• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

How Silly is Climate Change Denial?

Forums New posts
Paleontologist said:
So why are we still arguing with boys?
Click to expand...

Because of this:

Pause in Global Warming Comes Served With Unwelcome Side Dishes (Op-Ed) - Yahoo News

And I'm a grown man, not a boy. When you resort to name-calling it pretty much means you lost.

Right now there are pro-AGW scientists writing all kinds of articles trying to excuse this away and most of them are contradicting each other. The truth will have to wait for several more years for people to fully realize the earth is indeed in a cooling period, something which the pro-AGW, claimed would never happen and did not predict.
 
Last edited:
I think you should read up on Google Scholar. The info is there, but only if you actually want to know what scientists have to say.
 
I think right now most of us living in the western half of the U.S. would just settle for a return to something like normal rainfall patterns. The west is heading for a drought of epic proportions. We don't expect the kind of predictable (if they even still are) rainfall patterns common to areas east of the Mississippi. But the long term trend is quite worrying.
 
Myself said:
I think you should read up on Google Scholar. The info is there, but only if you actually want to know what scientists have to say.
Click to expand...

I know what scientists say. I know that from what little surveys there are that only a little over half of scientists believe in AGW. I know that the 97% figure is a myth and it just gets repeated over and over again, all the way up to NASA and Obama. Doesn't make it right. And it's not right.
 
One of the most common things we hear from the AGW deniers is its not man made its part of a natural cycle.
Every single prediction about the effects of global warming can play out, and they will simply say "oh thats part of the natural cycle, nothing we could have done about that"

Which is why its important to drill down and identify the root cause ,human overpopulation coupled with our addiction to the stuff we consume.

The species exctinction rate is not natural
The decimation of the oceans fish stocks is not natural
The deforestation rate is not natural
The aquifer depletion rates are not natural
The unprecidented loss of biodiversity is not natural
The pollution of the rivers and oceans, with islands of plastic waste is not natural
The air quality or rather lack of it in cities like beijing is not natural

Stripping the biosphere of renewable resources faster than they can renew, is the very posterchild of "not natural"

On the balance of the evidence, its not unreasonable to conclude the warming is not natural either

The study, by McGill University physics professor Shaun Lovejoy, represents a new approach to the question of whether global warming in the industrial era has been caused largely by man-made emissions from the burning of fossil fuels.

Rather than using complex computer models to estimate the effects of greenhouse-gas emissions, Lovejoy examines historical data to assess the competing hypothesis: that warming over the past century is due to natural long-term variations in temperature.

"This study will be a blow to any remaining climate-change deniers," Lovejoy said.

"Their two most convincing arguments - that the warming is natural in origin, and that the computer models are wrong - are either directly contradicted by this analysis, or simply do not apply to it," he said.

Lovejoy's study applies statistical methodology to determine the probability that global warming since 1880 is due to natural variability.

His conclusion: the natural-warming hypothesis may be ruled out "with confidence levels great than 99 percent, and most likely greater than 99.9 percent."
Click to expand...

Global warming is not due to natural factors, says expert

We can address and solve the whole lot by addressing and solving the root cause

Seems a more sensible more proactive way to go, as opposed to simply saying its natural there is nothing we can do about that and doing just that, nothing.
 
The fingerprints.......

Fundamental physics and global climate models both make testable predictions as to how the global climate should change in response to anthropogenic warming. Almost universally, empirical observations confirm that these 'fingerprints' of anthropogenic global warming are present.

There many "fingerprints" of human-caused global warming. For example, as the Earth's surface and lower atmosphere have been warming, the upper atmosphere has been cooling. There are not many mechanisms which can explain these observations, but they are precisely what we would expect to see from human-caused global warming. As the concentration of greenhouse gases in the lower atmosphere increases, they effectively trap more and more heat in this lower layer, causing it to warm and causing the layers above to cool. Another human "fingerprint" is the higher rate of warming at night than during the day. This is because at night, when the surface is cooler and not being bombarded by solar energy, the increased amount of greenhouse gases are able to make more of a difference in the surface temperature.

