More on Fakegate!

[badhatharry]

So nice of you to stop by. I thought you were done with all of this. You are such a silly woman with your silly insults.

I actually read this article earlier this morning.

The threat of climate change is an increasingly important environmental issue for the globe

So here we have an opening sentence which warns us about a threat. That's the kind of stuff that really speaks to you, eh? And the threat is increasingly important not only to this guy and you too, probably but to the globe. He makes a definitive statement thinking that absolutely everyone will agree with him. I'm guessing everyone he knows is just like you. Bad start.

Then the fellow tells us that he has trouble accessing skeptics' views because they are scattered over the internet. Geez! If I knew he was having trouble I would have suggested a Google search. Not only that, but in the sidebar of every skeptic site is a list of all kinds of climate sites of all stripes.

This guy is not interested in addressing skeptics' arguments or even learning what they are. Someone told him he could make fast work of those silly guys who wrote that silly letter to the WSJ. His effort was pretty pathetic and what the heck are you doing offering an economist's view? I thought only real live certified climate scientists were allowed to weigh in.

Here are his questions:

• Is the planet in fact warming?
• Are human influences an important contributor to warming?
• Is carbon dioxide a pollutant?
• Are we seeing a regime of fear for skeptical climate scientists?
• Are the views of mainstream climate scientists driven primarily by the desire for financial gain?
• Is it true that more carbon dioxide and additional warming will be beneficial?

1) Yes and the 16 scientist article doesn't say that the planet (climate?) isn't warming. It says that the climate hasn't warmed in 15 years. And do you know how much it has warmed in the last 150 years? 1 degree C.

Since that didn't seem alarming enough, Mann, et al postulated climate sensitivity which says that once CO2 reaches a tipping point the climate will warm exponentially. Since the emission of CO2 is growing larger and significant warming hasn't occured, they now say the warming is hiding in the ocean.

2) It depends on what you call important. Some, maybe even most, skeptics say that there are human influences on the climate. But those influences are not always in the form of CO2. They come in the form of aerosols and land use, to name two.

3) Here's the definition of a pollutant...

“any air pollution agent or combination of such agents, including any physical, chemical, biological, radioactive…substance or matter which is emitted into or otherwise enters the ambient air.”

So pretty much everything, including your perfume, is a pollutant.

4) What is a regime of fear? This is what the 16 said:

Although the number of publicly dissenting scientists is growing, many young scientists furtively say that while they also have serious doubts about the global-warming message, they are afraid to speak up for fear of not being promoted—or worse….

This guy is being hyberbolic for effect. This is not a serious effort to critique the article by the 16.

5) Who the heck knows?...probably. Billions of dollars are quite enticing. The Eisenhower video speaks to that. And Dr. Gleick's latest escapade is telling.

6) Maybe, if it happens. The climate has changed many times before without the influence of evil human beings. What makes us think we can stop it? Pure foolishness.