By Peter Galuszka
There’s no denying it now. We’re two degrees hotter than in 1991. There is no denying it, according to the National Climate Assessment of experts.
I am sure the Deniers will way in with their pseudoscience.
In response, read what former GOP presidential contender Jon M. Huntsman has to say.
(comments below)
(comments below)
I didn’t think there’d ever been much dispute about rising temperatures. What deniers have maintained, based on scant denial science, was that rising temperatures were little more than points along a cyclical of rising and lowering temperatures. What they continue to deny is that there is a connection between the action of mankind–i.e. carbon emissions–and rising temperatures.
well.. Peter – why can you say to convince folks who think there is a worldwide conspiracy to falsify data? give them more data from “experts”?
this is another bright line between Dems and GOP.
The GOP has all manner of folks from rapid conspiracy types that go way way beyond just climate to more “reasonable” folks that are, for instance, in Congress.
here, look:
well.. Peter – why can you say to convince folks who think there is a worldwide conspiracy to falsify data? give them more data from “experts”?
this is another bright line between Dems and GOP.
The GOP has all manner of folks from rabid conspiracy types that go way way beyond just climate to more “reasonable” folks that are, for instance, in Congress.
Problem is “reasonable” does not describe the GOP these days on GW.
I’d be the first to admit that we don’t know with certainty what is going on but to pretend that none of it is real – to basically gamble that none of it is possible seems like a huge gamble to me.
What would have happened if we took that approach with the Ozone Holes?
that’s the thing – there was virtually no attack on Science for the ozone holes except for the conspiracy types.
but since that time – the conspiracy folks have essentially taken over the GOP.
again – to pretend that none of this is true and nothing will happen – is just plain ignorant.
Even if you are just a “mild” skeptic why would you openly associate yourself with the views of the conspiracy folks instead of being careful to disassociate yourself and stake out a more sensible opinion?
you show these folks the temperature charts and they cite colder than normal conditions … but that’s what the temp charts actually show – periods of down temp but overall, after each down, the temps go up even higher and the chart over the last century is pretty clear on both long term trend and the intermediate down temp periods.
http://thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/NASA2012-FINAL.png
now ..the GOP wants NOAA and NASA to stop tracking temps!
Peter, There is nothing surprising in this map. The average temperature of the United States has increased about 1.5 degrees Fahrenheit, or roughly 1 degree centigrade over the past century. Who’s disputing that?
The issue, which you steadfastly refuse to acknowledge, is not whether average temperatures have increased over the past century — it’s whether temperatures are increasing as rapidly as projected in the IPCC climate models. This maps sheds no light whatsoever on that point. Indeed, the map obscures the fact that temperatures (global temperatures at least) have not increased for 17 years.
Try to understand the debate that’s actually occurring, not the debate as misrepresented by MSNBC.
As for LarryG… No, there is not a “conspiracy” among scientists to create a climate-change furor. But there could well be group think in the scientific community, reinforced by left-of-center politicians, the media and government funding for climate-change science. You are really debasing the debate by characterizing the skeptics the way you do. You also show your ignorance on the topic — there is a lot more debate within the scientific community than you realize. The idea that we’re talking about “settled” science smacks of the Catholic Inquisition.
“The issue, which you steadfastly refuse to acknowledge, is not whether average temperatures have increased over the past century — it’s whether temperatures are increasing as rapidly as projected in the IPCC climate models. This maps sheds no light whatsoever on that point. Indeed, the map obscures the fact that temperatures (global temperatures at least) have not increased for 17 years.”
They haven’t? Then why are thousands of scientists warning us of the catastrophic impacts of global warming. Should we take a ‘never mind’ approach?
Are you anti-Catholic, too?
re: ” As for LarryG… No, there is not a “conspiracy” among scientists to create a climate-change furor. But there could well be group think in the scientific community, reinforced by left-of-center politicians, the media and government funding for climate-change science.”
… that means 98% of scientists around the world are engaging in group think, as well as 98% of country leaders, media and government – around the world ?
but it’s not a conspiracy?
😉
“You are really debasing the debate by characterizing the skeptics the way you do. You also show your ignorance on the topic — there is a lot more debate within the scientific community than you realize. The idea that we’re talking about “settled” science smacks of the Catholic Inquisition.” ”
actually what I said was that there is no guarantee of how correct the scientists are – but we had that same degree of uncertainty with the ozone holes but no accusations of group think, left wing politicians and median – around the world.
why?
the skeptics debase themselves with their outlandish conspiracy theories that they claim are not conspiracy theories. by trying to disguise them as worldwide “group think” instead.
good Lord Jim! at least admit that you think all this nefarious activity is occurring with 98% of the worlds scientists … be honest guy.. state forthrightly that you believe that 98% of the worlds scientists are not only wrong but reinforcing their wrong views with each other, government and media…
What the MSM suppresses – not everyone agrees with the Climate Scientists’ conclusions or research methodology. http://www.nationalreview.com/article/376574/climate-inquisitor-charles-c-w-cooke
I remain agnostic on climate change, believing there can be problems from carbon emissions, but also people lie and cheat for money.
re: “What the MSM suppresses”
why do folks insist there is an MSM conspiracy when we have dozens, hundreds of non- MSM media involve in the dialogue?
the world is dominated by left wing MSM? the world?
Larry, are you suggesting the MSM is not to the left of the American public? What do you guys smoke down in Spotsy?
re: ” Larry, are you suggesting the MSM is not to the left of the American public? What do you guys smoke down in Spotsy?”
