# Are There STILL People Who Deny Global Warming Is Happening? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 22, 2009, 10:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-still-people-who-deny-global-warming-is-happening/511156 "2009-09-22T22:58:24Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 10\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2009, 5:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-still-people-who-deny-global-warming-is-happening/511156/121 "2009-10-02T17:06:24Z")
> [@MLS](#): > > You might want to check out [this book](http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0980076315/ref=ox_ya_oh_product) on the subject. > > The author says, Well, it seems that the author did not consult climate researchers: As Dyson is one of the deniers mentioned: > **[RealClimate: Freeman Dyson’s selective vision](https://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2008/05/freeman-dysons-selective-vision/)** > > RealClimate: In the New York Review of Books, Freeman Dyson reviews two recent ones about global warming, but his review is mostly shaped by his own rather selective vision. 1. Carbon emissions are not a problem because in a few years genetic... > [@](#): > > In the New York Review of Books, Freeman Dyson reviews two recent ones about global warming, but his review is mostly shaped by his own rather selective vision. > > 1. _Carbon emissions are not a problem because in a few years genetic engineers will develop “carbon-eating trees” that will sequester carbon in soils._ Ah, the famed Dyson vision thing, this is what we came for. The seasonal cycle in atmospheric CO2 shows that the lifetime of a CO2 molecule in the air before it is exchanged with another in the land biosphere is about 12 years. Therefore if the trees could simply be persuaded to drop diamonds instead of leaves, repairing the damage to the atmosphere could be fast, I suppose. The problem here, unrecognized by Dyson, is that the business-as-usual he’s defending would release almost as much carbon to the air by the end of the century as the entire reservoir of carbon stored on land, in living things and in soils combined. The land carbon reservoir would have to double in size in order keep up with us. This is too visionary for me to bet the farm on. > > … > > 1. _Majority scientists are contemptuous of those in the minority who don’t believe in the dangers of climate change_. I often find myself contemptuous of efforts to misrepresent science to a lay audience. The target audience of denialism is the lay audience, not scientists. It’s made up to look like science, but it’s PR. We have documented Lindzen’s tortured and twisted representation of the science to non-scientists here and here. If Lindzen had a credible argument to support his gut feeling (and apparently Dyson’s), I can promise that I for one would take it seriously. I’ve got kids at home whose future I worry about. If Lindzen were right, no one would be happier about that than me. But I do get contemptuous of BS. Really, virtually all the deniers mentioned already had their complaints debunked or explained. (However the author deserve some kudos for not shying away from using the “deniers” term) ---
**Author:** ![Kearsen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/82dd89/32.png) [@Kearsen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kearsen)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2009, 5:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-still-people-who-deny-global-warming-is-happening/511156/122 "2009-10-02T17:23:08Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > Your own words were: > > “ **I would be a whole lot more ready to accept the proof of global warming** , if proponents didn’t appear so reluctant to have their ideas challenged.” > > There would be no complaint from me if you had not started with a copy cat misleading note. > > **Lomborg is not challenging the science behind global warming** , he is challenging what to do and how to deal with the changes that are coming. That IMHO have a good basis for current discussions. > > The same goes to **Kearsen**. I would agree, if there were significant ‘theory’ or ‘proof’ to determine that global warming even exists. How long does the earth tend cold? How long does it tend warm? When was the last ice age? Billions of years ago you say? What would stop the warming to continue for as long? Global warming _might_ be a problem. We _might_ be able to do something about it. And then again, we might not. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2009, 5:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-still-people-who-deny-global-warming-is-happening/511156/123 "2009-10-02T17:42:15Z")
> [@Kearsen](#): > > I would agree, if there were significant ‘theory’ or ‘proof’ to determine that global warming even exists. > **[Empirical evidence that humans are causing global warming](https://skepticalscience.com/empirical-evidence-for-global-warming.htm)** > > \Direct observations find that CO2 is rising sharply due to human activity. Satellite and surface measurements find less energy is escaping to space at CO2 absorption wavelengths. Ocean and surface temperature measurements find the planet continues... > [@](#): > > What the science says… > > Direct observations find that CO2 is rising sharply due to human activity. Satellite measurements find less energy is escaping to space at CO2 absorption wavelengths. Ocean and surface temperature measurements find the planet is steadily accumulating heat. Empirical measurements show human CO2 emissions are causing the planet to accumulate heat (eg - global warming). Doing something or nothing in the future regarding the effects does not change the past evidence or the science. ---
