Posted on 02/06/2018 5:26:15 AM PST by Oldeconomybuyer
In other words...
“Vee have to figure out better vays to FORCE the unwashed masses to think as VEE do!”
I can think critically. I accept that the climate changes, has changed, and will change. The only constant in the Earth’s climate since the dawn of time has been change. What I don’t agree with is calling plant food a “pollutant” or that we puny humans can do a damned thing about the Sun’s cycles, our angle to the Sun, the Earth’s wobbly rotation on its axis, or our wavering distance from the Sun, all of which have been scientifically shown to have an impact on climate. Human activity has not been conclusively shown to have an impact.
They simply want EVERYONE to agree with them and think like they do.
Nobody denies that climate can and does change, may even be changing as I write this.
But long-term climate change tends to respond to many contradictory forces, some cancelling out or even reversing the effects of others. To somehow imagine that the efforts of mankind are so overpowering, so massive, that all other factors are totally swamped, is very near the height of arrogance. And the engine of this “change” is supposed to be carbon dioxide?
Carbon dioxide has about the same heat trapping capability of water vapor. But water vapor is part of a cycle that carbon dioxide cannot come close to replicating under terrestrial conditions. For dihydrogen oxide, or the water molecule, something called the “triple point” at which the solid form, ice, the liquid form, which we commonly call water, and the gaseous form, water vapor, allows all three to exist simultaneously. There are vast differences in the heat energy content of each of these forms, and passing from one of these forms to another either up or down either absorbs an enormous amount of energy, or releases it to the surroundings.
Carbon dioxide cannot do this, except under very special conditions. The freeze point of CO2, when it become solid, is well below the range of temperatures commonly observed at or near the earth’s surface, and the liquid form cannot exist at all in earth’s atmosphere. Thus all the carbon dioxide we ever encounter will be in a gaseous state, or combined into a class of chemical compounds known as carbonates, such as calcium carbonate (limestone).
Go back and check your high school chemistry classes again. It is all explained much more thoroughly and in depth there, if chemistry is even taught at the high school level any more.
He is talking to climate alarmists, not climate deniers. He is not saying climate deniers need to adopt critical thinking. He is telling climate alarmists to start thinking critically. He is correct. Climate alarmists need to start thinking critically. It will change their understanding of the world.
Intelligent humans do need to continue to reason logically and without falling for classic fallacies as we address hypotheses regarding climate change. In order that we might continue to meet our high standard of logical reasoning on FR, it is entirely appropriate that we review logical fallacies:
Ad hominem – attacking those who are not convinced by questionable mathematical models, for example by calling us “deniers” rather than attacking our argument.
Appeal to authority (argumentum ad verecundiam) – Global Warming is deemed true because of the position or authority of the scientists who advocate for that assertion and whose funding depends on us believing their assertion.
Appeal to consequences (argumentum ad consequentiam) – advocates assert negative consequences from failure to believe in an attempt to distract from the scientific weaknesses of the Global Warming hypothesis.
Appeal to emotion – an argument is based on the manipulation of emotions (women and minorities hardest hit, skeptics are anti-science, the seas will rise 20 feet, etc.) rather than the use of valid reasoning.
Argumentum ad baculum (appeal to the stick, appeal to force, appeal to threat) – an argument made through coercion or threats of force, as when Global Warming advocates argue that the skeptics whom they label as “deniers” should be prosecuted for genocide.
Argumentum ad populum (appeal to widespread belief, bandwagon argument, appeal to the majority, appeal to the people) – a proposition is claimed to be true or good solely because 90%, 95%, 98% or some other high percentage of scientists are reported to believe in that hypothesis.
Judgmental language – insulting or pejorative language to influence the recipient’s judgment, as when those who follow the scientific method are referred to as “deniers” or “anti-science” for rejecting a hypothesis that has been constructed so that it cannot be refuted with evidence.
Cherry picking (suppressed evidence, incomplete evidence) – act of pointing at individual cases or data that seem to confirm a particular position, while ignoring a significant portion of related cases or data that may contradict that position. Correcting some temperature measurements and selectively excluding other observations may be the largest scale example of cherry picking in the history of science.
Hasty generalization (fallacy of insufficient statistics, fallacy of insufficient sample, fallacy of the lonely fact, hasty induction, secundum quid, converse accident, jumping to conclusions) – basing a broad conclusion on a small sample or the making of a determination without all of the information required to do so.
