Durkin screwed up, shooting himself in the foot. Too bad because apart from the needlessly tweaked graphs it's pretty scientifically sound as an argument-making film. He didn't need to tweak and his point is way more compelling than Gore's Disney fantasy whose marketing tag says it all: the most frightening film you will ever see.
The only criticism I have of this otherwise excellent series is about the attribution of individual weather events to global warming. Events like the European Heat Wave are becoming more likely according to ongoing research. Very rare events, far to the right on a bell curve of probabilities that represents the current climate are becoming more common as the entire curve shifts to the right, a curve representing a new, warmer climate regime where a previously rare event becomes more common.
@moor4348 The events aren't so rare anymore when every one of the last couple of centuries' warmest years have all occured more or less during the last decade:)
@moor4348 =Events like the European Heat Wave are becoming more likely according to ongoing research.= This is true. The problem comes when people claim that a particular weather event is due to global warming. It is rather like saying that smoking increases the likelihood of lung cancer. True, but you cannot point to an individual case of lung cancer and say it was due to smoking.
Potholer54 - Thank you so much for this video series. It goes a long way to overcoming the genuine confusion that some have on this subject, and more importantly, it helps to overcome the manufactured confusion by the forces that seek to prevent action to reduce carbon emissions.
Durkin is a "financial planner" who has "evidence" about future of the stock market that, like other "financial planning experts" has ruined our financial future.. with his idiotic horeshit and fabricated powerpoint graphs.... I am sure he is "climate expert" who george will, inhofe, right wing republicans, et al will quote as fact.
But one thing has to be said: if Gore is wrong, there will be no problems. But if Durkin is wrong, we could face global disaster in the future. So let's just face the facts here: global warming is a problem and needs to be addressed asap.
I find it fascinating that at least 177 microcephalic cranio-rectally inverted retards have disliked this (and the previous, and most likely all future) videos! It's fairly obvious these imbeciles dislike any unbiased presentation of facts and argument. My moron-o-meter is pegged against it's stop!
So has Durkin taken the 'Strychnine Test' yet? I can't wait to hear the results. They wouldn't even need to be peer-reviewed. Just an obituary would do!
There is a quick simple solution to global warming and climate change. It is called Muon Catalysed Fusion. As worked on Star Scientific. NO CO2. NO Greenhouse Gases. NO Toxic Waste. The source is dueterium from the World's Oceans - virtually limitless. It is cheap to produce. WE NEED IT NOW. See the website "Star Scientific Limited", Blog "The Big Picture by Andrew Horvath", Youtube video - "In the Footsteps of Fusion"
@potholer54 Sorry its .039% its a typo that i repeated. my video, which i revised and added a background to btw :D actually uses Lbs instead of PPM, here ya go, ill remove my old post so as not to spread confusion. here's the new one. watch?v=HbH05-JC9II
@TheStigsIndianCousin Whether salty blood or salty ocean circulation: blood flow regulates human body temperature just as ocean flow regulates the body of Earth's temperature.
@grandpied Hahaha, so the human body is the PERFECT analogy for THE WHOLE GOD DAMNED EARTH and that's all there is too it right? The sun, clouds, pollution, forest area, greenhouse gases, the earth's orbit, El Nino and La Nina are bullshit words, climatologists are getting paid far too much for problems which even truck drivers can understand, solve and ignore, and the rest of us are just fools. Is that what you are saying, sir?
@TheStigsIndianCousin It was the peasants that observed scratches on the rocks that had been moved by glaciers and knew they had been pushed or dragged to another location. But it was scientists of the day that surmised that rocks were somehow floated atop glaciers thus depositing them miles away.
Anthropogenic Global Warming is caused by human increases in fossil fuel CO2 PPM from 300 PPM for the last 800,000 years at least to the industrial revolution, to 390 PPM now.
1 /2 Obama stop offshore drilling until it was reinstated. This could cause a $5 a gallon increase, because we would grow dependent upon foreign nations we are not allies with in order to provide our oil. Cap and Trade (American Power Act) would increase gas prices increase by $2.58 a gallon according to George C. Marshall Institute& taxes on the average household up to $3200 according to the RNC Foreign countries price gouge w/ gas prices to $10/gal!.
This series is marvellous. Thank you potholer for the detailed research and clear presentation. I've been reading about this stuff for some time but have still learnt a lot.
1."I used Mike's Nature trick to hide the decline"
2. "The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t."
3. "This period is even shorter than 1995-2009. The trend this time is negative (-0.12C per decade), but this trend is not statistically significant. " Jones, BBC
@prikhod Wow, this is addressed pretty well in future videos by Potholer54. Can you show me any other emails that would suggest fraud? Or do you only know what Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh tell you?
News from today, Oct 5, 2010: "Europe facing coldest winter in 1,000 years."
Meanwhile, in the Southern Hemisphere (which is now approaching summer, not wintter) New Zealand just had a six-day blizzard, the "worst in living memory", according to several NZ papers.
To those snake-oil salesman who blame cold on global warming, this defies basic physics. If a circulation pattern slows to make a region colder, some *other* region must get even hotter to compensate.
Yeah, scientists, unlike amateurs, don't just look out of the window to see if it's unusually hot or cold, they monitor the temperature "all over the planet" - well, we've seen how well they've been doing that, haven't we, potholer54? Rather like if we had a theory the sky is getting brighter, measured it at night from the yard, and ignored light pollution increase over our data set from increasing urbanisation! Wow - the sky is getting brighter! Those scientists?
@TheStigsIndianCousin As moremileyplease says, they measure temperature at ground stations in areas that have been gradually urbanized over time, which makes them get hotter due to local micro-climate rather than global changes. I'm assured someone has adjusted for this and we're all still going to die, but that's the point of the analogy. Increase in urban island effect is as relevant to atmospheric temps as urban light pollution is to the brightness of the sky.
An example of humans being "stronger than nature" or at least ingenious, is that we have the technology today to put thin film mirrors in orbit that could either direct more sunlight to the earth or away from the earth. The only barriers are legal.
Don't you overemphasize the reliability of the temperature rise data? Aren't most of the data taken from airports, veritably all of which have seen developement in their areas that would naturally raise their temperature? In other words, if I wanted to show global cooling, couldn't I simply go out to airports and paint most of the surrounding areas white, which would reflect more sunlight, thus cooling the area? I would be interested in how recent the satellite data is and it's results.
The prophet of the AGW Cult Gore is a fraud. While he was Senator, VP, and AGW Prophet, he either promoted, or remained silent on increasing GHG emissions, US Wildlife declines, and overall Environmental degradation, via immigration to the US.
Add in his cheerleading for the environmentally destructive NAFTA and WTO creation,................................ total fraud
Did you even watch the video? Potholer clearly criticizes both gore and Durkins for their preposterous claims. Gore is not a scientist, and his claims should not be considered to be the views of the scientific community. Gore didn't develop the science behind AGW, he misrepresented it. Gore is a politician (a salesman). If a salesman deceives or misleads you, blame him, not the original source of whatever he's selling.
@adkinsjr Your one of the few who will admit that Gore is an idiot and a fraud. So the "face" of Global Warming is a fraud, no wonder why the majority of people are not buying it, plus you have the Climategate emails, uncooperative weather etc
Your more honest than most of the proponents on here. Why do you think the scientists were hiding the Medieval Warm Period?
@adkinsjr Ty I have been looking at the Medieval Warm period emails, I find them quite distrurbing. Neo-cons are former communists who took over the Republican party, they are no friends of mine or the US. Alex Jones while somewhat entertaining on a comical level, is a misinformation agent.
Knowing the financial motivation to implement Cap & trade, carbon credits so gangsters with breifcases instead of guns can make billions, means these emails are important
@Thisawareness Um, remember Nader? The whole green movement disliked Gore enough to risk Bush winning, I wouldn't say idiot but would say fraud, willing to lie for his beliefs. The idea that Gore is the leader of the serious greens, rather than the one that corporate media likes enough to give air time, is an idea from the right. Climategate is pretty trivial both in what was actually caught and in scale.
@Thisawareness Um, remember Nader? The whole green movement disliked Gore enough to risk Bush winning, I wouldn't say idiot but would say fraud, willing to lie for his beliefs. The idea that Gore is the leader of the serious greens, rather than the one that corporate media likes enough to give air time, is an idea from the right. "Climategate" is pretty trivial both in what was actually caught and in scale.
@Thisawareness Um, remember Nader? The whole green movement disliked Gore enough to risk Bush winning, I wouldn't say idiot but would say fraud, willing to lie for his beliefs. The idea that Gore is the leader of the serious greens, rather than the one that corporate media likes enough to give air time, is an idea from the right. "Climategate" is pretty trivial both in what was actually caught and in scale.
Quick question for potholder: is the solar activity graph used in The Swindle, the same one the weatherman used on Penn & Teller's Bullshit? They look really similar...