**Author:** ![jshore](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/b5e925/32.png) [@jshore](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jshore)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2009, 6:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-still-people-who-deny-global-warming-is-happening/511156/124 "2009-10-02T18:09:39Z")
> [@MLS](#): > > You might want to check out [this book](http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0980076315/ref=ox_ya_oh_product) on the subject. So that book, written by someone with no scientific credentials talking to a handful of scientists is somehow more convincing than the statements by nearly every major scientific organization on the planet? And, by the way, I would be very skeptical of people who make the claim that they used to believe in AGW until they started to investigate it, unless they can provide real evidence of their past belief. Even Sen. James Inhofe has made this claim. Strangely, I have not seen any documentary evidence demonstrating these past beliefs. [Here](http://www.desmogblog.com/national-post-ducks-correction-repeats-slander) is something showing the shoddiness of Lawrence Solomon’s work, in which he so seriously misrepresented the views of a scientist that the scientist issued a statement about it. ---
**Author:** ![Kearsen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/82dd89/32.png) [@Kearsen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kearsen)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2009, 6:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-still-people-who-deny-global-warming-is-happening/511156/125 "2009-10-02T18:36:17Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > [Empirical evidence that humans are causing global warming](http://www.skepticalscience.com/empirical-evidence-for-global-warming.htm) > Doing something or nothing in the future regarding the effects does not change the past evidence or the science. Even the link you gave criticizes the means and methods. If global warming exists, what is the cause? Multiple sources. How many do we have a direct control over? How big is our carbon footprint? How much impact does that have? For the empirical data provided, how long was the course of “study”? If it isn’t billions of years you have failed to support anything. About the only thing that study shows is that over some arbitrary period, the earth was warmer during one period than another. This does not equate to ‘Global Warming’ ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2009, 6:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-still-people-who-deny-global-warming-is-happening/511156/126 "2009-10-02T18:41:20Z")
> [@Kearsen](#): > > Even the link you gave criticizes the means and methods. > If global warming exists, what is the cause? Multiple sources. How many do we have a direct control over? How big is our carbon footprint? How much impact does that have? > > For the empirical data provided, how long was the course of “study”? If it isn’t billions of years you have failed to support anything. > > About the only thing that study shows is that over some arbitrary period, the earth was warmer during one period than another. > > This does not equate to ‘Global Warming’ :rolleyes: From the same link: > [@](#): > > Conclusion > > There is a clear empirical evidence that CO2 is rising, CO2 causes warming and the expected warming is observed. This poses two problems for those who deny anthropogenic warming: > > 1. What is causing the warming if not CO2? > 2. Why isn’t rising CO2 causing the warming? [Sense from Deniers on CO2? Don’t hold your breath…](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WPA-8A4zf2c&feature=related) ---
**Author:** ![bri1600bv](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/9fc29f/32.png) [@bri1600bv](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bri1600bv)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2009, 3:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-still-people-who-deny-global-warming-is-happening/511156/127 "2009-10-03T15:43:38Z")
Is it possible that AGW is just the latest doomsday cult? One thing I’ve noticed is that they want limits on CO2 output on the US and Europe even though, by their own models, it won’t do any good. The CO2 from China and India, which won’t be reduced, will render the whole thing useless. A few years ago, Al Gore (Saint Al Gore, I suppose as this seems more and more like a religion every day) said we had 10 years left. I felt relieved…at that point (10 years from his proclamation) we can stop talking about this stuff as it will be too late to do anything. The sinners in CO2 are the West. (3rd worlders get an exemption as they aren’t white). The saints and prophets are the seers who are using limited data and theories to forecast doom. The apostates are the deniers who (according to one enviro) “should be put in camps”. No, that’s not a religion or anything. There’s something in the human psyche which says “we have sinned and must be punished”. AGW are just priests taking advantage of this trait. That’s why they limit their punishment to the West…people in the 3rd world aren’t buying it. ---
