Grist | Topics | 292 Results

RESULTS		Results 226 – 250 of 292
Page:1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Headline	Author	Published	Section
'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, How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic, greenhouse-gas emissions (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)

'Current global warming is just part of a natural cycle' This idea is just one short step above appealing to magic	Coby Beck	18 Dec 2006	Gristmill
(Part of the How to Talk to a Global Warming Skeptic guide) Objection: Current warming is just part of a natural cycle. Answer: While it is undoubtedly true that there are natural cycles and variations in global climate, those who insist that current warming is purely natural -- or even mostly natural -- have two challenges. First, they need to identify the mechanism behind this alleged natural cycle. Absent a forcing of some sort, there will be no change ...
Topics: climate, climate change skepticism, climate science, How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic (all these topics)

'Vineland was full of grapes' Or was it an early advertising campaign?	Coby Beck	18 Dec 2006	Gristmill
(Part of the How to Talk to a Global Warming Skeptic guide) Objection: Newfoundland was so warm in the Medieval Warm Period that when the Vikings landed they called it Vineland and brought boatloads of grapes back to Europe. Answer: Once again: you can't draw conclusions about global climate from an anecdote about a single region, or even a few regions. You need detailed analysis of proxy climate indicators from around the world. These proxy reconstructions have sh ...
Topics: climate, climate change skepticism, climate science, How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic (all these topics)

'The hockey stick is broken' Well, no ... but who's playing hockey anyway?	Coby Beck	17 Dec 2006	Gristmill
(Part of the How to Talk to a Global Warming Skeptic guide) Objection: The Hockey Stick graph -- the foundation of global warming theory -- has been shown to be scientifically invalid, perhaps even a fraud. Answer: The first order of business here is to correct the mischaracterization of this single paleoclimate study as the "foundation" of global warming theory. What's going on today is understood via study of today's data and today's best sci ...
Topics: climate, climate change skepticism, climate science, How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic (all these topics)

'Global warming is nothing new' Yes, the last ice age started thawing over 20,000 years ago, but that stopped a long time ago	Coby Beck	16 Dec 2006	Gristmill
(Part of the How to Talk to a Global Warming Skeptic guide) Objection: Global warming has been going on for the last 20,000 years. Answer: It is true that 20,000 years ago the temperature was some 8 to 10� C colder than it is today. But to draw a line from that point to today and say, "look, 20K years of global warming!" is dubious and arbitrary at best. If you have look at this graph of temperature, starting at a point when we were finishing the ...
Topics: climate, climate change skepticism, climate science, How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic (all these topics)

'Greenland used to be green' Don't judge a book by its cover, much less a land by its name	Coby Beck	16 Dec 2006	Gristmill
(Part of the How to Talk to a Global Warming Skeptic guide) Objection: When the Vikings settled it, Greenland was a lovely, hospitable island, not the frozen wasteland it is today. It was not until the Little Ice Age that it got so cold they abandoned it. Answer: First, Greenland is part of a single region. It can not be necessarily taken to represent a global climate shift. See the post on the Medieval Warm Period for a global perspective on this time period. Br ...
Topics: climate, climate change skepticism, climate science, How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic (all these topics)

'The Medieval Warm Period was just as warm as today' Repetition of this point has failed to make it any more true	Coby Beck	15 Dec 2006	Gristmill
(Part of the How to Talk to a Global Warming Skeptic guide) Objection: It was just as warm in the Medieval Warm Period (MWP) as it is today. In fact, Greenland was green and they were growing grapes in England! Answer: There is no good evidence that the MWP was a globally warm period comparable to today. Regionally, there may have been places that exhibited notable warmth -- Europe, for example -- but all global proxy reconstructions agree it is warmer ...
Topics: climate, climate change skepticism, climate science, How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic (all these topics)

'It was warmer during the Holocene Climatic Optimum' In fact, the warmth of this period was not global and not like today.	Coby Beck	14 Dec 2006	Gristmill
(Part of the How to Talk to a Global Warming Skeptic guide) Objection: It was warmer during the Holocene Climatic Optimum than it is today -- without any human influence. Answer: Though some temperatures during that period were in the same range as today, they were confined to the northern hemisphere and the summer months. What's more, the cause is understood (orbital forcing similar to what controlled the Ice Ages), just as today's cause is understood (CO2 emissi ...
Topics: climate, climate change skepticism, climate science, How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic (all these topics)

