CNN: Global warming skeptics

[EddieVedder13]

Bullshit at 0:16 cuz we already are, and even unknowingly too. I don't even get why skeptics can't accept it, the sooner you address the wound the better. One might as well be having a argument of religion and belief. They are just greedy and fearful, if money was part of the issue, there would be no "debate".

[NoMorThanMost]

I used to believe the globe warming theory. But as I get older, get more educated and keep an open mind to all sides I have to say that the “skeptics” have a very strong argument. And one I find myself more and more agreeing with. I also find it sad that many of the people who believe in the globe warming theory are the same people who always preach being “open-minded” then turn around bash anyone who disagrees with them like this video does. It’s sad really.

[david222444]

Here is reality!! the american astronomical society predicts a grand solar minimun with the possibility of a little ice age. Ash from the volcanoe in Chile has now circled the southern hemisphere. 

[llblaszak]

Man, It's amazing how utterly stupid CNN really is.

[rugbyguy59]

Sorry oomblikkes but O'Brien is right. Go check the IPCC's references you'll see thousands of references to thousands of studies.

Your denialist half truths:

CO2 is released as temp warms but then it causes increased warming.

Ice cores show climate is sensitive to CO2 levels. Just like Hanson predicted

Your source for the medieval warm temp is?

Which species survived warmer and cooler? All of them? Every time?

Sea level has continued to rise. 20 feet will take some time but it will occur.

[tippman2k01]

@rugbyguy59

is that why co2 lags behind temperature by 800 years? co2 never drove climate in the past and is certainly not driving it now. google the environmental effects of increased atmospheric carbon dioxide. multiple peer reviewed papers come up debunking alarmists claims. but the biggest red flag of all is we are told the debate is over! shut up! in science the debate is NEVER over. there hasnt been a debate, yet we are told its over. this is what a religion does, which is what GW is

[rugbyguy59]

@tippman2k01 Are you still sucked in by that denialist half truth? It was AGW proponents that predicted CO2 would lag temp naturally. CO2 amplifies warming. However if we add CO2 it will drive warming..

The debate is not over but the wise understand what the debate is. The question of CO2 as GHG has been settled for over a hundred years. There is lots to debate but not the fact that the climate is warming and we are primarily behind it.

[dartplayer170]

@rugbyguy59 I think you are confused. The statements 'CO2 amplifies warming' and 'if we add CO2 it will drive warming' mean the same thing. So why do ypu begin the second with 'however'? The evidence supports that warming drove the increase in CO2. Perhaps this is what you meant in one of the previous statements however there is a big problem with that claim. That would mean that CO2 and temperature provide positive feedback. Positive feedback is unstable.

[tippman2k01]

@rugbyguy59

explain how we have been cooling since 1998 and co2 output by man has increased. dont believe me? google the environmental effects of increased carbon dioxide. also, watch the documentary global warming or global governance. they explain how we are not the primary contribution to co2 in the atmosphere, and also how the earth is getting colder. in 2007 there were 183 cold records all over the united states, and even now, florida is having one of its coldest years ever

[rugbyguy59]

@tippman2k01 Explain the warming since 1996, 97, 99, or better yet 1980? 1998 is a classic cherry pick. As for contributors to CO2 your documentary is likely conflating the natural carbon cycle with the added CO2 created by burning trapped fossil fuel carbon. A common denialist error. Then you conflate local weather records with global climate patterns. Europe and Eastern North America had cold winters but despite that 2010 was one of the warmest years on record.

[tippman2k01]

@rugbyguy59

first of all we have been cooling since 1998. john christy, who invented the satilites that give us temperature data, gets the direct numbers himself. and his numbers show cooling since 1998. even leading alarmist scientist Phil Jones admits that the earth has been cooling. and to go even further and debunk AGW completely, we're being told that GHGs are heating the planet. if this were true there would be warming in the upper troposphere, bc heat rises. but there is no warming there

[rugbyguy59]

@tippman2k01 Christy releases the data for all to see. Christie himself says anyone making the cooling argument is wrong. And sorry Jones never said the earth has been cooling. Go to the source, the BBC interview, and not the fabricators. Jones said there had not been statistically significant warming to the 95% confidence rate since 1995. It is almost there. However if you go back to 1994 you do get statistically significant warming with 95% confidence. It is all about long term trends.

[tippman2k01]

@rugbyguy59

just saw this comment. christy never said the cooling argument is wrong. quite the contrary. look up global warming debate:climate models vs. real world observations. christy KILLS schlesinger in the debate, and brings up a lot of true and interesting points. there has been no warming since 1998 and jones has admitted that too. just look it up. a quote from the daily mail news in england "the past 15 years there has been no significant warming" wake up and top preaching ur religion

[rugbyguy59]

@tippman2k01 You really are hung up on Christy aren't you. He is just one guy and has had little impact on the climate science community. Either way Christy accepts warming is occurring he disagrees with how much. Christy has made at least two changes to his position. First he said that there was no warming, but he the mounting evidence forced him to change so he then said we aren't to blame. But now he accepts we are to blame but doesn't think the warming will be "catastrophic."

