Some Myths Presented by Climate Change Deniers, Part 2
By Keith Antonysen
Comments such as … “Indeed, the AGW theory posing as ‘settled science’ in in fact the greatest science fraud in human history.” It is just a meaningless comment that offers no evidence, and is quite infuriating. It is a form of comment often provided by anthropogenic climate change deniers.
Each point made has lots of further details, but I’m trying to be brief.
Deniers argue climate science is just modelling
Tell that to divers in Antarctica, or scientists tramping up and down glaciers, or scientists working in other inhospitable places gathering data. Modelling has been used in the past to provide an idea of what is happening. The grids used were quite large two hundred kilometres square, now they can be as small as ten square kilometres. A few years ago quite a number of glaciologists were complaining about modelling not keeping up with the pace of decline in snow and ice regions. Erosion of coastlines, river banks or valleys requires observation and measurement, nothing to do with modelling. Noting how fish species are moving North or South from their habits depending on which hemisphere they are in, requires observation.
Deniers like to promote problems with temperature measurement; but, when the artefacts of temperature are pointed out, they claim that is out of order. Examples of artefacts … thawing of permafrost; where greening of tundra areas is taking place, lakes and ponds forming, marshes are forming, infra-structure is breaking down, and glaciers disappearing.
Anthropogenic climate change is not happening
Often the response is just, it is not happening without any kind of evidence provided. It’s a case of knowing better than the millions of scientists over the years who have come to the conclusion that humans do have an effect on climate. Sometimes it is expressed as humans do have a little effect on climate, though not enough to do much damage. The point particularly came to mind after watching a BBC interview with Myron Ebell, a strong Trump supporter. He had no better response than in his view climate scientists are wrong.
Science is not based on opinion, it is based on hypotheses being shown to be correct through observations and data collected.
Satellite data shows that temperatures are not increasing to any large extent
New data in relation to warming of Oceans almost makes temperature readings from land-based weather stations and satellites superfluous. Oceans comprise 70% of the Earth’s surface, and they act as a sink for CO2 and temperature. Satellites do not actually measure temperature; they provide inferred data which then needs to go through a modelling process. Remember, denialists do not like modelling. There is controversy in relation to the accuracy of satellite inferred temperature relating to the process the data needs to be processed by. There has been controversy for many years in relation to the processing of inferred temperature. The other factor is that as satellites age they move out of their orbits causing difficulty in accurately interpreting their inferred temperature.
There is no consensus between climate scientists in relation to anthropogenic climate change
The comment seems mainly directed at John Cook, he began the successful Skeptical Science web site years ago which provides a thorn in denier arguments. The consensus view was first spoken about by Naomi Orestes, it was an observation she made without any objective proof. The consensus view created much attention and several studies were completed to verify the opinion including one by Naomi Orestes. The studies varied from 91% to greater than 97%; the studies assessed were from recognised peer reviewed climate science journals. Consensus studies: Orestes 2004, 100%; Doran 2009, 97%; Andregg 2010, 97%; Cook 2013, 97%; Verheggan 2014, 91%; Stenhouse 2014, 93% and Carlton 2015, 97%. (From Skeptical Science).
Water vapour is the main greenhouse gas.
As with the claim that the climate has always changed it is a true observation.
But, water vapour doesn’t just happen without a particular processes occurring. There is the normal water cycle operating with the add-on of warm marine waters and warm atmosphere. The warm atmosphere is created by extra greenhouse gas emissions which then allow for extra water vapour to be carried. Warming waters allow for more evaporation to take place. Water vapour once created is a powerful greenhouse gas, and a positive feedback system is developed. Wet micro bursts, jargon for “rain bombs” in the past were quite rare, and occurred for a short time frame; now, they are very common and can last for long periods; for example, Hurricane Harvey 2017.
Some Myths Presented by Climate Change Deniers, Part 1
Like what we do at The AIMN?
You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.
Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!
Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.
You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969
1,016 total views, 2 views today
18 commentsLogin here Register here
In short, too much empowering of lay people (including MPs, lobbyists and academics outside their discipline) who deny GW with mega phoning of pseudo science, beliefs and driven by political sentiment and/or PR.
In the court of public opinion, Rupert Murdoch is chief magistrate, judge and jury.
Seems we have 3 or 4 options to deal with climate change. The narrative was changed by George (Dubbya) Bush from GW to Climate Change)
!. Reduce the population to 500 million (Georgia Guidestones)
2 Adopt the Chinese model to support a population of 9 billion people by 2050
3 Explore and colonize our solar system
4 You tell me
Then I get this little epistle! What do YOU think?
Subject: World Wide Coal Plants – Existing and PLANNED..
Yes it is all bs and grand standing when we get down to the nitty gritty. Why are we paying so much for power, partially the Greens, partially the government trying to please, green minded voters. Interesting to note other countries are forging ahead. Look below for the stats. We supposedly have some of the cleanest coal.
Hmmm – saving the planet – here we go! 💥🤯💥
Here’s a small sample of how many coal plants there are in the world today.
The EU has 468 plants building 27 more for a total of 495
Turkey has 56 plants building 93 more total 149
South Africa has 79 building 24 more total 103
India has 589 building 446 more total 1036
Philippines has 19 building 60 more total 79
South Korea has 58 building 26 more total 84
Japan has 90 building 45 more total 135
At the end of 2012, there were 1,308 coal-fired power generating units spread across 557 power
plant sites in the U.S. with the total capacity to generate 310 gigawatts of electricity.
