# I'm sick of this Global Warming!
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440
**Category:** The BBQ Pit
**Created:** [August 16, 2013, 6:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440 "2013-08-16T18:57:18Z")
**Posts on this page:** 20
**Page:** 116
### Author:  [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)
#### Post date: [March 31, 2014, 4:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440/2301 "2014-03-31T16:54:48Z")
I can’t prove it myself of course, but based on data and research I’ve read, a possible factor in the unusual climate trends that we know are happening at present, may be due to the sun. If so, and we are also seeing warming due to greenhouse gases, deforestation and other human changes to the world, what in reality may be happening is a climate change unlike anything we know of in our historic records and theories about climate change.
That being said, I have no doubts that around 5000 years ago, the global climate was much warmer than it is at present. This is based on the science, and anyone who actually studies climate history knows that the global climate was much warmer than now, from around 8000 to 5000 years ago. It’s one of those hard scientific truths that has existed long before the climate hysteria of late.
We know, with no doubt at all, that all the glaciers in the USA are less than 5000 years old. That during what is called the **Climatic Optimum** , (or Holocene climatic optimum) the sea level was 3 meters higher, the arctic was ice free, and Greenland had much less ice. The world was warm, and there was no global disaster from it. Trees grew much higher on mountains, forest extended all the way north, and vast bogs and swamps existed year round where there now is permafrost. It’s where all that “stored methane” the alarmists worries about came from in the first place.
If you can get an alarmists to admit all that is true, they then claim the “rate of change” is faster. When that argument fails, it’s back to “civilization developed with conditions blah blah blah blah”, or “the sea level rise will cause”, which may be true.
But there is no methane disaster awaiting, much less any risk of the world ending from it getting warmer. Not anytime soon.
---
### Author:  [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)
#### Post date: [March 31, 2014, 5:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440/2302 "2014-03-31T17:32:40Z")
> [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](#):
>
> You admitted it about FX _while still castigating Brazil._ That you were still getting the latter wrong may well explain why it took you so long to get the former right.
No, post 2293. Read it again. Near the bottom.
> [@](#):
>
> They did just fine shortly before the post where you got one right and one wrong. Since you proved incapable of reading Brazil’s clear post here and now, I can’t say I have much confidence that you’ve read either of 'em well before.
See above.
> [@](#):
>
> Wow, that’s great follow-up to _“I’m sure I’ve said similar before, and all anyone would have to do is ask me.”_
I’ve explained my position, which is that I trust the consensus of experts. You have some crazy fantasy that you are an expert. Which is silly.
> [@](#):
>
> Look, I appreciate that – as you say – your predictions don’t mean anything, and you don’t understand the issue enough to make reasonable proclamations. If you feel that way, that’s fine; I’d be equally happy if you relay the predictions and proclamations of someone you trust. Go right ahead. Whenever you’re ready.
NASA or the IPCC will do me fine, thanks.
> [@](#):
>
> You (a) don’t understand enough to make reasonable proclamations about the issue at hand, but (b) do feel confident enough to expound on Dunning-Kruger? Hmm.
I don’t think you understand the concept of Dunning-Kruger. Your ignorance makes you think you have something to offer. My looking into the issue, makes me realize that this is a problem beyond my level of personal expertise.
> [@](#):
>
> Well, since you’ve already been wrong about FX and Brazil, it’d be no surprise if you’re wrong about me as well: for all you know, I requested the specifics of your favorite predictions – whether made by you, or made by experts and relayed by you – to accept them as you have. We’ll never know unless you produce them. Can you?
Again, all I’m advocating is siding with the best experts in the field. You’re assuming that your ignorant dabblings can overturn their work. Absurd.
---
### Author:  [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)
#### Post date: [March 31, 2014, 6:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440/2303 "2014-03-31T18:15:36Z")
> [@Lobohan](#):
>
> Again, all I’m advocating is siding with the best experts in the field. You’re assuming that your ignorant dabblings can overturn their work. Absurd.
And where is there disagreement? It’s already been shown that your claim that Brazil and FX are not part of the 0.02% Mr.Dibble cited. So what other bullshit are you trying to put forth this time as you try maddeningly to keep that straw man alive?
