# XKCD's Climate Change Comic **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [September 12, 2016, 8:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/xkcds-climate-change-comic/765786 "2016-09-12T20:34:25Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2016, 6:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/xkcds-climate-change-comic/765786/41 "2016-09-13T18:36:28Z")
On a serious note, I hate the tern “denier.” Not everything everybody says about the horrors of climate change is always 100% accurate. Skepticism is a good thing. Making people afraid to object to wild or unsubstantiated claims, lest they be labeled or ridiculed is not good scientific progress. Every time someone points to some new hurricane or natural disaster as being a confirmation of global warming they are being just as stupid as the people who cite snowstorms or the occasional unusually cold spell as proof that it’s not. ---
**Author:** ![ruh-roh](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/8797f3/32.png) [@ruh-roh](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ruh-roh)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2016, 6:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/xkcds-climate-change-comic/765786/42 "2016-09-13T18:41:00Z")
So, global warming will drastically change the planet and our lives will not be like we have known them for the past couple of hundred years. But the only way to slow it down is to change the way we have lived for the past couple of hundred years. Think no more personal transportation, and no more steady, reliable supply of electricity. Back to early 1800’s in population and lifestyle. As a Midwesterner, my main concern is that if global warming is going to raise the ocean levels, we have to make sure it happens fast enough that all the people that live on the coast don’t get a chance to move inland first. ( It will really screw up the property values and taxes ). Fewer people will also take care of a major part of the warming problem. Things are changing, I’m just not convinced it isn’t more nature than man made. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2016, 6:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/xkcds-climate-change-comic/765786/43 "2016-09-13T18:48:42Z")
> [@Scylla](#): > > I knew it was all bullshit when he said the Pokemon were extinct. Those little bastards are everywhere. _North American_ Pokemon. The ones we have here now are an invasive species from Asia. Which means you don’t need a license to hunt them! ---
**Author:** ![dasmoocher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/dbc845/32.png) [@dasmoocher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dasmoocher)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2016, 6:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/xkcds-climate-change-comic/765786/44 "2016-09-13T18:52:46Z")
> [@Try2B\_Comprehensive](#): > > What a great mod. > > Anyway, ultimately this strip makes me mad at evangelicals. That’s who are voting the GOP into power, that’s who are just fine with denying/ignoring this problem. Evangelicals, man, they’re going to get us all killed. > > Really! But they’re going to Heaven to be with Jesus. > [@Scylla](#): > > I knew it was all bullshit when he said the Pokemon were extinct. Those little bastards are everywhere. Wasn’t it North American Pokemon? ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2016, 6:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/xkcds-climate-change-comic/765786/45 "2016-09-13T18:56:50Z")
> [@](#): > > Quoth **ruh-roh** : > > Things are changing, I’m just not convinced it isn’t more nature than man made. What would it take to convince you? Because the evidence is enough to convince thousands of the most skeptical people in the world. And while the most extreme changes to curtail emissions would indeed mean a drastic decrease to our standard of living and quality of life, there are still very big changes that could be made that would be very nearly painless. We can transition to smaller and otherwise more fuel-efficient cars, or even in many cases to pure electric or plug-in hybrid cars. We can shift more of our electrical generation over to non-fossil-fuel sources like wind and nuclear. We can make our homes and appliances more energy-efficient. We can come up with many other solutions, and institute something like a carbon tax or cap-and-trade to encourage industry to come up with other solutions. There’s no one big solution that’ll magically fix everything, but there are a lot of small solutions that, if we put them all together, can significantly mitigate the problem. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2016, 7:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/xkcds-climate-change-comic/765786/46 "2016-09-13T19:31:01Z")