Given the pattern in the last 80 years of research and journalism, I find it hard to panic, whether it is journalists hawking their papers or scientists boosting their funding who are promoting fear:
1934 - COLD - 1934 - COLD - 1934 - COLD - 1934 - COLD
Nation Is Held on Verge of Climate Shift; Experts See Old-Fashioned Winters Back
http://query.nytimes.com/search/query?srchst=p&query=%22Nation+Is+Held+on+Verge+of+Climate+Shift%22&bylquery=&hdlquery =
December 16, 1934, Sunday
America is believed by Weather Bureau scientists to be on the verge of a change of climate, with a return to increasing rains and deeper snows and the colder Winters . . .
____________________________________________________________
1956 . . . warm . . . 1956 . . . warm . . . 1956 . . . warm . . . 1956 . . . warm
SCIENCE IN REVIEW; Warmer Climate on the Earth May Be Due To More Carbon Dioxide in the Air
http://query.nytimes.com/search/query?frow=0&n=10&srcht=s&daterange=period&query=%22Warmer+Climate+on+the+Earth+May+Be+Due+To+More+Carbon+Dioxide+in+the+Air%22&srchst=p&hdlquery=&bylquery=&mon1=09&day1=18&year1=1851&mon2=12&day2=31&year2=1980&submit.x=30&submit.y=5
October 28, 1956, Sunday
By WALDEMAR KAEMPFFERT
The general warming of the climate that has occurred in the last sixty years has been variously explained. Among the explanations are . . .
____________________________________________________________
1958 - COLD - 1958 - COLD - 1958 - COLD - 1958 - COLD
Frozen Key To Our Climate; The world’s ice masses may be ushering in a fifth Ice Age. Frozen Key To Our Climate http://query.nytimes.com/search/query?frow=0&n=10&srcht=s&daterange=period&query=%22The+world%27s+ice+masses+may+be+ushering+in+a+fifth+Ice+Age%22&srchst=p&hdlquery=&bylquery=&mon1=09&day1=18&year1=1851&mon2=12&day2=31&year2=1980&submit.x=27&submit.y=8
December 7, 1958, Sunday
By LEONARD ENGEL
SEVERAL thousand scientists of many nations have recently been climbing mountains, digging tunnels in glaciers, journeying to the Antarctic, camping on floating Arctic ice. Their object has been to solve a fascinating riddle: what is happening to the world’s ice . . .
____________________________________________________________
1959 . . . warm . . . 1959 . . . warm . . . 1959 . . . warm . . . 1959 . . . warm
A WARMER EARTH EVIDENT AT POLES; Arctic Findings in Particular Support Theory of Rising Global Temperatures http://query.nytimes.com/search/query?frow=0&n=10&srcht=s&daterange=period&query=%22Arctic+Findings+in+Particular+Support+Theory+of+Rising+Global+Temperatures%22&srchst=p&hdlquery=&bylquery=&mon1=09&day1=18&year1=1851&mon2=12&day2=31&year2=1980&submit.x=17&submit.y=5
February 15, 1959, Sunday
WASHINGTON, Feb. 14 — The theory that the world is growing slightly warmer is receiving added confirmation . . .
____________________________________________________________
1961 - COLD - 1961 - COLD - 1961 - COLD - 1961 - COLD
SCIENTISTS AGREE WORLD IS COLDER; But Climate Experts Meeting Here Fail to Agree on Reasons for Change http://query.nytimes.com/search/query?frow=0&n=10&srcht=s&daterange=period&query=%22But+Climate+Experts+Meeting+Here+Fail+to+Agree+on+Reasons+for+Change%22&srchst=p&hdlquery=&bylquery=&mon1=09&day1=18&year1=1851&mon2=12&day2=31&year2=1980&submit.x=23&submit.y=5
January 30, 1961, Monday
By WALTER SULLIVAN
After a week of discussions on the causes of climate change, an assembly of specialists from several continents seems to have reached unanimous agreement on only one point: it is getting colder . . .
____________________________________________________________
1969 . . . warm . . . 1969 . . . warm . . . 1969 . . . warm . . . 1969 . . . warm
Expert Says Arctic Ocean Will Soon Be an Open Sea; Catastrophic Shifts in Climate Feared if Change Occurs Other Specialists See No Thinning of Polar Ice Cap
http://query.nytimes.com/search/query?frow=0&n=10&srcht=s&daterange=period&query=%22Expert+Says+Arctic+Ocean+Will+Soon+Be+an+Open+Sea%22&srchst=p&hdlquery=&bylquery=&mon1=09&day1=18&year1=1851&mon2=12&day2=31&year2=1980&submit.x=16&submit.y=3
February 20, 1969, Thursday
By WALTER SULLIVAN
Col. Bernt Balchen, polar explorer and flier, is circulating a paper among polar specialists proposing that the Arctic pack ice is thinning and that the ocean at the North Pole may become an open sea within a decade or two . . .
