Grist | Topics | 141 Results

RESULTS		Results 76 – 100 of 141
Page:1 2 3 4 5 6
Headline	Author	Published	Section
More on the 'reasonable middle' Why Broad's NYT piece isn't all that important	Andrew Dessler	13 Mar 2007	Gristmill
[ed. note from David Roberts: It appears everyone in the climate world was writing about this piece at once! My response is here; RealClimate's is here; Tim Lambert's is here. Now take it away, Andrew.] William J. Broad writes today on the complicated relationship between Al Gore and the scientific community in the New York Times. Here's the thesis of the article: But part of his scientific audience is uneasy. In talks, articles and blog entries that have a ...
Topics: climate, climate change skepticism, climate science (all these topics)

Debunking the NYT's sloppy hit piece on Gore The gray lady gets it woefully, laughably wrong	David Roberts	13 Mar 2007	Gristmill
Yesterday, Drudge breathlessly reported a coming "hit on Gore" from The New York Times. Today that hit has come, in the form of a state-of-the-art piece of slime from Bill Broad. This may be the worst, sloppiest, most dishonest piece of reporting I've ever seen in the NYT. It's got all the hallmarks of a vintage Gore hit piece: half-truths, outright falsehoods, unsubstantiated quotes, and a heaping dose of innuendo. As usual with these things, unless you' ...
Topics: Al Gore, climate, climate change skepticism, climate science (all these topics)

Hurricanes: A new and improved hockey stick Another silly debate around the IPCC report	Andrew Dessler	01 Feb 2007	Gristmill
News stories have been reporting that the IPCC will make a statement about the relation between global warming and hurricanes: During marathon meetings in Paris, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change approved language that said an increase in hurricane and tropical cyclone strength since 1970 'more likely than not' can be attributed to man-made global warming, according to Leonard Fields of Barbados and Cedric Nelom of Surinam.The blogosphere is already awash ...
Topics: climate, climate change skepticism, climate science, IPCC (all these topics)

'The U.S. is a net carbon sink' Only if you ignore fossil fuel emissions	Coby Beck	28 Jan 2007	Gristmill
(Part of the How to Talk to a Global Warming Skeptic guide) Objection: The United States absorbs more CO2 into its land than it emits into the air. The world should be grateful. Answer: As often the case, at the heart of this talking point is a grain of truth. But it does not serve the purpose for which it's been enlisted. According to the U.S. Department of Energy land-use changes in the U.S. between 1952 and 1992 have resulted in a net absorption of CO2. But this is ...
Topics: climate, climate change skepticism, climate science, How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic (all these topics)

'Climate change mitigation would lead to disaster' Not really, but this may well be a lesser of two evils situation	Coby Beck	25 Jan 2007	Gristmill
(Part of the How to Talk to a Global Warming Skeptic guide) Objection: The kind of drastic actions required to mitigate global warming risk the destruction of the global economy and the deaths of potentially billions of people. Answer: Is this supposed to mean the theory of anthropogenic global warming must be wrong? You can not come to a rational decision about the reality of a danger by considering how hard it might be to avoid. First things first: understand that th ...
Topics: climate, climate change skepticism, climate science, How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic (all these topics)

'Why should the U.S. join Kyoto when China and India haven't?' They have, they just have different obligations, as is morally appropriate	Coby Beck	11 Jan 2007	Gristmill
(Part of the How to Talk to a Global Warming Skeptic guide) Objection: Why should the U.S. join Kyoto while India and China haven't? Answer: The U.S. puts out more CO2 than any other nation on earth, including China and India, by a large margin. Considering the relative populations (a billion-plus each for China and India versus 300 million in the U.S.), per capita emissions in the U.S. are many times larger. This has been true for the past 100-plus years of CO2 poll ...
Topics: climate, climate change skepticism, climate science, How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic, Kyoto Protocol (all these topics)

'Kyoto is a big effort for almost nothing' Kyoto is only in its first phase	Coby Beck	10 Jan 2007	Gristmill
(Part of the How to Talk to a Global Warming Skeptic guide) Objection: The Kyoto treaty, even if fully implemented, would only save us about a tenth of a degree of future temperature rise many decades from now. What a waste of effort! You can see for yourself here at the Junk Science website. Answer: There are three big problems with this claim. First, it's a red herring. The purpose of Kyoto is to establish international political and economic mechanisms for deali ...
Topics: climate, climate change skepticism, climate science, How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic (all these topics)

'What's wrong with warmer weather?' The problem is not how high the temperature may go, but how fast it is changing	Coby Beck	09 Jan 2007	Gristmill
(Part of the How to Talk to a Global Warming Skeptic guide) Objection: The earth has had much warmer climates in the past. What's so special about the current climate? Anyway, it seems like a generally warmer world will be better. Answer: I don't know if there is a meaningful way to define an "optimum" average temperature for planet earth. Surely it is better now for all of us than it was 20,000 years ago when so much land was trapped beneath ice sheets. Pe ...
Topics: climate, climate change skepticism, climate science, How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic (all these topics)