> [@Scylla](#): > > Every time someone points to some new hurricane or natural disaster as being a confirmation of global warming they are being just as stupid as the people who cite snowstorms or the occasional unusually cold spell as proof that it’s not. The best analogy I read is that you’ve got a pair of 6-sided dice, your hurricane dice. Whenever you roll ten or more, you get a hurricane. Whenever a double-six comes up, there’s a really bad hurricane. Global warming takes one die and changes the 1 to a 6. That die now has two sixes on it. Hurricanes are gonna happen a lot more now. Any individual hurricane you can’t say is proof of global warming, but the pattern definitely results from global warming. That’s not the same thing as people who confuse weather events with climate change. ---
**Author:** ![dracoi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/90db22/32.png) [@dracoi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dracoi)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2016, 7:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/xkcds-climate-change-comic/765786/47 "2016-09-13T19:39:45Z")
> [@ruh-roh](#): > > So, global warming will drastically change the planet and our lives will not be like we have known them for the past couple of hundred years. But the only way to slow it down is to change the way we have lived for the past couple of hundred years. Think no more personal transportation, and no more steady, reliable supply of electricity. Back to early 1800’s in population and lifestyle. That’s quite the exaggeration. Electric cars produce lower carbon emissions than regular, even if you use a coal plant to get the electricity. Natural gas is lower than coal. Nuclear, hydro, wind and solar are all zero carbon, and we know that they could entirely replace fossil fuel. So there are lots of ways to make incremental progress with very little impact on daily life. Furthermore, we know fossil fuels are limited resources so it’s inevitable that we must transition away from them. The question is whether we make that replacement over decades (by choice) or over centuries (by necessity). The impact on lifestyle depends entirely on how fast and how completely you want to make the transition and only Pol Pot would try a transition that would send us back to the 1800s. ---
**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:** [September 13, 2016, 7:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/xkcds-climate-change-comic/765786/48 "2016-09-13T19:52:35Z")
> [@Scylla](#): > > On a serious note, I hate the tern “denier.” > > Not everything everybody says about the horrors of climate change is always 100% accurate. Skepticism is a good thing. > > Making people afraid to object to wild or unsubstantiated claims, lest they be labeled or ridiculed is not good scientific progress. Well fie to that, this talking point is also a talking point from climate change deniers. And after 100 years of this the reality is that the wild and unsubstantiated claims are coming almost exclusively from the ones rejecting science. > **[In defence of climate science denier!](https://blog.hotwhopper.com/2015/02/in-defence-of-climate-science-denier.html)** > > Global warming & climate change. Eavesdropping on climate science deniers, their weird pseudo-science and crazy conspiracy theories. > [@](#): > > A denier is defined as a person who denies something. The word “denier” was around well before the second world war. These days one would hardly see it used in that context, compared to its use in relation to climate science (or HIV/AIDS). Arguably the most accepted authority on the English language, the Oxford Dictionary, defines it as follows, illustrating the definition by reference to denial of global warming: > > [Oxford Languages | The Home of Language Data](http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/denier) > > > [@](#): > > > > noun > > A person who denies something: a prominent denier of global warming > > What makes a person reject climate science? > > As well as wanting to reserve the word “denier” for the context of “The Holocaust” (ie the WWII massacres), Science of Doom seems to think that people reject climate science because they can’t quite understand the underlying physics or mathematics. He wrote: > > > [@](#): > > > > ``` > > The worst you could say is people who don’t accept ‘consensus climate science’ are likely finding basic – or advanced – thermodynamics, fluid mechanics, heat transfer and statistics a little difficult and might have misunderstood, or missed, a step somewhere. > > > > The best you could say is with such a complex subject straddling so many different disciplines, they might be entitled to have a point. > > > > ``` > > He is missing the point. Social and cognitive sciences suggest that rejection of climate science isn’t related to the science itself. Most people who vocally reject climate science do so because: > > [ul] > [li]they think it requires mitigating action that conflicts with their world view or personal self-interest [/li][li] for ideological/political reasons in general[/li][li] it’s their job (eg they work for the Heartland Institute or the IPA or CFACT).[/li][/ul] > As a classic example, Anthony Watts said to a television interviewer (around 53 seconds in): > > > [@](#): > > > > ``` > > Interviewer: "What bothers you the most about the arguments that there is serious global warming?" > > Watts: "They want to change policy, they want to apply taxes..."