"How to convince a climate skeptic he’s wrong"

[winsor 236]

kallend

*** CO2 levels are rising and they have risen in the past to higher levels and we are still here

"Still here"? Were we here at those times in the past when they were at higher levels? Did our civilization's infrastructure exist and survive at those times?

Phone service was much worse in the Mesozoic Era.

[kallend 2,148]

rushmc

****** CO2 levels are rising and they have risen in the past to higher levels and we are still here

"Still here"? Were we here at those times in the past when they were at higher levels? Did our civilization's infrastructure exist and survive at those times?

Actually, thanks for making my point
Contrary to the opinion of Sen. Inhofe (R-OK), the Earth is actually much older than 6,000 years and humans did not co-exist with dinosaurs.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[rushmc 23]

kallend

********* CO2 levels are rising and they have risen in the past to higher levels and we are still here

"Still here"? Were we here at those times in the past when they were at higher levels? Did our civilization's infrastructure exist and survive at those times?

Actually, thanks for making my point
Contrary to the opinion of Sen. Inhofe (R-OK), the Earth is actually much older than 6,000 years and humans did not co-exist with dinosaurs.

Ah


Ok


thanks for playing?

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[brenthutch 444]

lawrocket

***I thought I was mistaken once, but I was wrong.

It's a logarithm. Logs are asimptotal. Going from 400 to 800 ppm has the same effect as going from 600 to 1200 ppm. Point is it ain't saturated. It is no use overplaying your hand.

Ok I am guilty of being ahead of the curve; a position I am quite comfortable/familiar with.

[normiss 896]

Not what's up with that yet some think melting glaciers might help break the ice with the deniers.

[rushmc 23]

normiss

Not what's up with that yet some think melting glaciers might help break the ice with the deniers.

Why?

the climate does change
That is a fact
Do you expect these glaciers to exist forever?
It is not normal that they are melting?

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[billvon 3,116]

>the climate does change That is a fact

From less than two weeks ago:

==============
>>Remember back when you admitted the planet was warming?

>At that time all I had to go on was the lies those who belive as you do provided
>things change
==============

So now you "believe the lies" again. You change your positions faster than an anti-vaxxer facing re-election.

Meanwhile back in Antarctica:

====================
Antarctica May Have Experienced Its Hottest Day Ever
Published Apr 2 2015 07:13 AM EDTs.
www.weather.com

Antarctica may have recorded its warmest temperature on record during the final full week of March 2015.

Argentina's Esperanza Base, located on the northern tip of the Antarctic Peninsula, hit 63.5 degrees Fahrenheit on March 24, 2015, according to Dr. Jeff Masters and Bob Henson of wunderground.com. Based on research done by Maximiliano Herrera, this tops the previous all-time record for the continent of 63.3 degrees Fahrenheit that was recorded the prior day at Argentina's Marambio Base.
====================

[lawrocket 3]

billvon

>the climate does change That is a fact

From less than two weeks ago:

==============
>>Remember back when you admitted the planet was warming?

>At that time all I had to go on was the lies those who belive as you do provided
>things change
==============

So now you "believe the lies" again. You change your positions faster than an anti-vaxxer facing re-election.

Meanwhile back in Antarctica:

====================
Antarctica May Have Experienced Its Hottest Day Ever
Published Apr 2 2015 07:13 AM EDTs.
www.weather.com

Antarctica may have recorded its warmest temperature on record during the final full week of March 2015.

Argentina's Esperanza Base, located on the northern tip of the Antarctic Peninsula, hit 63.5 degrees Fahrenheit on March 24, 2015, according to Dr. Jeff Masters and Bob Henson of wunderground.com. Based on research done by Maximiliano Herrera, this tops the previous all-time record for the continent of 63.3 degrees Fahrenheit that was recorded the prior day at Argentina's Marambio Base.
====================

Hmmm. Noted denier Jeff Masters says "not so fast." He says there is debate as to whether to consider Esperanza Antarctica.

What I also find controversial is pointing to weather as proof. Again.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[billvon 3,116]

>Hmmm. Noted denier Jeff Masters says "not so fast." He says there is debate as to
>whether to consider Esperanza Antarctica.

Yeah, I saw that. Antarctica is actually a bunch of islands connected by ice. So where does the "real" Antarctica start?

>What I also find controversial is pointing to weather as proof. Again.

