Climate Denial Crock of the Week

In the popular media, Youtube, and the blogosphere, you get an awful lot of compelling documentaries of why climate change is nonexistent/natural/a global conspiracy. You don’t get as many grassroots projects from the advocates, at least not as many as you’d expect given the scientific distribution on the theory.

I recently came across a fantastic video series by Peter Sinclair, an American journalist. Keep in mind our credibility spectrum – Mr Sinclair is only a professional individual – but it appears that he cites the professional scientific organizations at the top of the spectrum almost exclusively.

Each of his videos deals with a common objection to the mainstream scientific view on climate change. Here’s his most recent, and my favourite, which addresses the all-too-common-claim that “Global warming stopped in 1998.”

If you enjoyed that, here are links to all his videos to date. Watch whichever ones strike your fancy.

“The Antarctic isn’t warming, so the planet, overall, isn’t changing at all.”

“It’s cold. So there’s no climate change.”

“The Arctic ice is growing, not declining.”

“Global warming is caused by the sun.”

“Climate change is a natural, unstoppable, 1500-year cycle.”

“The scientists were all warning of an ice age in the 70s, so why should we trust them now?”

“The urban heat island effect is skewing the data.”

“Every other planet in our solar system is also warming, so we can’t be causing it.”

“But lots of scientists signed the Oregon Petition saying climate change was false!”

“It was warmer during the Medeival Warm Period.”

“Al Gore said the ocean was going to rise more than the IPCC did.”

“Temperature determines carbon dioxide level, not the other way around.”

“Global warming stopped in 1998.”

Have fun and spread it around to your friends.

Discover Magazine, June 2009

I just read the most recent (June 2009) issue of Discover magazine, which is not peer-revewied but generally writes about stuff that is. There was a fantastic article you all should read, entitled “The Big Heat”. It was an interview with three publishing climatologists – Robin BellBill Easterling, and Stephen Schneider (please, people, stop it with that seemingly scandolous quote of his) – and one publishing Earth scientist, Ken Caldeira.

The article covered common questions such as “is it natural?”, “what problems will it cause?”, and “what do we do about it?” in a more in-depth, cited fashion than your average middle-school science unit. They talk about things like D-O events, rate of warming, credibility, and risk management. Fascinating stuff. I danced around a little as I read it.

A small excerpt:

“When we entered into the computer all the various things that forced the climate to change, we were able to faithfully reproduce the temperature record of the past 100 years globally. When you take out the component of human-generated carbon dioxide, the models don’t work at all. There are all these people who say, “Well, what about the sun? Why don’t they think about solar variability?” Of course we think about the sun. The models think about all these things, but the models work only if you put all the components in, and one of the big components is us.” – Bill Easterling

I’d expect that Discover would be available at most libraries in North America. Definitely worth a read.

How it All Ends

For anyone who hasn’t yet heard of these video series –

Greg Craven is a high school teacher from the States who put together six hours of video explaining why we should act on climate change. Don’t be scared by the “six hour” thing – all his arguments are condensed into the first, 10-minute long video.

Still skeptical? Chances are, whatever you’re thinking of is covered in the other five hours and fifty minutes. Check out the rest of the videos here.