Image of the day

From the
ATWB Customer Gallery

NEOWISE With Airplane 7/17/20

My Account

New to Astromart?

Register an account...

Need Help?

Top Ten myths about global warming

Started by rpasken, 01/01/2008 06:50AM
Posted 01/01/2008 06:50AM | Edited 01/01/2008 06:51AM Opening Post
Myth #1: It’s cold outside, so that means global warming isn’t happening.

Myth #2: The Medieval Warming Period was at least as warm as the current global temperature.

Myth #3: The reason people think global warming is happening is because of the “hockey stick” graph, which is completely inaccurate.

Myth #4: The Earth is getting warmer because the Sun is getting warmer.

Myth #5: The global mean surface temperature actually decreased between 1940 and 1970, so that means CO2 emissions have nothing to do with global warming.

Myth #6: It’s only a few degrees warmer; that’s not a big catastrophe, is it?

Myth #7: The interior of Antarctica has shown an overall cooling trend in recent years, and there has been a larger than normal amount of snowfall that has actually been increasing the amount of Antarctic snow and ice. If ice mass in Antarctica is increasing, that in itself disproves global warming.

Myth #8: Global warming is caused by natural phenomena on Earth such as volcanoes and trees, not by human activity.

Myth #9: The thermometer record is skewed by the Urban Heat Island effect – because most of the world’s thermometers are in cities, and cities are disproportionately warm compared to the surrounding countryside, that is the explanation for global warming.

Myth #10: We shouldn’t base political and economic decisions on some unreliable “computer modeling” because global warming is too uncertain, the risk to our economy too great.


These myths about global warming have been answered beyond any shadow of a doubt to be false. Suggesting one of these as a reason to doubt global warming puts you in the same category as those who claim that the destruction of the World Trade centers was not an act of terrorism, but a desperate act on the part of the Bush administration.
Posted 01/01/2008 12:14PM #1
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;jsessionid=HIB1F5CAKOQ31QFIQMGSFFWAVCBQWIV0?menuId=1570&menuItemId=-1&view=XMLSUMMARY&grid=F7&targetRule=15
It's a huge shortcut, but it has graphs of Medieval warming period, and "hockey stick" graph, which is a fabrication that ignored the warm period. It also links to the source of the data used in the article.Myth#2 destroyed.
Posted 01/01/2008 12:40PM #2
Myth #4 solar influenceshttp://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/01/050111175828.htmhttp://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2006/nov/18/guardianletters.globalwarming http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/10/051001100950.htm
I didn't read each of these, but listed them because of the title's description. There's a larger number of articles concerning solar activity and its influence on climate here:

http://z4.invisionfree.com/Popular_Technology/index.php?showtopic=2050
Your last comment in the post was quite humorous. It's like saying "all the science is in", or that to question how much, or causes of climate change is like being a holocaust denier. Science is never done.
Posted 01/01/2008 01:25PM #3
This news story comments on what 90%probability means in science-it's a wide open breach that needs more study. Also, an experiment concerning cosmic rays and cloud production.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article1363818.ece
Posted 01/01/2008 01:31PM #4
Agreed. Instead of discussing the issue, attack the messenger.
Posted 01/02/2008 05:36PM #5
Linton Rohr said:

"Suggesting one of these as a reason to doubt global warming puts you in the same category as those who claim that the destruction of the World Trade centers was not an act of terrorism, but a desperate act on the part of the Bush administration."

Wow. You're entitled to your opinion on the global warming debate,
but that kind of BS is entirely uncalled for.
Linton

Just as every single piece of "evidence" the 9/11 truth movement has presented has been shown to be knowingly falsified, the global warming myths have been shown to be deliberate falsifications. Why would you knowingly deliberately edit and misuse someone else's scientific results in testimony before congress as Pat Michaels did in 1998 unless your agenda was to discredit those who actually were working to understand the problem. Why do the global warming skeptics spend more time on speaking tours funded by the oil/gas industry than they do conducting research?

Don't shoot the messenger because reality does fit your preconceived notion
Posted 01/03/2008 11:41AM #6
Lets talk turkey about the Medieval warming period- this was caused almost entirely by the burning of millions of cantankerous elderly women with land as witches. As soon as this practice petered out we get the Little Ice Age almost immediately.

Today we use fossil fuel- back then it was fossil babes. Burn about as good as a stack of Doritos.

Jess Tauber