---
### Author:  [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)
#### Post date: [March 31, 2014, 6:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440/2304 "2014-03-31T18:18:46Z")
> [@magellan01](#):
>
> And where is there disagreement? It’s already been shown that your claim that Brazil and FX are not part of the 0.02% Mr.Dibble cited. So what other bullshit are you trying to put forth this time as you try maddeningly to keep that straw man alive?
Reread the post where I mention FX and Brazil. What do I say about them specifically?
---
### Author:  [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)
#### Post date: [March 31, 2014, 6:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440/2305 "2014-03-31T18:27:14Z")
> [@Lobohan](#):
>
> Reread the post where I mention FX and Brazil. What do I say about them specifically?
> [@](#):
>
> Uh, FX and Brazil for two.
>
> At least that’s what they suggest. From what I’ve seen they don’t answer when asked directly.
They suggested something in your own empty head, that is all. And now that that has been cleared up, you still act as if there is someone in this thread that falls into that 0.02%. Perhaps you’d like to attempt another list? Now that FX and Brazil are off of it, who would you say is on it?
---
### Author:  [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)
#### Post date: [March 31, 2014, 6:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440/2306 "2014-03-31T18:39:01Z")
> [@magellan01](#):
>
> They suggested something in your own empty head, that is all. And now that that has been cleared up, you still act as if there is someone in this thread that falls into that 0.02%.
Do I? I think you’re reading something into it, because of your personal anger.
> [@](#):
>
> Perhaps you’d like to attempt another list? Now that FX and Brazil are off of it, who would you say is on it?
Has clothy posted here? I’d guess he thinks it’s a liberal hoax.
If he tells me otherwise, I’ll accept that, though.
---
### Author:  [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)
#### Post date: [March 31, 2014, 10:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440/2307 "2014-03-31T22:52:49Z")
> [@Lobohan](#):
>
> [QUOTE=The Other Waldo Pepper]
> You admitted it about FX _while still castigating Brazil._ That you were still getting the latter wrong may well explain why it took you so long to get the former right.
No, post 2293. Read it again. Near the bottom.
[/QUOTE]
I know. The progression goes like this: you made wrong guesses about FX, and wrong guesses about Brazil, in post 2251.
By post 2281, you’d been proven wrong about FX, _and_ proven wrong about Brazil.
(With me so far?)
I read 2281, and saw you’d been doubly wrong about Brazil, and so wrote post 2286.
In post 2292, you noted that you – still had no idea what Brazil thinks. You did so in reply to 2286 (which, of course, came _after_ 2281; it was _caused_ by 2281).
I replied, accurately, to post 2292.
Granted, _after_ post 2292, you apparently came around to my position: we now both apparently agree that all four of the observations you made in 2251 were bizarrely off the mark: FX and Brazil aren’t the “for two” you made 'em out to be, as shown when they answered upon being asked directly, like you figured they wouldn’t.
You’ve now moved on to making incorrect observations about me, which I hope you’ll soon abandon with equal vigor:
> [@](#):
>
> I’ve explained my position, which is that I trust the consensus of experts. You have some crazy fantasy that you are an expert. Which is silly.
Have I said that I _don’t_ trust the consensus of experts? Have I said I _don’t_ think their predictions will come to pass? You claim I have a crazy fantasy of being an expert, because you’ve seen me – offer differing predictions? No, that’s not it. Perhaps you’ve seen me – insist they’ll be proven wrong? No, I haven’t said that either.
You have some crazy fantasy that I have some crazy fantasy.
> [@](#):
>
> Again, all I’m advocating is siding with the best experts in the field. You’re assuming that your ignorant dabblings can overturn their work. Absurd.
But I _didn’t_ claim I’ll be overturning their work. You, by contrast, _did_ claim that I’m assuming something. You made that claim in error. You assumed.
> [@](#):
>
> I don’t think you understand the concept of Dunning-Kruger. Your ignorance makes you think you have something to offer. My looking into the issue, makes me realize that this is a problem beyond my level of personal expertise.
But you think that recognizing the Dunning-Kruger effect at work _is_ within your personal expertise. I’d like to suggest that, no, in much the same way that you _“don’t understand the issue enough to make reasonable proclamations”_ when it comes to climate change, you maybe likewise _“don’t understand the issue enough to make reasonable proclamations”_ when it comes to Dunning-Kruger.
---
### Author:  [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)
#### Post date: [March 31, 2014, 11:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440/2308 "2014-03-31T23:46:21Z")
> [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](#):
>
> I know. The progression goes like this: you made wrong guesses about FX, and wrong guesses about Brazil, in post 2251.
>
> By post 2281, you’d been proven wrong about FX, _and_ proven wrong about Brazil.
>
> (With me so far?)
>
> I read 2281, and saw you’d been doubly wrong about Brazil, and so wrote post 2286.
>
> In post 2292, you noted that you – still had no idea what Brazil thinks. You did so in reply to 2286 (which, of course, came _after_ 2281; it was _caused_ by 2281).
>
> I replied, accurately, to post 2292.
>
> Granted, _after_ post 2292, you apparently came around to my position: we now both apparently agree that all four of the observations you made in 2251 were bizarrely off the mark: FX and Brazil aren’t the “for two” you made 'em out to be, as shown when they answered upon being asked directly, like you figured they wouldn’t.
>
> You’ve now moved on to making incorrect observations about me, which I hope you’ll soon abandon with equal vigor:
>
> Have I said that I _don’t_ trust the consensus of experts? Have I said I _don’t_ think their predictions will come to pass? You claim I have a crazy fantasy of being an expert, because you’ve seen me – offer differing predictions? No, that’s not it. Perhaps you’ve seen me – insist they’ll be proven wrong? No, I haven’t said that either.
>
> You have some crazy fantasy that I have some crazy fantasy.
>
> But I _didn’t_ claim I’ll be overturning their work. You, by contrast, _did_ claim that I’m assuming something. You made that claim in error. You assumed.
>
> But you think that recognizing the Dunning-Kruger effect at work _is_ within your personal expertise. I’d like to suggest that, no, in much the same way that you _“don’t understand the issue enough to make reasonable proclamations”_ when it comes to climate change, you maybe likewise _“don’t understand the issue enough to make reasonable proclamations”_ when it comes to Dunning-Kruger.
Feel free to disabuse me of my fantasies.
---
### Author:  [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)
#### Post date: [March 31, 2014, 11:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440/2309 "2014-03-31T23:52:55Z")
[The IPCC’s new report is out.](http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/01/science/earth/climate.html?partner=rss&emc=rss&_r=1)
> [@](#):
>
> YOKOHAMA, Japan — Climate change is already having sweeping effects on every continent and throughout the world’s oceans, scientists reported on Monday, and they warned that the problem was likely to grow substantially worse unless greenhouse emissions are brought under control.
>
> The report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a United Nations group that periodically summarizes climate science, concluded that ice caps are melting, sea ice in the Arctic is collapsing, water supplies are coming under stress, heat waves and heavy rains are intensifying, coral reefs are dying, and fish and many other creatures are migrating toward the poles or in some cases going extinct.
>
> The oceans are rising at a pace that threatens coastal communities and are becoming more acidic as they absorb some of the carbon dioxide given off by cars and power plants, which is killing some creatures or stunting their growth, the report found.
>
> Organic matter frozen in Arctic soils since before civilization began is now melting, allowing it to decay into greenhouse gases that will cause further warming, the scientists said. And the worst is yet to come, the scientists said in the second of three reports that are expected to carry considerable weight next year as nations try to agree on a new global climate treaty.
---
### Author:  [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)
#### Post date: [April 1, 2014, 1:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440/2310 "2014-04-01T01:33:09Z")
> [@Lobohan](#):
>
> Do I? I think you’re reading something into it, because of your personal anger.
>
> Has clothy posted here? I’d guess he thinks it’s a liberal hoax.
>
> If he tells me otherwise, I’ll accept that, though.
