The Gravityloss blog has an excellent post on how deniers can, and do, effectively assassinate the truth.
It's not enough to bash in heads, you have to bash in minds
Monthly Archives: March 2009
It’s OK, if you are a climate change denier
Remember the outcry when Micheal Tobis merely asked the question ‘is unfairly criticizing those pushing for action on climate change and thus delaying action morally equivalent to killing people’? And then answered only by saying “It’s not all that obvious to me that it isn’t.”
Deniers like Marc Morano instantly claimed that: “Scientists claim that criticizing Al Gore is equal to killing 1000 people!
Canada’s creationism problem
Gary Goodyear, the federal Minister of State for Science and Technology (who was already on shaky grounds with scientists), recently caused quite a stir when he refused to say whether or not he accepted evolution.
Good news from the Greenland ice sheet, bad news from elsewhere
From Climate Feedback:
Jonathan Bamber of Bristol University was talking about the stability of the Greenland ice sheet at a session on tipping points. There was a widely cited Brief Communication in Nature that came out just after the Exeter meeting and was discussed there which suggested that if global temperatures rose above 3 degrees the ice sheet was effectively doomed.
An illustration of the climate change debate
Is it any wonder why a disconnect exists between the public and the scientific positions in regards to climate change?
Graph created by Michael Tobis
The horizontal axis above refers to an unconstrained emissions (“business as usual”) scenario.
Monckton’s silly graph: Part 3
Why I accept the scientific consensus on global warming, and what would change my mind
It will come as no surprise to those who read my blog, that I fully accept the scientific consensus on climate change. The question is why? And what would cause me to change my mind.