Global Warming Debate - Richard Lindzen, part 2 of 10

The goal of IQ2 US is to raise the level of public discourse on our most challenging issues. To provide a new forum for intelligent discussion, grounded in facts and informed by reasoned analysis. To transcend the toxically emotional and the reflexively ideological. To encourage recognition that the opposing side has intellectually respectable views. To engage the live audience as active participants who will ask questions and decide which speakers have carried the day by voting on the motions both before and after the debate.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• IQ2
• global
• warming
• crisis
• debate
• intelligence
• squared
• brian
• lehrer
• wnyc
• richard
• lindzen
• climate
• skeptics

[WheelsRCool]

Global warming is mostly nonsense. I find the mention of religion rather funny, as it is the environment that is the religion for so many of the global warming proponents. Environmentalism is really just a modified variant of conventional Christianity when one looks at it. Most of this obsession over human-induced global warming is just done by leftwing whackjobs who hate capitalism and want government to control our lives.

[digitalfilmvillage]

Dr. Lindzen doesn't agree that man-induced CO2 is catastrophic as predicted; he believes it's insignificant. Man-induced CO2 is like a tiny, measly burning candle inside a jumbo jet hangar. It will not effect climate change whatsoever.

[MewCat100]

@slytown What comment are you replying to?

[slytown]

@MewCat100 +1. He's referring to a compounding effect at a certain hump in the graph.

[MewCat100]

@chamjulee THere is not contradiction. His point was that CO2 causes temperature change, but that the impact per unit of carbon decreases as more CO2 enters the atmosphere. In other words, if you have an increase of CO2 from 1 billion to 2 billion tons, the impact is more than the increase from 2 billion to 3 billion. To get the same impact starting from 2 billion, you would have to go 4 billion. See what he is saying?

[RogerOnTheRight]

@chamjulee

He did not get to finish his sentence.

[chamjulee]

although I thought Lindzen's talk was one of the most informative, he did contradict himself about CO2 - at 4:19 he claims temperature goes down per unit increase while at 8:20 he states that each doubling of CO2 give a 1% increase.

[muetter]

@WheelsRCool obvious troll is obvious

[MegaPostman77]

This planet has presumably been around for billions of years (4.5 is the current estimate). The notion that human-induced C02 emissions have been causing warming over the past 50 years may or may not be true, but in any case - SO WHAT! The geological record quite clearly shows that there have been many periods in the earth's history of far higher temperatures and C02 emissions - meaning that current temperatures are well within natural variability i.e. Jurassic Period, Medieval warming, etc.

[Svecenader1]

You can hardly hear the guy

[MegaPostman77]

It seems to me that human-beings, or at least some of us, have a remarkably narrow-minded perception of TIME. We tend to associate and relate to things within the time-frame of our lives. One must bear in mind that this planet has been around for approximately 4.5 BILLION years and has experiened far colder and warmer climate conditions than at present. The planet Earth is DYNAMIC, RESILIENT and as ALBERT EISTEIN once said: 'it is a self-regulating living organism which reycles everything'.