Here’s one for those with too much time on their hands. You can use up ten minutes of it watching this video. As I point out in this video, I recently did a piece going to town on Sheryl Crow for her stupid line about limiting people to using a single square of toilet paper. It was definitely a stupid thing to say and saying it was a joke doesn’t make it any less stupid.
But there’s being stupid in the name of getting attention and there’s being an evil, malicious liar in the name of… well, who knows what. I have seen and heard so many things recently from global warming deniers that have made me so angry, I decided to cut loose on them.
I make a disclaimer in the video but I’ll make it here as well for people who don’t watch the video: having doubts regarding some of the claims made regarding climate change doesn’t make you a liar. Healthy scepticism is an attitude I recommend people carry with them at all times. But the campaign against the reality of climate change is not driven by scepticism. The people behind these orchestrated campaigns are nothing less than self-interested liars.
Coincidentally, Scott Adams has just posted an interesting series of links on his Dilbert blog that cover both the pro and con arguments about climate change. Follow this link for the first part and check through his follow up posts for more. Feed your scepticism with a range of conflicting views. Then you’ll at least have some food for rational thought.
Angry 365 Days a Year 
I think you missed the point a little, I’m not sure that anyone denies that we are experiencing climate change, what is in dispute is what is causing it. Historically the earth has had hot and cold periods, grapes grown in Britain at the time of the Romans and recent evidence would suggest that climate change may have more to do with fluctuations in the sun, after all, how do you explain global warming and melting icecaps on Mars? As a skeptic I’m not against doing the right thing by the environment, but the society is entirely to blame part and that we should all revert back to the 16th century is a load of BS.
Ok, point 1: I didn’t miss the point.
Point 2: There are PLENTY of people who specifically and categorically deny that climate change is even happening.
Point 3: The vast majority of credible scientific consensus is that humans ARE directly responsible for the current rapid UNPRECEDENTED climate change we are seeing.
Point 4: Comparing Mars to earth is completely irrelevant. Different atmospheres, proximity to sun, planetary makeup etc. An utterly irrelevant comparison.
Point 5: I agree that anyone who wants to revert to an agrarian existence can go to hell. I think the answer is innovation. Doing nothing will screw us all.
People are still growing grapes in Britain – it is not that cold, it is kept warm (and wet) by the surrounding sea (and Gulf stream).
Grapes in Britain are mainly grown in the south with a bit of shelter and south-east facing slopes.
I am not at all sure what the relevance of that is.
Maaaate! That was excellent. I particularly like the way you summed up.
The really sad thing is that there are people out there who are so ideologically driven that they will never listen to, or respond to debate outside of their “belief system”.
As an example, I met a republican guy last year, when I was in the US and I was struck by the fact that he had no idea that conversation could be a dialogue (in the Socratic sense) where people could actually exchange ideas. He was all about scoring points based on his rigid political stance.
There is no real debate going on about climate change or just about anything else that one could care to name in the political arena. Truth doesn’t necessarily triumph by merely “being out there”, because many people will ignore it as it doesn’t fit with their worldview. The fact that John Howard and George Bush got reelected is proof of this.
The real trouble with this political polarization and emotive obfuscation is that it’s taking away the power of words to sway people and as Clauswitz said, “War is the natural outcome of the failure of diplomacy”.
I’ve got no idea how we’re going to change this. It’s almost like discussing religion.
It’s exactly like discussing religion. To far too many people of all stripes all issues take on religious significance and so any disagreement is tantamount to heresy.
I’m not 100% sure how to change this either, all we can do is to keep trying.
Hello Aussie, I would like to counter on two points made in your video.
First: Humans being cannot affect something as massive as the climate on this earth.
Scientists have discovered that earth is much less sensitive to our actions. The testimony of Roy W. Spencer (google this) shows concrete evidence on this.
Second: Regulating Carbon Emissions
Naturally occuring carbon dioxide is produced at magnitudes skyrocketing above what humans produce. For example, a volcano in Fiji not to long ago emitted more carbon dioxide that humans could produced in 200 years.
Several things you said in the video are agreeable. The general idea that earth is experiencing a climate change is fact. Although, this is just part of a reoccuring cycle thats about 30 years long. About 30 years ago scientist had solid proof that we were undergoing a global cooling, and today, we have solid proof of a global warming. A constant cycle that has always been around. It just so happens that we are in the warming part of the cycle today.
“Humans being cannot affect something as massive as the climate on this earth.”
Laughable opinion there, Andre. Don’t remember how 30 years of CFC use stripped a hole the size of a continent in the ozone layer, then? The argument you used there was one of the first that sceptics used, and was also the first to be comprehensively destroyed. Not even ardent sceptics believe it anymore.
“For example, a volcano in Fiji not to long ago emitted more carbon dioxide that humans could produced in 200 years.”
You’re using selective arguments and cherry picking “facts”. Nature DOES produce much more CO2 than humans do, BUT nature also ABSORBS as much as it creates; the system is in broad balance without humans stripping out vegetation (natures balance on excess CO2) and pumping CO2 into the atmosphere which nature cannot deal with. Oh, and volcanos throw enough ash into the high atmosphere to produce a cooling effect that offsets the CO2 which they release.
“About 30 years ago scientist had solid proof that we were undergoing a global cooling, and today, we have solid proof of a global warming. A constant cycle that has always been around. It just so happens that we are in the warming part of the cycle today”
The climate record now goes back 800,000 years, and in all of that time (covering NINE ICE AGES!), the climate has never been as volatile as it is today.
Andre, your arguments are tired and have long since been debunked by better men than me. What comes across from you is that you don’t WANT to believe in man-made climate change and you’re ignoring the evidence. What sceptics won’t admit is this: The debate is over. There is no credible argument against man-made global warming.
Ah yes, the latest line of lies pushed by self-interested deniers: it’s real but humans aren’t causing it. Custador gave you a far better answer than you deserve. Mine is simply:
SHUT THE FUCK UP!