____________________________________________________________
1970 - COLD - 1970 - COLD - 1970 - COLD - 1970 - COLD
U.S. and Soviet Press Studies of a Colder Arctic; U.S. and Soviet Press Arctic Studies
http://query.nytimes.com/search/query?frow=0&n=10&srcht=s&daterange=period&query=%22U.S.+and+Soviet+Press+Studies+of+a+Colder+Arctic%22&srchst=p&hdlquery=&bylquery=&mon1=09&day1=18&year1=1851&mon2=12&day2=31&year2=1980&submit.x=17&submit.y=10
July 18, 1970, Saturday
By WALTER SULLIVAN
The United States and the Soviet Union are mounting large-scale investigations to determine why the Arctic climate is becoming more frigid, why parts of the Arctic sea ice have recently become ominously thicker and whether the extent of that ice cover contributes to the onset of ice ages . . .
____________________________________________________________
1972 - COLD - 1972 - COLD - 1972 - COLD - 1972 - COLD
Climate Experts Assay Ice Age Clues
http://query.nytimes.com/search/query?frow=0&n=10&srcht=s&daterange=period&query=%22Climate+Experts+Assay+Ice+Age+Clues+%22&srchst=p&hdlquery=&bylquery=&mon1=09&day1=18&year1=1851&mon2=12&day2=31&year2=1980&submit.x=14&submit.y=7
January 27, 1972, Thursday
Special to The New York Times
After invading Nebraska and Colorado, the armadillos, faced with increasingly frigid weather, are in retreat from those states toward their ancestral home south of the Mexican border. The winter snow accumulation on Baffin Island has increased . . .
____________________________________________________________
1972 - COLD - 1972 - COLD - 1972 - COLD - 1972 - COLD
Scientist Fears Equable Climate Around World Could Be Ending
http://query.nytimes.com/search/query?frow=0&n=10&srcht=s&daterange=period&query=%22Scientist+Fears+Equable+Climate+Around+World+Could+Be+Ending+%22&srchst=p&hdlquery=&bylquery=&mon1=09&day1=18&year1=1851&mon2=12&day2=31&year2=1980&submit.x=22&submit.y=9
October 31, 1972, Tuesday
By BOYCE RENSBERGER
The current 12,000-year-old era of comfortable climates around the world may be coming to an end . . .
____________________________________________________________
1975 - COLD - 1975 - COLD - 1975 - COLD - 1975 - COLD
Scientists Ask Why World Climate Is Changing; Major Cooling May Be Ahead; Scientists Ponder Why World’s Climate Is Changing; a Major Cooling Widely Considered to Be Inevitable
http://query.nytimes.com/search/query?frow=0&n=10&srcht=s&daterange=period&query=%22Scientists+Ask+Why+World+Climate+Is+Changing%22&srchst=p&hdlquery=&bylquery=&mon1=09&day1=18&year1=1851&mon2=12&day2=31&year2=1980&submit.x=17&submit.y=8
May 21, 1975, Wednesday
By WALTER SULLIVAN
The world’s climate is changing. Of that scientists are firmly convinced. But in what direction and why are subjects of deepening debate . . .
____________________________________________________________
1975 . . . warm . . . 1975 . . . warm . . . 1975 . . . warm . . . 1975 . . . warm . . .
WARMING TREND SEEN IN CLIMATE; Two Articles Counter View That Cold Period Is Due
http://query.nytimes.com/search/query?frow=0&n=10&srcht=s&daterange=period&query=%22WARMING+TREND+SEEN+IN+CLIMATE%3B+Two+Articles+Counter+View+That+Cold+Period+Is+Due%22&srchst=p&hdlquery=&bylquery=&mon1=09&day1=18&year1=1851&mon2=12&day2=31&year2=1980&submit.x=25&submit.y=6
August 14, 1975, Thursday
By WALTER SULLIVAN
Articles in two scientific journals have questioned widely publicized predictions that, in coming decades, the world climate will deteriorate severely affecting food production and, perhaps, initiating a new ice age . . .