AND CHINA has 2363 building 1171 total 3534
NOW… Here come our AUSTRALIAN politicians who are going to shut down our 21 remaining plants
and save the planet!!
Which shows just how clever our elected representatives are!
In reply to David Bruce,
Did you read the references provided earlier from Part 1?
In maintaining a business as usual program it provides for higher temperatures. The IPCC Report put together by 91 scientists using 6,000 studies suggests that we have 12 years to get things in order. Each study often has a multiple of authors, so the number of scientists involve is much larger than 6,000 plus 91.
Should we increase temperature further we will gain the wrath of the Siberian dragon:
There have been 7,000 pingos found, a few of them have exploded already. Pingos happen to often contain huge volumes of methane. The Siberian Times has had many articles about these pingos. I will dig some references out if you request it.
Do you have a reference for the number of coal powered stations to be built?
No politicians, Green or otherwise, have shutdown any power stations.
This scenario is promoted on talk-back radio, by Coal Industry stooges.
They just shutdown occassionally, they aren’t built to last forever. They shutdown when they are supposed to be producing electricity also, this is called a Blackout.
Or how’s this?
I find it interesting that climate change deniers and coal advocates rarely provide links to back up the comments they make. perhaps you could oblige with showing us your source because that makes a whole lot of difference in this debate.
Could I also correct you about “the narrative” changing. Global warming causes climate change.
Thanks for the feedback.
I am getting sources for coal powered generators.
for corvus boreus, I sent Miles Mathis article on Cycles because it was intended for lay readers
With big data and fast Fourier transforms we are getting a better picture of how the World Weather system operates. If my research budget depended on funding from UN climate change funds, I would find data to support their opinions too.
As you probably know Lennox Walker and others from the Crohamhurst Observatory, provided long range weather forecasts for the Farmers Almanac and others, based on Sun Spot activities.
You may also know about the ITCZ (Inter Tropic Convergent Zone) and how it influences weather in the Northern or Southern hemisphere. My first experience with the ITCZ was in 1967, flying from Vung Tau, Vietnam to Butterworth, Malaysia.
Here are 4 more reports which may stretch the mind:
This was the first report which sparked my interest in Solar System activity and our weather, from University of Southern Queensland
Then this report
Jackpot! Jupiter and Saturn – Solar cycle link confirmed
For information about the ITCZ from Cathay operations manager, How do you fly around a 50,000 foot cloud? see:
This last report leads in to discussion about how doppler radars can cause cloud heating and intensify and steer storms and typhoons (eg Yolanda/Haiyan). Then we can discuss the USAF Dragon Lady U2 aircraft used for weather modification and earthquake production, and trace the history of weather modification experiments conducted during the war in Vietnam (Operation Popeye).
Finally, I know climate change action and disaster risk recovery are needed. However, I question the way science is being politicized!
You seem to subscribe to every conspiracy theory going. That is in itself a real concern.
Good link, Rossleigh.
I particularly liked the following line from the opening paragraph:
This is a virus, yet to be officially recognised, but a virus of most pernicious ramifications. It afflicts 90% of the right and has infiltrated the left.
It must be stopped.
Education is one of the best inoculations; public education, free and uncompromised. Which is difficult to provide given the neoconservative’s aversion to words such as “public”, “free”, “education”. Let alone “uncompromised” which means keeping ideology in their pants where it belongs. If such dogma must be revealed there are places called churches which may contain viral contamination to an extent. At least, not everyone is forced to watch.
And some kind of alarm for when someone tells a whopper. For example, claiming “Hazelwood was closed by the Greens (or other lefty group)” – mention of the name of any coal station can initiate a warning. On the social web use of alogarithms be used to install facts over lies, to read, “Hazelwood was closed by owners because it was too old even to restore” or something similar, as long as it is demonstrably true.
This is sounding frighteningly Orwellian, but we have to do something and I am all out of ideas.
My language has changed. From climate change to climate destruction. ’tis happening, and we who feel it must deal with it, ‘coz we dealt it
For some relief, (I know I needed it) please watch Stephen Colbert deal with a compulsive liar:
David Bruce, for sun spot/sun irradiance, read Tony Eggleton (Cambridge UP, 2013) pp30-34. In fact, read the whole book for enlightenment.
A fact ignored is that the Federal govt along with everyone else knew it was closing. The Coalition did nothing, even though they were in power. The state govt didn’t have the power to do anything.
It seems that your assertion regarding the number of coal-fired generators under construction was, shall we say, at variance with more authoritative citations.
Given that you have made such basic errors on easily verifiable subjects, I decline to follow you down a rabbit hole of Doppler-driven weather, earthquake manufacture, chemtrails, vaccine autism and fluoride sedation.
I’lll stick with peer reviewed science, thanks.
It’s your choice cb, I have survived this long by following a different path.
Speaking of fluoride, it was Dr Hodge working on the Manhattan project who wrote the original source for promoting fluoride for oral health. Go check it out?
The deniers are deluded in their belief that they understand more about the operation of the climate than do professionally qualified climate scientists. I think it is one form of the Dunning-Kruger syndrome — they know nothing and think they know everything. They probably hold contrary viewpoints in regard to a range of other issues too.
China has only 2363 coal fired power stations?
I remember some years ago when the “fact” being trumpeted in the media was that China was commissioning a new coal-fired power station every 3 minutes or so.
2363 only about 5 days worth. Where are the rest of them – or was it only meant to be scaremongering or a deliberate distortion of the truth?