(If so it might be good to quickly point that out should you ever do a remake of these or something.)
I think this video does miss an important point, particularly in the first few minutes when such information should be emphasised... even IF the massive ice-sheets would take thousands of years to disappear, it is during our lifetimes that we will decide, through our actions, whether or not we set that process in motion. If our actions result in runaway climate change, CO2 levels heading for 550ppm or above, then we make such future impacts inevitable, non?
I'm so sick and tired of this global warming thing. Never believed it for one second and how many years have it been talked about now? Sick and tired of it.
"Why do we suppose that carbon dioxide is responsible for our changing climate? In fact we measure changes in the level of atmospheric CO2 in 10s of ppm"
"To answer that question, Dirkin could have read some of the hundreds of scientific papers based on research that shows EXACTLY why [....] OR he could have drunk water laced with a tiny tiny amount of strychnine, to see what effect one TINY substance has on his body. Tiny amounts of things CAN have big effects"
It's a shame to see this video, in a series that does a good job explaining science, misrepresent what Gore said. He never claimed that the heat wave over Europe was caused by climate change. His point, which is visible even in the few moments of the film shown here, regards the human costs of raising the temperature. The heat wave killed thousands of people, and the point that was being made is that as global temperatures rise, what was once a rare occurrence will become more common.
See how Koch Industries spent $50 million supporting "Americans for Prosperity Foundation (AFP)" and 40 other 'echo-chamber' organizations in the 'climate denial machine' as well as millions in Republican campaign contributions.
Jim Hoggan, author of 'Climate Cover-up", and Rachel discuss the oil & coal campaign, using 40 separate 'echo' organizations, to spew false & misleading propaganda about global warming.
By 2100, at current rates of increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide, average ocean pH will drop 0.3 - 0.4 and be @ 7.8 with an increase in acidic H+ ion concentration of 150-200%.
That will cause a 50% DECREASE of ocean carbonate ions (CO3).
Carbonate ions are needed for growth by plankton & corals at the base of the ocean's food chain.
The people who don't believe in climate change, as the science actually suggests that is, not as Gore exploited it, should never gamble. They are too statistically retarded for it. They'll end up thinking betting systems are cash cows!
125,000 years ago a +2C rise in global temps. correlated with a 6-9 meter (25ft) rise in sea levels.
For a clear assessment of the most recent Climate Change science watch:
FORA (dot) tv
Global Warming: How Policy Can Catch Up With Science, Dr. Michael Oppenheimer, 2/23/10 (Environment)
Dr. Michael Oppenheimer is Professor of Geosciences at Princeton University & was the Lead Author on the third and fourth assessment reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2001 & 2007.
In just FIVE YEARS between 2004-2009 thick perennial arctic sea ice DROPPED 42%. This was discovered by NASA satellite measurements. Reported 7/7/09
Search:
New NASA Satellite Survey Reveals Dramatic Arctic Sea Ice Thinning
Global Warming is changing our world NOW. CO2 is 35% above levels for 650,000 years. In just 30 years CO2 will be over 450ppm, enough to acidify oceans to the point of stopping the growth of many planktons and corals. They are at the base of the oceans' food chain.
Methane Releases from Arctic Shelf May Be Much Larger and Faster Than Anticipated
NSF - March 4, 2010.
Research results, published in the March 5 edition of the journal Science, show that the permafrost under the East Siberian Arctic Shelf, long thought to be an impermeable barrier sealing in methane, is perforated and is starting to leak large amounts of methane into the atmosphere. Release of even a fraction of the methane stored in the shelf could trigger abrupt climate warming.
After watching Al Gore wave his hand about W. Antarctica, I got curious. Here is why he points it out.
An awful lot of the WAIS sits atop dry land that is below sea level. One spot is 8233 ft below sea level The Bentley Subglacial Trench is unique but, it sits in area below sea level the size of Mexico. Over 1/2 mile of ice above it is above sea level.
I have never seen a climate change denier find out about esoteric facts like this.
Scientists call for better way to do climate report; errors tarnish Nobel Prize-winning effort
By SETH BORENSTEIN AP Science Writer
WASHINGTON February 10, 2010 (AP)
The Associated Press
The flaws — and the erosion they've caused in public confidence — have some scientists calling for drastic changes in how future UN climate reports are done
and a growing clamor for the resignation of the chairman of the IPCC (Choo Choo Charlie)
Phil Jones, the head of the British Climatic Research Unit at the heart of ClimateGate, told the BBC: the recent warming trend that began in 1975 is not at all different than two other planetary warming phases since 1850; there has been no statistically significant warming since 1995, and; it is possible the Medieval Warm Period was indeed a global phenomenon thereby making the temperatures seen in the latter part of the 20th century by no means unprecedented.
I think you're missing some very key elements to your claim. We need to understand what the term "significant" means in a statistical formula. Second, Phil Jones said, "I am 100% confident that the climate has warmed." If you'd like to look at NCDS for records, or GISS for records you can. Also the MET office can show ocean temps. But to conclude that this "is by no means unprecedented" is just not accurate. And climate"gate" is fiction propagated by sensationalism.
In just FIVE YEARS between 2004-2009 thick perennial arctic sea ice DROPPED 42%. This was discovered by NASA satellite measurements. Reported 7/7/09
Search:
New NASA Satellite Survey Reveals Dramatic Arctic Sea Ice Thinning
Global Warming is changing our world NOW. CO2 is 35% above levels for 650,000 years. In just 30 years CO2 will be over 450ppm, enough to acidify oceans to the point of stopping the growth of many planktons and corals. They are at the base of the oceans' food chain.
This perhaps the most scientific informative non- political video I've seen on global warming. The only thing that would crush me would be to learn that you're not a scientist. So are ya?
Agreed Greenman3610 is also working hard to debunk the myths check him out as well when you get a chance. Spread truth, not lies, hate and propaganda.
One of the best youtube videoes I have ever seen! Thank you! The only reason people are skeptic to climate change is most of all taxes and bills... tell me what els they want to achive? (sorry for bad english ) ;)
I usually don't bother reading comments from people who call other people names...The USA might be left behind in the global curve if we are wrong and don't work for global climate change. This could impact our economy in a negative way, one needs to look at the trends that China, the true economic leader of the world is doing. A fair balanced video set..good job
A lot of people seem to want 100% certainty. Want all scientists to agree.
We need to look at the risks involved. Businesses and prudent home owners don't ignore the risk of fire damaging their property on the basis it is unlikely. They pay insurance/take precautions because it might happen and the consequences if it happens are considerable.
Much the same with climate change you look at the probability of it happening and the consequences if it does. Then you decide on the action to take.
9 of last 10 years were the HOTTEST on record. 2009 = 2nd HOTTEST on record & solar irradiance is at a 35 year low Search: Data @ NASA GISS: GISS Surface Temperature Analysis: Graphs See: Ranking (Top 10 Warmest Years) The latest on YouTube: It's so Cold, there can't be Global Warming /watch?v=sAvqabAPIr4&feature=sub 50% of arctic sea ice & mountain glaciers have disappeared in just 30 years. Plants, animals & insects all migrating north. Search: Climate Change: NASA's Eyes on the Earth
Go to INFORMATIONLIBERATION website for a great expose of Al Fraud & the Marxist warm-mongers
How does relocating Industry from the West which has Environmental & Human Rights laws to countries that have little to no Environmental or even human rights laws help stop Global warming?
Al Gore helped engineer the economic destruction via NAFTA/GATT & WTO & now our children are being poisoned by Chinese slave labor made junk
It's called the Free Market, which you love so much. Jeebus, you people don't do joined up thinking do you? You need regulation to stop abuse of labour forces, but oooh that would interfere with your blessed Free Market.
The USA makes a lot of money because of free trade. Pandering to different interest groups because they demand that their ineffective way of doing things be supported by tariffs, artificial barriers or subsidies sounds socialist to me.
If its junk presumably people don't buy it.
How many children have been poisoned by Chinese products? What evidence do you have about slavery in China?
Croxleylad, Let me correct you, the Corporations made allot of money. Multiple tens of millions of good working/middleclass jobs were lost through these economic/humanRights/environment killing legislation.
Here's the key try NOT to buy Chinese, let me know how you make out
Try & stay away from the cadmium toy watches, especially if you have children. Many of the slave made chinese toys like crayons have lead in them. I hope you haven't been using them
You are talking about toys that were largely designed in the USA. They were all sold by US retailers. The importer, the authorities, the retailer and consumer need to ensure that products are safe. When ordering products from overseas companies importers should specify the standard required and have appropriate procedures in place to ensure that the product delivered meets those standards.
As to China being the only source of cheap toys. You still don't need to buy cheap toys.
I do belive in Global Warming and that it i man made and we should take precautionary measures.
