So the reaosn that there hav been very few benefits projected is actual economists consider predicting the effects of warming over a century to be futile, so very little has been published on the matter at all.
Barring anything else, sea level rise is likely a major economic factor. If New York becomes submerged, economic damage could result.
4 "There is no consensus" 97% of climate experts agree humans are causing global warming.
To be precise, 97% of climate experts
do not contest that humans are
a cause of global warming. That does not conclude that they all agree thathuman activities are the predominate cause. Furthermore, the idea that a scientific consensus, even if true, represents reality is historically false. This is just a short list of the crackpots who truned out to be correct, contrary to the scientific consensus of the age.
http://amasci.com/weird/vindac.htmlCrackpot isn't the right word; "heretic" is. Many famous scientists of yesteryear were heretics, as your list gives. However, unless one is a scientist oneself, it's probably better to listen to consensus than to isolated heretics. As your article states itself, "99% of revolutionary announcements from the fringes of science are just as bogus as they seem".
5 "It's cooling" The last decade 2000-2009 was the hottest on record.
I won't contest this, but that data point isn't actually an argument for human caused global warming.
It isn't an argument for human-caused global warming, true. But, it does indicate that some kind of global warming is occurring.
6 "Models are unreliable" Models successfully reproduce temperatures since 1900 globally, by land, in the air and the ocean.
While it's true that the models were tweeked until they could accurately reproduce measurements we have seen in the past, it's not true that those same models were able to predict the warming over the next several years, much less decades. This is the great failing of the models, they simple arien't good enough
I'm not contesting this point, partly because I believe in the Bitcoin motto: "past results do not imply future performances". Models or not, however, the past 10-20 years are already a cause for alarm.
7 "Temp record is unreliable" The warming trend is the same in rural and urban areas, measured by thermometers and satellites.
Yes, and they don't agree with each other. Traditionally, the surface measurements are used in the computer models because there is simply more data than sats, but the surface monitors can be screwed with by changes in the immediate environment they reside, which is why they are the unreliable set to use. Sat data does not, and has not, reported the same degree of warming, although they have reported some warming.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/07/29/press-release-2/Surface monitors can be screwed in both directions equally. Satellites are now reporting the same degree of warming, because corrections to bias due to shifting orbit times were made. This quote, from
this report, is significant:
Previously reported discrepancies between the amount of warming near
the surface and higher in the atmosphere have been used to challenge the
reliability of climate models and the reality of human-induced global warming.
Specifically, surface data showed substantial global-average warming, while
early versions of satellite and radiosonde data showed little or no warming
above the surface. This significant discrepancy no longer exists because errors
in the satellite and radiosonde data have been identified and corrected. New
data sets have also been developed that do not show such discrepancies.
8 "Animals and plants can adapt" Global warming will cause mass extinctions of species that cannot adapt on short time scales.
Says who? Who has the expertise to say that animals cannot adapt over a century by migration? And so what if they can't? More species go extinct yearly than we have ever caused.
Some animals cannot migrate. Polar bears, Arctic seals, and Antarctic penguins are examples. Species are going extinct because we are in a period of mass extinction, the
Holocene mass extinction, that began due to the end of an ice age. If temperatures continue to increase, it is assumed that this mass extinction event will be continued.
These extinction events tend to cause severe upsets in the balance of nature. The past three events have usurped insects (to the advantage of amphibians), amphibians (to the advantage of reptiles), and finally reptiles (to the advantage of warm-blooded birds/mammals). After many mammals have already gone extinct due to the end of the ice age, mammals and birds like the polar bears, Arctic seals, and Antarctic penguins are in jeopardy: they may likely end up similar to the woolly mammoth.
9 "It hasn't warmed since 1998" For global records, 2010 is the hottest year on record, tied with 2005.
No contest here.
Okay.
10 "Antarctica is gaining ice" Satellites measure Antarctica losing land ice at an accelerating rate.
Sure, does not mean that climate change is human caused.
Okay.
11 "CO2 lags temperature" CO2 didn't initiate warming from past ice ages but it did amplify the warming.
CO2 didn't initiate this trend either, since records show that the warming trend began well before the Industrial Age.
Yep, and this time the CO2 will likely amplify the warming again. History tends to repeat.
12 "Ice age predicted in the 70s" The vast majority of climate papers in the 1970s predicted warming.
The vast majority of the climate papers in the 1950's predicted cooling, which wasn't a bad bet since even at the time the global average was over teh long term mean.
The 1950's were characterized by cooling, so the climate papers were not incorrect.
13 "Climate sensitivity is low" Net positive feedback is confirmed by many different lines of evidence.
And contradicted by many others.
Isn't everything? Ignoring feedback, the current temperature is already very high.
14 "We're heading into an ice age" Worry about global warming impacts in the next 100 years, not an ice age in over 10,000 years.
The Little Ice Age, while not technically a true ice age, dropped the average temps by half a C in under that time frame. Tens of thousands died of starvation directly, or due to complications of desiese related to malnourishment as a direct result of the fall in agricultural productivity during this time frame.
Due to the increase of that much in the past 40 years, I think it's safe to say another Little Ice Age is not a problem. In fact, because of 1.5 K warming in the past 200 years, we could survive three Little Ice Ages. That would be enjoyable to many of the Pacific islands that are sinking.
15 "Ocean acidification isn't serious" Ocean acidification threatens entire marine food chains.
Sure, and so did Acid Rain when I was a younger man. Didn't really pan out, did it?
I'll give you this.
16 "Hockey stick is broken" Recent studies agree that recent global temperatures are unprecedented in the last 1000 years.
But not over the past 10,000 years. Again, roots have been found on islands north of Canada under several feet of permafrost.
Most technological advances occurred in the last 3000 years. The rest of the 7000 years in your timeline probably have nothing to do with human activity.
17 "Climategate CRU emails suggest conspiracy" A number of investigations have cleared scientists of any wrongdoing in the media-hyped email incident.
Some scientists, others have lost their jobs.
I'd just point out that although more scientists believe in anthropogenic global warming than scientists who don't, just as much data has been fabricated on both sides.
18 "Hurricanes aren't linked to global warming" There is increasing evidence that hurricanes are getting stronger due to global warming.
No contest here.
Okay.
19 "Glaciers are growing" Most glaciers are retreating, posing a serious problem for millions who rely on glaciers for water.
Most being the oparative word.
There's a direct causality between a warming planet and most glaciers retreating. Some glaciers grow due to local variations.
20 "Al Gore got it wrong" Al Gore book is quite accurate, and far more accurate than contrarian books.
According to whom? The movie "An inconvient truth" was so full of provablely false data points that a court ordered that it could not be shown to public school students because it might ingrain falsehoods into their education.
Al Gore is not a magical leader. His economic policies and personal self-righteousness are despicable, in my humble opinion. The person's shortcomings does not impact the theory's validity.
Besides, most contrarian movies are also not allowed to be shown to public school students because they are just as inaccurate.
