Twelve Cherry-Picked Climate Change Denial Myths

The only way to get our society to truly change is to
frighten people with the possibility of a catastrophe
.”
– emeritus professor Daniel Botkin

Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the
industrialized civilizations collapse?
Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about
?”
– Maurice Strong,
founder of the UN Environment Programme (UNEP)

We’ve got to ride this global warming issue.
Even if the theory of global warming is wrong,
we will be doing the right thing in terms of
economic and environmental policy.

– Timothy Wirth,
President of the UN Foundation

•••

‘Climate denier’ Lord Monckton surely couldn’t be citing ‘peer-reviewed’, ‘scientific’ or ’empirical government data’ in answer to these ‘cherry picked’ climate change myths ?!

Even so, he is ‘not a scientist’ and he is obviously being ‘paid-off by the fossil fuel industry’ so it doesn’t count.


From Lord Monckton :

Twelve Urban Myths of Climate Change

 

1. “Global warming is happening.”

No: According to the RSS satellite record, there has been none for 17 years 10 months.

 

2. “Warming is faster than we thought.”

No: In 1990 the climate models predicted that global warming would happen twice as fast as it has.

 

3. “There’s a 97 percent consensus.”

No: Only 0.5 percent of the authors of 11,944 scientific papers on climate and related topics over the past 21 years said they agreed that most of the warming since 1950 was man-made.

 

4. “Droughts are getting worse.”

No: A recent paper in the learned journals shows the fraction of the world’s land under drought has fallen for 30 years.

 

5. “Floods are getting worse.”

No: The U.N.’s panel has said in two recent reports that there has been no particular change in the frequency or severity of floods worldwide.

 

6. “Sea ice is melting.”

No: It has grown to a new record high in the Antarctic, though the Arctic icecap has been shrinking a little in summer.

 

7. “Sea level is rising dangerously.”

No: Some satellites show it as rising a little, while others show it as falling.

 

8. “Hurricanes are getting worse.”

No: Their combined frequency, severity and duration has been at or near the lowest in the 35-year satellite record.

 

9. “Global warming caused recent extreme weather.”

No: There has been no warming recently, so it cannot have caused any extreme weather in recent years.

 

10. “Global warming will reduce the number of redheads.”

No: This is one of many scare stories about imaginary effects of warmer weather.

 

11. “The ocean is acidifying.”

No: The ocean remains decidedly alkaline, and there cannot be much change in its acid-base balance because it is buffered by the basalt rocks in which it lies.

 

12. “It’s cheaper to act now, just in case.”

No: It is 10-100 times costlier to try to prevent global warming today than to let it happen and pay the cost of adapting to it the day after tomorrow.

(Climatism links added)

H/t to The Galileo Movement


See also : 


Prestigious German Research Centre Endorses “The League Of Deniers”


“I don’t have much patience for people who deny climate change”
– Barack Obama,
US President

“I hope there are no climate-change deniers in the Department of Interior.
– 
Sally Jewell, U.S. Interior Secretary

claimte-change-deniers-600x357

A common fallback position when losing an argument is to assault your adversary personally. Known as ad hominem, it involves “attacking an opponent’s motives or character rather than the policy or position they maintain.”

In climate science, those who employ this rhetorical tactic attack individuals who ask probing scientific questions. The attacks indicate that they know how inadequate their science is. It often works because of a deliberate campaign to exploit basic sensitivities: fear the sky is falling, guilt about not protecting the environment, guilt about the damage already done, fear and embarrassment of showing ignorance.

People who challenge the claims of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) are often labeled “global warming skeptics”. Skeptics do not deny that warming occurred in modern times, but, sensibly, questioned the cause. The IPCC said it was due to human production of CO2. This is driven by a political agenda, not science, so any opposition is considered troublesome and requires silencing.

The IPCC claim is an unproven hypothesis. Science advances by proposing hypotheses that other scientists challenge in their proper role as skeptics. The word skeptic has markedly different public and scientific connotation; negative for the former and positive for the latter. Scientists act as skeptics by trying to disprove the hypothesis. Global warming skeptics are acting appropriately. (Dr Tim Ball, WUWT)

•••

Pierre Gosselin at NoTricksZone has discovered a rather concerning example of a “denier” strike, endorsed by one of Germany’s most respected research centres, the prestigious Helmholtz Center Geesthacht

Prestigious Helmholtz Research Center Gutter-Dives…Promotes Sophomoric Attacks On Skeptics, Labelling Them “Deniers”

By P Gosselin on 20. February 2014

It’s worrisome enough that the German government itself recently issued a brochure singling out, naming, and defaming German and American climate science skeptics. Today we have one of Germany’s most prestigious science associations actively backing adolescent-level attacks on skeptics who have decided not to take part in collective climate hysteria.

This morning on Twitter I happened to come across the following tweet:

Climate-Service-Center-1

Helmholtz Center’s Climate Service Center displays its ugly ideological side in defaming skeptics as deniers. Click here to view defamatory video.

Inhofe, Morano, Michaels, Bachmann labeled “deniers”

The above tweet comes from the Climate Service Center, which provides a link to an intolerant video called “The League of Deniers“, which was produced by Kickstarter.com. In summary the video portrays skeptics as “deniers”, claims that ”the public is misinformed” and that skeptics’ words are “human foolishness”.

– Read on here.

Gosselin posts a series of basic climate questions that identify, not what sceptics deny, but rather what the promoters of CAGW continually fail and refuse to answer :

To help them understand why there are skeptics when it comes to climate science, below are some questions that us skeptics have been waiting 15 years to receive answers.

  1. Why has there been no global warming for 17 years?
  2. Why have 97% of the climate models failed to foresee this?
  3. Why has Antarctic sea ice been well above normal for more than 2 years?
  4. Why are northern hemispheric winters getting colder?
  5. What makes the present warm period any different from that of the Medieval warm period?
  6. Why is it that CO2 has been suddenly assumed to be the major climate factor and the rest like the sun and oceans
  7. If there is consensus on manmade climate change, then why is there so much controversy over it?
  8. Do you think that it’s not necessary to have skeptics in order for science to progress?

Perhaps instead of wasting taxpayer resources on sophomorically defaming and ridiculing those who legitimately ask questions, the Helmholtz Center ought to focus on providing some clear answers for the above questions for once.

Continue reading »

•••

UPDATE

Climate scientist Dr Roy Spencer has had enough…

Screen Shot 2014-02-21 at , February 21, 6.38.49 am

Yeah, somebody pushed my button.

When politicians and scientists started calling people like me “deniers”, they crossed the line. They are still doing it.

They indirectly equate (1) the skeptics’ view that global warming is not necessarily all manmade nor a serious problem, with (2) the denial that the Nazi’s extermination of millions of Jews ever happened.

Too many of us for too long have ignored the repulsive, extremist nature of the comparison. It’s time to push back.

I’m now going to start calling these people “global warming Nazis”.

The pseudo-scientific ramblings by their leaders have falsely warned of mass starvation, ecological collapse, agricultural collapse, overpopulation…all so that the masses would support their radical policies. Policies that would not voluntarily be supported by a majority of freedom-loving people.

They are just as guilty as the person who cries “fire!” in a crowded theater when no fire exists. Except they threaten the lives of millions of people in the process.

Like the Nazis, they advocate the supreme authority of the state (fascism), which in turn supports their scientific research to support their cause (in the 1930s, it was superiority of the white race).

Dissenting scientific views are now jack-booted through tactics like pressuring scientific journals to not publish papers with which they disagree…even getting journal editors to resign.

Like the Nazis, they are anti-capitalist. They are willing to sacrifice millions of lives of poor people at the altar of radical environmentalism, advocating expensive energy policies that increase poverty. And if there is a historically demonstrable threat to humanity, it is poverty.

Continue reading »

Time to push back against the global warming Nazis « Roy Spencer, PhD

Bravo Dr Spencer.

What has become of society, and science, when one of the core principles of the scientific method – the ability to question it – is met with “Nazi” totalitarian hostility?

The inference ‘eco-fascism’ not too far from the truth at all.

H/t to Andrew Bolt.

•••

UPDATE

Climate Service Center (CSC) has removed “The League Of Deniers” video link from their webpage.

However, their tweet endorsement still remains.

•••

UPDATE

via Jo Nova :

Climate Change Denial and the Holocaust allusion

Readers here will know that my problem with the term “denial” is with its misuse in English*. But the term “denier” is also used as a character slur to mark those who disagree in a science debate as being as odious as Holocaust deniers. The hope, apparently, is that dissenting views should be shunned and their arguments and evidence ignored. It’s a cheap debating tactic to shut down debate for those without evidence and reason, but it’s incredibly effective if you have the media on your side. What’s amazing is how many otherwise smart people don’t see through this babyish rhetorical stunt.

Last week Roy Spencer had had enough. In response to years of name-calling, he  protested at being called a “denier” and said

“Too many of us for too long have ignored the repulsive, extremist nature of the comparison. It’s time to push back.  I’m now going to start calling these people “global warming Nazis”.

Continue reading »

•••

See also : 

Related :

Climatism Trending :


Establishing Propaganda Is Vital For Climate Action

It doesn’t matter what is true,
it only matters what people believe is true
.”
– Paul Watson,
co-founder of Greenpeace

We’ve got to ride this global warming issue.
Even if the theory of global warming is wrong,
we will be doing the right thing in terms of
economic and environmental policy.

– Timothy Wirth,
President of the UN Foundation

No matter if the science of global warming is all phony…
climate change provides the greatest opportunity to
bring about justice and equality in the world
.”
– Christine Stewart,
former Canadian Minister of the Environment

JohnCookSkep190

(un)skeptical-science’s John Cook

In a recent article, Mike Hulme argued that the debate “needs to become more political, and less scientific”. We agree, because the scientific debate has moved on from the fundamentals – there is no scientific debate about the fact that the globe is warming from human greenhouse gas emissions. So we need to hammer out political solutions rather than “debating” well-established scientific facts. – John Cook

Establishing consensus is vital for climate action | The Conversation

•••

Memo to John Cook : There has been no atmospheric global warming, at all, over the past 17 years, despite 35% of all human CO2 emissions, since 1751, emitted over the same period.

No GLOBAL WARMING 17 YEARS 5 MONTHS

Satellites show no global warming for 17 years 5 months | Watts Up With That?

•••

Whilst Cook et al would prefer to talk politics to avoid the inconvenient global warming “Pause”, here are some well-established scientific facts …

Screen Shot 2014-02-09 at , February 9, 3.15.04 pm

Recent global-warming hiatus tied to equatorial Pacific surface cooling : Nature : Nature Publishing Group

Screen Shot 2014-02-09 at , February 9, 3.18.07 pm

Reconciling anthropogenic climate change with observed temperature 1998–2008 | PNAS

Screen Shot 2014-02-09 at , February 9, 3.20.49 pm

Retrospective prediction of the global warming slowdown in the past decade : Nature Climate Change

Screen Shot 2014-02-09 at , February 9, 3.24.00 pm

Overestimated global warming over the past 20 years : Nature Climate Change : Nature Publishing Group

 Screen Shot 2014-02-09 at , February 9, 3.32.58 pm

Climate change: The case of the missing heat : Nature News & Comment

•••
UPDATE
England et al.
Screen Shot 2014-02-15 at , February 15, 6.42.32 pm
Recent intensification of wind-driven circulation in the Pacific and the ongoing warming hiatus : Nature Climate Change : Nature Publishing Group

•••

“The Oceans Ate My Global Warming” :

With no rise in atmospheric temps over the past 17 years, the latest bluff in climate alarmism is that the ‘missing heat’ is hiding at the bottom of the oceans. However, the first globally accurate network of measurement buoys (3000+ ARGO satellite buoys), which descend to depths of 2,000 metres, have detected no significant increase in ocean heat since deployment in 2003.

Kevin Trenberth theorises that missing heat takes a dive into deep oceans. “The oceans can at times soak up a lot of heat. Some goes into the deep oceans where it can stay for centuries [and where lamentably, there are no reliable temperature measurements].  But heat absorbed closer to the surface can easily flow back into the air.” Yet sea surface temperatures and the upper heat content didn’t increase over the last decade by enough to account for the “missing heat” that those greenhouse gas emissions should have trapped in the Earth’s climate system but couldn’t be found. (via Forbes)

screen-shot-2013-09-06-at-september-6-1-13-12-pm

Upper Ocean Heat Content Anomaly – NOAA

screen-shot-2013-09-06-at-september-6-1-20-23-pm

Global Marine Argo Atlas

•••

UPDATE :

Another alarmist excuse for the 17+ year “pause” in Global Warming has been ‘scientifically’ assassinated …. by none other than the doyens of ‘Global Warming’ hysteria ~ NASA, who now admit that the “Missing (atmospheric) heat” is NOT “Hiding in the deep oceans” after all !

