Questions from a global warming skeptic
Dan Sherrier
Do you believe that mankind is wrecking the planet’s climate? If so, I have some questions for you.
Let’s put the comments section to good use. Below are numerous questions relating to anthropogenic global warming (AGW). Please pick whichever one(s) you care to address, and have at it. Remember, if you’re asserting we need to make drastic changes to our lifestyles, the burden of proof is on you.

Make your case, please.
The questions:
1.) If skeptics point to a colder winter or mild summer as evidence against AGW, then believers usually say they’re confusing climate with weather. And yes, climate and weather–while related–are not synonyms. But why is it okay for believers to point to certain weather events (such as the recent snowstorms across America) as evidence to support the AGW theory? Or to say that 2009 was the fifth warmest year on record, as if a single year can represent a climate trend?
2.) The U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has admitted to several errors lately. Among them is a claim about Himalayan glaciers melting by 2035–a claim that originated from magazine interviews rather than peer-reviewed studies. While a few mistakes in a report are understandable, this goes beyond an honest mathematical error or typo. How does a mistake of this magnitude not hurt the IPCC’s credibility?
3.) Why does expressing skepticism about science make someone “anti-science”?
4.) Some scientists say higher temperatures follow increased carbon, while others say increased carbon follows higher temperatures. Are there scientists out there on both sides who can summarize their respective cases?
5.) So let’s say, hypothetically, that the U.S. government takes some action to combat AGW. What good would this do if other countries don’t take action? How do you propose getting every single industrialized nation in the world onto the same page? Are any of you hoping for some sort of global government to impose regulations relating to this issue?
6.) How can the science on something as complex as the Earth’s entire atmosphere ever be “settled” beyond all doubt? How can we account for every single factor that might play a role?
7.) Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders recently compared AGW skeptics to those who doubted the danger of the Nazis in the 1930s. Is this an appropriate tactic, and why?
8.) Climate Research Unit director Phil Jones said in a BBC interview that there has been no statistically significant warming or cooling since 1995. Thoughts?
9.) In the same interview, Jones is quoted as saying, “It would be supposition on my behalf to know whether all scientists who say the debate is over are saying that for the same reason. I don’t believe the vast majority of climate scientists think this.” Thoughts? Particularly from those among you who claim the science is settled?
10.) How reliable is temperature data from centuries and millennia past, and why?
11.) However the climate might change over time, isn’t it possible for mankind to adapt to changes along the way? And why is climate change necessarily a bad thing?
12.) Please, tell me your worst fears about AGW.
13.) Without AGW, what would a typical winter and summer look like in your area compared to what you’ve experienced in recent years?
14.) Is global population size a factor related to AGW? If so, how should the world address it?
15.) If we were to combat AGW properly, what changes does the world need to make? What’s the best way to address the issue? How do we ensure carbon emissions are cut?
Please discuss. And please be polite.
No one will take on Obama, and the Washington establishment, like Newt Gingrich
Fantastic: Obama would like to replicate Detroit’s foibles elsewhere
New York Times scandalized as NYPD is trained on Muslim-perpetrated violence
Detroit boldly choosing to crackdown on the innocent
South Carolina stopped Romney. For now
Cartoon: Down and out
In which I praise Mitt (but explain why I won’t vote for him)
Bernero the gambler sells Main Street for a shot at the slots
The Emergency Financial Manager law is undemocratic, but opponents need an alternative to guard against local fiscal calamities
Memo to Snyder: Don’t stop the radical reforms now!
A Tiger named AL
A story of global warming
Once upon a time, thousands of years ago there was clan of cavemen. The whole clan lived together in a cave and spent all their available hours hunting and gathering to keep from starving.
On day, while out hunting and gathering on his own, one of the clan members, Al, came across some strange tracks at the edge of the clan’s hunting area.. He wasn’t sure what they were from but they seamed really BIG. Young Al thought about it for awhile and decided that these tracks could be from the dreaded Saber toothed tiger.
Al had never actually seen a saber toothed tiger nor had he ever seen their tracks. But, thought Al, what else could the tracks be from?
Al rushed back to the clan cave to tell the others of what he had discovered. To young Al’s surprise most of the clan didn’t seem too concerned. Al said “ we need to take precautions to keep the saber toothed tiger from killing us” “ We need to build a high fence around our camp to keep the tiger out.”