'Hansen has been wrong before' Maybe, but not about the climate!	Coby Beck	14 Dec 2006	Gristmill
(Part of the How to Talk to a Global Warming Skeptic guide) Objection: In 1988, Hansen predicted dire warming over the next decade -- and he was off by 300%. Why in the world should we listen to the same doom and gloom from him today? Answer: While in some instances it is ignorant repetition of misinformation, at its source this story is a plain lie. In 1988, James Hansen testified before the U.S. Senate on the danger of anthropogenic global warming. During that t ...
Topics: climate, climate change skepticism, climate science, How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic, James Hansen (all these topics)

Snowe and Rockefeller on the 'uncertainty' agenda Senators send letter to ExxonMobil	Andrew Dessler	04 Dec 2006	Gristmill
Today's Wall Street Journal printed a letter from Senators Snowe and Rockefeller to ExxonMobil (here) along with an editorial about the letter (here). In the letter, Snowe and Rockefeller ask ExxonMobil to stop perpetuating the uncertainty agenda (which they refer to as the 'obfuscation agenda'). The letter is similar in many respects to a letter sent to Exxon by the British Royal Society. The editorial is a broadside against the Senators. How dare they write that l ...
Topics: Big Oil, business, climate, climate change skepticism, politics (all these topics)

'They predicted global cooling in the 1970s' There was a bit of speculation, but nothing even remotely resembling today's consensus	Coby Beck	24 Nov 2006	Gristmill
(Part of the How to Talk to a Global Warming Skeptic guide) Objection: The alarmists were predicting the onset of an ice age in the '70s. Now it's too much warming! Why should we believe them this time? Answer: It is true that there were some predictions of an "imminent ice age" in the 1970s, but a cursory comparison of those warnings and today's reveals a huge difference.Today, you have a widespread scientific consensus, supported by national academies a ...
Topics: climate, climate change skepticism, climate science, How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic (all these topics)

'If we can't understand the past, how can we understand the present?' Understanding what is happening right under our noses does not require paleoclimate perfection	Coby Beck	23 Nov 2006	Gristmill
(Part of the How to Talk to a Global Warming Skeptic guide) Objection: Climate science can't even fully explain why the climate did what it did in the past. How can they claim to know what is going on today? Answer: There are two requirements for understanding what happened at a particular point of climate change in geological history. One is an internally consistent theory based on physical principles; the other is sufficient data to determine the physical p ...
Topics: climate, climate change skepticism, climate science, How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic (all these topics)

'Chaotic systems are not predictable' Sure, but who says climate is chaotic?	Coby Beck	22 Nov 2006	Gristmill
(Part of the How to Talk to a Global Warming Skeptic guide) Objection: Climate is an inherently chaotic system, and as such its behavior can not be predicted. Answer: Firstly, let's make sure we define climate: an average of weather patterns over some meaningful time period. We may thus discount the chaotic annual fluctuations of global mean temperature. That's weather, and one or two anomalous years does not represent a climate shift. Quite a few people beli ...
Topics: climate, climate change skepticism, climate science, How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic (all these topics)

'We can't even predict the weather next week' But weather is not climate -- that's why we have two distinct words	Coby Beck	21 Nov 2006	Gristmill
(Part of the How to Talk to a Global Warming Skeptic guide) Objection: Scientists can't even predict the weather next week, so why should we believe what some climate model tells us about 100 years from now? Answer: Climate and weather are very different things, and the level of predictability is comparably different. Climate is defined as weather averaged over a period of time -- generally around 30 years. This averaging smooths out the random and unpredic ...
Topics: climate, climate change skepticism, climate science, How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic (all these topics)

Inhofenfreude The delightful travails of a fading climate denier	David Roberts	20 Nov 2006	Gristmill
In all the chaos of moving, I missed out on the latest episodes of Inhofenfreude. First and most cosmically delectable is the news that Sen. John Warner plans to unceremoniously boot Inhofe from his seat as chair of the Senate EPW committee. Inhofe was already going to lose out when the Dems took over, but now his crazed hands are being pried from the controls even of this lame duck session. Oh, the ignominy! Oh, joyous laughter ringing through the Roberts househol ...
Topics: climate, climate change skepticism, James Inhofe, politics (all these topics)

Page:1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12		Results 226 – 250 of 292

Stories About: climate change skepticism