Climate Change Denial Denial

[kindy64]

Pretty balanced attempt at presenting the state of the debate as it is today. This is picking apart a recent article in the Atlantic.

https://ombreolivier.liberty.me/climate-...al-denial/

Ignoring scientific consensus is not necessarily bad. Ignoring the scientific consensus in the 1920s and 1930s meant not forcibly sterilizing millions of genetic inferiors as the eugenecist scientific consensus of the time recommended. Oddly the regime that did attempt to implement that consensus is one that is roundly condemned today. Moreover, despite the claims of “journalists” and “scientists” the NOAA manipulation seems fairly well proven. If NOAA and interested scientists want to dispute this then there is a very simple way to do so: release in to the public domain the data and programs used. Moreover if the results are “robust” they will be easily replicable using other datasets and similar manipulations that are clearly explicable. The fact that this sort of independent replication has not been performed suggests that NOAA were indeed manipulating the data in underhand fashions – a practice that is common on “climate science” and a definite no-no in other more reputable fields of scientific research.

The Atlantic would do its readers (and contributors come to think of it) a favor by clearly enunciating the following

1. the evidence that the climate is changing
   
2. the evidence that this is due to humans (and specifically human caused CO2 emissions)
   
3. the evidence that this will be catastrophic in a reasonable time frame (say 50 years or less)
   
4. the proposed solutions
   
5. how said solutions will resolve the problem
   
6. how much they will cost
   
7. what impacts they will have on the world
   
8. why other solutions (coff Nuclear power coff) are inneffective
   

Currently most popular journalism fails all but perhaps the first and fourth.

[InbetweenDreams]

I think the case about volcanoes producing more CO2 than human activity, sounded like a good point, except may it isn't.

https://hvo.wr.usgs.gov/volcanowatch/arc...02_15.html

Now I can't say those numbers are accurate with the so-called scandal that NOAA has been caught in.

Do humans have an effect on climate? Yeah, it would be foolish not to think so. How much of an effect? Don't know, the best that we can do is estimate based on the data we can collect and we're not really limited to the last 200 years of data. We can look for a lot of things to give us *some* information about climate change. How reliable that data is disputable, but if we're going to dismiss that our presence isn't having an in impact well...



Yes, I do think we partially, maybe mostly responsible for climate change.

If you don't think CO2 is a green house gas... For reference 600 nm is near infrared, actually pretty close to the color red itself. Longer wavelengths like 1,000 are well into the infrared spectrum. So seems pretty simple to me, we pump out more CO2 we get more of this. How much and what effect, sure debate away.



Not going to get into an argument about the data being tainted...but I think it is pretty reasonable to believe that 7 billion people and an ever more industrialization across the globe is having an effect on things.

[Borg69]

Doom and gloom. The end times are near. People have been trying to manipulate others using fear for eons. Sinners repent! Jesus is coming! Fear! Remorse! Feel guilty! Beg for mercy and perhaps... just perhaps... you might be saved... IF you do what *I* tell you to do.

Of course now that people are mostly more educated and we (mostly) don't blame every earthquake, tsunami, and famine on angry gods, the manipulators have to change their tactics to global warming.

Now they don't blame god for global events, they blame you. Please pay on your way out. Donations welcome.

[kindy64]

Interesting article...
http://www.the-american-interest.com/201...g-greener/

****

Yeah, I don't want to get into a full debate on climate change either. I've stated my position, the article in the original post matches my thinking quite closely. I don't think the extremists on either side of this (or any other) debate are doing justice to the actual issues.

I'm just of the opinion that it is reasonable to be skeptical of the doomsayers, as they've had a shitty track record over the last millennium.

[deephiance]

Until someone starts a climate conversation with 'Based on 4.7 billion years of records.....' I am going to be forever skeptical that the climate isn't or is changing. As stated, it would be naive to believe that we have no impact on the environment...but so do cows.

The earliest recording of weather are found in China, recorded in the Shang Dynasty between 18th c and 12th c BC. While not a complete series, when translated the recording showed that 3-4000 years ago, the climate in this region was warmer with more humidity.

Save the planet, don't fart and stop masticating

[InbetweenDreams]

[MENTION=24118]deephiance[/MENTION] Particularly the FARTING!

[deephiance]

[MENTION=24118]deephiance[/MENTION] Particularly the FARTING!

I know right, I feel so guilty