Not proof of anything. Just an interesting note.

[rushmc 23]

billvon

>the climate does change That is a fact

From less than two weeks ago:

==============
>>Remember back when you admitted the planet was warming?

>At that time all I had to go on was the lies those who belive as you do provided
>things change
==============

So now you "believe the lies" again. You change your positions faster than an anti-vaxxer facing re-election.

Meanwhile back in Antarctica:

====================
Antarctica May Have Experienced Its Hottest Day Ever
Published Apr 2 2015 07:13 AM EDTs.
www.weather.com

Antarctica may have recorded its warmest temperature on record during the final full week of March 2015.

Argentina's Esperanza Base, located on the northern tip of the Antarctic Peninsula, hit 63.5 degrees Fahrenheit on March 24, 2015, according to Dr. Jeff Masters and Bob Henson of wunderground.com. Based on research done by Maximiliano Herrera, this tops the previous all-time record for the continent of 63.3 degrees Fahrenheit that was recorded the prior day at Argentina's Marambio Base.
====================

So climate does not change?????

I guess that blows your AWG bull out of the water

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[billvon 3,116]

>So climate does not change?????
>I guess that blows your AWG bull out of the water

Not following the conversation, I see.

Perhaps you could just update us once a week (or more frequently if needed) as to what type of denier you are this week.

[Amazon 7]

billvon

>So climate does not change?????
>I guess that blows your AWG bull out of the water

Not following the conversation, I see.

Perhaps you could just update us once a week (or more frequently if needed) as to what type of denier you are this week.

You could just sign up for the same Company newsletters....

[rushmc 23]

billvon

>So climate does not change?????
>I guess that blows your AWG bull out of the water

Not following the conversation, I see.

Perhaps you could just update us once a week (or more frequently if needed) as to what type of denier you are this week.

Very simple
I do not believe that the worlds climate changes becaue of man
Simple enough for you?
the other bs you keep bringing up just depends on the context of the coversation at the time
pars it if you want but hopefully the line above is simple enough for even you

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 23]

Oh
I AM a denier of poor science bs (which is what AGW is today)
And I know climate changes

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[billvon 3,116]

>I do not believe that the worlds climate changes becaue of man

But unlike two weeks ago, you now believe the climate is warming.

Let's see what happens in another two weeks.

[rushmc 23]

billvon

>I do not believe that the worlds climate changes becaue of man

But unlike two weeks ago, you now believe the climate is warming.

Let's see what happens in another two weeks.

Oh

Now i get it.

You think all changes in the climate are caused by man.

Now all the strange claims you are making make more sense.

You really are out there

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[billvon 3,116]

>You think all changes in the climate are caused by man.

Nope. Like I said, you're not following the conversation.

[rushmc 23]

billvon

>You think all changes in the climate are caused by man.

Nope. Like I said, you're not following the conversation.

Oh

I got your style of conversing down pat

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[JWest 0]

This guy, lol

[SkyDekker 1,465]

rushmc

***>So climate does not change?????
>I guess that blows your AWG bull out of the water

Not following the conversation, I see.

Perhaps you could just update us once a week (or more frequently if needed) as to what type of denier you are this week.

Very simple
I do not believe that the worlds climate changes becaue of man
Simple enough for you?
the other bs you keep bringing up just depends on the context of the coversation at the time
pars it if you want but hopefully the line above is simple enough for even you

Exactly 8 days ago you posted that there has been no warming for over 20 years.

8 Days later you now seem to believe there is warming, but it isn't because of man.

No that isn't simple enough for me, cause it simply doesn't make any sense.

Dude, you are all over the place, whats up with that?

[rushmc 23]

SkyDekker

******>So climate does not change?????
>I guess that blows your AWG bull out of the water

Not following the conversation, I see.

Perhaps you could just update us once a week (or more frequently if needed) as to what type of denier you are this week.

Very simple
I do not believe that the worlds climate changes becaue of man
Simple enough for you?
the other bs you keep bringing up just depends on the context of the coversation at the time
pars it if you want but hopefully the line above is simple enough for even you

Exactly 8 days ago you posted that there has been no warming for over 20 years.

8 Days later you now seem to believe there is warming, but it isn't because of man.

No that isn't simple enough for me, cause it simply doesn't make any sense.

Dude, you are all over the place, whats up with that?