[tippman2k01]

@rugbyguy59

ok christy never said that. looked to find that quote and never found it. so its probably some alarmist forum. also wat are we doing now? we're debating. we are proving that the debate is NOT over, and that there plenty of arguments. so we shouldnt be told the debate is over wen there is not only plenty of room for debate, but there has never been one. remember an argument is only as good as the evidence backing it. and the AGW theory has no concrete evidence backing it

[rugbyguy59]

@tippman2k01 First was Published on Thursday, December 18, 2003 by the San Francisco Chronicle. Second, In 2003, the American Geophysical Union released a statement stating its agreement that industrial emissions have caused C02 concentrations in the atmosphere to rise at a sharper rate than any other time in the history of the Earth. The statement included the quote John Christy signed the statement.

I found them both in sources other than my original one in a matter of seconds.

[rugbyguy59]

@tippman2k01Christy: "It is scientifically inconceivable that after turning millions of acres into farmland, putting massive quantities of soot and dust into the atmosphere and sending quantities of greenhouse gases into the air, that the natural course of climate change hasn't been increased in the past century." "Scientific evidence strongly indicates that natural influences cannot explain the rapid increase in global near-surface temperatures observed in the second half of the 20th century."

[tippman2k01]

@rugbyguy59

this is why alarmists always lose when there is a balanced debate, because they rely on computer models which are totally inaccurate. temperature has been cooling since 1998. the raw numbers show it. remember co2 is not a pollutant, it is essential for all life. and it is plant food in simple terms, and because of the co2 we put into the atmosphere, plant production worldwide has increased 16% which is a big number if you think of it.

[rugbyguy59]

@tippman2k01 Computer model? Computer models are useful for looking into the future but the evidence for warming and man's influence is in the data collected from real places in the real world over the past 100 years.

And now you get desperate spewing every nonsense argument in rapid succession as you bow out.  Any substance, even those necessary for life, can become toxic if present in too high a concentration. CO2 induced acidification of oceans comes to mind.

Got a reference for that 16%?

[Finlandcitizen]

@rugbyguy59

Spencer et al 2008, it's worth looking in terms of model accuracy.

[rugbyguy59]

@Finlandcitizen Not particularly. Go to realclimate period org and check out their post called "How to cook a graph in three easy lessons"

[Finlandcitizen]

@rugbyguy59

Go to comment sections page 3, I believe post 171.

It's not the debunk about the 2008 paper, but rather Spencer's craptastic article about PDO that is not even peer-review material.

Spencer et al 2008 to this day is still un-debunked.

[rugbyguy59]

@tippman2k01 And if you want to see it from the horses mouth go to greenman3610's channel and go to the 6:50 mark of his Creepy at the EPA video and you'll see Christy, in Feb of 2009, stating that the earth is warming at .14 degrees Celsius per decade.

You may think that Christy owns people or kills people in debate but you and I are just observers. If Christy was doing so well, he would be convincing his colleagues not slowly changing his position to theirs.

[tippman2k01]

@rugbyguy59

this is my last comment, bc your just spewing crap from the bible of your religion. sure i may have been just talking about christy, but dr. piers corbyn predicts weather months in advance using the sun, not co2 levels, and he is more accurate than anyone else. not to mention all the planets in the solar system are experiencing similar warming and cooling trends as us. AGW has A LOT of room for debate, and u alarmists are too afraid to debate skeptics. thats why there hasnt been one

[rugbyguy59]

@tippman2k01 I like the bible/religion connection you guys try to make. Yet, I can give you references to all the peer reviewed science you like. You quote the Daily Mail and don't know the current position of your favourite skeptical scientist. If you have anything that can stand up to real scientific peer review then put it out there. Otherwise you are just going on faith. Faith in one scientist and a sort of weatherman treating those who disagree with you as religious zealots.

You are sad.

[rugbyguy59]

@tippman2k01 Did you actually read my comment that you just discovered? You have got the year wrong on the Mail's story and what is typical you are sticking to the words of a second hand news story to the words of Jones himself. The "quote" isn't actually a quote. It is an invention. He said no statistically significant warming since 1995 but there has been since 1994. Statistical significance usually requires longer time periods.

And there has undoubtedly been warming since 1997, 1999, 2000.

[rugbyguy59]

@tippman2k01 Allen and Sherwood May 2008 in Nature Geoscience showed that the upper troposphere has been warming as expected.

Could you be confusing Christy's earlier conclusion that satellite data showed lack of warming? When other's found problems with the satellite data the .expected warming was found. Christy has accepted that his early conclusion was wrong.