! > > > > ``` > > There are other examples. I’ve documented some of the reasons given by science deniers themselves for rejecting climate science - here and here.\*\* It is rare that it’s because they don’t understand the intricacies of climate science, even in their own mind. Many reject climate science because they have a tendency to conspiracy ideation, or because they distrust normal authorities on any subject with which they want to disagree.\*\* > > I’m not including the conspiracy nutters in the above list. The people who subscribe to New World Government/One World Order conspiracies. Those who think climate science is a hoax perpetrated by Jewish bankers from the 19th century. Who knows what drives their thinking. That’s a subject for cognitive scientists. (See Bob Altemeyer’s The Authoritarians.) > > Think about yourself. Do you accept or reject climate science because you have difficulty with the maths or physics? Be honest with yourself. If you are a climate researcher yourself, do you understand every aspect of every discipline that is related to climate science? It would be a rare person who could keep abreast of the details of developments in every area of the earth and atmospheric sciences. > > As I commented at Science of Doom: One doesn’t have to know how to work out equations to accept climate science any more than one has to understand the intricacies of biology to accept evolution, or the details of geology to appreciate the age of the world, or the ins and outs of modern physics to accept that there are tiny particles, or an in-depth understanding of the immune system to accept or reject the value of vaccines. ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2016, 8:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/xkcds-climate-change-comic/765786/49 "2016-09-13T20:39:05Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > Well fie to that, this talking point is also a talking point from climate change deniers. And after 100 years of this the reality is that the wild and unsubstantiated claims are coming almost exclusively from the ones rejecting science. > > [In defence of climate science denier! | HotWhopper](http://blog.hotwhopper.com/2015/02/in-defence-of-climate-science-denier.html) I stand corrcected. Nobody arguing for climate change has ever made an exaggerated or unsubstantiated claim. My bad. ---
**Author:** ![dasmoocher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/dbc845/32.png) [@dasmoocher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dasmoocher)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2016, 8:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/xkcds-climate-change-comic/765786/50 "2016-09-13T20:43:47Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > And while the most extreme changes to curtail emissions would indeed mean a drastic decrease to our standard of living and quality of life, there are still very big changes that could be made that would be very nearly painless. We can transition to smaller and otherwise more fuel-efficient cars, or even in many cases to pure electric or plug-in hybrid cars. We can shift more of our electrical generation over to non-fossil-fuel sources like wind and nuclear. \*We can make our homes and appliances more energy-efficient. \* We can come up with many other solutions, and institute something like a carbon tax or cap-and-trade to encourage industry to come up with other solutions. There’s no one big solution that’ll magically fix everything, but there are a lot of small solutions that, if we put them all together, can significantly mitigate the problem. [my italics] [It Just Gets Better: NIST Net-Zero House Quadruples Energy Surplus in Second Year](https://www.nist.gov/news-events/news/2016/03/it-just-gets-better-nist-net-zero-house-quadruples-energy-surplus-second) > [@](#): > > [NIST] conducted a year-long experiment to prove it could build a modern, spacious house that would create as much energy as it uses. This “net-zero” house was home to a virtual family that consumed as much energy as an average American family of four. Thanks to the house’s energy efficient construction and appliances, and solar panels for producing electricity and hot water, the house made more energy than the family used. The house will serve as a testbed for new energy efficient technologies for decades to come. ---
**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:** [September 13, 2016, 8:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/xkcds-climate-change-comic/765786/51 "2016-09-13T20:53:26Z")
> [@Scylla](#): > > I stand corrcected. Nobody arguing for climate change has ever made an exaggerated or unsubstantiated claim. My bad. That is why I said **almost**. I know already several environmentalists and internet posters that don’t know shit from Shinola. ---
