![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
telemann.livejournal.com posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
talkpolitics
This is a video clip from "Climate Denial Crock of the Week" puts to rest one of the canards by global warming deniers: that in the 1970s, scientists predicted a global ice age, and the idea of human based climate change due to increased levels of CO2, well that was a relatively recent idea hawked by Al Gore. As you will see, all of this is utter hogwash. Considering that key committees in the House of Representatives will likely be chaired by AGW denialists, the stakes in the misinformation game by the Right couldn't be higher. I think this is a critical step by scientists, and long overdue!
Popular Mechanics - 1953 / Dr. Gilbert Plass of John Hopkins University: article on CO2 causing global temperature increases.
Bell Telephone Science documentary (directed by Frank Capra) showing ramifications of global warming due to human caused CO2 increases.
President Johnson's scientific advisory report warned of significant temperature increases by the year 2000 due to CO2.
Today in an unprecedented move the American Geophysical Union, the country's largest association of climate scientists, "plans to announce that 700 climate scientists have agreed to speak out as experts on questions about global warming and the role of man-made air pollution. The still-evolving efforts reveal a shift among climate scientists, many of whom have traditionally stayed out of politics and avoided the news media. Many now say they are willing to go toe-to-toe with their critics, some of whom gained new power after the Republicans won control of the House in Tuesday's election."
Lord Christopher Monckton of Great Britain, global warming denialist extraordinaire.
John Abraham of St. Thomas University in Minnesota, will be assembling what's called a "fast response" team to rebut denialists. In May of this year, Abraham posted an extensive rebuttal to Lord Monckton's anti-global warming lectures, given around the world (an anti-version of Al Gore, so to speak). Lord Monckton has appeared on Fox News and Glenn Beck's evening show.
Abraham's rebuttal is lucid and compelling and shows in many instances Lord Monckton is outright misrepresenting information on many topics that are favorites to global denialists, including shrinking glacial ice sheets, rising water levels, are polar bear populations decreasing, the Medieval Warming period, Co2 levels, is Solar variance to blame for recent warming etc.
Re: Been here
Date: 9/11/10 05:16 (UTC)http://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php
It's kinda nifty, it addresses every denier myth and destroys them with facts.
Re: Been here
Date: 9/11/10 11:21 (UTC)He did a one second google search!
Re: Been here
Date: 9/11/10 16:13 (UTC)Re: Been here
Date: 23/11/10 20:21 (UTC)Re: Been here
Date: 23/11/10 20:22 (UTC)Re: Been here
Date: 23/11/10 20:41 (UTC)Re: Been here
Date: 24/11/10 01:35 (UTC)Such as telemann claiming that "puts to rest one of the canards by global warming deniers: that in the 1970s, scientists predicted a global ice age".
As I demonstrated, that's exactly what some scientists were predicting.
Hint: that's called evidence. Evidence that refutes claim made by others. As in not a straw man.
Re: Been here
Date: 24/11/10 04:04 (UTC)Denial ain't just a river.
Date: 24/11/10 18:19 (UTC)I posted sources that debunked your claim about global cooling in the 1970s being a myth manufactured by "denialists".
Keep waving your hands: you might just achieve flight!
Re: Denial ain't just a river.
Date: 24/11/10 18:23 (UTC)Re: Denial ain't just a river.
Date: 24/11/10 18:28 (UTC)Your pathetic performance here is, of course, one of the many reasons why replying to you is low on my list of priorities.
Re: Denial ain't just a river.
Date: 24/11/10 18:35 (UTC)Re: Denial ain't just a river.
Date: 24/11/10 19:03 (UTC)And don't worry, my grades in
economicslogic at Ohio State were all As. (This is what I get for responding right after posting about economics.)Any other tangents you'd like to shoot off on?
Re: Denial ain't just a river.
Date: 24/11/10 21:07 (UTC)And it sounds as though you need a brush-up class on logic, since you really don't understand the fallacy to begin with. It's common though, dear. You rush on down to the school and sign up. Hurry hurry hurry!
Re: Denial ain't just a river.
Date: 27/11/10 22:25 (UTC)Re: Been here
Date: 24/11/10 05:31 (UTC)http://www.skepticalscience.com/ice-age-predictions-in-1970s.htm
Re: Been here
Date: 24/11/10 18:13 (UTC)How many of them talked about carrots?
Failure to link to premise is failure.
Keep posting red herrings about "all" scientists or "consensus" and I'll keep noting that you haven't debunked anything I've said.
OP made a claim which I easily refuted (refudiated, even) and all you can do is post items which don't address that.
IOW: cool story. bro.
Now if it still isn't clear enough for you (and you will undoubtedly claim it is not) I'll quote your own source:
Which is exactly what I said.
Thanks for the back up!
Re: Been here
Date: 24/11/10 19:00 (UTC)Re: Been here
Date: 27/11/10 22:28 (UTC)Re: Been here
Date: 28/11/10 01:08 (UTC)