I always felt that Al Gore should shut up about it. Anytime you introduce a prominent politician it will be sure to divide people and they will disagree simply to spite.
For some one who has spent years - talking with experts , writing extensively on environmental issues - had the opportunity to interview the best , tell every one how to live (not like he does) and then make patently stupid claims like just a couple of kilometers under the earths surface it is millions of degrees...
your absolutely right - the fat fool should shut up.
He is a walking teaching moment on pathetic state of US education.
So if the science is settled - why did the IPCC head have to hide raw data, obscure data with special arrays in the programs to produce results, delete rather then Freedom of INformation act, belittle skeptics, threaten to pull publication - try to have fire uncooperative editors of varions "peer review" journals?
Is that how Science is run?
when is the term green house gas going to be abandoned - since it is a fraud - atmospheric effect is more accurate.
"threaten to pull publication - try to have fire uncooperative editors of varions "peer review" journals"
Perhaps you should have watched the 7th part before posting this comment. I don't know enough about your other assertions to comment on them, but you're free to point me to credible sources.
Or perhaps you should start with part 1 since apparently you seem ignorant of even the basics.
Do you people even bother to watch these videos before you comment? If you want answers to all that, or if you at least want a perspective on all of that, watch videos 6 and 7 of this guy's climate change series.
"...Martin Derkin, who has a degree in Geo-physics - Sorry... not Geo-physics. He has a degree in Ancient and Medieval History and a career as a financial journalist."
Al Gore is an idiot. He loves to "play scientist." He should stick to what he knows and leave science to the grown-ups. Gore does more harm than good because the deniers spend all their time attacking him instead of getting informed.
I give him some papers published in prominent journals and he tells me I beat a hasty retreat? Too funny! That's right Rotpig, have fun in your little cave, the adults need to get back to work.
Actually I take that back. It seems that my reply to your request for evidence did not post, or was otherwise deleted. Not sure why, I will dig up the papers again and repost.
Funny thing is you never referenced anything. You said this evidence was right before you and was undeniable. Where? What? Tell me what you have right in front of you. What paper?
Also consider watching Greg Craven's YouTube series which may spin it all in an entirely different way for you. He's got a pretty unique approach to the problem.
"How It All Ends" by wonderingmind42
But really, I come back to my main point. We can spin around with our eyes closed claiming there's no evidence all we want. Unless we have the tools to evaluate that evidence when it is presented, the song and dance is pointless.
Science doesn't seek to prove things, it seeks to disprove them. Congrats, you just misunderstood the point of science and made yourself look like a grade schooler who failed their science test.
Science seeks to explain things rationally and logically.
What you are saying is that anyone can come up with any kind of theory, no matter how stupid and unless it can be scientifically dis-proved, then we should all agree it is real.
How wrong you are. How fucking stupid you are.
Dis-prove santa claus then. Gotcha! You are a fucking dimwitted piece of wasteoid shit.
Santa clause is a null-hypothesis. Do you know what that means? No? Look it up then.
And no, that's clearly not what i'm saying. A good theory is developed from evidence. This is only the first half of the process. The second half is to find out exactly where and when it is valid, if it is at all. This is the process of disproving it. Nothing is ever assumed.
Notice how I can reply with resorting to ad-hominem attacks? A skill you should seek to acquire, if you are able.
Global warming is a null-hypothesis, if that's how you want to play it.
Observable data disagrees with AGW.
In fact, there is no empirical evidence based atmopsheric study that proves Co2 is causing global warming. We know Co2 traps heat in a laboratory test but the atmopshere is something entirely different - it's such a chaotic system.
You're not entirely correct. AGW is a kind of null hypothesis, which is why it requires evidence to support it. But now we have a lot of evidence to support it. You can choose to ignore that evidence if you choose, but it makes it no less of a fact. People have an extraordinary capacity for self-delusion, something you're providing evidence for right now.
The rest of your post is commonly called "The Argument From Lack of Imagination". AKA plugging your ears and claiming the earth is flat.
YOU "can punch massive holes" in AGW? YOU can? Is that so? What journals have you published in? What methods did you use to gather your data? Who funded you?Precisely what functions of modern climate science are wrong? How do you explain why YOUR "evidence" is in complete contradiction with all evidence ever collected? If you're right, the world is waiting to know. Science always wants to know when it is wrong so we can study something else. Hurry up and tell us. Otherwise, you're just babbling.
You don't seem to realise when you are being duped. Being a bit more skeptical of doomsday scenarios is probably wise. Scientists, even with their journals, infallible peer-review, consensus etc etc, have been wrong before.
Eugenics had the support of every credible scientific institution. Eugenics was a sham.
You sound like an authority robot. Just because they are "climate scientists" you think they are automatically right and never make mistakes. Wrong.
Sir, I'm not being duped at all. I'm a physicist and I study the climate. I have the evidence right before me, and I have spent years learning the science behind it expressly so that I can understand why it IS evidence. At this point, if you understand any science, the evidence is undeniable and extensive.
If you had half the knowledge you profess to, you clearly wouldn't be so quick to judge the people who spend their lives studying it for very little money and only a reward of conscience.
Very little money eh? You know that is not true. The US government alone has spent 80 billion dollars on research grants. Exxon: 23 million. Don't ever underestimate the corrupting power of money.
If you had half the knowledge you profess to, you wouldn't be chatting with a non-scientist on a fucking youtube video.
Lets see that evidence. I bet you've got some computer model predictions. Wow, they are just so compelling.
I'll not waste my time on here. The evidence is amply available, you just need to learn who to trust better. If you're convinced the IPCC is a conspiracy, of course you will not accept any evidence presented - you've discounted it before seeing it. That is the very definition of blind faith (aka stupidity).
I don't know where you got your grant numbers from (you provided no reference, you just pulled it out of your hat) nor are the least bit relevant for anywhere other than the US.
"Enlighten Me!" - what an ironic imperative. How can someone force enlightenment on another? You have to go out and learn for yourself. Pick up a textbook on climate science if you are actually interested. There are these great places called "schools" and "libraries". Maybe you've heard of them?
All I'm saying here is that when you spout off random unreferenced facts on an internet forum, the only thing you achieve is making yourself look catastrophically uneducated and backwards.
We have a classic case here of "running off at the mouth" You told me that the evidence was undeniable and it was sitting right in front of you. Tell me what you've seen.
I've read the IPCC Ar4, among many other documents that contain this so called evidence.
Their is a reason why they say they are 90% certain - because they don't have the evidence. There are all these different factors that they think are related but they just don't know.
I overestimated your intelligence, it seems, if you truly believe I can fit over a century of climate science in 500 characters or less. I have no interest wasting my time with someone of your remarkably low calibre. If you can't even be bothered to pick up a book yourself, then why should I do it for you? There is no need. No, it is better for those of us who can think to simply wait for dinosaurs like you to finally die off. Goodbye, my dimly-lit entertainment for the day. Back to work for me.
The evidence is far from undeniable, which is why some of the smartest people on earth are not convinced that AGG are driving the climate.
If AGG were effecting the earth to the degree that the "evidence" suggests, we wouldn't have seen a MODEST .6* Celsius increase over the past century - it would have been far more significant.
Do AGG influence the climate? Of course they do. Can they drive climate? There is no evidence of that.
That is a very curious sentiment. Nobody is claiming that AGG "drives" climate. I've never heard anyone make that claim at all. But if you agree that they influence the climate, then you already agree with AGW.
And yes, you're right, there are other factors at work which are mitigating the effect of AGG on climate change. This is why we need to continue the work so we can understand it better.
Of course I believe in AGW. But the alarmists' position is that of AGW is going to cause cataclysmic and irreversible destruction to our planet and all species herein. That is absolutely not true.
I'm not really hearing anyone saying that... nobody in the public spotlight anyway. But I suppose that depends on where you live and the media in your area.
There is no doubt that climate change will cause some irreversible damage, but certainly nobody is sure quite what or to what extent. Unfortunately that's one reason nothing is happening. The precautionary principle simply isn't on the agenda for anyone these days. Humans really do like to gamble with the future.
In addition to taking temperatures and averaging them from all over the world, it seems many scientists cook the data, filter the results, and do whatever necessary in order to achieve their aim.
This is a very compelling and well made series. It leaves out the emotion and scare tactics found with so many alarmists. I'm still not convinced AGG are acting as a catalyst for temp increase. It also would be hard to convince me that it is a bad thing for the earth to warm up. Great video, though.
Classy response. A trend that is emerging in so many of your responses to people who "don't matter." Why is there so much anger in the AGW movement? Because other people disagree with your position? That's a sign of junk science. Congratulations on being a physicist. I'm a geologist and have studied the climate for nearly 12 years. What evidence do you have right before you that has managed to escape me?
It may have sounded like an insult, but it really wasn't. We tend to think that each of our opinions matter, but none do so much. Mine included.