To this the clan elders said “ Sorry Al, we don’t have time to stop hunting and gathering to build a fence. We have to hunt and gather every waking hour just to keep alive. We don’t have time to waste on fences to keep out a tiger that probably doesn’t even exist”.
“ But”, Cried Al” I saw the tracks, there may even be lots of saber toothed tigers about . I can’t be sure how many tracks I saw”
The clan elders sat young Al down and tried to explain things to him.
“First”, they said, “ You don’t know what those tracks were from. Could be from a big fluffy dog named Rex. Second, nobody around here has ever even seen a saber toothed tiger. We don’t even know if they still exist. Thirdly, Even if they do exist, we don’t know that they would hurt us. Fourthly, Even if all you said was true, we don’t know that a fence would keep the tiger out.”
“ Tell you what, You go out and get some really good solid information and we will re-visit the issue”
Well, young Al didn’t like that response. He vowed to do whatever he could to save his clan. Al went back and took a second look at the tracks he had found. The tracks had been trampled over by other animals and were hard to distinguish. Now it seemed to him there were many more tracks than he first thought. Maybe the tracks of a HUNDRED tigers. He also saw something that looked like a spot of blood. Probably from an eaten member of a neighboring clan. Also, he was able to calculate that the tiger was at least 10 feet tall. So now he had his proof. There were over a hundred tigers. They were ten feet tall and they loved to eat cave dwellers.
“ Now they will have to believe me and build that fence.” Thought Al.
When young Al went to the clan elders and explained of his very scientific findings he was very surprised that they still refused to stop hunting and gathering and build a fence.
When Al came back the next day and told the elders that he was now sure that there were a THOUSAND tigers and that they were 25 feet tall they still weren’t convinced. In fact they seemed even less convinced.
That’s when he knew what he had to do. He packed his bags and headed to Copenhagen. If those stupid clan elders wouldn’t believe him, He’d talk directly to Obama. That will get some action. Maybe even a few hundred million of those new paper dollars he keeps hearing about. Al wasn’t going to let no tiger cause any GORE in his cave.
Hey, Al thought as he headed for his private jet, He would need a last name when he got to Copenhagen. Maybe that would make a good last name, “Tiger”, He would be: “ Al Tiger” That would be a COOL name.
I’m not going to pretend to be knowledgeable in all the formulas supporting or not supporting global warming, but pictures like these past/morecurrant shot are sure concerning.
http://www.livescience.com/php/multimedia/imagegallery/igviewer.php?gid=42
I’m pretty sure if the day comes when everyone totally agrees that global warming is occurring that it’s going to be too late to reverse the trend.
This is continued from previous post
6. The premise here is that we know enough!
Science should never be settled if it was then the discoveries of Galileo would not have come about, or any list of thousands of Scientist that question what was known vs what was unknown. Science is about asking question, coming up with answers,and questioning the answers. The study of Climate is very new, and our knowledge of even just localized weather is still only scratching the surface, trying to understand something as large of scale as Global Climate past, present and future, is on a scale hard to comprehend. Even if CO2 emissions from all cars and industries was eliminated there is no way to truly know how the planet would respond, how does that effect plant life, the oceans, etc.. do we create a new problem with our solution? to many variables to know with absolute certainty.
This does not mean that we can not do anything or should not do anything but caution and moving with out jumping to conclusions would be wise.
7. This is a fear and shame tactic seeking an emotional response, not a scientific or rational one.
8. I lot of the projections are based in computer simulations, what a computer model says is going to happen does not always happen. While 15 years do not prove there is no AGW, it does point out that the models that are predicting it may have some flaws.
9. pass ?
10. Even if we concede the reliability of the data how to interpret the data can still be a problem. If you have a particularly hot or could century or two, will you know all the factors, Solar activity, volcanic, deforestation to fires or other factors that could impact temperature. Raw temperature data is not enough, and how to know all other variables contributing to that data gets more and more difficult the further back you go.
11. It is assumed that the impact of AGW will be negative, but this is somewhat dishonest, there will be both negative and positive impacts, it depends on where you are. Northern Canada and Russia could be come lush farm lands while other areas become deserts. Mankind has always adapted to to changing environment and climate. Even if it was not man-made the climate has changed before, and in those periods man adapted to the circumstances. Migrations of people, and development of countries has often be because of changes. Humanity coming to a catastrophic end would be unlikely. In fact if you want to respond to a changing environment perhaps we should be looking at how to create homes underwater, how to build cities and buildings that can resist hurricanes and tornadoes. How to store and grow things in desert environments, and come up with alternatives if things go the way predicted. Because even if you believe in AGW, there is no guarantee that any carbon police will stop it from happening, there are some that believe we are past the point of no-return. If so policies, and plans to help us adapt may be the only solution.
12- 15. I will not answer since it would be purely speculative and I have already address most of these in the answers above.
These are some good questions, I will be interested to see how others answer them, although I am afraid, instead of well thought out answers there will be a lot of attacking instead of answering.
I don’t have time to answer all the points, but I will say that:
Phil Jones didn’t say there wasn’t warming that was statistically significant, he said that the period of time wasn’t statistically significant (95% confidence). The amount of warming was significant, but he can’t prove at 95% confidence that it wasn’t just an anomaly. On the other hand, he has longer data sets which ARE statistically significant that actually include some of the last 10 years!
This is so typical. Global warming skepticism has become as dishonest as creationism, employing many of the same tactics. It’s why I threw my denier hat in the fire. I got tired of looking denial claims up only to find I was duped by the deniers.
Here is exactly what Dr Jones said: ( interview with BBC)
B – Do you agree that from 1995 to the present there has been no statistically-significant global warming
Yes, but only just. I also calculated the trend for the period 1995 to 2009. This trend (0.12C per decade) is positive, but not significant at the 95% significance level. The positive trend is quite close to the significance level. Achieving statistical significance in scientific terms is much more likely for longer periods, and much less likely for shorter periods.
Here is exactly what Phil jones told the BBC on Feb 13 2010:
B – Do you agree that from 1995 to the present there has been no statistically-significant global warming
Yes, but only just. I also calculated the trend for the period 1995 to 2009. This trend (0.12C per decade) is positive, but not significant at the 95% significance level. The positive trend is quite close to the significance level. Achieving statistical significance in scientific terms is much more likely for longer periods, and much less likely for shorter periods.
Two very different planets in two different galaxies: Party Planet and Yoga Planet. Party Planet overpopulated and depleted it’s natural resources and had to spread out to deplete other planets’ resources. Yoga planet lived in harmony with nature. Both planet’s sun went supernova. Yoga Planet had no survivors. Party Planet’s decendents are still partying!
Think of the future: throw a party!
In response to John (above) – the sun has enough fuel to last for 5 million years. If we deplete all the earth’s resources, most of us will be long gone before that, not to mention the resources wars that could distract us from investment in space technology. Oh, and going out into space requires a LOT of oil – we might want to save some resources for that…
Anyway, the people on Yoga Planet can still party, and become astrophysicists!
Hey! Thanks a lot…
Hi, Gald I came across your post. Much thanks
i think that global warming could slow down in the future due to the steps that we are doing:`~
global warming is a disaster that we should avoid at all cost but i am afraid that we are too late already *
To many people in a dustbin means there not much room in side
fertig parkett
Interesting website, i read it but i still have a few questions. shoot me an email and we will talk more becasue i may have an interesting idea for you.
The positive trend is quite close to the significance level. Achieving statistical significance in scientific terms is much more likely for longer periods, and much less likely for shorter periods.
The next time I learn a weblog, I hope that it doesnt disappoint me as a lot as this one. I mean, I know it was my option to learn, however I truly thought youd have something attention-grabbing to say. All I hear is a bunch of whining about one thing that you could repair in case you werent too busy searching for attention.
Beautiful plus precise without a doubt. I such as the content concept in page. Also the several options regarding blog in addition to full-width webpages. Looks like that is a great set for youth.
A significant fine posting. When i spotted a webpage that has a report specifically exactly like this place a couple of hours earlier. This post is each week mature so I recon they’ve got simply just burned together with eddited it. I am not saying accusing people connected with plagiarism it can be simply basically notice that it’s. I won’t can recall the url, apologies (era thing)
I such as the content concept in page. Also the several options regarding blog in addition to full width webpages. Looks like that is a great set for youth.
Once upon a time, thousands of years ago there was clan of cavemen. The whole clan lived together in a cave and spent all their available hours hunting and gathering to keep from starving.