Global Warming Denial

[medv4380]

Over the last year I went from a position of mostly agreeing with the Global Warming Argument to a complete rejection of the Global Warming Argument.

The reason for this is a bit complex, but simply put there were too many pro global warming arguments that consisted of Logical Fallacies. Ad hominem, ad populum, and just plain exaggerations don't make for a convincing rational augment. So I went to look at the data myself.

Here's some questions for global warming supporters.

Why does the Pan Evaporation Rate stay relatively constant from 1971 to 2010 never varying outside of a plus or minus 10 millimeter range, and that variance isn't a trend up but rather a random walk up and down that entire period?

Why didn't global warming move the evaporation rate even one millimeter in that entire period if global warming somehow causes more precipitation?

Why does the rapid evaporation increase 2010 correlate far better to Solar Cycle 24 than it does with CO2 emissions?

Why, if Global Warming caused a coincidental correlation between Solar Cycle 24, did the evaporation rate return to normal ranges for a few months in early 2015?

If you think I'm just making up these questions then watch this, and check it out for yourself.
https://youtu.be/92ujRZ-s5m0

 

[Silvanus]

Why does the Pan Evaporation Rate stay relatively constant from 1971 to 2010 never varying outside of a plus or minus 10 millimeter range, and that variance isn't a trend up but rather a random walk up and down that entire period?

The rate of pan evaporation is linked to a decrease in direct sunlight/ irradiance (in part due to increased cloud coverage), as well as (possibly) being connected to aerosol use.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2007GL031166/pdf

http://science.sciencemag.org/content/298/5597/1410.short

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2004JD004511/full

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v396/n6706/abs/396030a0.html

Why didn't global warming move the evaporation rate even one millimeter in that entire period if global warming somehow causes more precipitation?

Why does the rapid evaporation increase 2010 correlate far better to Solar Cycle 24 than it does with CO2 emissions?

Why, if Global Warming caused a coincidental correlation between Solar Cycle 24, did the evaporation rate return to normal ranges for a few months in early 2015?

These questions are largely down to misused indicators. If you're expecting a simple correlation between global warming and increased evaporation, then you're off the mark. They are nevertheless linked (read above).

So, to answer, the questions are misdirected and/or mistaken.

If you think I'm just making up these questions then watch this, and check it out for yourself.

I don't believe you're just making them up. I believe they were thought up by someone else (such as the video creator perhaps), who has a limited or fairly simplistic understanding of climate science but believes he has an extensive one. You're repeating them without doing your own research. They're not difficult to debunk if you know what you're looking for.


====


There is near-universal scientific consensus among climatologists and other relevant authorities about climate change. It is not seriously disputed in the scientific world.

For this to be false, for it to be a lie, would require the greatest conspiracy in the history of mankind, spanning hundreds of thousands of scientists and researchers, millions of employees, across almost every country on earth. It is a thousand times less likely than the moon landing having been faked.

 

[Zontar]

I lean heavily towards climate change being a thing, mainly due to the fact I have actually seen the climate change where I live over the course of my lifetime (winters start and end about a month later then they used to, summers are warmer and the spring's rainy season is much more intense).

The only real issue I have with those advocating for something to be done is that many of them are like Al Gore in their massively over blowing how imminent the danger is, and as a result making it harder to take more moderate claims seriously by a lot of people as a result.

 

[Lufia Erim]

Im just a common layman, so i don't really care about climate change one way or another. One of two things will happen. Either we adapt, as we always do, or we die . Circle of life.

 

[Silentpony_v1legacy]

There is snow on the ground outside my window as I type! Global warming is therefore a lie!

 

[Jeopardy Surface]

To be honest, I've never understood the need for laypeople to have a position on something they have no hope of understanding. We don't expect them to have a stance on controversies in particle physics, and we don't take their input seriously. The scientific consensus on this isn't just set, it's overwhelming, so I don't see the need or opportunity for "deep thinking" from people without the education or experience to have any useful thoughts on the topic.

 

[Silvanus]

Im just a common layman, so i don't really care about climate change one way or another. One of two things will happen. Either we adapt, as we always do, or we die . Circle of life.

Do you have the same attitude towards natural disasters? Usually people will try to prevent or remedy the damage they cause.

To be honest, I've never understood the need for laypeople to have a position on something they have no hope of understanding. We don't expect them to have a stance on controversies in particle physics, and we don't take their input seriously. The scientific consensus on this isn't just set, it's overwhelming, so I don't see the need or opportunity for deep thinking from people without the education or experience to have those thoughts on this topic.

It would be nice if the scientific community were the only one necessary to provide action, but unfortunately, that's not the case; the political community is needed, too, because these decisions impact business and finance.

And as long as the political community is needed, the voters (read: laypeople) will be, too. It's far from ideal, but the need is there (to an extent).

 

[Jeopardy Surface]

Im just a common layman, so i don't really care about climate change one way or another. One of two things will happen. Either we adapt, as we always do, or we die . Circle of life.

Do you have the same attitude towards natural disasters? Usually people will try to prevent or remedy the damage they cause.

Natural disasters aren't going to destroy the fabric of our civilization, almost inevitably, in the coming century. You're conflating a local event with an extinction event.

 

[Silvanus]

Natural disasters aren't going to destroy the fabric of our civilization, almost inevitably, in the coming century. You're conflating a local event with an extinction event.

I did not say they were comparable in scope or nature; only that they both can kill.

Climate change need not be an extinction event, depending on the reaction of humanity (which is looking unpromising at present, admittedly). Either way, my question to Lufia Erim stands; why should we not try to prevent or remedy the damage we have caused (and will cause to ourselves)?