Why is there generally anger though? Because we see our world being destroyed and people not caring. That makes us upset. We are not angry about disagreement, disagreement is healthy.
Actually, I will turn the question around. Given the consensus in science, what evidence do you have that AGW is wrong? Peer-reviewed, please.
We've established that I don't disagree that AGG influence the climate (along with roughly 500 other variables, not the least of which is the Sun).
To your question: First would be The Soon and Baliunas paper (Peer Reviewed, Concluded that there wasn't anything unusual about the 20th century modest increase in temperature).
2nd would be the slew of emails recently discovered where "Leading" researchers were found to be cooking the science and trying to silence anyone with a different opinion.
The Soon and Baliunas paper was a laughing-stock. They were doing research way outside of their field. As a geologist, surely you can see why that would be a problem. You wouldn't trust a sociologist challenging plate tectonics would you? Even the people whose work was cited said that their papers were badly misinterpreted by Soon and Baliunas.
The emails are similarly a joke. Have you read them? I encourage you to read them if not. There's nothing remotely challenging the science in there.
Looked up some more information on those two. You should seriously consider looking into them before referring to them in the future. They are "junk science" promoters, a blight on the entire notion of science and honesty. They take contracts by lobby groups to "prove" or cast doubt on whatever is desired by those paying the bills. There are far better AGW sceptics out there than these two-bit hacks trying to pass themselves off as scientists. You're better off believing Ted Hovind on evolution.
They're both astrophysicists so doing research on solar radiation and it's affect on climate wouldn't really be outside of their field, though you can criticize their findings all you want. Seems to be a popular thing to do.
The emails are not a joke and anyone who says that they are clearly has an agenda. I've ready every single one. They're quite embarrassing, really. Good science has no angle or opinion. It speaks for itself. You don't need to trick things or try and discredit others.
The Soon and Baliunas paper that I believe you're referring to on the MWP comes to a conclusion that is in exact contravention of the evidence - which is why so many climate scientists whose work was cited cried foul. There is very good reason to criticize their findings. Again, you would criticize someone concluding that plate tectonics is false, would you not? Read their paper, read the rebuttals. They do not have a leg to stand on.
How so? They never claimed total uniformity throughout the MWP or the Little Ice Age. What specific data violates their conclusion? I would argue other reasons for climate scientists crying foul (IE disparaging emails). If you truly do have a specific data set that disqualifies their conclusion, please provide.
then, al gore used the wrong graph aswell
IFrancyISantosI 1 day ago
very interesting video thanks
grisgrisy 2 days ago
great video thanks
smuggecko 5 days ago
Durkin screwed up, shooting himself in the foot. Too bad because apart from the needlessly tweaked graphs it's pretty scientifically sound as an argument-making film. He didn't need to tweak and his point is way more compelling than Gore's Disney fantasy whose marketing tag says it all: the most frightening film you will ever see.
jaydoubledee 1 week ago
Al Gore exaggerates, Durkin straight up lies...
Mistersamsam 1 month ago
Comment removed
moket123 2 months ago
The only criticism I have of this otherwise excellent series is about the attribution of individual weather events to global warming. Events like the European Heat Wave are becoming more likely according to ongoing research. Very rare events, far to the right on a bell curve of probabilities that represents the current climate are becoming more common as the entire curve shifts to the right, a curve representing a new, warmer climate regime where a previously rare event becomes more common.
moor4348 3 months ago
@moor4348 The events aren't so rare anymore when every one of the last couple of centuries' warmest years have all occured more or less during the last decade:)
winterstellar 2 months ago
@moor4348 =Events like the European Heat Wave are becoming more likely according to ongoing research.= This is true. The problem comes when people claim that a particular weather event is due to global warming. It is rather like saying that smoking increases the likelihood of lung cancer. True, but you cannot point to an individual case of lung cancer and say it was due to smoking.
potholer54 1 day ago
Potholer54 - Thank you so much for this video series. It goes a long way to overcoming the genuine confusion that some have on this subject, and more importantly, it helps to overcome the manufactured confusion by the forces that seek to prevent action to reduce carbon emissions.
moor4348 3 months ago
DUUURRRRRkin
grendelee 3 months ago
Great set of videos
Seargent363 3 months ago in playlist Climate Change
Comment removed
Seargent363 3 months ago
Durkin is a "financial planner" who has "evidence" about future of the stock market that, like other "financial planning experts" has ruined our financial future.. with his idiotic horeshit and fabricated powerpoint graphs.... I am sure he is "climate expert" who george will, inhofe, right wing republicans, et al will quote as fact.
poosta7 4 months ago
But one thing has to be said: if Gore is wrong, there will be no problems. But if Durkin is wrong, we could face global disaster in the future. So let's just face the facts here: global warming is a problem and needs to be addressed asap.
dutchbb1979 4 months ago
Same opinion as before: Awesome series, invaluable for the non-specialist viewer
MauroRincon 5 months ago
I find it fascinating that at least 177 microcephalic cranio-rectally inverted retards have disliked this (and the previous, and most likely all future) videos! It's fairly obvious these imbeciles dislike any unbiased presentation of facts and argument. My moron-o-meter is pegged against it's stop!
VinylMechanic 5 months ago
So has Durkin taken the 'Strychnine Test' yet? I can't wait to hear the results. They wouldn't even need to be peer-reviewed. Just an obituary would do!
VinylMechanic 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
There is a quick simple solution to global warming and climate change. It is called Muon Catalysed Fusion. As worked on Star Scientific. NO CO2. NO Greenhouse Gases. NO Toxic Waste. The source is dueterium from the World's Oceans - virtually limitless. It is cheap to produce. WE NEED IT NOW. See the website "Star Scientific Limited", Blog "The Big Picture by Andrew Horvath", Youtube video - "In the Footsteps of Fusion"
2110kop 6 months ago
Comment removed
Ravalat 6 months ago
@Ravalat =Carbon dioxide makes up .0039% of our atmosphere....Dont believe me?= No.
potholer54 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@potholer54 Sorry its .039% its a typo that i repeated. my video, which i revised and added a background to btw :D actually uses Lbs instead of PPM, here ya go, ill remove my old post so as not to spread confusion. here's the new one. watch?v=HbH05-JC9II
Ravalat 6 months ago
Durkin, you are a complete and utter wanker.
PICLex 7 months ago in playlist Climate Change
Holy Crap!!! We have a space center in Denmark???
ArvidofDK 8 months ago
@ArvidofDK
Thats weird... But kind of cool
Thetarget1 7 months ago
Just watch all of Denmark disapear;(
killermusen 9 months ago
It's frickin hot here... Anyway I love your series, it is awesome.
TearsOfWar1 9 months ago
Research? Ocean currents control the climate. Even I know that and I'm a truck driver.
grandpied 9 months ago
@grandpied Yeah, your over simplified explanation told me that, thank you very much.
TheStigsIndianCousin 6 months ago
@TheStigsIndianCousin Whether salty blood or salty ocean circulation: blood flow regulates human body temperature just as ocean flow regulates the body of Earth's temperature.
grandpied 5 months ago
@grandpied Hahaha, so the human body is the PERFECT analogy for THE WHOLE GOD DAMNED EARTH and that's all there is too it right? The sun, clouds, pollution, forest area, greenhouse gases, the earth's orbit, El Nino and La Nina are bullshit words, climatologists are getting paid far too much for problems which even truck drivers can understand, solve and ignore, and the rest of us are just fools. Is that what you are saying, sir?
TheStigsIndianCousin 5 months ago
@TheStigsIndianCousin It was the peasants that observed scratches on the rocks that had been moved by glaciers and knew they had been pushed or dragged to another location. But it was scientists of the day that surmised that rocks were somehow floated atop glaciers thus depositing them miles away.
grandpied 5 months ago
Awesome.
psistarpsi80 10 months ago
So funny at 2:30 - sarcastic and lovely.
TheMotherPhuckers 10 months ago
@0709 LOL
Dude, I love your videos, its great information and out of nowhere a slap of humor.
xinecallaw 10 months ago
Anthropogenic Global Warming is caused by human increases in fossil fuel CO2 PPM from 300 PPM for the last 800,000 years at least to the industrial revolution, to 390 PPM now.
qwertypoiu4321 11 months ago
hahaha, fucking great joke to start!
eduardoobregon 11 months ago
No apologies needed - thankyou for an excellent series of clips here. Great work. :-)
Astrostevo 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
2/2 Obama's Former Green Jobs Czar and Communist, Van Jones
Admits Left is 'PRETENDING' Need for Regulations in Green Movement
watch?v=bgKr480RYc4
bootylicification 1 year ago
1 /2 Obama stop offshore drilling until it was reinstated. This could cause a $5 a gallon increase, because we would grow dependent upon foreign nations we are not allies with in order to provide our oil. Cap and Trade (American Power Act) would increase gas prices increase by $2.58 a gallon according to George C. Marshall Institute& taxes on the average household up to $3200 according to the RNC Foreign countries price gouge w/ gas prices to $10/gal!.
.
Allen West 2012
bootylicification 1 year ago
@bootylicification you need professional help. You keep on posting allen west 20212 and you make very insane arguments.
thesparitan 3 weeks ago
Keep on!
molekulaTV 1 year ago
This series is marvellous. Thank you potholer for the detailed research and clear presentation. I've been reading about this stuff for some time but have still learnt a lot.
xxwookey 1 year ago
...He Can't be serial.
mmmmmarcus 1 year ago
"so what do the experts say?"
They say
1."I used Mike's Nature trick to hide the decline"
2. "The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t."
3. "This period is even shorter than 1995-2009. The trend this time is negative (-0.12C per decade), but this trend is not statistically significant. " Jones, BBC
Your cause is DEAD! Deal with it, greentard!
prikhod 1 year ago
@prikhod
1."I used Mike's Nature trick to hide the decline"
WHAT DOES IT MEAN?
2. "The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t."
WHAT DOES IT MEAN?
BeondaPale 1 year ago
@BeondaPale
-
Check potholer54's CRU emails videos. Long story short, deniers are quote-mining, again
Edbrad 1 year ago
@Edbrad
I agree
BeondaPale 1 year ago
@prikhod
Watch the rest of the series. Your quotes are addressed in "those hacked emails" and a subsequent video.
adkinsjr 1 year ago
@prikhod Wow, this is addressed pretty well in future videos by Potholer54. Can you show me any other emails that would suggest fraud? Or do you only know what Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh tell you?
zzyzx0788 1 year ago
@ 0:42 to 0:48
Ow look, that's where I live xD
tiaxanderson 1 year ago
I figured that the global warming information that the public receives is largely exaggerated, while the general trend is scientifically accepted.
dookiecheez 1 year ago
News from today, Oct 5, 2010: "Europe facing coldest winter in 1,000 years."
Meanwhile, in the Southern Hemisphere (which is now approaching summer, not wintter) New Zealand just had a six-day blizzard, the "worst in living memory", according to several NZ papers.
To those snake-oil salesman who blame cold on global warming, this defies basic physics. If a circulation pattern slows to make a region colder, some *other* region must get even hotter to compensate.
ttowntom 1 year ago
Al Gore: Lord Carbon Credit
Former Vice President Al Gore’s
crusade against carbon dioxide emissions
could make him millions of dollars. With
help from friends at Goldman Sachs, Gore
has established a network of organizations
to promote the “climate crisis”—and keep
himself in the spotlight
Thisawareness 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Just wondering - do you believe global warming is happening?
ChurchOfArceus 1 year ago
fantastic series! One single perl in the pigsty made the search all worthwhile
rewtnode 1 year ago
Yeah, scientists, unlike amateurs, don't just look out of the window to see if it's unusually hot or cold, they monitor the temperature "all over the planet" - well, we've seen how well they've been doing that, haven't we, potholer54? Rather like if we had a theory the sky is getting brighter, measured it at night from the yard, and ignored light pollution increase over our data set from increasing urbanisation! Wow - the sky is getting brighter! Those scientists?
freedeanna 1 year ago
@freedeanna Ahem, HOW exactly is that analogy relevant?
TheStigsIndianCousin 1 year ago
@TheStigsIndianCousin As moremileyplease says, they measure temperature at ground stations in areas that have been gradually urbanized over time, which makes them get hotter due to local micro-climate rather than global changes. I'm assured someone has adjusted for this and we're all still going to die, but that's the point of the analogy. Increase in urban island effect is as relevant to atmospheric temps as urban light pollution is to the brightness of the sky.
freedeanna 1 year ago
An example of humans being "stronger than nature" or at least ingenious, is that we have the technology today to put thin film mirrors in orbit that could either direct more sunlight to the earth or away from the earth. The only barriers are legal.
moremileyplease 1 year ago
Don't you overemphasize the reliability of the temperature rise data? Aren't most of the data taken from airports, veritably all of which have seen developement in their areas that would naturally raise their temperature? In other words, if I wanted to show global cooling, couldn't I simply go out to airports and paint most of the surrounding areas white, which would reflect more sunlight, thus cooling the area? I would be interested in how recent the satellite data is and it's results.
moremileyplease 1 year ago
Human being is stronger than the nature. We'll conquer it.
dolongchunfengzhou 1 year ago
How exactly are humans stronger than nature?
BeondaPale 1 year ago
The prophet of the AGW Cult Gore is a fraud. While he was Senator, VP, and AGW Prophet, he either promoted, or remained silent on increasing GHG emissions, US Wildlife declines, and overall Environmental degradation, via immigration to the US.
Add in his cheerleading for the environmentally destructive NAFTA and WTO creation,................................ total fraud
Thisawareness 1 year ago
@Thisawareness
Did you even watch the video? Potholer clearly criticizes both gore and Durkins for their preposterous claims. Gore is not a scientist, and his claims should not be considered to be the views of the scientific community. Gore didn't develop the science behind AGW, he misrepresented it. Gore is a politician (a salesman). If a salesman deceives or misleads you, blame him, not the original source of whatever he's selling.
adkinsjr 1 year ago
@adkinsjr Your one of the few who will admit that Gore is an idiot and a fraud. So the "face" of Global Warming is a fraud, no wonder why the majority of people are not buying it, plus you have the Climategate emails, uncooperative weather etc
Your more honest than most of the proponents on here. Why do you think the scientists were hiding the Medieval Warm Period?
Thisawareness 1 year ago
@Thisawareness
Watch potholer54's videos on "those hacked e-mails." The emails aren't nearly as sensational as the neocons and Alex Jone's cult make them out to be.
adkinsjr 1 year ago
@adkinsjr Ty I have been looking at the Medieval Warm period emails, I find them quite distrurbing. Neo-cons are former communists who took over the Republican party, they are no friends of mine or the US. Alex Jones while somewhat entertaining on a comical level, is a misinformation agent.
Knowing the financial motivation to implement Cap & trade, carbon credits so gangsters with breifcases instead of guns can make billions, means these emails are important
Ty for the info ill watch them
Thisawareness 1 year ago
@Thisawareness
Potholer54 makes a very interesting point about 6 minutes into this video:
watch?v=7nnVQ2fROOg
adkinsjr 1 year ago
@Thisawareness Um, remember Nader? The whole green movement disliked Gore enough to risk Bush winning, I wouldn't say idiot but would say fraud, willing to lie for his beliefs. The idea that Gore is the leader of the serious greens, rather than the one that corporate media likes enough to give air time, is an idea from the right. Climategate is pretty trivial both in what was actually caught and in scale.
spaceshare 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Thisawareness Um, remember Nader? The whole green movement disliked Gore enough to risk Bush winning, I wouldn't say idiot but would say fraud, willing to lie for his beliefs. The idea that Gore is the leader of the serious greens, rather than the one that corporate media likes enough to give air time, is an idea from the right. "Climategate" is pretty trivial both in what was actually caught and in scale.
spaceshare 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Thisawareness Um, remember Nader? The whole green movement disliked Gore enough to risk Bush winning, I wouldn't say idiot but would say fraud, willing to lie for his beliefs. The idea that Gore is the leader of the serious greens, rather than the one that corporate media likes enough to give air time, is an idea from the right. "Climategate" is pretty trivial both in what was actually caught and in scale.
spaceshare 1 year ago
Brilliant series, thanks for going through all this time to make it for us
1michelemichele1 1 year ago
This series is the BEST!!!
dilemmix 1 year ago
Quick question for potholder: is the solar activity graph used in The Swindle, the same one the weatherman used on Penn & Teller's Bullshit? They look really similar...
(If so it might be good to quickly point that out should you ever do a remake of these or something.)
tweaker1bms 1 year ago
You, sir, are a gentleman!
Thankyou so much for making this video series!
mojorhythm 1 year ago
Thank you, an excellent critique!
I think this video does miss an important point, particularly in the first few minutes when such information should be emphasised... even IF the massive ice-sheets would take thousands of years to disappear, it is during our lifetimes that we will decide, through our actions, whether or not we set that process in motion. If our actions result in runaway climate change, CO2 levels heading for 550ppm or above, then we make such future impacts inevitable, non?
AnnaKBrisvegas 1 year ago
WHAT COOLING? LOL!!!
MARCH was the HOTTEST March in the UAH 32 year satellite record.
UAH (Univ. of Alabama, Huntsville) is run by Dr. Christy, the well known AGW denier.
Global temperatures for FEBRUARY were 2nd WARMEST February in 32 years.
Global Temperatures for JANUARY were the HOTTEST January for UAH in 32 years.
LOL!!
goog2k 1 year ago
I'm so sick and tired of this global warming thing. Never believed it for one second and how many years have it been talked about now? Sick and tired of it.
AutomaticAwesome 1 year ago
@AutomaticAwesome How did you find this video, then? Did you watch it? And if so, why do you think things dont get warm? Do you own an oven? : P
grendelee 1 year ago
Comment removed
goog2k 1 year ago
Comment removed
aveltkam 1 year ago
Comment removed
aveltkam 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"Why do we suppose that carbon dioxide is responsible for our changing climate? In fact we measure changes in the level of atmospheric CO2 in 10s of ppm"
"To answer that question, Dirkin could have read some of the hundreds of scientific papers based on research that shows EXACTLY why [....] OR he could have drunk water laced with a tiny tiny amount of strychnine, to see what effect one TINY substance has on his body. Tiny amounts of things CAN have big effects"
This response is PURE GOLD!!! XD
aveltkam 1 year ago
Comment removed
aveltkam 1 year ago
Comment removed
aveltkam 1 year ago
Comment removed
aveltkam 1 year ago
It's a shame to see this video, in a series that does a good job explaining science, misrepresent what Gore said. He never claimed that the heat wave over Europe was caused by climate change. His point, which is visible even in the few moments of the film shown here, regards the human costs of raising the temperature. The heat wave killed thousands of people, and the point that was being made is that as global temperatures rise, what was once a rare occurrence will become more common.
enodo 1 year ago
See how Koch Industries spent $50 million supporting "Americans for Prosperity Foundation (AFP)" and 40 other 'echo-chamber' organizations in the 'climate denial machine' as well as millions in Republican campaign contributions.
Jim Hoggan, author of 'Climate Cover-up", and Rachel discuss the oil & coal campaign, using 40 separate 'echo' organizations, to spew false & misleading propaganda about global warming.
Rachel Maddow: Oil & coal 'Climate Denial Machine' EXPOSED!
/watch?v=-ZFyH1BM9ec
goog2k 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Dissolved CO2 makes acid.
By 2100, at current rates of increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide, average ocean pH will drop 0.3 - 0.4 and be @ 7.8 with an increase in acidic H+ ion concentration of 150-200%.
That will cause a 50% DECREASE of ocean carbonate ions (CO3).
Carbonate ions are needed for growth by plankton & corals at the base of the ocean's food chain.
Oops!!!
For info. on CO2 ocean acidification check:
Dr. Richard Feely, NOAA
Ocean Acidification Part 1 of 3
/watch?v=0KgRpJxWQDw&NR=1
goog2k 1 year ago
The people who don't believe in climate change, as the science actually suggests that is, not as Gore exploited it, should never gamble. They are too statistically retarded for it. They'll end up thinking betting systems are cash cows!
Muchodelcrazy 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
125,000 years ago a +2C rise in global temps. correlated with a 6-9 meter (25ft) rise in sea levels.
For a clear assessment of the most recent Climate Change science watch:
FORA (dot) tv
Global Warming: How Policy Can Catch Up With Science, Dr. Michael Oppenheimer, 2/23/10 (Environment)
Dr. Michael Oppenheimer is Professor of Geosciences at Princeton University & was the Lead Author on the third and fourth assessment reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2001 & 2007.
goog2k 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
In just FIVE YEARS between 2004-2009 thick perennial arctic sea ice DROPPED 42%. This was discovered by NASA satellite measurements. Reported 7/7/09
Search:
New NASA Satellite Survey Reveals Dramatic Arctic Sea Ice Thinning
Global Warming is changing our world NOW. CO2 is 35% above levels for 650,000 years. In just 30 years CO2 will be over 450ppm, enough to acidify oceans to the point of stopping the growth of many planktons and corals. They are at the base of the oceans' food chain.
goog2k 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
NEWS:
Methane Releases from Arctic Shelf May Be Much Larger and Faster Than Anticipated
NSF - March 4, 2010.
Research results, published in the March 5 edition of the journal Science, show that the permafrost under the East Siberian Arctic Shelf, long thought to be an impermeable barrier sealing in methane, is perforated and is starting to leak large amounts of methane into the atmosphere. Release of even a fraction of the methane stored in the shelf could trigger abrupt climate warming.
goog2k 1 year ago
After watching Al Gore wave his hand about W. Antarctica, I got curious. Here is why he points it out.
An awful lot of the WAIS sits atop dry land that is below sea level. One spot is 8233 ft below sea level The Bentley Subglacial Trench is unique but, it sits in area below sea level the size of Mexico. Over 1/2 mile of ice above it is above sea level.
I have never seen a climate change denier find out about esoteric facts like this.
TRUMPHENT 1 year ago
Scientific discourse needs to be done with empirical evidence. Selling the scientific process down the river just weakens American democracy.
dwolfcoach 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Climategate
Mann:
"..The key thing is making sure the series are vertically aligned in a reasonable
way. I had been using the entire 20th century, but in the case of Keith's,
we need to align the first half of the 20th century w/ the corresponding mean
values of the other series, due to the late 20th century decline."
Thisawareness 1 year ago
Scientists Seek Better Way to Do Climate Report
Scientists call for better way to do climate report; errors tarnish Nobel Prize-winning effort
By SETH BORENSTEIN AP Science Writer
WASHINGTON February 10, 2010 (AP)
The Associated Press
The flaws — and the erosion they've caused in public confidence — have some scientists calling for drastic changes in how future UN climate reports are done
and a growing clamor for the resignation of the chairman of the IPCC (Choo Choo Charlie)
Thisawareness 1 year ago
Comment removed
Thisawareness 1 year ago
Phil Jones, the head of the British Climatic Research Unit at the heart of ClimateGate, told the BBC: the recent warming trend that began in 1975 is not at all different than two other planetary warming phases since 1850; there has been no statistically significant warming since 1995, and; it is possible the Medieval Warm Period was indeed a global phenomenon thereby making the temperatures seen in the latter part of the 20th century by no means unprecedented.
scrollandkey 1 year ago
@scrollandkey
I think you're missing some very key elements to your claim. We need to understand what the term "significant" means in a statistical formula. Second, Phil Jones said, "I am 100% confident that the climate has warmed." If you'd like to look at NCDS for records, or GISS for records you can. Also the MET office can show ocean temps. But to conclude that this "is by no means unprecedented" is just not accurate. And climate"gate" is fiction propagated by sensationalism.
dwolfcoach 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
STILL WARMING!
For an excellent new scientific YouTube investigating the COOLING claims on Global Temps. see:
Climate Change -- Has the Earth been cooling?
/watch?v=xvMmPtEt8dc&feature=sub
HOTTEST JANUARY in UAH satellite record
(UAH/Dr. Christy, renown denier)
"This is the warmest January in the 32-year satellite-based data record."
To see the graph of the "UAH Globally Averaged Satellite-Based Temperature of the Lower Atmosphere, 1979-2010"
Search:
Hottest January in UAH satellite record
goog2k 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
In just FIVE YEARS between 2004-2009 thick perennial arctic sea ice DROPPED 42%. This was discovered by NASA satellite measurements. Reported 7/7/09
Search:
New NASA Satellite Survey Reveals Dramatic Arctic Sea Ice Thinning
Global Warming is changing our world NOW. CO2 is 35% above levels for 650,000 years. In just 30 years CO2 will be over 450ppm, enough to acidify oceans to the point of stopping the growth of many planktons and corals. They are at the base of the oceans' food chain.
goog2k 1 year ago
This perhaps the most scientific informative non- political video I've seen on global warming. The only thing that would crush me would be to learn that you're not a scientist. So are ya?
Churro1189 1 year ago
Agreed Greenman3610 is also working hard to debunk the myths check him out as well when you get a chance. Spread truth, not lies, hate and propaganda.
Amatsuhira 1 year ago
Thanks for making the clips. You're doing an awsome job in science education, whatever topic you touch!
smarthandsomeguy 1 year ago
Comment removed
goog2k 1 year ago
Comment removed
goog2k 2 years ago
One of the best youtube videoes I have ever seen! Thank you! The only reason people are skeptic to climate change is most of all taxes and bills... tell me what els they want to achive? (sorry for bad english ) ;)
vicols 2 years ago
Comment removed
soth3dcom 2 years ago
I usually don't bother reading comments from people who call other people names...The USA might be left behind in the global curve if we are wrong and don't work for global climate change. This could impact our economy in a negative way, one needs to look at the trends that China, the true economic leader of the world is doing. A fair balanced video set..good job
newguy4888 2 years ago
A lot of people seem to want 100% certainty. Want all scientists to agree.
We need to look at the risks involved. Businesses and prudent home owners don't ignore the risk of fire damaging their property on the basis it is unlikely. They pay insurance/take precautions because it might happen and the consequences if it happens are considerable.
