- Climate change ignorance caused by humans
- This weeks stupidity harvest
- Some Useful Tools
- Old memes, new life
Climate change ignorance caused by humans
It has been confirmed, climate change ignorance is caused by humans! The belief that it could be due to natural causes probably applies to only 10-15% of the population.
Study Links Global Warming to Right-wing Media Hot Air Emissions: “SAN FRANCISCO, CA – Earlier this week, the Environmental Protection Agency released the highly anticipated results of a year-long study, confirming a long suspected link between right-wing media blowhards and current global warming trends.”
OK, this is supposedly humour from a site thespoof.com, but you will find that it hits very close to the mark. If it is read as the disinformation spread by these blow hards leads to massively higher emissions rather than directly causing them, then it’s true.
I don’t know that I would stand by the accuracy of the numbers, but the qualitative descriptions are bang on as well.
This weeks stupidity harvest:
It’s been a fruitful week for the purveyors of ignorance, so I propose a stroll through the halls of stupidity accompanied by refutations so you are fore-armed should you run into any of them in the wild.
For those unfamiliar with climate science, please allow me to introduce you to some of the “authorities” that make up the Denier case, and the tactics they use as part of their war on science.
We’ll end our tour with a quick look at some excellent new resources for resisting the onslaught of ignorance and fighting back.
Let’s open with a piece of political stupidity just to get it out of the way before getting to the science. Climate Progress asks you to “Guess which country the Bush team blames for lack of a climate deal.”
Well? any one? You’ll have to read it to find out if you were right (hint NOT the real culprit).
Quick updates on Inhofe’s Folly; Jule’s Klimaat blog asks “Inhofe’s 650 : what does it take to be called a scientist?” and effectively knocks Ferdinand Engelbeen off the list.
Deltoid has a look at “So who’s on Inhofe’s list and the HIV/AIDS deniers list?” and documents that Deniers are flexible, ie capable of being ignorant across multiple disciplines.
Deltoid also discovers hitherto unimagined depths to David Evans’ ignorance in “David Evans doesn’t even know what the hot spot is.” Evans also takes it on the chin from Chris Colose with “Skeptics/Denialists Part 2: Hotspots and Repetition.”
“This one is too easy. Even though no one at ForceChange is a professional scientist, we apparently know more about science than CNN Meteorologist Chad Myers … “
The Toot also get’s in a shot with “That’s just heaps of stupid poured atop a mountain made of dumb. “
The Daily Mail is at it again, and LayScientist let’s them have it in “The 1930s were the Warmest Decade, and Climate Fascists Need to Find God”:
“Even by the impressive standards of the Daily Mail, Richard Littlejohn’s column contains a spectacular amount of idiocy, but in today’s paper he surpasses himself with some of the most ridiculous nonsense I’ve ever seen written on the subject of climate change in a “credible” mass media publication.” [emphasis added]
Ever a font of misinformation, distortion, and flagrant lies, Andrew Bolt has been using quotes out of context to completely misrepresent their meaning as explained in “Denier’s quote: True, but not truthful.”
His other contribution this week is an attempt to discredit climate science with “Top 10 dud predictions.” Needless to say he cherry picks specific predictions by a few individuals and local examples to “prove” climate science is somehow flawed.
The refutation is naturally to look at the broad science and see what is going on globally rather than a few, specific local examples. Since that would clearly show that he is lying through his teeth he does not suggest that anyone do this.
Every bit as bad as Bolt for idiocy, Booker has written a screed “Facts melted by ‘global warming‘” that is so wrong in so many ways, from misrepresenting the Siberian temperatures (cherry pick of course) to irrelevant analogies about wildlife surviving the climate change that isn’t happening when it happens (the usual Denier logic).
It would take an entire post to debunk the entirety of Bookers Gish Gallup, but for now let’s just mention two.