I don’t think he’s posted here. If so, you can correct me. But assuming he hasn’t, can we then say that there is no one involved in the discussion that does not accept that man has contributed to climate change?
So we can torch that straw man once and for all. Or at least to someone comes into to the thread and states he or she believes otherwise?
---
### Author:  [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)
#### Post date: [April 1, 2014, 9:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440/2311 "2014-04-01T09:32:31Z")
> [@FXMastermind](#):
>
> I can’t prove it myself of course
Of course? But…you’re a scientist!
> [@](#):
>
> , but based on data and research I’ve read, a possible factor in the unusual climate trends that we know are happening at present, may be due to the sun.
I’d _love_ to know what data and research backs you up.
---
### Author:  [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)
#### Post date: [April 1, 2014, 12:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440/2312 "2014-04-01T12:23:07Z")
> [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](#):
>
> But you think that recognizing the Dunning-Kruger effect at work
I have a hypothesis I call the Meta-Dunning-Kruger effect: When an arrogant fool (such as **lobohan** ) learns about Dunning Kruger, he becomes even more arrogant and more foolish. Because it’s that much easier for him to dismiss the points made by his perceived adversaries.
Of course it leads to an interesting situation: Each side ends up thinking that it is rational and it’s the other guys who are deluded. How do you break the symmetry? Well it’s not easy, but one difference is that I am willing to lay out my position in detail and concede points which favor the other side. The warmers generally conceal their position and/or take a “concede nothing!” approach to discussion.
---
### Author:  [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)
#### Post date: [April 1, 2014, 2:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440/2313 "2014-04-01T14:50:56Z")
> [@brazil84](#):
>
> Of course it leads to an interesting situation: Each side ends up thinking that it is rational and it’s the other guys who are deluded. How do you break the symmetry? Well it’s not easy, but one difference is that I am willing to lay out my position in detail and concede points which favor the other side. The warmers generally conceal their position and/or take a “concede nothing!” approach to discussion.
I’ve found that to often be the case, or we see “the consensus says”, and wave after wave of “official reports”, and an avoidance of discussing actual data. Or theory. It’s an odd sort of thing, global warming/climate change discussions, so much like a political/moral/religious argument, rather than a science one.
> [@MrDibble](#):
>
> I’d _love_ to know what data and research backs you up.
While I can’t prove it, I suspect that is just sarcasm, and there is no honest interest at all involved.
If there was just one single science based topic here, I would probably post about it.
---
### Author:  [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)
#### Post date: [April 1, 2014, 3:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440/2314 "2014-04-01T15:58:23Z")
> [@magellan01](#):
>
> I don’t think he’s posted here. If so, you can correct me. But assuming he hasn’t, can we then say that there is no one involved in the discussion that does not accept that man has contributed to climate change?
I don’t know if no one does. But I’ll take as true the idea that those who have said such definitively are telling the truth.
> [@](#):
>
> So we can torch that straw man once and for all. Or at least to someone comes into to the thread and states he or she believes otherwise?
Again, I was only responding to their rhetoric. If you call people that trust the scientific consensus “warmists”, dismissively point out that it’s cold today someplace, and change the subject every twenty picoseconds, it does seem like you don’t agree with the scientific consensus.
That said, if everyone here agrees that the climate is warming due to man’s contributions, obviously not everyone agrees that this is a bad thing, or that there is anything that can, or should, be done to address it.
---
### Author:  [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)
#### Post date: [April 1, 2014, 4:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440/2315 "2014-04-01T16:11:41Z")
> [@brazil84](#):
>
> I have a hypothesis I call the Meta-Dunning-Kruger effect: When an arrogant fool (such as **lobohan** ) learns about Dunning Kruger, he becomes even more arrogant and more foolish. Because it’s that much easier for him to dismiss the points made by his perceived adversaries.
I don’t think of you as an adversary. I think of you as a sad, broken little man, with hilarious rules for debate and a painfully pathetic website where you “ban” other posters because that’s easier than arguing in good faith. I see you as a racist, hateful thing that struts around with a false sense of superiority because by attacking outward, you can’t see the inward rot and failure that interweave to form your thews. My adversaries are people made of better stuff.
