Wednesday, 12 September 2012

The Alarmists are the True Deniers.

Cartoons by Josh.
Six aspects of true denial – the denial of the Alarmists.

I’ve adopted the first four of  the “Six Aspects of Denial” from Sean B. Carroll’s book “The Making of the fittest”.

Who are the true deniers

Why those who deny that climate change is natural, that climate has changed since the beginning of time.

They are the IPCC and the ClimateGate/CRU.

Or, perhaps, they are fake deniers! They know that the Medieval warm period (MWP) happened. 

They know that there was a little ice age (LIA). But they try to suppress these natural events (deny these natural events?) to push their propaganda that the evil mankind is sending the planet to unnatural catastrophic global warming. 

I hope this framework helps people understand the flawed logic behind many of the arguments used by the true denial movement – ie the alarmist movement.
  1. Doubt the science –  Make stupid statements  based on flawed papers - like  MBH98; like the flawed 97% scientists agree paper; like the Lew paper; say that  increased CO2 causes warming instead of the factual warming causes increased CO2.
2.     Question the motives and integrity of scientists – This is the favourite tactic of the  alarmist movement. Constantly you hear about the financing of the sceptics by “Bigoil.”  Come on, Big Oil! We could use some of the money that you give to the alarmists.       Who gets the most money? The alarmists, of course.

3.    Magnify disagreements among scientists and cite gadflies – Again, one of the favourite tactics of the denial movement. A recent alarmist denier blog posted “The tiny percentage of actual scientists who express scepticism (Plimer, Lindzen) are dwarfed by the thousands of scientists who agree with the consensus that climate change is happening.” This alarmist was trying to prove this point, when the reverse (ISN’T IT ALWAYS?) is true. The 31,487 American scientists have signed this petition, including 9,029 with PhDs would solidify agreement, not magnify disagreement. And how many pushed the alarmist proposition? 4000? Well, not quite. Would you believe 60 or less? (Link) 
       How many times have you heard or read words to the effect that 4000 scientists from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate change (IPCC) supported the claims about a significant human influence on climate?  I think  I've seen it on television, radio and the Internet and I know that politicians at national levels have quoted such figures. There's no question whatsoever.  It's utterly wrong. In fact, once the duplicated names are removed that number falls below 2,900 and if we only want those who explicitly supported the claims it falls to only about 60. 

4.     Exaggerate potential harm It is amazing that warm is good. Think of the advancements mankind made during the Medieval Warm Period. Magnificent buildings. In Asia think Angkor Wat, in Europe: (link)
Under these conditions, art, literature and even science were developing apace and we see the height of medieval civilisation. The most visible achievements of this period are undoubtedly the construction of the many cathedrals all over Europe. The good harvests had made Europe rich and the good weather freed people from the burden of the struggle against the elements. It created the wealth and labour force to build cathedrals. It was a golden period for European Architecture and art. And… Vikings reach Island and Greenland during the milder condition that prevailed during Medieval Warm Period.

 It is amazing that the Alarmists - the true deniers - continually pour out their false "science" and continue to call the real scientists "deniers," whilst they continuallt deny the real science.

No comments:

Post a comment

All serious comments published after moderation.
Comments should be polite, and respect all views.
No bad language. Spam never makes it!