First, despite the catastrophic decline in Arctic ice he tries the “ice experiencing massive growth” meme. I discussed the very real catastrophic loss of Arctic ice recently, but two new posts worth noting would be: “2008 Arctic Sea-Ice Refreeze Trend Line Dropping Below Last Year’s“
The other meme Brooker belabours is the “golly gee my toes are cold what global warming?” nonsense, which we’ll cover under:
Even if a week is slow for ignorance you can trust Newsbusters to have something for you. Sheppard packages the meme as “my cold toes are covered in snow” in Lib Radio Host: Record Snows and Cold Caused By Global Warming.
Of course we all know the fact that “weather isn’t climate“, and that if you choose your time frames and geographic area you can justify almost any idiocy (some examples where I do just that here, here, and here).
However, in his piece Heavy snow (job) Tamino has a good in-depth look at snow (pun not initially intended, but left once recognized), including trends in snow cover:
Don’t run away yet; go read it after … it’s worth it. While you’re there check out 2008 temperature summaries and spin as well.
Ricky Rood answers the question “how can it be so cold in such a warm world?” (for those who were wondering) and more in his piece “Cold in a Warm World:“, a welcome contribution as many people are legitimately puzzled.
Which will lead you back to the ‘climate vs weather’ question … when and why does one become the other? Thanks to Grumbine for How to decide climate trends you will learn that
“…you need at least 15 years for your average to stabilize, 20-30 being a reasonable range. Stabilize means for the value of the average for a number of years to be close to the average to a somewhat longer or shorter span of years.”
If that contribution were not enough, Grumbine has also given us this excellent discussion Science and consensus:
“The error made by the people who try to deny, for example, the conclusions of the IPCC reports because ‘science doesn’t do consensus’ is that they’re confusing the two sides. The live science, which is summarized in the IPCC reports, doesn’t have consensus. That’s why it’s live and why folks have science to do in the area. The body of scientific knowledge, which is also summarized in the reports, does have a consensus, which is being described in detail as to what the consensus is about and how strong it is.”
Chris Colose “wants to ask the age-old question: what separates denialists from skeptics? in Will the real skeptics please stand up?
Yet another source worth citing when the “we’re skeptics, not Deniers – stop trying to invoke the Holocaust you enviro-Nazis” canard comes up.
Denialism (the blog) has some fun with Skeptics’ Circle 102 at Happy Jihad’s House of Pancakes which turned me on to HUMBUG! the skeptic’s field guide to spotting fallacies in thinking (caution ebook – large file) by Jef Clark and Theo Clark.
I have only just started it, but it looks like a “must have” for the serious climate troll slayer. A great stocking stuffer since it is free.
Denialism also links us to Conspiritorial Thinkings at Dubito Ergo Sum which analyses the fallacies and errors in conspiracy delusions (HINT Global government, UN, science funding, and of course Al Gore).
Old memes, new life
This story “Did Early Global Warming Divert A New Glacial Age?” from Science Daily is adding a new twist to the “climate change is a good thing” meme. In a wingnutshell we should all thank God for climate change (that isn’t happening) for saving us from dying of cold. Expect to see a lot more of that one from now on.
New Scientist’s story about “Arctic melt 20 years ahead of climate models” is beng jumped on by the Deniers. Naturally enough NOT to say that the melt isn’t happening (which would be consistent with everything they have claimed up to now).
Oh no … ready for this? According to them this proves the models are flawed and hence all of climate science is not to be believed at all. Never mind the face slapping stupdity that this shows everything they have heretofore claimed to be true is complete nonsense. I am not kidding – see the comment threads here)
To sum up, the warming that isn’t happening is melting the ice ahead of schedule and that shows the models are wrong and therefore climate change isn’t happening; Quod demonstrandum that they are idiots, or something like that.
What is particularly galling to those who are aware of it is that one reason the climate predictions are too conservative is because of the Deniers in the first place. As discussed in an earlier post the IPCC reports are so low key and downplayed because of political meddling by the Bush administration (and others) ie official Denialism.
Expect to see the same “logic” to be used with reference to sea levels as well. Indeed a variant of it already has been.
We give our consent every moment that we do not resist.
Denier “Challenge” aka Deathwatch Update: Day 71 … still no evidence.