It's Hot! But Fox Only Talks About Global Warming When It's Snowing

[Rashiminos]

So, you're saying that we don't have to be worried about the climate change because once the earth is as hot as Venus, the climate won't change anymore?

The Earth will not be getting as hot as Venus through humans emitting gases, try as they might.

 

[Berzerker]

If the ice-caps melt, they're going straight to the ocean, and the water's gonna become saltwater. Thus, there will be a net decline in freshwater worldwide. Actually, a pretty huge decline -- most of the freshwater in the world is glacial.

Adding fresh water to the oceans decreases salinity and that increases evaporation, thats where the ice mostly came from in the first place - the oceans. You seem to think water locked up in ice is "in the system" and when it melts we "lose" it, thats the opposite of how the hydro cycle works. A warmer world means more water - more evaporation, more rain, more snow and higher water tables.

Simultaneously, glaciers are absolutely vital as the source for the Indus and Ganges rivers, which help feed hundreds of millions of people... as well as a number of other rivers, for that matter. Ice, when not in your driveway, is actually pretty important to the survival of a good chunk of humanity.

Those rivers exist because of the Himalayas and monsoons, not glaciers. Ice aint good unless its melting... When it comes to life, ice is the least efficient use of h2o.

Global warming isn't feared for the sake of fearing warming. People are afraid of it because it can cause unpleasant things like drying of Ganges and/or Chinese farming area, which can lead to ~2 billion people starving, and that may cause political destabilization too. So if the warming will once stop, that isn't really addressing the point.

If we had today's population 400 years ago, 2 billion people might have starved to death because of a "natural" cold snap between ~1350-1850 - a cold snap our ghgs may have alleviated somewhat. Cooling trends should be feared, not global warming.

 

[Arwon]

So why aren't countries actively pursuing a warming policy if warming is so great? Why all the efforts to cut those nourishing life-giving warming emissions by businesses and governments?

This is the irreducable problem people run into making these various isolated claims that Teh Science Is Wrong. For their arguments to make sense they need to be positing either entirely unconvincing pop-psych theories of mass-delusion or what amounts to a grand conspiracy involving not just world leaders, governments and research institutes and all the thousands of individuals therein, but also people as diverse as David Cameron, Marius Kloppers (head of BP) and the Pope.

And give it a silly name like "warmists".

Just to avoid admitting the hippies were right.

 

[Ajidica]

Just to avoid admitting the hippies were right.

Question: Can I still call them smelly, drug-addled pea-brains who happened to latch onto a sound, scientific concept?
If no, do you have any replacement names?

 

[Arwon]

Most of us have degrees and don't even like the smell of pot.

 

[Ajidica]

I wasn't calling you a hippie, but rather the actual hippies who cared about the enviroment before it was profitable to appear to do so.

 

[kochman]

Just to avoid admitting the hippies were right.

Hippies were right, they said, take care of the planet. No one disputes this concept... It sucks to litter, waste, etc. That doesn't mean the hippies figured out that something called "global warming" was happening... since there is still widely disputed opinion in the scientific community as to whether it is man made or not, that seems pretty obvious.

 

[Arwon]

Guys you're taking "hippies" slightly more narrowly and literally than intended.

Adjid: I'm a member of the Greens, we have been around since the 1970s and were pretty literally a hippie party. Well, if you ignore all the doctors and middle class housewives and lawyer grandmothers.

there is still widely disputed opinion in the scientific community as to whether it is man made or not

Where? If this is the case, why is the constantly lying Lord Monckton seemingly their most visible champion and avatar?

 

[kochman]

Where? If this is the case, why is the constantly lying Lord Monckton seemingly their most visible champion and avatar?

http://www.petitionproject.org/
31,487 American scientists have signed this petition,
including 9,029 with PhDs

 

[History_Buff]

since there is still widely disputed opinion in the scientific community as to whether it is man made or not, that seems pretty obvious.