The scientific debate Some thoughts	David Roberts	05 Jan 2007	Gristmill
Part of the confusion over Revkin's article is that there isn't one "climate debate." There are several. I'm going to taxonomize them in another post, but first I want to say something about the scientific one. This debate, as many folks have pointed out, is pretty much over. The denialists are wrong and they've been completely discredited. Every serious person involved in the climate change discussion accepts the broad conclusions of the IPCC. However, ...
Topics: Al Gore, climate, climate change impacts, climate change skepticism, climate science, IPCC (all these topics)

My problem with Revkin's article It muddles the science and policy debates together	Andrew Dessler	03 Jan 2007	Gristmill
The darling of the the climate blogosphere for the last two days is an article by Andy Revkin on the silent middle ground in the climate debate. Since I am nothing if not a blogosheep, I felt compelled to follow the pack and weigh in. The problem I have with the article is that it confuses two separate debates, one scientific (is climate change real?) and one value-based (what should we do about it?). By putting these two issues into the blender, the article confuses ...
Topics: climate, climate change mitigation, climate change skepticism, climate science (all these topics)

'It's the sun, stupid' Very bright, yes, but not getting brighter	Coby Beck	29 Dec 2006	Gristmill
(Part of the How to Talk to a Global Warming Skeptic guide) Objection: The sun is the source of warmth on earth. Any increase in temperature is likely due to changes in solar radiation. Answer: It's true that the earth is warmed, for all practical purposes, entirely by solar radiation, so if the temperature is going up or down, the sun is a reasonable place to seek the cause. Turns out it's more complicated than one might think to detect and measure chan ...
Topics: climate, climate change skepticism, climate science, How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic (all these topics)

'Historically, CO2 never caused temperature change' Not so	Coby Beck	28 Dec 2006	Gristmill
(Part of the How to Talk to a Global Warming Skeptic guide) Objection: In the geological record, it is clear that CO2 does not trigger climate changes. Why should it be any different now? Answer: Given the fact that human industrialization is unique in the history of planet earth, do we really need historical precedent for CO2-triggered climate change before we accept what we observe today? Surely it is not far-fetched that unprecedented consequences would follo ...
Topics: climate, climate change skepticism, climate science, greenhouse-gas emissions, How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic (all these topics)

'Geological history does not support CO2's importance' Just not true	Coby Beck	27 Dec 2006	Gristmill
(Part of the How to Talk to a Global Warming Skeptic guide) Objection: Over the last 600 million years, there hasn't been much correlation between temperatures and CO2 levels. Clearly CO2 is not a climate driver. Answer: While there are poorly understood ancient climates and controversial climate changes in earth's long geological history, there are no clear contradictions to greenhouse theory to be found. What we do have is an unfortunate lack of comprehensiv ...
Topics: climate, climate change skepticism, climate science, greenhouse-gas emissions, How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic (all these topics)

'CO2 doesn't lead, it lags' Turns out CO2 rise is both a cause and an effect of warming	Coby Beck	27 Dec 2006	Gristmill
(Part of the How to Talk to a Global Warming Skeptic guide) Objection: In glacial-interglacial cycles, CO2 concentration lags behind temperature by centuries. Clearly, CO2 does not cause temperatures to rise; temperatures cause CO2 to rise. Answer: When viewed coarsely, historical CO2 levels and temperature show a tight correlation. However, a closer examination of the CH4, CO2, and temperature fluctuations recorded in the Antarctic ice core records reveals that, ye ...
Topics: climate, climate change skepticism, climate science, greenhouse-gas emissions, How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic (all these topics)

'There is no proof that CO2 is causing global warming' There is no proof in science, but there are mountains of evidence	Coby Beck	26 Dec 2006	Gristmill
(Part of the How to Talk to a Global Warming Skeptic guide) Objection: Correlation is not proof of causation. There is no proof that CO2 is the cause of current warming. Answer: There is no "proof" in science -- that is a property of mathematics. In science, what matters is the balance of evidence, and theories that can explain that evidence. Where possible, scientists make predictions and design experiments to confirm, modify, or contradict their theorie ...
Topics: climate, climate change skepticism, climate science, greenhouse-gas emissions, How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic (all these topics)

'Water vapor accounts for almost all of the greenhouse effect' It is indeed a powerful greenhouse gas, but there is plenty of room for CO2 to play a role	Coby Beck	25 Dec 2006	Gristmill
(Part of the How to Talk to a Global Warming Skeptic guide) Objection: H2O accounts for 95% of the greenhouse effect; CO2 is insignificant. Answer: According to the scientific literature and climate experts, CO2 contributes anywhere from 9% to 30% to the overall greenhouse effect. The 95% number does not appear to come from any scientific source, though it gets tossed around a lot.Please see this paper (PDF), the textbook referenced here, and this article at RealCl ...
Topics: climate, climate change skepticism, climate science, How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic (all these topics)

'Climate scientists dodge the subject of water vapor' No, they really don't	Coby Beck	24 Dec 2006	Gristmill
(Part of the How to Talk to a Global Warming Skeptic guide) Objection: Climate scientists never talk about water vapor -- the strongest greenhouse gas -- because it undermines their CO2 theory. Answer: Not a single climate model or climate textbook fails to discuss the role water vapor plays in the greenhouse effect. It is the strongest greenhouse gas, contributing 36% to 66% to the overall effect for vapor alone, 66% to 85% when you include clouds. It is how ...
Topics: climate, climate change skepticism, climate science, How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic (all these topics)

