sceptic guide
illconsidered | October 12, 2010Okay, the main page for How to Talk to a Climate Sceptic has over 500 comments now, so as I should have done long ago, I am closing comments there.
Please post any miscellaneous comments that don't fit better elsewhere on this site here on this thread, thanks!
illconsidered | April 20, 2010Last week I was interviewed by Ki Mae Heussner for an article on ACBNews.com. That article can be viewed here.
Anyone coming here from there via the "How to Talk to a Climate Sceptic" link, it was incomplete, click here.
I think that in the broader scheme of "science says sky is blue, Republicans disagree" journalistic balance, the article does well enough. It is a big topic to cover well as a one off assignment, which this may have been. I did not find any previous work of Ki Mae's in this area.
illconsidered | February 1, 2010A commenter just asked on the original "One or two warm years is not Global Warming" thread if the article is still true five years later.
Certainly the logic of it, that the temperature trend is unequivocally warming and we are not claimig global warming because of a record or two, still holds, but I thought it might be interesting to revisit the specific data points I raised in it and ask if they are still true.
The temperature data points are from the GISS analysis and can be found here (as you see, I have discovered where they hide their data!).
The statements I made are as follows:
every…
illconsidered | August 7, 2009So the thread on the "There is no evidence" sceptic guide article is too long and off topic. Comments are now closed there, please add any you may still have on that post's topic here.
Comments specific to the "missing hotspot" tangent should go here.
illconsidered | June 16, 2009Of all the myriad climate skeptic arguments out there, the argument that the current rise in CO2 is not human caused truly is one of the most ridiculous positions one could take.
(Please note, I am not saying it is ridiculous to consider, we should consider everything, but like wondering if the light in the fridge really turns off when you close the door, a quick check with your cell phone video camera really should put it to rest!)
It is of course one of the standard denials in the HTTTACS series.
I am closing comments on that thread and directing them here, as surprising as it is to me…
illconsidered | March 18, 2009While on the subject of being talked about, a columnist writing for Pajamas Media recently took a pot-shot at me and my How to Talk to a Climate Sceptic series.
No publicity is bad publicity, right? Plus, a close second to imitation, mockery is another of the most sincere forms of flattery, at least in the blog world, so I'm not complaining.
On to some substance in a moment, but one thing I found rather remarkable was that even though they get some 450,000 hits per day, my traffic barely registered a blip, despite a prominent link in the first paragraph! The main thrust of the article was…
illconsidered | November 24, 2008This is just one of dozens of responses to common climate change denial arguments, which can all be found at How to Talk to a Climate Sceptic.
Objection:
In his June 23, 2008 testimony before the United States Congress, James Hansen called for the punishment of climate change skeptics for "crimes against humanity". This is a mockery of free speech, the antithesis of scientific investigation and a clear indication that global warming "science" is just another religious persecution like the Catholic Church's persecution of Galileo.
Answer:
The accusation is simply false. James Hansen never…
illconsidered | November 18, 2008This is just one of dozens of responses to common climate change denial arguments, which can all be found at How to Talk to a Climate Sceptic.
Objection:
In October, 2008, Al Gore's science advisor, James Hansen announced yet another "hottest" month on record. After all the alarmist banner headlines sank in, yet another "correction" quietly contradicted this, and October was not particularily warm after all. This is yet another example of why the temperature record can not be trusted.
Answer:
Wow. Where to begin with this one? There are many versions of this myth around already at the time…
illconsidered | October 20, 2008This is just one of dozens of responses to common climate change denial arguments, which can all be found at How to Talk to a Climate Sceptic.
Objection:
We all live on a thin crust that floats on a huge ball of molten iron, and at its core, the Earth's temperature is over 5000oC! It's pretty far fetched to think a few parts per million of CO2 can have a bigger effect that all that heat!
Answer:
Although there is nothing wrong with the statement that the Earth is truly very hot at its center (actually as hot as the surface of the sun) the notion that it is a significant source of heat at…
illconsidered | September 19, 2008 This is just one of dozens of responses to common climate change denial arguments, which can all be found at How to Talk to a Climate Sceptic.
Objection:
Sea ice at the north pole recovered a whopping 9.4% from 2007 to 2008 despite the doom and gloom predictions of the alarmists. Yet another wheel falls off the global warming bandwagon.
Answer:
It is true that the minimum summer ice extent in the arctic ocean in 2008 was 9.4% higher than the minimun in 2007. But calling this a recovery is simply not justifiable, not even by a long shot. Firstly, at 4.52 million square kilometers, this…
illconsidered | September 17, 2008This is just one of dozens of responses to common climate change denial arguments, which can all be found at How to Talk to a Climate Sceptic.
Objection:
The American Physical Society with tens of thousands of member scientists no longer believes that the science of global warming is conclusive. So what about that so called consenus?