Much the same with climate change you look at the probability of it happening and the consequences if it does. Then you decide on the action to take.
croxleylad 1 year ago
If your not addressing the #1 factor for environmental degradation & increased GHG production, means its a fail & fraud
If you claim you want to protect wildlife, yet not address the #1 factor means its a fraud & fail
If you have non climate experts, like Railroadconductors running the IPCC& IMF economists in charge of CUEI, means its a Pseudo-science
If you have flakes & politicians that sold us the NAFTA, GATT & WTO creation, means they are liars
GW=lies, fraud, fail, pseudo-science
Thisawareness 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
goog2k 2 years ago
Comment removed
goog2k 2 years ago
Sorry Marxist Warm-mongers........
But....
Go to INFORMATIONLIBERATION website for a great expose of Al Fraud & the Marxist warm-mongers
How does relocating Industry from the West which has Environmental & Human Rights laws to countries that have little to no Environmental or even human rights laws help stop Global warming?
Al Gore helped engineer the economic destruction via NAFTA/GATT & WTO & now our children are being poisoned by Chinese slave labor made junk
Thisawareness 2 years ago
It's called the Free Market, which you love so much. Jeebus, you people don't do joined up thinking do you? You need regulation to stop abuse of labour forces, but oooh that would interfere with your blessed Free Market.
joecushley 2 years ago
The USA makes a lot of money because of free trade. Pandering to different interest groups because they demand that their ineffective way of doing things be supported by tariffs, artificial barriers or subsidies sounds socialist to me.
If its junk presumably people don't buy it.
How many children have been poisoned by Chinese products? What evidence do you have about slavery in China?
croxleylad 1 year ago
Croxleylad, Let me correct you, the Corporations made allot of money. Multiple tens of millions of good working/middleclass jobs were lost through these economic/humanRights/environment killing legislation.
Here's the key try NOT to buy Chinese, let me know how you make out
Try & stay away from the cadmium toy watches, especially if you have children. Many of the slave made chinese toys like crayons have lead in them. I hope you haven't been using them
Thisawareness 1 year ago
You are talking about toys that were largely designed in the USA. They were all sold by US retailers. The importer, the authorities, the retailer and consumer need to ensure that products are safe. When ordering products from overseas companies importers should specify the standard required and have appropriate procedures in place to ensure that the product delivered meets those standards.
As to China being the only source of cheap toys. You still don't need to buy cheap toys.
croxleylad 1 year ago
What I really want on a Science channel is evidence based discussion not hype and misinformation. So you must have got these 'facts' from somewhere
Tens of millions of jobs ?
How many is that ? Is that 20 million, 30 million maybe 60 million jobs lost? Lost in USA and attributable to Chinese imports?
Did you do that calculation yourself ? How were those figures arrived at?
You repeated 'slave made'. Evidence of slave labor would be useful.
croxleylad 1 year ago
I do belive in Global Warming and that it i man made and we should take precautionary measures.
I always felt that Al Gore should shut up about it. Anytime you introduce a prominent politician it will be sure to divide people and they will disagree simply to spite.
Eaglesfaninca 2 years ago
@Eaglesfaninca
Al Gore is a liar and or a moron.
For some one who has spent years - talking with experts , writing extensively on environmental issues - had the opportunity to interview the best , tell every one how to live (not like he does) and then make patently stupid claims like just a couple of kilometers under the earths surface it is millions of degrees...
your absolutely right - the fat fool should shut up.
He is a walking teaching moment on pathetic state of US education.
Martintfre 2 years ago
Ugh...
A living example of my point.
Eaglesfaninca 2 years ago
"Al Gore is a liar and or a moron."
Then don't listen to him. Listen to scientists instead.
m3141592 1 year ago
So if the science is settled - why did the IPCC head have to hide raw data, obscure data with special arrays in the programs to produce results, delete rather then Freedom of INformation act, belittle skeptics, threaten to pull publication - try to have fire uncooperative editors of varions "peer review" journals?
Is that how Science is run?
when is the term green house gas going to be abandoned - since it is a fraud - atmospheric effect is more accurate.
Martintfre 2 years ago
"threaten to pull publication - try to have fire uncooperative editors of varions "peer review" journals"
Perhaps you should have watched the 7th part before posting this comment. I don't know enough about your other assertions to comment on them, but you're free to point me to credible sources.
Or perhaps you should start with part 1 since apparently you seem ignorant of even the basics.
GrantZ90 2 years ago
@GrantZ90 /watch?v=1aUHt04WKcU&feature=PlayList&p=BDBFF24B76C4E2DF&index=5&playnext=2&playnext_from=PL
Martintfre 2 years ago
wow so confused. the IPCC head hid raw data in "special arrays"?
You can't make this stuff up. Yet you have!
cthulhu11111111 2 years ago
Do you people even bother to watch these videos before you comment? If you want answers to all that, or if you at least want a perspective on all of that, watch videos 6 and 7 of this guy's climate change series.
packets1 2 years ago
Well, no, the heat wave might well be caused by climate change.
It didn't just happen in Europe, it happened in the United States, too, and in India.
seltian 2 years ago
your videos are great...you're clearly very knowledgeable and articulate in your communication
integer22 2 years ago
"...Martin Derkin, who has a degree in Geo-physics - Sorry... not Geo-physics. He has a degree in Ancient and Medieval History and a career as a financial journalist."
I love your humor ph54; so witty.
CharBroiled04 2 years ago
Al Gore is an idiot. He loves to "play scientist." He should stick to what he knows and leave science to the grown-ups. Gore does more harm than good because the deniers spend all their time attacking him instead of getting informed.
niqueth 2 years ago
See what happens people?
When you ask a global warming alarmist for evidence, they make a very hasty retreat.
They are bluffing. I've seen this crap they call evidence. It's nothing. It's bullshit. No proof whatsoever that humans are causing global warming.
Rotpig 2 years ago
I give him some papers published in prominent journals and he tells me I beat a hasty retreat? Too funny! That's right Rotpig, have fun in your little cave, the adults need to get back to work.
kaupaxup 2 years ago
Actually I take that back. It seems that my reply to your request for evidence did not post, or was otherwise deleted. Not sure why, I will dig up the papers again and repost.
kaupaxup 2 years ago
Funny thing is you never referenced anything. You said this evidence was right before you and was undeniable. Where? What? Tell me what you have right in front of you. What paper?
Rotpig 2 years ago
I have to dig up the links again, give me a few more minutes. Very irritating that that post was lost.
kaupaxup 2 years ago
Apparently we can't post URLs. So the best I can do is to suggest searching for:
NOAA's Climate Literacy program, since you mentioned US.
You also mentioned the MWP, so perhaps read a good publicly available paper on that one:
Crowley, "How Warm Was the Medieval Warm Period?" AMBIO v29-1, pp51-54
And from Nature v399, pp429-435 "Climate and atmospheric history of
the past 420,000 years from the
Vostok ice core, Antarctica"
This is a tiny sample. Follow the references to find thousands more.
kaupaxup 2 years ago
Also consider watching Greg Craven's YouTube series which may spin it all in an entirely different way for you. He's got a pretty unique approach to the problem.
"How It All Ends" by wonderingmind42
But really, I come back to my main point. We can spin around with our eyes closed claiming there's no evidence all we want. Unless we have the tools to evaluate that evidence when it is presented, the song and dance is pointless.
kaupaxup 2 years ago
You haven't proved anything. Congrats.
Rotpig 2 years ago
Science doesn't seek to prove things, it seeks to disprove them. Congrats, you just misunderstood the point of science and made yourself look like a grade schooler who failed their science test.
kaupaxup 2 years ago
Wrong on all counts.
Science seeks to explain things rationally and logically.
What you are saying is that anyone can come up with any kind of theory, no matter how stupid and unless it can be scientifically dis-proved, then we should all agree it is real.
How wrong you are. How fucking stupid you are.
Dis-prove santa claus then. Gotcha! You are a fucking dimwitted piece of wasteoid shit.
Rotpig 2 years ago
Santa clause is a null-hypothesis. Do you know what that means? No? Look it up then.
And no, that's clearly not what i'm saying. A good theory is developed from evidence. This is only the first half of the process. The second half is to find out exactly where and when it is valid, if it is at all. This is the process of disproving it. Nothing is ever assumed.
Notice how I can reply with resorting to ad-hominem attacks? A skill you should seek to acquire, if you are able.
kaupaxup 2 years ago
Global warming is a null-hypothesis, if that's how you want to play it.
Observable data disagrees with AGW.
In fact, there is no empirical evidence based atmopsheric study that proves Co2 is causing global warming. We know Co2 traps heat in a laboratory test but the atmopshere is something entirely different - it's such a chaotic system.
Rotpig 2 years ago
You're not entirely correct. AGW is a kind of null hypothesis, which is why it requires evidence to support it. But now we have a lot of evidence to support it. You can choose to ignore that evidence if you choose, but it makes it no less of a fact. People have an extraordinary capacity for self-delusion, something you're providing evidence for right now.