____________________________________________________________
1978 /// no change /// 1978 /// no change /// 1978 /// no change /// 1978
Climate Specialists, in Poll, Foresee No Catastrophic Weather Changes in Rest of Century; Warning About Carbon Dioxide
http://query.nytimes.com/search/query?frow=0&n=10&srcht=s&daterange=period&query=%22Climate+Specialists%2C+in+Poll%2C+Foresee+No+Catastrophic+Weather+Changes+in+Rest+of+Century%22&srchst=p&hdlquery=&bylquery=&mon1=09&day1=18&year1=1851&mon2=12&day2=31&year2=1980&submit.x=18&submit.y=9
February 18, 1978, Saturday
By WALTER SULLIVAN
WASHINGTON, Feb. 17—A poll of climate specialists in seven countries has found a consensus that there will be no catastrophic changes in the climate by the end of the century. But the specialists were almost equally divided on whether there would be a warming, a cooling or no change at all . . .
____________________________________________________________
2007 . . . warm . . . 2007 . . . warm . . . 2007 . . . warm . . . 2007 . . . warm
Science Panel Calls Global Warming ‘Unequivocal’
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/03/science/earth/03climate.html
Published: February 3, 2007
By ELISABETH ROSENTHAL and ANDREW C. REVKIN
In a grim and powerful assessment of the future of the planet, the leading international network of climate scientists has concluded for the first time that global warming is “unequivocal” and that human activity is the main driver, “very likely” causing most of the rise in temperatures since 1950 . . .
____________________________________________________________
2009 ??? Fraud ??? 2009 ??? Fraud ??? 2009 ??? Fraud ??? 2009 ??? Fraud
Hacked Email is New Fodder for Climate Dispute
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/21/science/earth/21climate.html
Published: November 20, 2009
By ANDREW C. REVKIN
Hundreds of private e-mail messages and documents hacked from a computer server at a British university are causing a stir among global warming skeptics, who say they show that climate scientists conspired to overstate the case for a human influence on climate change . . .
The earths magnetic fields are fluctuating. The government knows this but does not mention this as a possible cause of earth climate change. Some fear the poles will shift in the near future. Then we will see REAL CLIMATE CHANGE.
dana1981
Dana Nuccitelli is an environmental scientist at a private environmental consulting firm in the Sacramento, California area. He has a Bachelor’s Degree in astrophysics from the University of California at Berkeley, and a Master’s Degree in physics from the University of California at Davis.
Dana has been researching climate science, economics, and solutions since 2006, and has contributed to Skeptical Science since September, 2010. He also blogs at The Guardian, and is the author of Climatology versus Pseudoscience. He has published climate-related papers on various subjects, from the build-up of heat in the Earth’s climate system to the expert consensus on human-caused global warming.
https://www.skepticalscience.com/team.php
And he’s a Trump-hating liberal.
“Misinformation needs short, sharp, immediate inoculation. Our paper provides a blueprint into how to write these inoculations.”
The fact that they use the word inoculate is scary. Even more scary is that they utilize the methods of the Ministry of Truth. (Or is this the goal?)
Anything from the Guardian nothing less than leftist propaganda.
Attempting to delegitimate skepticism by calling it “denial” is the very antithesis of scientific method.
They don’t have to become smarter. They just need to make climate skepticism socially unacceptable.
critical thinking will tell you that hu-mans could have nothing to do with global climate change.
“The earths magnetic fields are fluctuating”???
I DEMAND the government “scientists” do something about it!
What are they waiting for? Oh, that’s right..... the grant money.
/s
This article is in code—what they mean to say is “Cane the peons until morale improves” :-(
B.mj
No, Leftists, you aren’t going to be able to brainwash me.
Sorry, better stick to the kids.
I like the following comment on another site about the propagandist of this piece.
“My final point is that they are playing politics and expect us to do the same. To which I say ‘nah, this is war’. This isn’t a polite little exchange in the House of Commons where we precede every comment with ‘my right honourable colleague’. I’m as passionate about my vision of what’s good in this world as any Greenpeace member. Some of them are the same but many of them are 100% in the opposite direction. I refuse to play nice and let idiots and crooks dismantle my world without a bloody good reason. If scientists and their buddies refuse or are unable to supply that reason I’ll use any technique I want to, to impede their goal. So far, all that has entailed has been to grumble on the internet. Can you imagine if all the world’s battles could be won that way?
Much though I admire climate sceptics we cannot take the credit for the failures of the other side. It’s not that we’re good communicators, but that they’re very, very bad. You’ve got to wonder if they’ll ever ask themselves why.”
Who are you calling “hupeople? “
Until they believe. Pretty cool, huh?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.