> [@](#):
>
> Of course it leads to an interesting situation: Each side ends up thinking that it is rational and it’s the other guys who are deluded. How do you break the symmetry? Well it’s not easy, but one difference is that I am willing to lay out my position in detail and concede points which favor the other side. The warmers generally conceal their position and/or take a “concede nothing!” approach to discussion.
So, “warmers” aren’t people who think the world is warming due to man’s activities. They are people who think this is a negative thing? Or are they people who overstate the likely severity?
---
### Author:  [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)
#### Post date: [April 1, 2014, 4:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440/2316 "2014-04-01T16:45:38Z")
“It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose.”
Harry Frankfurt, author of _On Bullshit_
---
### Author:  [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)
#### Post date: [April 1, 2014, 6:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440/2317 "2014-04-01T18:00:59Z")
THIS JUST IN FROM MR. POT:
[quote=“Lobohan, post:2315, topic:666440”]
I see you as a…hateful thing that struts around with a false sense of superiority because by attacking outward, you can’t see the inward rot and failure that interweave to form your thews.
---
### Author:  [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)
#### Post date: [April 1, 2014, 7:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440/2318 "2014-04-01T19:16:11Z")
> [@Lobohan](#):
>
> [QUOTE=brazil84]
> I have a hypothesis I call the Meta-Dunning-Kruger effect: When an arrogant fool (such as **lobohan** ) learns about Dunning Kruger, he becomes even more arrogant and more foolish. Because it’s that much easier for him to dismiss the points made by his perceived adversaries.
I don’t think of you as an adversary. I think of you as a sad, broken little man, with hilarious rules for debate and a painfully pathetic website where you “ban” other posters because that’s easier than arguing in good faith. I see you as a racist, hateful thing that struts around with a false sense of superiority because by attacking outward, you can’t see the inward rot and failure that interweave to form your thews. My adversaries are people made of better stuff.
[/QUOTE]
Hmm. Well, in this thread you’ve reached conclusions about **brazil84** , and he’s reached conclusions about you – and we’ve seen, in this thread, that when you reached conclusions about **brazil84** that could be proven false, they soon were. And you did the same with **FX**. And near as I can tell, you did the same with me.
So if you think he’s got a false sense of superiority, and he thinks you have a false sense of adequacy, I think you’re probably just wrong about him again, again.
---
### Author:  [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)
#### Post date: [April 1, 2014, 7:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440/2319 "2014-04-01T19:27:38Z")
> [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](#):
>
> Hmm. Well, in this thread you’ve reached conclusions about **brazil84** , and he’s reached conclusions about you – and we’ve seen, in this thread, that when you reached conclusions about **brazil84** that could be proven false, they soon were. And you did the same with **FX**. And near as I can tell, you did the same with me.
>
> So if you think he’s got a false sense of superiority, and he thinks you have a false sense of adequacy, I think you’re probably just wrong about him again, again.
As I say, they’ve been evasive, or at least unintelligible in the past. I don’t have a particular desire to explain it to you again, but since you think you’re got a supreme gotcha, feel free to march it around for a bit.
As for Brazil, check out his racism threads and his blog, then tell me what you assessment of our friend is.
---
### Author:  [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)
#### Post date: [April 1, 2014, 8:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440/2320 "2014-04-01T20:06:41Z")
> [@Lobohan](#):
>
> As I say, they’ve been evasive, or at least unintelligible in the past. I don’t have a particular desire to explain it to you again, but since you think you’re got a supreme gotcha, feel free to march it around for a bit.
>
> As for Brazil, check out his racism threads and his blog, then tell me what you assessment of our friend is.
Look, if I’m ever in a thread where he makes a flawed claim about race – or a flawed claim about anything else – I’ll gladly offer an assessment on the spot. And if I ever happen to be in a thread where _you’re_ offering up half-a-dozen flawed claims, I’ll of course point that out likewise.
Since you did the latter over the last couple of pages, I assessed you on the spot; if I ever see him following your example, I’ll assess him accordingly.
[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440.md?page=115)
[Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440.md?page=117)