Oh dear…

Screen Shot 2014-11-16 at , November 16, 2.59.44 pm

NASA Study Finds Earth’s Ocean Abyss Has Not Warmed | NASA

More from former NASA Climate Scientist Dr Roy Spencer :

NASA: The Deep Ocean Hasn’t Warmed Since 2005 (but we’re all gonna die)

October 6th, 2014 by Roy W. Spencer, Ph. D.

While still claiming that the results do not cast doubt on climate change, a new NASA press release says that the global oceans below 2,000 meters depth haven’t warmed since 2005. This is the period that we have had the deep oceans reasonably well sampled with thousands of globally-distributed Argo floats.

The thing that annoys me about such press releases is the obligatory disclaimer (no doubt crafted so that “skeptics” don’t have a field day with the press release):

“Study coauthor Josh Willis of JPL said these findings do not throw suspicion on climate change itself.”

Such statements have the usual vagueness that allows the True Believers to interpret it any way they want.

Does it mean: “It doesn’t throw suspicion on Al Gore’s impending thermogeddon”?

Or does it mean: “It doesn’t throw suspicion on the fact that climate has always changed, and always will change, with or without the help of humans”?

Or maybe something in between?

You see, as long as the IPCC gets away with basing alarmist rhetoric upon factually benign statements, like over half of the warming since the 1950s has been human induced (yawn), the global warming debate will remain dominated by extremists.

And this allows politicians to get away with saying whatever they want. Scientists are so vague that their statements can be used in a wide variety of ways that help the politician.

NASA: The Deep Ocean Hasn’t Warmed Since 2005 (but we’re all gonna die) « Roy Spencer, PhD

•••

From the well-established scientific fact that there has been no global warming, at all, for the past 17 years, it’s not hard to see why Cook and the global warming climate change cult believe the debate “needs to become more political, and less scientific”.

Global Warming was never about ‘science‘. It was always about Power, Money and Overpopulation.

•••

A little humour on Cooky …

•••

UPDATE

No global warming for 17 years, 6 months

Posted on WUWT March 4, 2014 by 
Seventeen and a half years. Not a flicker of global warming. The RSS satellite record, the first of the five global-temperature datasets to report its February value, shows a zero trend for an impressive 210 months. Miss Brevis, send a postcard to Mr Gore:
clip_image002_thumb
•••
UPDATE
Make that 18 years and 4 months, or now a “pause” of global warming lasting for more than half the entire satellite record:
GW Pause 18 years 4 months
El Niño or ñot, the Pause lengthens again | Watts Up With That?
•••
UPDATE
The latest “peer-reviewed” global warming “pause” update from Nature journal:
Screen Shot 2015-04-24 at , April 24, 7.48.56 am
Decadal modulation of global surface temperature by internal climate variability : Nature Climate Change : Nature Publishing Group
•••
UPDATE
via Andrew Bolt :

Warmists who denied the pause now claim to explain it

•••
See Also :

John Cook’s Bogus “97%” Climate Consensus Survey related :

John Cook Misc. :

Climatism Related :


Reality Is A Denier

Climatism comment :

  • Satellite temperature records (via wood for trees) on six different data sets show that there has been no atmospheric global warming since 1998 or any statistically-significant warming for between 18 and 23 years. A distinct lack of any warming evident, despite a dramatic rise in industrial greenhouse gas emissions over the same period:

SIX DIFFERENT DATA SETS - GLOBAL TEMP

WoodForTrees.org 

Peer-Reviewed studies that confirm the lack of any recent global warming:

Real Science

I saw an interesting comment on a discussion forum the other day

“Wood for trees is a well known denier site”

Wood for Trees is a graphing site which allows you to plot out temperature data sets, among other things. Apparently actual data is biased towards deniers, which gives the site a bad reputation among alarmists.

View original post


How to Cure a Climate Change Denier

Watts Up With That?

81B3RbTSszL._SL1500_[1]Here is a book with a twist – an eco gone rogue and self modified into a climate change “denier”. His experience parallels many, actually, including some of mine (though I’d never join Greenpeace, UPDATE: and now after having read his Kindle book, I’ll point out that I believe that CO2 has some effect, but far less than has been claimed, especially where feedbacks operate) – Anthony

From the description:

Paul Caruso once lived in an off-grid eco-community, grew much of his own food and was an active member of Greenpeace. However, over the past few years he has lost his faith in human induced climate change and become a denier!

He doesn’t really deny that the climate is changing – he has just come to the conclusion that it is natural variation.

View original post 93 more words