Skeptoid PodcastSkeptoid on Facebook   Skeptoid on Twitter   Skeptoid on Stitcher   iTunes   Google Play

Members Portal



Get a Free Book



3 Things for AGW Deniers to Stop Saying

by Brian Dunning

November 17, 2016

Share Tweet Reddit

Donate I suppose it's good for shipping traffic, but not for much else. Sea ice reflects a lot of solar radiation back out to space. When there's a lot of it, it's easier for the Earth to get cooler (the "Snowball Earth" effect); and when there's less sea ice, it's easier for the Earth to warm even more.

Anyone should find this graph (credit: Wipneus) a bit sobering. It's only one of many such climate observations we make around the world. This is not a prediction, an estimate, or a calculation. It's an observation.

Stop saying the alarmists' predictions have all failed to come true. Any specific predictions have been fantasies in the minds of those seeking to show climate models are wrong. Climate models don't make specific predictions; they never have, and they don't now. Climate models produce probability curves. Many variables go in, many curves come out. If you've ever heard someone say "Sea levels will rise 33 feet by the year 2005" or anything like that, its source was not climate modeling. If you truly believe your insight into climate models is greater than the those who create the models, then you need to at least understand the fundamentals of what a climate model is. An AGW who says predictions have been missed has just demonstrated that he doesn't know the most basic information about climate models.

Stop saying there are two sides to this. Creationists believe there are two sides to the question of what caused species to change over time; science supports only one theory, it does not also support a fundamentally different alternative. Conspiracy theorists believe there are two sides to the question of whether the moon landings were hoaxed; history gives us only one timeline, it does not also support a fundamentally different timeline. Similarly, our climate models produce results in which nearly all scenarios show a probability of warming increasing. They do not also show a second, fundamentally different result.

Stop saying AGW is a money-making scheme for a few corrupt scientists. Refer again to the graph at the top of this page.

I'm not a political type, but I do believe that any thinking person has at least one or two disagreements with the platform of their preferred political party, and I hope most people would agree with that. I encourage everyone to allow the global warming issue to be one where it's OK to disagree with your party.

by Brian Dunning

Share Tweet Reddit

@Skeptoid Media, a 501(c)(3) nonprofit