It warms it cools
It is what climate does

And in the end the issue is not really if it is warming or not correct?
The issue really is, is man affecting this

Just to argue whether the temp is changing or not does not address the issue

Look at the temp changes over time that these researchers came up with. Did man affect all of these?
We know the answer to this
So
If temps have changed in the past, how can you or anyone, say without doubt, that man is changing how temps change???????
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/04/13/the-detection-of-climate-regime-transitions-in-the-upper-colorado-river-basin/

Lawrocket stated it well
Some data shows increases
Some does not
Which do you believe and why?

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[billvon 3,116]

SkyDekker

Exactly 8 days ago you posted that there has been no warming for over 20 years.
8 Days later you now seem to believe there is warming, but it isn't because of man.
No that isn't simple enough for me, cause it simply doesn't make any sense.
Dude, you are all over the place, whats up with that?

It's common in climate change denial. Many deniers flip between two (or more) positions based on the latest thing they read on wattsupwiththat:

1) "See? There's no warming! The climate isn't warming, stupid! It's all a lie." (Type I denial)

2) "I never said the climate wasn't changing. It ALWAYS changes. But man has nothing to do with it." (Type II denial)

This is the most fundamental characteristic of denial - that new information always supports their denial of all things climate change. If they see something on the Internet that questions the instrumental record, they immediately adopt the position that there is not warming. If they see something on the Internet that explains the record (or they see hard-to-refute proof of warming) then they adopt the position "it's warming but we didn't do it." They see no conflict between the two because their basic belief is denial, and both statements deny AGW, and are thus consistent.

This (IMO) is distinct from climate change skepticism, where someone questions some part of AGW science. For example, a scientist might theorize that day-side cloud formation, driven by increased evaporation, mitigates the increase in warming, and thus IPCC predictions are incorrect. He would then likely maintain that objection for as long as the data supports it. If further research shows that the day/night cloud formation ratio does not change, then he would abandon that in the face of new data.

Such skeptics are often angered when they get lumped in with deniers, since their methods are very different.

[rushmc 23]

billvon

***
Exactly 8 days ago you posted that there has been no warming for over 20 years.
8 Days later you now seem to believe there is warming, but it isn't because of man.
No that isn't simple enough for me, cause it simply doesn't make any sense.
Dude, you are all over the place, whats up with that?

It's common in climate change denial. Many deniers flip between two (or more) positions based on the latest thing they read on wattsupwiththat:

1) "See? There's no warming! The climate isn't warming, stupid! It's all a lie." (Type I denial)

2) "I never said the climate wasn't changing. It ALWAYS changes. But man has nothing to do with it." (Type II denial)

This is the most fundamental characteristic of denial - that new information always supports their denial of all things climate change. If they see something on the Internet that questions the instrumental record, they immediately adopt the position that there is not warming. If they see something on the Internet that explains the record (or they see hard-to-refute proof of warming) then they adopt the position "it's warming but we didn't do it." They see no conflict between the two because their basic belief is denial, and both statements deny AGW, and are thus consistent.

This (IMO) is distinct from climate change skepticism, where someone questions some part of AGW science. For example, a scientist might theorize that day-side cloud formation, driven by increased evaporation, mitigates the increase in warming, and thus IPCC predictions are incorrect. He would then likely maintain that objection for as long as the data supports it. If further research shows that the day/night cloud formation ratio does not change, then he would abandon that in the face of new data.

Such skeptics are often angered when they get lumped in with deniers, since their methods are very different.



And what kind of alarmist does this make you?



And again you post that you must beleive all climate change is caused by man

You (again) are really out there now Bill

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 23]

Oh

and put me down as a Type III denier

Which is someone who does pay attention to the man behind the curtin!

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

And in the end the issue is not really if it is warming or not correct?
The issue really is, is man affecting this

Just to argue whether the temp is changing or not does not address the issue

Look at the temp changes over time that these researchers came up with. Did man affect all of these?
We know the answer to this
So
If temps have changed in the past, how can you or anyone, say without doubt, that man is changing how temps change???????

Marc, I am but a simple man and am not a scientist. When an overwhelming number of actual climate scientists are convinced that man has influenced climate, I see no reason not to believe that. To me it is similar to the overwhleming number of doctors stating that smoking as bad for you. I believe them, even if there are a few doctors who claim different....and there are some lifetime smokers who die of old age.