'We are just recovering from the LIA' Why should we expect this to happen?	Coby Beck	23 Dec 2006	Gristmill
(Part of the How to Talk to a Global Warming Skeptic guide) Objection: Today's warming is just a recovery from the Little Ice Age. Answer: This argument relies on an implicit assumption that there is a particular climatic baseline to which the earth inexorably returns -- and thus that a period of globally lower temperatures will inevitably be followed by a rise in temperatures. What is the scientific basis for that assumption? There is no evidence of such a bas ...
Topics: climate, climate change skepticism, climate science, How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic (all these topics)

'The CO2 rise is natural' No skeptical argument has been more definitively disproven	Coby Beck	23 Dec 2006	Gristmill
(Part of the How to Talk to a Global Warming Skeptic guide) Objection: It's clear from ice cores and other geological history that CO2 fluctuates naturally. It is bogus to assume today's rise is caused by humans. Answer: We emit billions of tons of CO2 into the air and, lo and behold, there is more CO2 in the air. Surely it is not so difficult to believe that the CO2 rise is our fault. But if simple common sense is not enough, there is more to the case. (I ...
Topics: climate, climate change skepticism, climate science, greenhouse-gas emissions, How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic (all these topics)

'Natural emissions dwarf human emissions' But emissions are only one side of the equation	Coby Beck	22 Dec 2006	Gristmill
(Part of the How to Talk to a Global Warming Skeptic guide) Objection: According to the IPCC, 150 billion tonnes of carbon go into the atmosphere from natural processes every year. This is almost 30 times the amount of carbon humans emit. What difference can we make? Answer: It's true that natural fluxes in the carbon cycle are much larger than anthropogenic emissions. But for roughly the last 10,000 years, until the industrial revolution, every gigatonne of ...
Topics: climate, climate change skepticism, climate science, greenhouse-gas emissions, How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic (all these topics)

'Climate is always changing' That doesn't mean it isn't different today	Coby Beck	21 Dec 2006	Gristmill
(Part of the How to Talk to a Global Warming Skeptic guide) Objection: Climate has always changed. Why are we worried now, and why does it have to be humans' fault? Answer: Yes, climate has varied in the past, for many different reasons, some better understood than others. Present-day climate change is well understood, and different. Noting that something happened before without humans does not demonstrate that humans are not causing it today. For example, we see ...
Topics: climate, climate change skepticism, climate science, How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic (all these topics)

'The null hypothesis says global warming is natural' An inappropriate test, and one that would fail anyway	Coby Beck	20 Dec 2006	Gristmill
(Part of the How to Talk to a Global Warming Skeptic guide) Objection: Natural variability is the null hypothesis; there must be compelling evidence of an anthropogenic CO2 warming effect before we take it seriously. Answer: The null hypothesis is a statistical test, and might be a reasonable approach if we were looking only for statistical correlation between increasing CO2 and increasing temperature. But we're not -- there are known mechanisms involved whose ef ...
Topics: climate, climate change skepticism, climate science, How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic (all these topics)

'Volcanoes emit more CO2 than humans' Not even close ...	Coby Beck	20 Dec 2006	Gristmill
(Part of the How to Talk to a Global Warming Skeptic guide) Objection: One decent-sized volcanic eruption puts more CO2 in the atmosphere than a decade of human emissions. It's ridiculous to think reducing human CO2 emissions will have any effect. Answer: Not only is this false, it couldn't possibly be true given the CO2 record from any of the dozens of sampling stations around the globe. If it were true that individual volcanic eruptions dominated human emissions ...
Topics: climate, climate change skepticism, climate science, greenhouse-gas emissions, How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic (all these topics)

'Mars and Pluto are warming too' No they aren't -- and what if they were?	Coby Beck	19 Dec 2006	Gristmill
(Part of the How to Talk to a Global Warming Skeptic guide) Objection: Global warming is happening on Mars and Pluto as well. Since there are no SUVs on Mars, CO2 can't be causing global warming. Answer: Warming on another planet would be an interesting coincidence, but it would not necessarily be driven by the same causes. The only relevant factor the earth and Mars share is the sun, so if the warming were real and related, that would be the logical place t ...
Topics: climate, climate change skepticism, climate science, How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic (all these topics)

New polling data on global warming ... It's disheartening	Andrew Dessler	19 Dec 2006	Gristmill
... can be found here (hat tip to pollster.com). Here's the important result: American voters tend to see Global Warming as a serious problem but are divided as to whether it's caused by human activities or long-term planetary trends. This is important because: As with most issues, the understanding of why something is happening has a huge impact on perceptions about the issue. Among those who believe human activity is the primary cause of Global Warming, 71% cons ...
Topics: climate, climate change skepticism, climate science (all these topics)

Page:1 2 3 4 5 6		Results 76 – 100 of 141

Stories About: climate AND climate science AND climate change skepticism