Are you arguing that GHGs don't heat up the planet? Surely you can't be that misinformed

[dartplayer170]

@rugbyguy59 How can 2010 be one of the warmest YEARS on record? we're only in march!

[rugbyguy59]

@dartplayer170 Oops. Meant to say 2009. Apologies.

[tippman2k01]

@rugbyguy59

without GHGs the earth would be a ball of ice. and the satilite data IS correct. because he confirms the satilite readings with weather balloons. weather balloons are very accurate. the weather balloons confirm christys' numbers. its all in a news article on cnn. dated may 14, 2009. and as for "2010 being the hottest year on record" alarmists use surface temperature data which is completely distorted by urbanization. also Christy owned Hanson in the house ways and means testimony

[rugbyguy59]

@tippman2k01 The urban heat island myth? The greatest warming is occurring in the arctic. A simple glance at the global map of heat change shows no correlation whatsoever to urban areas. Those maps are compiled from satellite data by the way.

In addition 2/3rds of temp data comes from ocean records.

Christy's claim in the CNN interview is that warming is due to urban heat islands reradiating heat at night. It may explain some small local anomalies but not global scale warming.

[tippman2k01]

@rugbyguy59

well remember oceans literally take 100s of years to heat and cool down. this is why temperature lags behind co2 by 800 years: when the oceans heat up, they emit more co2, when they cool down, they absorb co2. oceanographers say that oceans have, in simple terms, a temperature memory. oceans are not accurate for a present day temp. also, there has been warming in the arctic, but what about the antarctic? the antarctic ice caps are increasing. this was said in dr. christys' interview

[rugbyguy59]

@tippman2k01 Christy's out of date on the Antarctic too. You have two different situations, both are pretty well understood. One sea ice is increasing. The hole in the ozone layer above the South Pole has caused cooling in the stratosphere (Gillet 2003). This strengthens the cyclonic winds that circle the Antarctic continent (Thompson 2002). The wind pushes sea ice around, creating areas of open water known as polynyas. More polynyas leads to increased sea ice production (Turner 2009).

Cont.

[rugbyguy59]

@tippman2k01 Second Land Ice is decreasing. Satellites that use changes in gravity are being used to determine ice mass. As the record builds we now know Antarctica losing land ice at an accelerating rate of 26 Gigatonnes/yr2. It turns out that since 2006, East Antarctica, is in fact, losing ice mass (Chen 2009). This is a surprised scientists.

It is more complex than I can do on Youtube but the information has moved beyond what Christy is apparently aware of.

[oomblikkies]

Miles O'Brien says the IPCC compiles its report from THOUSANDS of scientists over the world. Rubbish, the IPCC gets its data from only 1 or 2 labs (East Anglia university is one).

[oomblikkies]

OK, lets recap some of the IPCC claims:

. CO2 causes warming - wrong - warming releases CO2.

. CO2 drives climate - wrong - it has never done that (confirmed by ice core and fossil samples)

. Temp today is the highest ever - wrong - Medieval period was warmer with little CO2.

. Species will get extinct - wrong - they have survived many higher and colder temp periods.

. Sea level will go up 20 feet - wrong - raised by only 8 inches past 100 year and stopped completely since 1950.

more?

[foundoutthat]

And while you sit in your bugger-like lawn chair pondering away what if global warming is real and my kids and grandkids don't see the earth as I see today?

I will be lecturing individuals like yourself on the facts of Global Warming and COz emmissions.

[tippman2k01]

co2 never drove temperature. the temperature changes before the co2. every co2 and temperature graph shows it. and actually the IPCC admitted in 2008 that the world is COOLING.

[BJJMTF]

did you know, based on the ICE found in Iceland, the earth was actualy hotter around 2000 BC, and when the roman empire emerged, it was cooler. And did you know mars is also heating up?

[foundoutthat]

shut yor cocksucking mouth up.

[BJJMTF]

LoL why? just because I'm right?

[foundoutthat]

i'm right you are right, we both win.

[BJJMTF]

awesome! but the global warming epademic is just a natural cycle.

[camcheck]

TO BAD CO2 levels were Much MUCH HIGHER than now. Just google - Carboniferous climate - . I think you can handle that...

[foundoutthat]

crazy7house Bravo Bravo, Encore! Encore!

That was a brilliant comment you posted. Please do tell, where do you get your facts? FOX News, Nat. Inq. ?

I will do tell, Global warming is not only factual, but the level at which we are consuming our natural resources we will need FIVE earths to meet our future needs in a few years.

We will drive dozens of animals into extinction if news standards and technology are not developed.

[crazy7house]

Global Warming is Junk Science you can overlook , it is simply false. Warming & Cooling are natural, at the time, seems we are cooling. case closed!

[LastTrueLiberal]

Now THAT is unbiased journalism! Bravo CNN!