The rest of your post is commonly called "The Argument From Lack of Imagination". AKA plugging your ears and claiming the earth is flat.
kaupaxup 2 years ago
If you think there is empirical evidence to show that Co2 drives the climate, then you must have a rather large logical breakdown going on upstairs.
I can punch massive holes in the AGW theory:
1. Ice core records show that Co2 rises AFTER temps rise.
2. Medieval warm period was global (unlike what the IPCC likes to tell us)
Science has nothing to do with imagining things. I'd say that's your problem right there.
Rotpig 2 years ago
YOU "can punch massive holes" in AGW? YOU can? Is that so? What journals have you published in? What methods did you use to gather your data? Who funded you?Precisely what functions of modern climate science are wrong? How do you explain why YOUR "evidence" is in complete contradiction with all evidence ever collected? If you're right, the world is waiting to know. Science always wants to know when it is wrong so we can study something else. Hurry up and tell us. Otherwise, you're just babbling.
kaupaxup 2 years ago
I just told you fuckwit. Read.
You don't seem to realise when you are being duped. Being a bit more skeptical of doomsday scenarios is probably wise. Scientists, even with their journals, infallible peer-review, consensus etc etc, have been wrong before.
Eugenics had the support of every credible scientific institution. Eugenics was a sham.
You sound like an authority robot. Just because they are "climate scientists" you think they are automatically right and never make mistakes. Wrong.
Rotpig 2 years ago
Sir, I'm not being duped at all. I'm a physicist and I study the climate. I have the evidence right before me, and I have spent years learning the science behind it expressly so that I can understand why it IS evidence. At this point, if you understand any science, the evidence is undeniable and extensive.
If you had half the knowledge you profess to, you clearly wouldn't be so quick to judge the people who spend their lives studying it for very little money and only a reward of conscience.
kaupaxup 2 years ago
What evidence is before you? Enlighten me!
Very little money eh? You know that is not true. The US government alone has spent 80 billion dollars on research grants. Exxon: 23 million. Don't ever underestimate the corrupting power of money.
If you had half the knowledge you profess to, you wouldn't be chatting with a non-scientist on a fucking youtube video.
Lets see that evidence. I bet you've got some computer model predictions. Wow, they are just so compelling.
Rotpig 2 years ago
I'll not waste my time on here. The evidence is amply available, you just need to learn who to trust better. If you're convinced the IPCC is a conspiracy, of course you will not accept any evidence presented - you've discounted it before seeing it. That is the very definition of blind faith (aka stupidity).
I don't know where you got your grant numbers from (you provided no reference, you just pulled it out of your hat) nor are the least bit relevant for anywhere other than the US.
kaupaxup 2 years ago
"Enlighten Me!" - what an ironic imperative. How can someone force enlightenment on another? You have to go out and learn for yourself. Pick up a textbook on climate science if you are actually interested. There are these great places called "schools" and "libraries". Maybe you've heard of them?
All I'm saying here is that when you spout off random unreferenced facts on an internet forum, the only thing you achieve is making yourself look catastrophically uneducated and backwards.
kaupaxup 2 years ago
We have a classic case here of "running off at the mouth" You told me that the evidence was undeniable and it was sitting right in front of you. Tell me what you've seen.
I've read the IPCC Ar4, among many other documents that contain this so called evidence.
Their is a reason why they say they are 90% certain - because they don't have the evidence. There are all these different factors that they think are related but they just don't know.
Rotpig 2 years ago
I overestimated your intelligence, it seems, if you truly believe I can fit over a century of climate science in 500 characters or less. I have no interest wasting my time with someone of your remarkably low calibre. If you can't even be bothered to pick up a book yourself, then why should I do it for you? There is no need. No, it is better for those of us who can think to simply wait for dinosaurs like you to finally die off. Goodbye, my dimly-lit entertainment for the day. Back to work for me.
kaupaxup 2 years ago
I just asked for you to give me a reference. A reference to the material you think is evidence will fit in this format.
Rotpig 2 years ago
The evidence is far from undeniable, which is why some of the smartest people on earth are not convinced that AGG are driving the climate.
If AGG were effecting the earth to the degree that the "evidence" suggests, we wouldn't have seen a MODEST .6* Celsius increase over the past century - it would have been far more significant.
Do AGG influence the climate? Of course they do. Can they drive climate? There is no evidence of that.
frickface1 2 years ago
That is a very curious sentiment. Nobody is claiming that AGG "drives" climate. I've never heard anyone make that claim at all. But if you agree that they influence the climate, then you already agree with AGW.
And yes, you're right, there are other factors at work which are mitigating the effect of AGG on climate change. This is why we need to continue the work so we can understand it better.
kaupaxup 2 years ago
Of course I believe in AGW. But the alarmists' position is that of AGW is going to cause cataclysmic and irreversible destruction to our planet and all species herein. That is absolutely not true.
frickface1 2 years ago
I'm not really hearing anyone saying that... nobody in the public spotlight anyway. But I suppose that depends on where you live and the media in your area.
There is no doubt that climate change will cause some irreversible damage, but certainly nobody is sure quite what or to what extent. Unfortunately that's one reason nothing is happening. The precautionary principle simply isn't on the agenda for anyone these days. Humans really do like to gamble with the future.
kaupaxup 2 years ago
nice banana split graphic
OscarMaris 2 years ago
In addition to taking temperatures and averaging them from all over the world, it seems many scientists cook the data, filter the results, and do whatever necessary in order to achieve their aim.
This is a very compelling and well made series. It leaves out the emotion and scare tactics found with so many alarmists. I'm still not convinced AGG are acting as a catalyst for temp increase. It also would be hard to convince me that it is a bad thing for the earth to warm up. Great video, though.
frickface1 2 years ago
Good thing we don't have to convince you, we only have to convince people who matter.
kaupaxup 2 years ago
Classy response. A trend that is emerging in so many of your responses to people who "don't matter." Why is there so much anger in the AGW movement? Because other people disagree with your position? That's a sign of junk science. Congratulations on being a physicist. I'm a geologist and have studied the climate for nearly 12 years. What evidence do you have right before you that has managed to escape me?
frickface1 2 years ago
It may have sounded like an insult, but it really wasn't. We tend to think that each of our opinions matter, but none do so much. Mine included.
Why is there generally anger though? Because we see our world being destroyed and people not caring. That makes us upset. We are not angry about disagreement, disagreement is healthy.
Actually, I will turn the question around. Given the consensus in science, what evidence do you have that AGW is wrong? Peer-reviewed, please.
kaupaxup 2 years ago
We've established that I don't disagree that AGG influence the climate (along with roughly 500 other variables, not the least of which is the Sun).
To your question: First would be The Soon and Baliunas paper (Peer Reviewed, Concluded that there wasn't anything unusual about the 20th century modest increase in temperature).
2nd would be the slew of emails recently discovered where "Leading" researchers were found to be cooking the science and trying to silence anyone with a different opinion.
frickface1 2 years ago
The Soon and Baliunas paper was a laughing-stock. They were doing research way outside of their field. As a geologist, surely you can see why that would be a problem. You wouldn't trust a sociologist challenging plate tectonics would you? Even the people whose work was cited said that their papers were badly misinterpreted by Soon and Baliunas.
The emails are similarly a joke. Have you read them? I encourage you to read them if not. There's nothing remotely challenging the science in there.
kaupaxup 2 years ago
Looked up some more information on those two. You should seriously consider looking into them before referring to them in the future. They are "junk science" promoters, a blight on the entire notion of science and honesty. They take contracts by lobby groups to "prove" or cast doubt on whatever is desired by those paying the bills. There are far better AGW sceptics out there than these two-bit hacks trying to pass themselves off as scientists. You're better off believing Ted Hovind on evolution.
kaupaxup 2 years ago
They're both astrophysicists so doing research on solar radiation and it's affect on climate wouldn't really be outside of their field, though you can criticize their findings all you want. Seems to be a popular thing to do.
The emails are not a joke and anyone who says that they are clearly has an agenda. I've ready every single one. They're quite embarrassing, really. Good science has no angle or opinion. It speaks for itself. You don't need to trick things or try and discredit others.
frickface1 2 years ago
The Soon and Baliunas paper that I believe you're referring to on the MWP comes to a conclusion that is in exact contravention of the evidence - which is why so many climate scientists whose work was cited cried foul. There is very good reason to criticize their findings. Again, you would criticize someone concluding that plate tectonics is false, would you not? Read their paper, read the rebuttals. They do not have a leg to stand on.
kaupaxup 2 years ago
How so? They never claimed total uniformity throughout the MWP or the Little Ice Age. What specific data violates their conclusion? I would argue other reasons for climate scientists crying foul (IE disparaging emails). If you truly do have a specific data set that disqualifies their conclusion, please provide.
frickface1 2 years ago