Answer:
The APS has not reversed its position on climate change:
Emissions of greenhouse gases from human activities are changing the atmosphere in ways that affect the Earth's climate. Greenhouse gases include carbon dioxide as well as methane, nitrous…
illconsidered | September 11, 2008This is just one of dozens of responses to common climate change denial arguments, which can all be found at How to Talk to a Climate Sceptic.
Objection:
The so called "Greenhouse Effect" which is the underpinning of the entire theory of anthropogenic global warming claims that greenhouse gases in the upper atmosphere absorb outgoing long wave radiation from the surface and reradiate it back, thereby warming the climate. But the upper atmosphere is colder than the lower atmosphere and the surface and the second law of thermodynamics clearly requires that heat flow from warmer areas of a…
illconsidered | September 8, 2008This is just one of dozens of responses to common climate change denial arguments, which can all be found at How to Talk to a Climate Sceptic.
Objection:
Temperatures plummeted over the last year (2007-2008). If you look at this data from the Met Office Hadley Centre you can clearly see that in one year alone global temperatures dropped .6oC, an amount equal to the entire warming over the 20th century claimed by the IPCC.
(click graph for a larger image in a new window)
Answer:
This argument represents a fundamental misunderstanding of the difference between weather and climate. Climate…
illconsidered | July 29, 2008Over the course of the last few years it has become quite clear to me that the attacks on the science of global warming in general are as often reiterated as they are clearly fallacious.
Initially created in 2006 for my own use as a handy way to reference and reuse the relevant material to rebut the sceptic talking points, How to Talk to a Climate Sceptic has grown into a well received and well used web resource for those willing to argue with and debate the purveyors of scientific fallacies and falsehoods who would deny the reality of anthropogenic climate change.
I am pleased to announce…
illconsidered | July 5, 2008Below is a listing of all the articles to be found in the "How to Talk to a Climate Sceptic" guide, presented as a handy one-stop shop for all the material you should need to rebut the more common anti-global warming science arguments constantly echoed across the internet.
In what I hope is an improvement on the original categorization, they have been divided and subdivided along 4 separate lines: Stages of Denial, Scientific Topics, Types of Argument, Levels of Sophistication. This should facilitate quick retrieval of specific entries. Individual articles will appear under multiple headings…
illconsidered | December 27, 2006This is just one of dozens of responses to common climate change denial arguments, which can all be found at How to Talk to a Climate Sceptic.
Objection:
Today's warming is just a recovery from the Little Ice Age.
Answer:
The problem with this argument is that it relies on an implicit assumption that there is some particular climate that the earth needs to be at and that given a period of globally lower temperatures, an eventual rise is inevitable. What is the scientific basis for such an assumption?
There is no evidence that such a situation exists. The climate is influenced by many…
illconsidered | June 27, 2006This is just one of dozens of responses to common climate change denial arguments, which can all be found at How to Talk to a Climate Sceptic.
Objection:
According to the latest state of the art satellite measurements from over the Arctic, sea levels are falling! Guess all that ice isn't melting after all.
Answer:
Yes, a new study using Europe's Space Agency's ERS-2 satellite has determined that over the last ten years, sea level in the Arctic ocean has been falling at an average rate of around 2mm/year. This is very new and very interesting news, though it is preliminary and not published…
illconsidered | June 27, 2006This is just one of dozens of responses to common climate change denial arguments, which can all be found at How to Talk to a Climate Sceptic.
Objection:
Taking into account the logarithmic effect of CO2 on temperature, the 35% increase we have already seen in concentrations represents about 3/4 of the total forcing to be expected from a CO2 doubling. Since we have warmed about .7oC so far, we should only expect about .3oC more for a doubling from pre-industrial levels, so about 1oC not 3oC as the scientists predict. Clearly the climate model sensitivity to CO2 is much too high.
Answer:…
illconsidered | June 27, 2006This is just one of dozens of responses to common climate change denial arguments, which can all be found at How to Talk to a Climate Sceptic.
Objection:
Some stations, in the US for example, show cooling trends. If there really were global warming, it would be warming everywhere.
Answer:
Global Warming refers to the long term increase in globally and seasonally averaged surface temperatures. It is not the case, nor is it expected, that all regions, let alone all weather stations, on the globe will show the same changes in temperature or rainfall patterns. There are in fact many stations…
illconsidered | May 26, 2006This is just one of dozens of responses to common climate change denial arguments, which can all be found at How to Talk to a Climate Sceptic.
Objection:
Scientists claim that Global Warming from GHG's is actually being countered somewhat by Global Dimming from aerosol pollution. They even say that's what caused cooling in mid-century. But, GHG's are evenly mixed around the globe while aerosols by far impact the northern hemisphere where they are produced more than the southern hemisphere. This means that warming should be greater in the southern hemisphere, which is the opposite of what is…