Comments on: As arctic ice shrinks, so does a denier claim

By: George Will’s Opinion: you’re dying of heat? Get over it. « This Earth Nature Blog

Wed, 11 Jul 2012 19:23:29 +0000

[...] Carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas which is dumped into the atmosphere by humans to the tune of 30 billion tons per year, 100 times the amount from volcanoes. And finally, approximately 97% of climatologists who [...]

By: William Hughes-Games

William Hughes-Games — Tue, 29 May 2012 23:53:21 +0000

You say you don’t know what will happen if the Arctic becomes ice free. Of course none of us do. Here is a bit of speculation on what might happen
http://mtkass.blogspot.co.nz/2008/07/arctic-melting-no-problem.html
Regards
William

By: Payday on Grant Avenue « Is it 2012 in Nevada County Yet?

Payday on Grant Avenue « Is it 2012 in Nevada County Yet? — Mon, 28 Nov 2011 17:29:17 +0000

[...] Global warming is real. Independent studies confirm it. Vast amounts of evidence support it. 97% of climate scientists who study it agree with this. It’s almost certainly caused by human activity. [...]

By: What I’m Reading Thursday, September 1, 2011 | Rationally Thinking Out Loud

Thu, 01 Sep 2011 17:21:07 +0000

By: El 97% de los climatólogos está de acuerdo: la Tierra se está calentando : vooLive.net

Thu, 25 Aug 2011 06:47:15 +0000

[...] un gas de efecto invernadero que se vierte a la atmósfera por los seres humanos en una cifra de 30 millones de toneladas por año, 100 veces la cantidad de volcanes. Y, por último, aproximadamente el 97% de los climatólogos [...]

By: Nigel Depledge

Nigel Depledge — Fri, 01 Jul 2011 11:35:19 +0000

Gunnar (136) said:

If that doesn’t convince anyone that AGW denialism is motivated more by pure avarice and greed on the part of oil companies than by honest concern about what we humans might be doing to our environment, what will?

Three possibilities:
1. Manhatten underwater;
2. Nothing;
3. A carbon-neutral future in which we can still have cars and aircon.

By: Gunnar

Gunnar — Fri, 01 Jul 2011 03:02:46 +0000

Even more outrageous than advocating deregulation of the oil companies is lobbying for maintaining or even increasing the subsidies that oil companies now enjoy, despite the fact that they are making record profits! If that doesn’t convince anyone that AGW denialism is motivated more by pure avarice and greed on the part of oil companies than by honest concern about what we humans might be doing to our environment, what will?

By: Phyllis

Phyllis — Wed, 29 Jun 2011 15:33:27 +0000

On the value of skepticism – skepticism is a very valuable tool in anyone’s intellectual arsenal … if used correctly. If one uses skepticism to further delve into a matter, do more research, speak with more experts, find more facts, then skepticism is serving you well and perhaps your studies will allow you find the truth. If skepticism, however, is used to insulate yourself from facts, is used to deflect the experts’ conclusions and essentially serves the same function as placing your fingers in your ears and humming loudly, then skepticism is crippling you intellectually and you will never find the truth, though it may be staring you in the face. As a few have pointed out, 98% of climate scientists have gathered enough evidence to present conclusions stating that climate change is happening, is either caused or being excelerated by man-made factors, and that action must be taken to reduce those man-made factors, ASAP. That’s an overwhelming majority and enough to convince me, even at my most skeptical, that something is going on and that if I can do something differently, to do my small part, I should. All things considered, reducing the amount of trash my family generates, reducing the amount of driving we do (thereby reducing the amount of fuel we have to buy), making our home more energy-efficient, maybe recycling as much as we can, when we can, all of those modest measures are not terribly onerous to me and not very hard to implement and, even if it doesn’t make a huge difference, these are all much kinder to my bank account, so I figure, meh, why not? Do I really think that switching to reusable water bottles will save the Earth? Not a bit. But it does save me money! What is more significant, though, are the ones who claim that skepticism is a virtue, the scientists are all frauds and we need to abolish the EPA and deregulate the oil companies – this on the heels of the BP spill which, as a Gulf Coast resident, ruined my summer last year, thank you very much. This is absurd! Do you know what the air quality is like in Mexico City? Children cannot be allowed outside to play most days because of the polution! Again, forget saving the planet – this planet will be fine – we need to rein in the industries causing the most polution and save ourselves. So many medical ailments -cancer, learning and developmental disorders, etc. – are occuring more and more often and I’m not convinced that pervasive air and water polution are not the root causes. We must find a better way to make the things we need/want, provide jobs and grow our economy without poisoning ourselves in the process.

By: Gunnar

Gunnar — Tue, 28 Jun 2011 16:49:10 +0000

Thank you to both Nigel Depledge and MTU for their clear thinking and comprehensive and compelling arguments, as well as Phil Plait for keeping the issue alive and effectively exposing the inherent dishonesty and irrationality of the most prominent AGW denialists.

By: Nigel Depledge

Nigel Depledge — Tue, 28 Jun 2011 12:00:54 +0000

@ MTU (131) -
Thank you!