The human fingerprint in global warming

Given we can see our grubby fingerprints all over the biosphere, in the measurable damage and degradation on multiple levels, all undeniably unnatural. Its no surprise our prints are on warming as well
 
Interesting phrases always being repeated - like 'Our climate is obviously changing; it has always been changing.' The picture of NYC basically underwater is a very realistic worse-case scenario depiction.

Fight War Not Climate Change: House GOP Tells Commie Pentagon To Forget About All That "Global Warming" Nonsense
Fight War Not Climate Change: House GOP Tells Commie Pentagon To Forget About All That "Global Warming" Nonsense | Common Dreams

Text: As even our historically less-than-progressive military increasingly identifies climate change as a threat to national security, House Republicans in their infinite wisdom last week passed a bill blocking funding for any Pentagon program that tries to do anything about saving the planet that pretty much everyone at this point agrees is in danger. Because climate change is just a "political hot item of the day" that "has nothing to do with winning battles" and "is it wise to continue to violently disrupt a culture which is fueled by tradition and a fierce warrior ethos by forcing them to constantly adjust to the popular political trends of the day?" when anyway it was Democrats who "snuck some language into the National Defense Authorization Act which got our military considering the 'threat' of climate change" even though "the link between extreme weather and global warming is (a) very shaky foundation upon which to reshape America's defense strategy" and really we need to free up the military to "concentrate on addressing real man-made threats to our national independence…a mission they can actually do something about!" Noting "the flat earth society is at it again," critics in the House called the bill "science denial at its worst." Hopefully, it will fail in the Senate. Then again, maybe it won't.

"Our climate is obviously changing; it has always been changing. With all the unrest around the global [sic], why should Congress divert funds from the mission of our military and national security to support a political ideology. This amendment will ensure we maximize our military might without diverting funds for a politically motivated agenda." - Amendment sponsor and incorrigible idiot Rep. David McKinley (R-WV).
 
I have long been an admirer of Thom Hartmann's thinking, ever since in 2005 I came across his seminal work - The Last Hours of Ancient Sunlight: Revised and Updated: The Fate of the World and What We Can Do Before It's Too Late - though I read it before it was revised and updated. Hartmann was talking about everything we are now talking about long before it was well-known - he was one of the first voices to assemble the ideas.

Amazon Blurb: "While everything appears to be collapsing around us -- ecodamage, genetic engineering, virulent diseases, the end of cheap oil, water shortages, global famine, wars -- we can still do something about it and create a world that will work for us and for our children’s children. The inspiration for Leonardo DiCaprio’s web movie Global Warning, The Last Hours of Ancient Sunlight details what is happening to our planet, the reasons for our culture’s blind behavior, and how we can fix the problem. Thom Hartmann’s comprehensive book, originally published in 1998, has become one of the fundamental handbooks of the environmental activist movement. Now, with fresh, updated material and a focus on political activism and its effect on corporate behavior,The Last Hours of Ancient Sunlight helps us understand--and heal--our relationship to the world, to each other, and to our natural resources."

Anyway, I have just come across this title by Hartmann. I haven't read it but it seems to cover much of what we are discussing here on this thread - The Last Hours of Humanity: Warming the World to Extinction -

Amazon Blurb: "Humanity, as we know it, is on the verge of extinction. There's a common thread to every single mass extinction in our planet's history. It's global warming. From the Permian Mass Extinction 250 million years ago that killed off 95% of all life on Earth to the K/T mass extinction 65 million years ago that killed off the dinosaurs, all were brought about by a sudden warming of the planet. New research shows that once that warming hits a tipping point of 5-6 degrees Celsius, it triggers a cataclysmic melting of sea ice and the release of noxious methane gasses stored deep in the oceans around the world and below the permafrost in the Arctic, which further accelerates the warming of the planet to temperatures unsuitable to life. This book, The Last Hours of Humanity, goes where far too few researchers have been willing to go, which is addressing global warming not as an economic or political problem, but as a geological problem that threatens the survival of every living thing on the planet, including us humans. By bringing together climate scientists, geologists, and cutting edge research too often left out of the global warming debate, the Last Hours of Humanity exposes the dangerous future of planet Earth, and what we humans have to do right now to save our species."
 
