How the right wing Big Lie techique worked in global warming
Earl Evleth
First, global warming is an established FACT, the only
area of debate is with what causes it.
But the right in American, powered by right wing "think tanks"
which distorts the facts have moved the polls on this
fact.
http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1386/cap-and-trade-global-warming-opinion
In April of 2008, 71% of those polled believed there was solid
evidence the earth is warming, this dropped to 57% in October
of 2009.
Among the Democrats this opinion dropped from 91% to 75%
and among the Republicans from 59% to 35%.
Here, once again opinion splits among party lines.
Is America becoming a nation of flat earthers?
Jigsaw1695
Fact? Earl, there seems to be a lot of debate about this issue with
much evidence supporting both sides.
I still remember last year when AlGores talk had to be canceled
because of ....are you ready for this..... cold weather and a snow
fall
Earl, old son, it is you that is the flat earther.
Jigsaw
John Rennie
Please let's have one bit of evidence that proves that
the Earth's climate is not warming. Let's see if that
piece counters the undoubted fact that Arctic is
diminishing at a much faster rate that was predicted
on a few years ago and that glaciers are on the retreat
world wide with very bad side effects for India and
China.
Surely you must have come to the conclusion that most
regulars here have absorbed: anything you promote
turns to dust as soon as you champion it.
Izzy Mandelbaum
Hasn't it been cooling & warming for millions of years?
Jigsaw1695
>
> - Show quoted text -
So I gather that you dont want me to say anything?
Jigsaw
Earl Evleth
a181f233-3327-4267...@n35g2000yqm.googlegroups.com,
"Jigsaw1695" <Jigsa...@aol.com> wrote:
> Fact? Earl, there seems to be a lot of debate about this issue with
> much evidence supporting both sides.
Not true, global warming is a measure fact. The only counter evidence
is furnished by junk science people.
Earl Evleth
0d78fb48-6432-450f...@s15g2000yqs.googlegroups.com, "Izzy
Mandelbaum" <texa...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Hasn't it been cooling & warming for millions of years?
a diversion. We are talking about the post industrial revolution
period and the sudden warming, especially since 1980.
There are numerous examples of observed data, but
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs/Fig.A2.pdf
will do. Note the period after 1980.
Some try to fuse both this observation with the fact
the CO2 (the primary green house gas) has been rising
and are now far above any level in hundreds of thousands
of years. I am not arguing that CO2 is the cause, but only
the measured fact of a temperature rise globally.
If you wish longer term measurement, the "hockey stick"
measurement as been refined and reconfirmed, so we
have a temperature record for about 1,000 years. We are
in record breaking region, well above the fluctuations
of the estimation from tree rings, isotopic measurements
etc.
An older presentation of the hockey stick is
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:2000_Year_Temperature_Comparison.png
but there is a paper submitted for publication which confirms
that curve.
The amazing thing for me is seeing how easily duped Republicans are,
both generally and on this news group.
Earl Evleth
655b24d2-bedd-4193...@d10g2000yqh.googlegroups.com,
"Jigsaw1695" <Jigsa...@aol.com> wrote:
> So I gather that you dont want me to say anything?
Jigsaw, you don't know this area and are usually among the duped.
John Rennie
Yes. What no one knows for sure is whether the present
warming is assisted by man. But again that's not the
point; the fact is the climate IS warming.
Earl Evleth
"John Rennie" <john-...@talktalk.net> wrote:
> Yes. What no one knows for sure is whether the present
> warming is assisted by man. But again that's not the
> point; the fact is the climate IS warming.
The deniers keep hopping back and forth on the
issue of whether global warming exists and what
causes it.
With regard to the cause, there is no currently generally
accepted opinion by climate scientists that the cause
is other than CO2 release. The consensus of this
took years to develop. That consensus it not built
on the in step warming and CO2 increase but largely
from broader studies, in particular assigning
various forcing values to various factors that
could influence warming. Not too many years
ago scientists gave CO2 maybe a 30% responsibility
in global warming, other factors were collectively
more important. That has changed to now CO2 and other
green house gases being the major cause.
My own examination of the numbers tells me that
the CO2 release was not a problem until the atmospheric
concentration got over 330 ppm. Over a very long time
(hundreds of thousands of years and through several
ice ages) the CO2 had varied between 200 and 290 ppm,
a cold and dry global climate at 200 and a much
warmer one at 290. A strong move below 200 would have
produce an iceball earth, which has occurred several times
in geological history. Getting out of the iceball stage
required volcanic release of CO2.
Man's release of CO2 has now caused the atmospheric
CO2 concentration to move above 380 ppm and moving
higher at about 1-2 ppm a year and before the end of
the century will reach 500 ppm. Even if held at the current
level of 380 sufficient warming will occur to destroy
summer ice in the Arctic and to speed up ice mass loss on
Greenland. The land ice melting will lead to a rise
in the ocean (along with thermal swelling of the ocean)
and a lot of low land flooding will occur.
This will not cause the end of the world, but the end
of the world as we know it.
Jigsaw1695
> On 9/11/09 11:41, in article uu6dnS4k5ZZRbGrXnZ2dnUVZ8sti4...@giganews.com,
John Rennie
deserve to be read again.
Earl Evleth
a3a09928-9a98-4a6b...@f16g2000yqm.googlegroups.com,
"Jigsaw1695" <Jigsa...@aol.com> wrote:
>> The deniers keep hopping back and forth on the
>> issue of whether global warming exists and what
>> causes it.
I hope you understood my posting. This is one
issue I am up on.
Earl Evleth
"John Rennie" <john-...@talktalk.net> wrote:
> Nice of you to repeat our comments, Jiggy, they
> deserve to be read again.
Maybe it is turning over a leaf, having realized how
easily duped he was in the past.
John Rennie
are you responding to here?
Earl Evleth
"John Rennie" <john-...@talktalk.net> wrote:
> Please, Earl be careful with your snipping. Who
> are you responding to here?
jiggy or so I thought
However I was also commenting generally on the CO2 cause
of global warming.
I note here that the deniers sometimes post about
so many "scientists" being skeptics, Senator Inhofe
has published minority reports claiming
that "U.S. Senate Minority Report Update: More Than 700 (Previously 650)
International Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims"
Many of the people mentioned are not scientists, but most importantly
they are not climate scientist working and publishing actively
in the area. So there is some debunking of the debunker Inhofe.
Inhofe is an example of right wing Republican extremism which
has at its base anti-intellectualism. He once said that
God would not allow Global warming to occur!
He himself is a "young earth" creationist.
What is disturbing about American is not that such nuts
are around but that they should occupy high positions
in the political system. I know of no elected French
politician in the Assembly who is as nutty. However
a couple of FN nuts make it to the European Parliament
because those elections are proportional. So if 5%
of the population is nuts, the composition of the
Parliament has 5% nuts. But comparatively being
a US Senator and a nut too allows for a lot of
damage to be done.
Happy99
"Jigsaw1695" <Jigsa...@aol.com> a écrit dans le message de
news:a181f233-3327-4267...@n35g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...