Do Climate Change Skeptics Distort The Scientific Evidence?

WeatherRusty

New member
By interpreting the available evidence differently than the mainstream scientific community, do skeptics present arguments intentionally or not based on false premises.

The Earth has not warmed since 1998
The warmest year globally was 1934
Arctic sea ice extent is recovering during the winter.
To little CO2 in the atmosphere to make a difference

etc.
 
In reality every bit of evidence for Global warming is hypothetical, or inconclusive. There are also recent discoveries that make it's fears look a joke:

For example, consider this:
----------
Considering the titanoboa was twice the size of today’s largest snake, the anaconda, the scientists estimated that the average temperature of its ecosystem would have been about 91 degrees Fahrenheit, 10 degrees warmer than the tropical forests which cover South America today.

"This temperature estimate is much hotter than modern temperatures in tropical rainforests anywhere in the world,” said Carlos Jaramillo, a paleobotanist at the Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute. “The fossil floras that the Smithsonian has been collecting in Cerrejon for many years indicate that the area was a tropical rainforest. That means that tropical rainforests could exist at temperatures 3-4 degrees Celsius hotter than modern tropical rainforests experience."

Such a discovery may have widespread implications as scientist attempt to predict how tropical forests will change in face of global warming. Many have feared the forest would become savannah due to higher temperatures, but if the climate of 60 million years ago is any indication some of tropical plants could survive temperature increases.
----------

So even if global warming is happening faster than it naturally happens(the earth cools and warms periodicaly), we still may be in the safe area for a long time.
 
1) It was warmer in 1998 than it is today. That's a true statement. It was also no warmer in 2000 than it is today. It has not warmed since 1998. Or 2000. Those are facts.

2) No, the warmest year in the US was 1934. The point was that NASA GISS had previously claimed that 1998 had been the warmest year both globally and nationally. It's not that 1998 wasn't the warmest year - it's that NASA GISS made another error - it's their models that are used to predict the FUTURE climate.

3) Yes, it has recovered - relative to Summer of course but also relative to last year.

4) The proportion of the atmosphere that is CO2 now that wasn't CO2 in 1800 is less than 1/10,000th of the atmosphere. That's a fact.
 
Nope, it is the other way around. There is no hard evidence that there is global warming. contrary to what you are being told.
 
Ignoring the evidence would be a better description. With few exceptions, they don't understand the science well enough to make more than superficial distortions that are easily recognized. The con artists selling kits to burn water in cars are much more skilled in distortion. Some of the very best con artists work for AIG. The climate change skeptics could take lessons.
 
Back
Top