Last edited:
History has always clearly shown that Climate Change, even cataclysmic Climate Change, has absolutely NOTHING to do with mankind's effect upon nature itself. How stupid is that? We are contained by nature. It's a living mechanism. If it found us to be a threat, we would be eliminated naturally. This is a self governing eco system. Ask the Mastodons that died out in the last Ice Age.

Climate Change is real. It ALWAYS has been. It's just like mankind, the self important twit that it is, to egotistically place itself at the center of something it's contained by. Oh how we would like to believe that this universe revolves around us, just for us. Is it ANY wonder why the anti authoritarian materialists believe that mankind created God?

Stop this insane foolishness and start focusing on things that matter. Like UFOs. Thank you.
 
Jeff Davis said:
History has always clearly shown that Climate Change, even cataclysmic Climate Change, has absolutely NOTHING to do with mankind's effect upon nature itself. How stupid is that? We are contained by nature. It's a living mechanism. If it found us to be a threat, we would be eliminated naturally. This is a self governing eco system. Ask the Mastodons that died out in the last Ice Age.

Climate Change is real. It ALWAYS has been. It's just like mankind, the self important twit that it is, to egotistically place itself at the center of something it's contained by. Oh how we would like to believe that this universe revolves around us, just for us. Is it ANY wonder why the anti authoritarian materialists believe that mankind created God?

Stop this insane foolishness and start focusing on things that matter. Like UFOs. Thank you.
Click to expand...

This is not the argument. Yes, there has always been climate change - that is not the issue - and has not been the debating point. The argument is that this time around, the evidence is that humans are contributing to the Global Warming - that humanity's activities have started the Global Warming snowball rolling this time around for the first time in the earth's history of climate change. This has been addressed in the course of the thread. The evidence is persuasive that humanity's activity has been the impetus for starting up what is a climate change before it's time sequence. (The warmings have a natural rhythm in a geological sense - and the current events are 'before time', happening before expected to occur).

As for this other point - that humanity is being egotistical, thinking it is impacting something it is 'contained' by - it is well known and observed that living beings do in fact change the environment they are 'contained by' all the time. Humans have done it routinely across the centuries wherever they live - even at the simple level of nomadic tribesman. We are human so we are able to observe and reflect on our impact - this is of course unique among the animal world. However, animals effect changes - as do plants - though they are unable to articulate anything because they do not self-consciously observe themselves. But living beings do effect change - even though they are 'contained' by what they change (nature).
 
Gene Steinberg said:
Thom Hartmann actually appeared on The Paracast back in 2006:

November 5, 2006 — Linda Zimmerman and Thom Hartmann
Click to expand...

I am enjoying Linda Zimmerman's section (which is the first section of the show). Fascinating about the lawsuit regarding selling a haunted house. It sounds to me like she is the inspiration for the show 'Ghost Hunters' on cable. (I think that's what it's called - haven't watched it in quite a while).

Regarding Rockland County NY (where Zimmerman does much of her investigation - in the Hudson Valley) - it was in Rockland County that I had my ghost experience - I related it here on the forum. Interesting.
 
Gene Steinberg said:
Thom Hartmann actually appeared on The Paracast back in 2006:

November 5, 2006 — Linda Zimmerman and Thom Hartmann
Click to expand...

At about 1:00:00 (or 50:00:00) Thom Hartmann begins (though I am glad I listened to Linda Zimmerman - she was very grounded - and fun). Hartmann begins with his famous observations around population/food/water - and that people are effectively 'eating oil'. Mike - you would find this interview interesting vis-a-vis population.
 
Back
Top