[willsl321]

CNN, so preposterously nonobjective it's sick. You'd think everyone would be more skeptical about any movement that premises its call for spending on the need to avert the apocalypse. The lack of willingness to engage in debate is what's so scary, though. Everyone "knows" global warming is real. Why? "Because!"

[jarblewarble]

@willsl321 It's hard to have a rational opinion on this issue without being well-informed about the subject. And there are tons of conspiracy theories on both sides of the argument.

[meowmix259]

Way to be objective, there, CNN. If I didn't know better, I'd have sworn this was FOX.

[corruptedsilence]

the only evidence that really matters is the correlation between temperatures and CO2. C02 clearly rises or falls based on temperature rises and falls at an 800 year lag. So using basic scientific method you can conclude that CO2 is effected by temperature, not the other way around.

[label1877]

Glad to see at least we are having an intelligent debate about global warming. Enlightened people know GW is simply an excuse to raise your taxes, such as the new Green Tax in England.

[gobhef]

im not a sceptic , just recon people should read all the facts, global warming is no longer its cooling now , dont get sucked in, read read, read. suckers

[moomintroll1963]

so called man-made global warming is a huge money spinner for the goverments,more excuses to tax everything that moves!they have gone to far with this to back down.I remember in the 1970's they said we would run out of oil long before now but there are new oil fields discovered all the time. We must always question these things.

[arcticigor]

skeptics make me laugh.

[diediehov64]

indeed the truth makes us all laugh cause its sometimes stranger then fiction. Global warming caused by man is fiction period. You people why don't use your own brain but let so called experts do the thinking for you purely disgust me.

[arcticigor]

So...let's say that "global warming caused by man is fiction period". Why in less than 100 years the world changed more than in any other period of 4.5 billion years of age? The fact, my friend, is not about global warming, is about our actions. And human actions don't fit in our beautiful planet anymore If you don't believe in global warming, start considering believing in human stupidity.

[bighitter42]

The global warming freakout train is WHY I believe in human stupidity. It's no different than how in the 70's something like 90% of scientists believed we were going into a new ice age, or how the whole world believed DDT was bad, or perhaps how plate tectonics was stupid.

Every species on the entire planet drastically changes the environment around it. Guess what? It's not the end of the world. Beyond the fact that the earth has warmed 6/10 of a degree in 100 years, your argument is weak.

[allemenia]

GW SCEPTICS is why I believe in human stupidity...

[bighitter42]

I love how you fail to bring any data to the table. In your case it wouldn't appear to be a natural state of stupidity, it's more like willful ignorance.

Do you have ANY points beyond the fact that the earth has warmed 6/10 of ONE degree in the past 100 years that don't have effective counterpoints? Any evidence that this change is more drastic that changes in the past?

Hell even the dire consequences predicted in Al Gore's movie wouldn't be possible for a century or more at full throttle.

[bighitter42]

Throughout history, skeptics have often proven right.

What would make me laugh if it wasn't immoral?

People who freak out and declare the world is ending and surely it's all our fault, that we should stop Africa from industrializing while refusing to step back into the stone ages themselves, and refuse to look at all HUGE amounts of NASA/IPCC/University data that contradicts the fearmongering positions they hold...and then berate those who don't follow their new religion.

[strapt313]

why is it never mentioned that water vapor accounts for 70% of the greenhouse gases while clouds account for 20% and CO2 accounts for 3.4%-5%? humans are responsible for 0.01% of the total CO2 greenhouse gases in our atmosphere. its all another reason for the politicians to tax our carbon usage and squeeze our wallets even more than they already do.

[metaslugx]

as is typical, everyone hates us skeptics...

Sorry, but when Al Gore says the Earth has never been warmer in the history of life, i just want to bitch slap him. So do the Dinosaurs.

[gwachberg]

sorry. is this the same mister singer who proved smoking does not harm your health?

[frankodelic]

Skepticism is fantastic. Please, analyze the data, come up with alternate theories, study the phenomenon from every possible perspective.

The problem occurrs when this skepticism causes us to delay the action recommended by an overwhelming consensus of scientists and scientific organizations.

So, yes... let's question, but at the same time move forward with great urgency to tackle what our scientific community has concluded is a great concern to future generations.

[bighitter42]

That might be true if the scientific community had achieved consensus. It might be true if the vast majority if Antarctica wasn't getting colder. It might be true if the icebergs in Iceland weren't growing.

As it stands though frankodelic, I'd suggest you do what you so boldly tell everyone else to do. ANALYZE THE DATA...it certainly doesn't promote the 550 TRILLION dollar action you would have us take. "Nothing is so strongly believed, as that which there is little understanding of."

[marineninga]

cnn that was a very biased report quit picking on skeptics

[darkling9109]

Thanks CNN. Next time though present the facts without inserting your own views and opinions.