What We Know about Climate Change

Support Climate Denial Crock of the Week - go to
http://www.greenmanstudio.com

This is the same video as "What do we know about Climate Change?", except it has a small typo -- I've left it up since so many places already have it embedded.

In the many responses I get to these videos, it appears that a number of people want to deny, or are not even aware, that there is a scientific foundation to the overwhelming consensus on climate change.

In fact, the science is built on thousands of publications and many decades of observation.

In this video we'll go over some of the fundamental discoveries, the
basic facts that we know beyond a doubt, about global warming.
Of course, many people will never believe science, because they believe that
anything that challenges their world view, is all part of a secret,
global conspiracy.

Increases in Longwave forcing inferred from Outward longwave
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v410/n6826/abs/410355a0.html
Trends in Forcings
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/123222295/PDFSTART
Downward Longwave Radiation
http://landshape.org/enm/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/philipona2004-radiation.pdf
Downward Longwave Radiation
http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2009/2009JD011800.shtml
29000 data sets, press release:
http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/news/20080514/
29000 data sets
http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/abstracts/2008/Rosenzweig_etal_1.html
Global Energy Imbalance:
http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/abstracts/2005/Hansen_etal_1.html
Isotopes:
http://www.bgc-jena.mpg.de/service/iso_gas_lab/publications/PG_WB_IJMS.pdf

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• Crock of the week
• climate
• climate denial
• climate denial crock
• climate science
• greenhouse
• warming
• global warming
• ocean
• acidification
• Peter Sinclair
• greenman
• greenman3610
• green
• video
• Hansen
• NASA
• GISS

[sicktoaster]

@playgrrrr

1. We argue, because there's a good exchange of ideas going on here. Hurray for arguing!

2. The link doesn't follow. Anything I can type into the search?

[sicktoaster]

@playgrrrr

"Humans aren't good with long term thought/delayed gratification/planning, but prone to the temptation of immediate gratification"

I've known some humans to be obsessed with preparing for everything, so this is by no means a universal vice, even if it's a vice that is common among the more powerful echelons of society.

[playgrrrr]

@sicktoaster I agree, it's conceivable. The scientific method coupled with peer review is our best tool to keep such deception at bay. You seem to be a good person, so I don't even know why we argue. Regardless of how conceivable it is or isn't, there's also this watch?v=zORv8wwiadQ

[playgrrrr]

@sicktoaster >things that would cool the atmosphere. Anything?< I don't know, sorry. If you're doing your best to keep energy use down and efficiency high then you're already doing more than the majority of people.

Sorry, what are you referring to at "5. You're generalizing humans. I've known people who obsess over being prepared"? I can't quite match it. Please elaborate if you deem a reply necessary.

[sicktoaster]

@playgrrrr

Either way we should continue researching the climate, but not just to know about it, but to CONTROL it. We need to learn ways of deliberately altering the climate through human technology. It is essential to our specie's survival. What if some sudden thing happened on the sun that would catapult us into a new ice age absent technological intervention?

[sicktoaster]

@playgrrrr

1. Is the climate changing in a way that effects our environment in a way that significantly threatens our interests as a species(including health, economic, too many natural disasters,etc.)

AND

2. If so what sorts of things can be done to mitigate it?

Even if it is natural if the answer to #1 is "yes" we need to do something about it. And if we're causing it but the effect is extremely minute then we don't need to worry about it.

[playgrrrr]

@sicktoaster >Species across the board? I'm just thinking of human well-being. Predators sometimes naturally drive prey to extinction, is that evil?< No. There's no inherent value to anything (though ideologists will tell you differently). But we don't know where our limit lies, without how much exactly we can make due, so it's good to keep things in order until we know where that limit lies.

3 - Good to hear. Habits are harder to change than people/leaders/products you support.

[sicktoaster]

@playgrrrr

NONE of that requires any deliberate conspiracy on anybody's part. It's just a matter of fact that eveyone, even you or I sometimes acts on hidden biases and motivations that are not consciously perceived.

I bet an honest, impartial analysis of the data would find that both sides tend to ignore facts that don't fit in with what they are trying to promote.

But why is the main question even whether humans are causing it. The main questions should be: