Green World Trust

[kaleesa]

What evidence indicates that global warming is false? I hear a lot of contradictory things about global warming, and I don't even know where to start. Anybody know a thing or two that they want to share that falsifies/verifies global warming?
__________________________________________
external keyword tool ~ keyworddiscovery.com ~ keycompete.com ~ compete.com ~ webmasterworld.com

[perseus]

Global warming contrarians assume that the default position is that humans can't cause climate change. Of course in view of the long history of global warming predictions and the subsequent multiple stands of evidence which suggest man is affecting climate, this should make us suspicious of their true motives.

I am not aware of any genuine climate scientist which claims global warming is false or indeed anthropogenic climate change is false, if that's what you mean. The nearest to this are the so called climate sceptics, which belive that climate sensitivity is lower than what mainstream science has calculated. This is mainly due to our uncertainty about how future cloud cover will react to further temperature changes.

With regard to references, you have to be very careful since the web has been hi-jacked by groups with political motoves to subvert the science. These always consist of credible sounding, but on deep examination cleverly deceptive arguments. It is therefore essential you stick with sites which are either overseen by genuine climate scientists or at least scientists who reference the peer reviewed studies into the subject.

A good start is the pew centre
http://www.pewclimate.org/global-warming-basics/facts_and_figures/climate_science_basics/ghe.cfm

For people starting from a contrarian bent, nothing beats Skeptical Science, a Web site that directly answers various skeptic talking points, with links to some of the original science.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/

And Real Climate is a must-read, since it includes some of the world’s top climate scientists translating their research into layman’s language.
http://www.realclimate.org/
_________________
change the opinions of a selected population regarding the validity of global warming. “Target 1: Older, less educated males”..... The Western Fuels Association, National Coal Association and Edison Electric Institute (ICE) 1991

[Lucy Skywalker]

I'm going to reply by picking apart Perseus' reply

[perseus]

Corruption is mainly confined to right wing politicians and their corporate friends not the climate scientists! However, a few scientists are corrupted.

This Bob Carter. His website states that his research "has been supported by grants from competitive public research agencies, especially the Australian Research Council (ARC)", and that he "receives no research funding from special interest organisations such as environmental groups, energy companies or government departments".

Nearly all the so called 'contrarians' are supported by the carbon lobby, so lets examine this Bob Carter to examine if he is telling the truth.

In fact Carter is a committee member in the "Institute for Public Affairs" (IPA), an Australian-based organisation that has received funding from the tobacco and fossil fuel industries (amongst others). The NIPCC report, which Carter contributed to, was published by the Heartland Institute, an industry-funded organisation that has worked with Philip Morris to question the link between secondhand smoke and health risks, and has received $676,500 from ExxonMobil since 1998.

The trick is to form a third party AstroTurf masquerading as a grass roots organisation. These are nothing less than subsidiaries of big coal, oil and other dirty polluting industries!

You can also see his other antics here.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/cif-green/2010/nov/30/climate-change-sceptic-bob-carter

With regard to the claim that climate scientists are frightened to express an opinion. They are certainly free to anonymously express opinions in surveys, and all these come to the same conclusion:

Examining the Scientific Consensus
on Climate Change
"It seems that the debate on the authenticity of global warming and the role played by human activity is largely nonexistent among those who understand the nuances and scientific basis of long-term climate processes. The challenge, rather, appears to be how to effectively communicate this fact to policy makers and to a public that continues to mistakenly perceive debate among scientists."
http://tigger.uic.edu/~pdoran/012009_Doran_final.pdf

I said no climate scientist disputes global warming, although very few scientists would be silly enough to do this. See one of the most famous 'contrarians' here Patrick Michaels here 7 mins into the video, telling his friends at the Heartland conference that "global warming is real and the second warming of the 20th century - people have something to do with it, alright? Now get over it."
http://climateprogress.org/2009/09/06/climate-crock-of-the-week-video-1998-revisited/

PS who was that name right at the start, did you see it!

