Climate Denial Crock of the Week - The "Urban Heat Island" Crock

Could the scientists at Nasa, the National academy of science, the American Meteorological Society, and every professional scientific organization on the planet really have been so silly as to miss something this obvious?

• Category

  Science & Technology

[edward eadie]

This is propaganda bullshit

[greenman3610]

elegantly argued and persuasive. bravo!

[Go Jo]

omg the ussr region is naturally cold that is why the mean increase in a 30 plus year period of construction boom increases the temperature of ussr the most because the heat of the world has to expand and escape somewhere, places that have declined in construction will actually get cooler since the 1950's.

[cbrhawk1]

There's nothing I disagree with on this. We've almost certainly caused a warming of the climate, but the question is how much? The devil is in the details, and we simply don't have enough information from the past to even determine how much temperature particular forcings cause. If very few agree on the details of the past, we have absolutely no clue about the future.

[KrunchyJD]

Humans cannot completely control the direction of the climate, but, we have made the climate warmer, by creating more CO2, by burning fossil fuels. Most of the excess CO2 comes from humans burning things.

[cbrhawk1]

The reason why I say it is probably small is because there are other reasonable correlations with an increased temperature, such as solar output, PDO, ENSO cycles. All of these combined with a slow, gradual temp rise due to the GH effect fit quite well, I believe.

But, as I said, we don't know, and if humans are causing catastrophic climate change, I want to know, but I won't have anything to do with change until we get some real evidence on the table.

[greenman3610]

You're sure that it's "unknown" and at the same time "pretty small"?

[cbrhawk1]

That isn't "deniers" that is alarmists that think that we humans can completely control the direction of the climate. Human influence on global climate is unknown and is probably pretty small.

[cbrhawk1]

I'm not cherrypicking anything. I use data from both sides of the argument to make my case. I cite sensitivity estimates that say 7C to 9C for a doubling of CO2 because it shows that there is no agreement on the details.

Yes, all national science academies and scientists agree that CO2 is a greenhouse gas. I fully agree with this consensus view.

I never claimed a conspiracy, that's your strawman.I'm an easy person to argue with,you don't have to make up my positions since I make mine clear.

[greenman3610]

you are the one cherry picking. we turn to science to give us the best current view - the National Academies of every country, and every professional science group that has examined the issue are in agreement.

Of course, in the conspiratorial mind, that just means it's all the more sinister. That's why you are not taken seriously.