**Author:** ![jshore](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/b5e925/32.png) [@jshore](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jshore)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2009, 5:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-still-people-who-deny-global-warming-is-happening/511156/128 "2009-10-03T17:32:31Z")
> [@bri1600bv](#): > > Is it possible that AGW is just the latest doomsday cult? Is it possible that denial of AGW is simply the latest unscientific response to a clear scientific consensus when that science raises issues that conflict with some powerful folk’s economic self-interests as well as many folk’s political views? (Other examples being evolution, the scientific evidence in regards to smoking and health problems, …) > [@](#): > > One thing I’ve noticed is that they want limits on CO2 output on the US and Europe even though, by their own models, it won’t do any good. The CO2 from China and India, which won’t be reduced, will render the whole thing useless. There is plenty of talk about China and India’s future emissions. In fact, that was one of the major subjects of discussion when Secretary of State Hillary Clinton visited China. However, these countries have made it quite clear that they don’t think it fair if the countries who have produced most of the cumulative CO2 in the atmosphere up to this point suddenly start demanding that they cut their emissions without taking a leadership role in doing it ourselves. And, as an issue of basic fairness, I think these nations make a reasonable point (although clearly they are also going to have to start contributing to the emissions reductions). > [@](#): > > A few years ago, Al Gore (Saint Al Gore, I suppose as this seems more and more like a religion every day) said we had 10 years left. I felt relieved…at that point (10 years from his proclamation) we can stop talking about this stuff as it will be too late to do anything. Nobody has ever said that we have 10 years until disaster but rather that we have rather estimated the time that we have to start to “turn the ship around” with the knowledge that a major restructuring of the use of energy in our society won’t happen overnight. Once a power plant is built, it can have a lifespan of 50 years. There is also a lot of inertia built into the climate system itself, mainly because of the thermal inertia of the oceans. We have scientific organizations such as the National Academy of Sciences that have served us well in separating real science from pseudo-scientific nonsense. And, these societies are telling us that AGW is a real problem and that much of the arguments raised by those in opposition are pseudo-scientific nonsense. (There are some real scientific sources of uncertainty but none that have led the major scientific organizations to conclude that we can just ignore the problem.) ---
**Author:** ![Martini\_Enfield](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/martini_enfield/32/11123_2.png) [@Martini\_Enfield](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martini_Enfield)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2009, 12:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-still-people-who-deny-global-warming-is-happening/511156/129 "2009-10-04T00:23:29Z")
> [@bri1600bv](#): > > Is it possible that AGW is just the latest doomsday cult? I wonder that myself. Not so much the “Planet heating up” thing, but the “We’re all doomed unless you give all your money to tree huggers immediately!” aspect of it. I’d rather see the money being spent of AGW campaigning spent on space exploration, myself, but this probably isn’t the right place to be saying that. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2009, 3:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-still-people-who-deny-global-warming-is-happening/511156/130 "2009-10-04T03:44:54Z")
> [@Martini\_Enfield](#): > > I wonder that myself. Not so much the “Planet heating up” thing, but the “We’re all doomed unless you give all your money to tree huggers immediately!” aspect of it. > > I’d rather see the money being spent of AGW campaigning spent on space exploration, myself, but this probably isn’t the right place to be saying that. Oddly enough I say the same thing. \* > **[NASA GISS: NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies](https://www.giss.nasa.gov/)** > > Research at the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) emphasizes a broad study of global change. Oh, did you forget that many probes sent to space are also investigating the earth and its climate? > **[NASA Satellite Duo Set for Cloud-Watching Mission](https://www.space.com/2315-nasa-satellite-duo-set-cloud-watching-mission.html)** > > After months of delays, NASA is once again set to launch a pair of cloud-watching satellites early Friday to join a flotilla of probes aimed at improving weather and climate forecasts. - Minus the cult thing. Really, if it is against the science the deniers are the actual cult. If it is against **what we should be doing about it** then I can see that what some people (and many times they are not the scientists) are proposing hare brained solutions that do sound like they are coming from a cult. Provided that the future evidence from satellites and other sources does not show a degradation of the environment due to global warming, I see no reason to follow any draconian measures. Practical and pragmatic reasons tell me that some future warming is inevitable, but to prevent any catastrophic levels of it the often mentioned target of not going over 2 degrees Celsius by the end of the century is doable IMHO. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-still-people-who-deny-global-warming-is-happening/511156.md?page=6)