 

[Jeopardy Surface]

Natural disasters aren't going to destroy the fabric of our civilization, almost inevitably, in the coming century. You're conflating a local event with an extinction event.

I did not say they were comparable in scope.

Climate change need not be an extinction event, depending on the reaction of humanity (which is looking unpromising at present, admittedly). Either way, my question to Lufia Erim stands; why should we not try to prevent or remedy the damage we have caused (and will cause to ourselves)?

The scope of climate change is the issue. You should find a better way to ask your leading questions.

 

[Silvanus]

The scope of climate change is the issue. You should find a better way to ask your leading questions.

A rhetorical example does not need to reflect the actuality in scope. This is a trivial issue, so I'm not going to respond to it again, in order to prevent the thread getting sidelined.

 

[aegix drakan_v1legacy]

I lean heavily towards climate change being a thing, mainly due to the fact I have actually seen the climate change where I live over the course of my lifetime (winters start and end about a month later then they used to, summers are warmer and the spring's rainy season is much more intense).

Speaking as a 27 year old fellow montrealer, I can totally back this up.

When I was a kid, we had snow up the wazoo from the end of November to the beginning of April, and "spring" was literally winter but with more slush followed by 2 days of warm-ish weather, and then suddenly it was summer, which was usually hot, but not too bad.

Now? It was 15 degrees above zero or 3 weeks ago. We sometimes get giant snow dumps in mid to late april. And we actually HAVE spring. Spring is now a week of "Warm" winter, followed by a solid 2-4 weeks of warm weather and rain, and finally summers often hit absolutely unbearable heat and this is coming from someone who loves hot weather.

The long-term weather trends up here have been going totally cuckoo for the past few years and it just keeps getting messier.

 

[Zontar]

The long-term weather trends up here have been going totally cuckoo for the past few years and it just keeps getting messier.

Indeed. Remember how back in 2009 when we had such a sudden shift? The first two weeks of December everyone was still wearing shorts because it was still around 20 degrees, and then over the course of a single weekend and a violent snow storm the temperature dropped 30 degrees in 48 hours? That's not normal.

Thank god I live on the South Shore though, our response with snow clearance wasn't as bad as on the Island, and at least we didn't call in the Army for help like Toronto did (I never let my Torontonian cousins live that down during my Winter visits)

 

[aegix drakan_v1legacy]

The long-term weather trends up here have been going totally cuckoo for the past few years and it just keeps getting messier.

Indeed. Remember how back in 2009 when we had such a sudden shift?

Yeah, I think I remember that. It was also the year when I found myself in an internship in March, and walking around during lunch break going "wait...I forgot my coat inside...And I'm warm and toasty even with snow on the ground. ...This is not normal. Is this what they call spring?"

 

[medv4380]

The rate of pan evaporation is linked to a decrease in direct sunlight/ irradiance (in part due to increased cloud coverage), as well as (possibly) being connected to aerosol use.

If what you claimed where true then the increase in aerosol due to Mount Pinatubo would show up in the graph in 1991 to 1993 and no such correlation exists. Even El Chich?n in 1981 doesn't appear. Your claim is also in contradiction with more main stream global warming claims such as this on in [a href=http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/climate-change-is-altering-rainfall-patterns-worldwide/]Scientific American[/a].

Now your claim is an improperly worded version of the Global Dimming argument which claims evaporation has been reduced, but that still requires that Mount Pinatubo and others to show up in the evaporation data as a decrees which they do not. The data clearly shows an increase which shows you have a limited grasp of the very argument being presented, and jumped the gun so to speak.

Note: I'm the author of the video. I've done the analysis myself. I don't rely on appeal to authority fallacies to justify ignoring an argument, I don't rely on ad populum argument, and I don't rely on ad hominem argument as ... well..

There is near-universal scientific consensus among climatologists and other relevant authorities about climate change. It is not seriously disputed in the scientific world.

For this to be false, for it to be a lie, would require the greatest conspiracy in the history of mankind, spanning hundreds of thousands of scientists and researchers, millions of employees, across almost every country on earth. It is a thousand times less likely than the moon landing having been faked.

Please maintain a level of professionalism with your claims.

 

[medv4380]

I lean heavily towards climate change being a thing, mainly due to the fact I have actually seen the climate change where I live over the course of my lifetime (winters start and end about a month later then they used to, summers are warmer and the spring's rainy season is much more intense).

The only real issue I have with those advocating for something to be done is that many of them are like Al Gore in their massively over blowing how imminent the danger is, and as a result making it harder to take more moderate claims seriously by a lot of people as a result.

I have no argument against the claim that climate has changed, but if you do watch the video I'm making a clear argument as to the cause of that change.

 

[Something Amyss]

I have no argument against the claim that climate has changed, but if you do watch the video I'm making a clear argument as to the cause of that change.

The video doesn't work. I imagine people aren't watching it for that reason.

 

[Imperioratorex Caprae]

Regardless of the validity of climate change, we still should be doing all we can to minimize and mitigate the impact we have on the environment. However the leading pollution spewing countries are currently unwilling, unable or uncaring about their impact and thus any true effect that the rest of the world has is more or less not putting a dent in those countries contribution to environmental impact due to the large population of said countries.
I think science is fallible, and there is always a chance our predictions are wrong. I hope thats the case because unless we can bring over a 1/3 of the world in line, we're screwed no matter how much we conserve in other countries.

 

[medv4380]

I have no argument against the claim that climate has changed, but if you do watch the video I'm making a clear argument as to the cause of that change.

The video doesn't work. I imagine people aren't watching it for that reason.

Odd, works just fine in the preview, but not in the post. Here's the direct link.
https://youtu.be/92ujRZ-s5m0