WinePusher wrote:nursebenjamin wrote:If I say to you, “In the Northern Hemisphere, daily temperatures will increase between January and July.� We know that this is true because of the tilting of earth on its axis. However, not every day between January 1 and July 1 will be warmer than the last. For example, perhaps the average daily temperature on May 8 in Cincinnati is 68°. On May 9, the average temperature is only 66°. The temperature on May 9 has decreased; it now “contradicts� the trend. Do you seriously think that this data “contradicts� what we know about the tilting of Earth’s axis?
Here's a more accurate analogy. You predict that temperatures between May 01-May 09 will increase drastically.
Wrong! In this analogy, we are discussing seasonal changes (winter to summer). In relation to the seasons, one week in one May is completely meaningless. There could be an ice storm; there could be a heat wave. Irregardless of what happens during the first week of May 2013, we
know that July (summer) will be warmer the January (winter).
What you are doing here is a favorite trick of the climate change denier. They ignore an overall trend, and point to “noise� or an anomaly within the trend. You are more than missing the forest for the trees; you are missing the forest for the rustling leaves.
[center]
[/center]
WinePusher wrote:You also claim that in order to stop this, we need to implement your socialist ideas and change our way of life.
I’ve said no such thing! I rarely talk about ways to mitigate climate change and deal mostly with the science behind it.
More importantly though, this statement of yours is quite telling, and is typical of climate change deniers. The thing that we need to understand is that for the denier, it's not about the science. It's about something else.
You say, “In order to stop this, we need to implement your socialist ideas and change our way of life.�
That is an emotional appeal and has nothing to do with science. Deniers are by and large scared of anthropogenic climate change being true, rather than objecting to it out of any sort of deep understanding of the science. For them, it
has to be false, because if man is affecting climate, someone is going to take something away from them.
These are the same men, by and large, who objected to things like African-Americans getting the vote, equality for women, gay rights, labor rights, health care for the poor/working classes, etc. because they see life as a zero sum game. Any gain in freedom by another group is somehow seen as an assault on their "freedom." They also are scared of people who have the right to tell them "no," whether it is a woman in the bedroom or the black kid taking up "their" seat on the bus back in the 1960's. Similarly, they see a call for a need for collective action to address climate change as the government "taking away" their freedom. As if freedom is equal to driving a huge truck and owning a huge screen television.
So it is not surprising to me you guys cling to the same stale pseudo-scientific canards listed in your reply. Deniers simply don't have the courage to "man up" and face the truth.
WinePusher wrote:You also claim that the temperatures are rising solely due to human activity.
We can't quantify this precisely of course, but we can give a range of possible values. One study found "By the end of the [Twentieth] century, the difference in simulated global temperature response between natural and natural plus anthropogenic forcings is >0.5°C."
[1] In other words, greater than 80% of the warming over the past century has been anthropogenic.
Another study attributes approximately 85% of the warming over the past century to anthropogenic effects.
[2]
Over the whole of the 20th century, maybe 15-20% of the warming was due to natural effects. Moreover, this "natural warming" was almost entirely due to the increase in solar irradiance in the early 20th century. Since the mid-20th century, nearly 100% of the warming has been anthropogenic.
WinePusher wrote:I'll point out that the temperature is not rising drastically. To the contrary, the temperature is decreasing and has decreased by about 60% last year.
What???
[center]
[/center]
WinePusher wrote:I'll also point out that you have not provided any proof showing the casual relationship between human activity, carbon/greenhouse gases, and the rising temperature.
The relationship is the fact that that (A) the CO2 molecule has greenhouse properties (This means the CO2 reflect longwave energy); and (B) humans have dumped billions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere -- so much CO2 that the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere has increased from 280ppm at the beginning of industrialization to nearly 400ppm today.
The earth is a closed system. Energy enters the system in the form of shortwave energy (UV and visible light). It leaves the system in the form of longwave energy. Because more CO2 is in the atmosphere, and because CO2 reflects outgoing energy, less energy is now able to leave the system. Less energy leaving Earth equals climate change and global warming. This is not too difficult of a concept is it??
FYI, we’ve known about the greenhouse effect for nearly 200 years.
[3] Where were you during fifth grade Earth Science class?
WinePusher wrote:nursebenjamin wrote:What you are doing is confusing weather and climate. Climate is defined as weather averaged over a period of time — generally around 30 years. This averaging smooths out the random and unpredictable behavior of weather. A cold winter does not mean Global Warming has been canceled. Ice cap expansion over the course of a few years does not “blow a huge hole� in the science underlying the greenhouse properties of the CO2 molecule.
Scientists are predicting that the ice caps will continue to expand annually and the climate will shift towards global cooling, not global warming.
What? Who? Which scientists? Can you back this claim up with a source? A scientific journal is preferred, but anything other than an editorial from the Daily Mail or Fox News will do.
WinePusher wrote:The fact is that the global warming fanatics have continually said that the ice caps are melting due to the changing climate. The ice caps have instead grown in size not by 10% or 20%, but by 60%.
[center]
[/center]
WinePusher wrote:Obviously the climate is not warming,
[center]
[/center]