No. I’m asking why you guys same the MSM is the only media and it dominates the news.
have you checked out the cable, news, and internet media lately in terms on non MSM?
do you really think there is no other media?
is the MSM whatever media out there that disagrees with FAUX news, Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Michelle Malkin, Laura Ingram, Sean Hannity, Bill O’Reilly, the Washington Examiner, the WSJ, the National Review , etc?
what’s the purpose of pretending there is only MSM reporting news?
Why cannot pro-global warming people ever discuss the issue without resorting to name-calling or callous comments. Or grouping all people who do not agree with them as skeptics or tea party members.
And why do they never discuss the ‘science’ rather than mindlessly parroting claims that 98% of scientists support their claims. That line is so old….and so not true.
The IPCC, created specifically to study global warming has been backing away from dire predictions. They have contradicted claims that every bad weather event is the result of climate change and that global warming has created more severe weather.
Let’s revisit the basic claim. That as CO2 levels go up, the global temperatures would go up in lockstep. That hasn’t happened. CO2 levels are going up even faster than predicted, mainly because of China and India industrializing with massive use of coal. They are up almost 5% over the last 15 years. We should be very hot by now. the poles should be melting (this past winter saw the most sea ice in many years).
Just open your eyes and see that the theory hasn’t been reality. Don’t listen to skeptics – see and think for yourself.
re: ” Why cannot pro-global warming people ever discuss the issue without resorting to name-calling or callous comments. Or grouping all people who do not agree with them as skeptics or tea party members.”
well I’m not “pro”. I’m just not a mindless “denier”. I tend to believe the majority scientists whether they’re talking about Cancer or Tsunamis or Ozone holes. Replacing CFCs was no small leap of faith now was it?
“And why do they never discuss the ‘science’ rather than mindlessly parroting claims that 98% of scientists support their claims. That line is so old….and so not true.”
well 98% on a world-wide basis is nothing something to dismiss lightly much less pretend it’s a conspiracy.
“The IPCC, created specifically to study global warming has been backing away from dire predictions. They have contradicted claims that every bad weather event is the result of climate change and that global warming has created more severe weather.”
they have said that from the beginning – I guess depending who you are listening to. I personally place little stock in the right wing echo chamber on these issues.
Scientists have said from the VERY BEGINNING – that WEATHER is NOT CLIMATE and it’s NOT been the scientists talking about cold winters disproving GW.
“Let’s revisit the basic claim. That as CO2 levels go up, the global temperatures would go up in lockstep. That hasn’t happened. CO2 levels are going up even faster than predicted, mainly because of China and India industrializing with massive use of coal. They are up almost 5% over the last 15 years. We should be very hot by now. the poles should be melting (this past winter saw the most sea ice in many years).”
“lockstep” have never been the claim – it’s TREND over TIME – taking into account periods where it slackens or accelerates.
why would you disbelieve them to start with since they are the ones with the academic credentials and decades of study?
did you disbelieve them for the Ozone Holes also?
Just open your eyes and see that the theory hasn’t been reality. Don’t listen to skeptics – see and think for yourself.
It’s ALWAYS been a THEORY – it’s NEVER been guaranteed in terms of timeline or outcome – and neither were the Ozone Holes. We were told that significant anomalies where and are occurring and really bad stuff might happen .. we don’t know for sure – but why assume that none of it can every happen as a reason to do absolutely nothing?
why would you bet the farm on this?
did you bet the farm on the Ozone Holes?
why? why not? what’s different between GW and Ozone holes in terms of the scientists and their analyzes?
did the entire field of science – 98% worldwide suddenly go over to the dark side?
what is a REASONABLE position on something that is changing on a worldwide basis but we’re not sure yet of the extent and scope?
do you think calling the whole thing a hoax that should be ignored – reasonable?
re: ” They are up almost 5% over the last 15 years. We should be very hot by now. the poles should be melting (this past winter saw the most sea ice in many years).”
why would you conclude that? you’re expecting some sort of precise lockstep measurements from something that is as complex as climate?
we’re seeing things changing in ways we have not seen before or for a long time. We don’t know with precision what happens next but we have some indications that bad stuff might ensue.
why in the world would some of us be willing to write it all off as a complete hoax?
we did not know much more with the ozone holes. we saw things happening that did not bode well for the future. We did not even know if we halted CFC use – IF the holes would recover and if they did it would happen in one or two years or one or two hundred years.
I don’t understand why we are demanding high precision and if we don’t get it or we get differences in predictions that this nullifies everything and makes it a hoax.
we’re expecting more from science in the way of concrete answers that we’ve ever gotten typically. It’s always been a bit of a crap shoot.
It’s as if we’re saying that Cancer is a hoax because we cannot precisely predict how it works and some things we predicted turned out wrong.
how did we get to the point where we essentially have returned to the days of torches and pitchforks?
it’s goofy. Science has ALWAYS been two steps forward, one step back .. some scientists are geniuses and others are a discredit to the field.
even when you get 98% in agreement – they can be wrong – that’s why it’s called a “consensus” not “absolute incontrovertible proof”.
but now days if a majority of scientist reach consensus – it’s a conspiracy. Back during the Ozone Holes – it was good enough to get CFCs banned.
so what has changed?
why did we believe the majority of scientists for the Ozone Holes but now with Global Warming – that many scientists in agreement denotes a world-wide conspiracy now renamed “group think”?
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.