It is impossible to get any thing of fact into the overly thick skulls of these evil agenda driven maniacs.
Quote by Chris Folland of UK Meteorological Office: “The data don't matter. We're not basing our recommendations [for reductions in carbon dioxide emissions] upon the data. We're basing them upon the climate models.”
Quote by David Frame, climate modeler, Oxford University: “Rather than seeing models as describing literal truth, we ought to see them as convenient fictions which try to provide something useful.”
They would much rather deal in fantasies and fairy tales than reality. Besides there is no money in real science.
Quote by Martin Keeley, geology scientist: “Global warming is indeed a scam, perpetrated by scientists with vested interests, but in need of crash courses in geology, logic and the philosophy of science.”
Quote by Eduardo Tonni, paleontologist, Committee for Scientific Research, Argentina: “The [global warming] scaremongering has its justification in the fact that it is something that generates funds.”
As a sceptic I have read what we are told about CO2 converting photons into heat. I also understand that this is only one of a large number of processes that affect the earth's temperature. Hence, every time someone mentions CO2 and warming I know I am getting a very partial view of the science.
Interestingly, there are already 12 answers here and no-one has answered the question. Perhaps the warmists neither know of a point that the sceptics do not understand nor have any good arguments to present? Which is what I suspect - but I am open to ideas to the contrary.
I think most resident alarmists would most like us to understand that we are stupid, knuckle-dragging, anti-science, fundamentalist creationsist snake-handling Christians who need to just shut up and listen to them. Because they have a monoply on the truth. And we get our news from rush Limaugh and Fox News.
I know of one skeptic named Matt Ridley who would gladly change his mind if a well-versed warmist could address 10 points of contention.
Edit: Well then let's look at Mr. Ridley's first point in its entireity, and readers can decide for themselves if his questions are valid or not.
1. I need persuading that the urban heat island effect has been fully
purged from the surface temperature record. Satellites are showing less
warming than the surface thermometers, and there is evidence that
local warming of growing cities, and poor siting of thermometers, is still
contaminating the global record. I also need to be convinced that
the adjustments made by those who compile the global temperature
records are justified. Since 2008 alone, NASA has added about 0.1C of
warming to the trend by unexplained “adjustments” to old records.
It is not reassuring that one of the main surface temperature records
is produced by an extremist prepared to get himself arrested (James
Hansen).
Wilds_of_virginia
>>I think most resident alarmists would most like us to understand that we are stupid, knuckle-dragging, anti-science, fundamentalist creationsist snake-handling Christians who need to just shut up and listen to them. Because they have a monoply on the truth. And we get our news from rush Limaugh and Fox News.<<
As entertaining as that description is, the salient comment that highlights the scientific ignorance of the anti-AGW political position is, “Because they have a monoply on the truth.” The nature of truth is a philosophical issue. Deniers conflate concepts of truth to suit their political ends, almost always falling back on some subjective, idealized absolute truth. Scientific truth(s), on the other hand, are nothing more than generalizations based on empirical evidence that are arrived at through induction.
Your Dr. Riddley plays the same game. His first demand, “I need persuading that the urban heat island effect has been fully purged from the surface temperature record” fails to include the criteria he would accept – although whatever they are, they do not include the existing scientific criteria. The fact is that he like every Denier claims to know The Truth – and there in nothing in science or any field of human knowledge that can ever change it.
When you follow Wild's link, you find a paper entitled, "What It Would Take To Persuade Me That Current Climate Policy Makes Sense"
An interesting title, given that current climate policy is to do nothing. What would persuade me that current sense would be if there were a natural explanation for the warming. It sure isn't the Sun.
http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/gistemp...
What would we gain by belief. We gain acceptance in a exclusive club; a society if you will of like minded people. We will walk hand in hand knowing we are the saviors of our earth. We believers can smile at our knowledge that we are above everyone else. Oh wait, those are for the Hale Bopp cult. Never mind.
There is overwhelming scientific evidence from multiple countries, and support from the United Nations who have a team that just focuses on Global Warming. The Biggest thing for me to get across is the current measure of Carbon in the world, and It is measured in PPM (particles per minute). Currently the PPM is around 400ppm. Overwhelming evidence states that our world PPM needs to be at 350 to ensure the world wont have an irreversible damage because of global warming.
Lastly, if they need proof, tell them to take a trip to LA so they can see visually the smog ( an OZ layer that is ground level, highly toxic, under another term called.....DUN DUN DUN Green House GAS). Surprise, Global warming is closer than we think. For some if they cant see it, it doesn't exist. Too bad for them, they cant wait that long to figure it out.
most deniers will never change. The point is make sure they do not influence others with their lies. At some point, they will look ridiculous like flat earthers.
We are talking about belief?
How about; their god [1] does not have a hand on the thermostat and fries the children of parents who do not bow deep enough and/or tithe sufficiently to the god?
I wouldn't bother.
What is the post important thing that you would like global warming skeptics to know so they believe in global warming like the global warming scientists?
I'd tell that denier about how the planet's global temperature is skyrocketing and we are all about to burn up just because you like driving SUV's !!!
Oops --- never-mind.
You asked this question before. Science is still not a matter of belief. Although it is not hard to believe that it was not your favorite subject at school.
There is no gravity. The whole world sucks.
make them cut the yard at high noon.