I'm afraid the disinformation campaign is rife and sickening. From Desmogblog with the D word censored in accordance with instructions from the moderator:

Democracy is utterly dependent upon an electorate that is accurately informed. There is a vast difference between putting forth a point of view, honestly held, and intentionally sowing the seeds of confusion. Free speech does not include the right to deceive. Deception is not a point of view. And the right to disagree does not include a right to intentionally subvert the public awareness.
_________________
change the opinions of a selected population regarding the validity of global warming. “Target 1: Older, less educated males”..... The Western Fuels Association, National Coal Association and Edison Electric Institute (ICE) 1991

[perseus]

Lucy

I have asked your opinion on these issues

Tobacco smoking on health
Second hand Tobacco smoking on health
Stratospheric ozone depletion by CFCs
Effect of unrestricted use of DDT on human health and habitats
Acid rain from industry affecting habitats

Do you have any?
_________________
change the opinions of a selected population regarding the validity of global warming. “Target 1: Older, less educated males”..... The Western Fuels Association, National Coal Association and Edison Electric Institute (ICE) 1991

[Lucy Skywalker]

[perseus]

Lucy

It is you who aren't reading the links. There is plenty about Carter's junk science there.

Carter's paper contains a stunning array of errors, the most serious of which I itemised in an analysis for the same journal. Some of the inaccuracies are laughable. For instance, Carter cites a palaeotemperature reconstruction as evidence that the Medieval Warm Period was warmer than the late 20th century, even though it only provides temperature data up to 1935. Elsewhere he suggests wrongly that atmospheric carbon dioxide only produces a small warming effect, basing his assertion solely on erroneous calculations posted on a website about "Plant Fossils of West Virginia". And he attributes the warming in the late 20th century to solar activity, but refers to a paper that used inaccurate data about sunspot activity, and which when corrected show no correlation with the recent global average temperature record.

I concluded that Carter's paper was "possibly the most inaccurate and misleading article about climate change that has ever been published by a journal". In his response, rather than explaining or justifying the many flaws in his paper, Carter merely stated that the issues I raised were "weary ones, and have been put to bed by qualified, independent scientists many times".

However, Carter did at least admit that a quotation that he claimed to have taken from a book by Sir John Houghton, the former chair of the science working group of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, was never said: "Unless we announce disasters, no one will listen." This "quote" was first used by a columnist in a rightwing Australian newspaper four years ago, and has been repeated by self-proclaimed climate change "sceptics" many times since. But in February, Sir John wrote to the Observer to point out: "The quote from me is without foundation. I have never said it or written it."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/cif-green/2010/nov/30/climate-change-sceptic-bob-carter
_________________
change the opinions of a selected population regarding the validity of global warming. “Target 1: Older, less educated males”..... The Western Fuels Association, National Coal Association and Edison Electric Institute (ICE) 1991

[perseus]

[quote="Lucy Skywalker"]

[perseus]

Potty Training Christopher Monckton March 20, 2011 by greenfyre

BPSDB Who?
The Full Monckton
Four new videos
A trip to the potty
Jest for fun
Who?
For those who don’t know him, in addition to delusions of being an authority on climate science the self-christened “Potty Peer” is (as Coby Beck put it) a certifiable crackpot and a very colourful loon.

As such documenting his seemingly endless stream of errors, misrepresentations, frauds, lies etc would appear to be a cruel and completely unwarrented exercise in mocking the feeble and afflicted were it not for one other fact – he is one of the most widely known of the professional so-called climate skeptics.

Further, for those desperate to embrace any idiocy that purports to refute climate science (eg the American Republican Party), Lord Monckton would appear to be one of the most credible of those professionals (undoubtedly based on his being an aristocrat).

In a field (ie climate change denial) where raving silliness and blatent fraud are the stock in trade it would be difficult to pick a King of the Dungheap, but I submit that if one looks at the difference between outragreous, egregious ridiculousness and perceived credibility by the Denialosphere and some popular media, then Monkton is a clear frontrunner if not outright winner. Few others come even close to being so obviously, blatantly wrong while being still held up as credible authorities by the Deniers.
_________________
change the opinions of a selected population regarding the validity of global warming. “Target 1: Older, less educated males”..... The Western Fuels Association, National Coal Association and Edison Electric Institute (ICE) 1991