There is no dispute. This is a lie. No major scientific body in the world holds a dissenting view. That anthropogenic global warming is happening is not up for debate.

 

[Defiant47]

since there is still widely disputed opinion in the scientific community as to whether it is man made or not, that seems pretty obvious.

Global warming-denying media sources like to posit this idea, that the science proving that there is and will continue to be climate change is "widely disputed"... in the scientific community, no less.

It is not.

(To be clear, it is happening naturally, but human activities is rapidly accelerating it to dangerous prospects)

 

[Defiant47]

http://www.petitionproject.org/
31,487 American scientists have signed this petition,
including 9,029 with PhDs

How many of those scientists study a field related to the global climate?

 

[Rashiminos]

There is no dispute. This is a lie. No major scientific body in the world holds a dissenting view. That anthropogenic global warming is happening is not up for debate.

Ah, marginalization.

/*/*/*
Delusion is certainly a possibility, and numbers aren't a cure.
(See the economy).

 

[Cutlass]

How many of those scientists study a field related to the global climate?

A very small minority.

 

[Arwon]

http://www.petitionproject.org/
31,487 American scientists have signed this petition,
including 9,029 with PhDs

Yeah um. If 1% of Americans have a doctoral degree (a conservative estimate I'm sure), that's 3 million people. 9000 is about what proportion of that?

So yeah, I'll take actual surveys of actual people in the know instead of easily faked lists of people with unrelated degrees like mathematics and aerospace engineering: this survey for example.

Or the fact that no professional scientific organisation in the world disputes it.

There is disagreement about many aspects of global warming, but the serious-pants debate has long moved from "is warming occurring" and "is the warming majorly contributed to by human activity which adds new CO2 and equivalents to the carbon cycle" to narrower questions like how various feedback loops may work and what climate changes are likely or unlikely to occur as a result of aggregate warming.

 

[Tee Kay]

Rebuttal 1
Rebuttal 2

I can post more if you like.

 

[Defiant47]

The truth is out there, folks.

 

[Dale]

Where? If this is the case, why is the constantly lying Lord Monckton seemingly their most visible champion and avatar?

NASA - Increasing total solar irradiation trend since 1970's (this isn't even new, it's 2003)
Reading University - Britain could experience 2C colder winters under predicted solar minimum if conditions return to those of little ice age
Duke University - 0.66C per century, not 2.3C per century under IPCC "business as normal" conditions
KamLAND Collaboration - 20 trillion watts natural positive forcing found entering climate system from internal Earth radioactive decay
PICES - Dropping Bering Sea temps allow more ice to form
Uni of Alaska - We now know how much carbon a tree stores
CERN - CERN cosmic ray effect on clouds research builds on earlier research showing 95% correlation between cosmic ray input into climate system and temps
NASA - NASA contradicts "China coal burning" announcements, proving once and for all natural forcings were the cause for the last decades temp stability
Pielke Research Group - Trenberth's "missing heat" goes out to space, not deep ocean as claimed

Of course, this is stuff (except the first one) just from the last week! Seems like these "Lord Monckton sycophants" are dissenting the premise that the majority of global warming is human CO2 induced.

 

[Arwon]

So.

Any of that stuff led to peer reviewed climate science articles arguing that human-induced global warming isn't a thing? I know the Daily Mail and MSNBC and The Register are pretty reputable, but still.

When you consider what The Australian constantly does with reporting of climate science.

 

[kochman]

I'm not going to argue with you guys...
You said show you the thousands of scientists that agreed, and I did.

I am sure, that of those 9000+ PhDs from America alone, that signed this, many many many of them are smarter than any of us posting on this site (I know that is a hard pill for some of you to swallow), and of those, many are likewise well educated in the topic at hand.

I know, it means you guys MAY not be right... you MAY be... I'm just saying, when you get soooooo wrapped up in something you don't really know that much about, it's guesswork at best.