**Author:** ![Peter\_Morris](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/peter_morris/32/359_2.png) [@Peter\_Morris](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peter_Morris)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2016, 8:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/xkcds-climate-change-comic/765786/52 "2016-09-13T20:55:56Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > Who is Godenberry? Rene Godenberry, the creator of Tar Strek. ---
**Author:** ![ruh-roh](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/8797f3/32.png) [@ruh-roh](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ruh-roh)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2016, 9:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/xkcds-climate-change-comic/765786/53 "2016-09-13T21:09:53Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > Because the evidence is enough to convince thousands of the most skeptical people in the world. As I said, things are changing. I don’t need to be convinced of that. I just am not sure that because it is happening now, and human population is at an all time high (and getting higher) that it is cause and effect. I think that most people just “ass-u-me” that it is due entirely to people, and more specifically to power plants, cars, etc. Then I see footage of the latest volcano, or read about the last ice age and think about the changes the planet has gone through long before humans were so wide spread. The xkd chart seems to show that significant changes have happened, and long before people could have a serious effect. No doubt we need to make drastic changes in our energy production and usage. I vote for nukes. Better to make a few small spots uninhabitable (for waste storage) than the whole planet. Unfortunately the movies have pretty much scared most people stupid about nuclear energy. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2016, 9:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/xkcds-climate-change-comic/765786/54 "2016-09-13T21:16:11Z")
> [@Scylla](#): > > I stand corrcected. Nobody arguing for climate change has ever made an exaggerated or unsubstantiated claim. My bad. Thank you for an exaggerated and unsubstantiated claim. Keep 'em coming. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2016, 9:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/xkcds-climate-change-comic/765786/55 "2016-09-13T21:18:17Z")
> [@Peter\_Morris](#): > > Rene Godenberry, the creator of Tar Strek. Ah! I mist have mussed that! Thenk’aa! (Seems like a strange character to assassinate. After all, Rodenberry had WWIII wipe out a hundred million people…all just a few years ago!) ---
**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:** [September 13, 2016, 9:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/xkcds-climate-change-comic/765786/56 "2016-09-13T21:49:13Z")
> [@ruh-roh](#): > > As I said, things are changing. I don’t need to be convinced of that. > I just am not sure that because it is happening now, and human population is at an all time high (and getting higher) that it is cause and effect. I think that most people just “ass-u-me” that it is due entirely to people, and more specifically to power plants, cars, etc. Uh, no. > **[How do we know more CO2 is causing warming?](https://skepticalscience.com/empirical-evidence-for-co2-enhanced-greenhouse-effect.htm)** > > \An enhanced greenhouse effect from CO2 has been confirmed by multiple lines of empirical evidence. Satellite measurements of infrared spectra over the past 40 years observe less energy escaping to space at the wavelengths associated with CO2.... > [@](#): > > The Empirical Evidence > > As temperatures started to rise, scientists became more and more interested in the cause. Many theories were proposed. All save one have fallen by the wayside, discarded for lack of evidence. One theory alone has stood the test of time, strengthened by experiments. > > We know CO2 absorbs and re-emits longwave radiation (Tyndall). The theory of greenhouse gases predicts that if we increase the proportion of greenhouse gases, more warming will occur (Arrhenius). > > Scientists have measured the influence of CO2 on both incoming solar energy and outgoing long-wave radiation. Less longwave radiation is escaping to space at the specific wavelengths of greenhouse gases. Increased longwave radiation is measured at the surface of the Earth at the same wavelengths. > > These data provide empirical evidence for the predicted effect of CO2. > [@ruh-roh](#): > > Then I see footage of the latest volcano, or read about the last ice age and think about the changes the planet has gone through long before humans were so wide spread. The xkd chart seems to show that significant changes have happened, and long before people could have a serious effect. This is missing the point, what is happening now is that we are putting stuff in the atmosphere faster than nature can deal in the carbon cycle, as a result the CO2 content is increasing and then the temperature increases to levels not seen before humans started to keep count. the old natural changes were mostly gradual and humanity could cope and develop. This unnatural change is going too fast. > [@ruh-roh](#): > > No doubt we need to make drastic changes in our energy production and usage. I vote for nukes. Better to make a few small spots uninhabitable (for waste storage) than the whole planet. Unfortunately the movies have pretty much scared most people stupid about nuclear energy. And also the best and largest use of nuclear power is in France, unfortunately the way they did it smells like socialism in the USA so it is unlikely that we will emulate that. In any case there are still ways that we can change that do not need us to go back to the stone age. And you should be aware that that point of the proponents of change demanding that we get to the stone age era is also a climate change denier talking point. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2016, 11:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/xkcds-climate-change-comic/765786/57 "2016-09-13T23:06:36Z")
The link between climate change and humans is actually quite simple. We know that carbon dioxide in the atmosphere makes the planet warmer. We see this in the historical (and pre-historical) record for both, and we understand the mechanism by which this occurs. The amount we see in the historical record matches what we would predict from our knowledge of the mechanism. We know that we humans are releasing large amounts of carbon dioxide, that previously lay undisturbed in the ground for millions of years. We know how exactly how much we’re releasing. The amount we’re releasing exactly matches the amount by which the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is increasing, and the amount by which the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is increasing corresponds to the amount of temperature increase we’re actually seeing. ---
**Author:** ![Johnny\_Q](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/898d66/32.png) [@Johnny\_Q](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_Q)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2016, 11:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/xkcds-climate-change-comic/765786/58 "2016-09-13T23:08:55Z")
> [@Peter\_Morris](#): > > Rene Godenberry, the creator of Tar Strek. I thought Godenberry was Tom Bombadil’s wife. ---
**Author:** ![TroutMan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/troutman/32/6721_2.png) [@TroutMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TroutMan)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2016, 11:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/xkcds-climate-change-comic/765786/59 "2016-09-13T23:16:13Z")
> [@Johnny\_Q](#): > > I thought Godenberry was Tom Bombadil’s wife. How would she do any moralising then? She wouldn’t be able to get a word in edgewise with all the damn singing. ---
**Author:** ![Measure\_for\_Measure](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/measure_for_measure/32/557_2.png) [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2016, 11:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/xkcds-climate-change-comic/765786/60 "2016-09-13T23:32:41Z")
> [@Amateur\_Barbarian](#): > > If you look at a[longer term temperature chart](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vostok_Station), it shows spikes into +4C and more about every 100,000 years. The last time was… about 100,000 years ago. If [this is the chart](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vostok_Station#/media/File:Vostok_420ky_4curves_insolation.jpg) that you had in mind, I can’t see the basis for a critique of the claims by XKCD. Each increment in your chart is 10,000 years. The point of the XKCD comic was to contrast the slope of the recent 100 year change to the experience over the past 20,000 years. My eyes can’t resolve slopes over 0.07 millimeters on my monitor. (7 mm divided by 100=10,000/100). Those so-called spikes occurred over thousands of years. Or tens of thousands. I do, however, see a reasonably sharp spike within the last 20,000 years of the Vostok chart. Assuming is was stretched out correctly, it was fairly gradual by modern standards if we trust the accuracy of the XKCD presentation. I’m not familiar with the science in wolfpup’s post, but I can read a graph. **Chronos** seems to think that there are no records of such rapid temperature changes in the geologic record outside of catastrophic asteroid/supervolcano events. If you have proof to the contrary, I’d like to see it. > [@wolfpup](#): > > Actually, it’s your comment that is a bit selective and misleading. > > What you’re describing there are the well known glaciation cycles. One significant difference from the present situation is that those cycles are thought to be primarily due to orbital fluctuations called Milankovitch cycles, which also directly influence the carbon cycle and specifically carbon exchange with the oceans, and it takes thousands of years to create the kind of temperature increase that we’ve seen in just the last 50. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/xkcds-climate-change-comic/765786.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/xkcds-climate-change-comic/765786.md?page=4)