Great series debunking GW-denial pseudo-science

I present to you the very well researched and soberingly scientific video-blog series "Climate Crock of the Week" by Peter Sinclair.

Those who contend that global warming is a hoax involving thousands of scientists around the world seem to frequently be mistaken on the hard science/facts. Here is a series which eloquently and thoroughly addresses some of the claims made by anthropogenic global-warming deniers. I assume most of you won't have the time to watch all of these videos in one sitting, but I'm sure you can find particular topics you'd like to skip to, so I've provided the titles above each video for an easier ID on the topics within.

If you consider yourself a real seeker of truth and respect sound science, then no matter your position on the subject, please be open minded to the facts/material presented. On the mountain of truth you never climb in vain...




Climate Denial Crock of the Week- "It's cold. So there's no Climate Change"


Climate Denial Crock of the Week - Ice Area vs Volume


Climate Denial Crock of the Week - Solar Schmolar


Climate Denial Crock of the Week - That 1500 Year Thing


Climate Denial Crock of the Week - I Love the 70s!!


Climate Denial Crock of the Week - The "Urban Heat Island" Crock


Climate Denial Crock of the Week - The Great Petition Fraud


Climate Denial Crock of the Week - "The Medieval Warming Crock"


Climate Denial Crock of the Week - The "Temp leads Carbon" Crock


Climate Denial Crock of the Week - Party like it's 1998


Sense from Deniers on CO2? Don't hold your breath....


Climate Denial Crock of the Week - Don't it make my Green World Brown


The Big Swindle Movie


This Year's Model


Polar Ice Update


Watts Up With Watts?


Creepy at the EPA


Denial was a River in Africa


1998 Revisited


Mars Attacks remix


All Wet on Sea Level - The Remix


Birth of a Climate Crock


2009 Sea Ice Update


The Big Mist Take

I do believe we are in a crisis whether man made or not. Our Earth and the natural resources are being depleted, the animal/bird species are going extinct and humans have a major role to play in that.

I have seen many people stating this is not true due to the hack of email, but majority of these people don't know anything more than what a layman knows. The technical knowhow to study and properly interpret these reports and messages. People just cherry pick the part which suits them, but fail to understand what the context it was in, the many geographical anomalies of different areas, difference in temp., rain etc. Most of the people on ATS are doing it because of the:
a) paranoia of NWO
b) suits their political stance (left wing...right wing stuff)
c) easy to deny than admit guilt
d) goes against their lifestyle
e) Is against the interest of current "power and energy" companies ruling the economies

Anti-Climate people simply do not have science with them to claim it is not man made or the climate change is not happening other than private blog articles or fox news propaganda.

reply to post by December_Rain


No evidence beyond blogs or faux news?

How about all the evidence of cover ups and downright lies and manipulation of data?

How about all the evidence of governmental manipulation and furtherance of the global governance agenda?

Sometimes views of members of a conspiracy site just boggle the mind.

Someone punches you in the face? Do you blame the global climate change or do you blame the guy who punches you in the face.

reply to post by December_Rain

I have seen many people stating this is not true due to the hack of email, but majority of these people don't know anything more than what a layman knows. The technical knowhow to study and properly interpret these reports and messages. People just cherry pick the part which suits them, but fail to understand what the context it was in, the many geographical anomalies of different areas, difference in temp., rain etc.

This is true of all sides. Politicians thinking they are scientists, scientists delving into politics and economics and laypeople delving into all three.

Here's what I know for sure

-By their own science, recommended measures to stop climate change are fairly ineffective

-Due to my own education in economics and personal knowledge of basic economic principles, I know that the recommended policy changes are counter to sound and sustainable economics.

-Just as I do not know much about climate science, scientists need to know their limits in economics.

-Al Gore is not a scientist or an economist and has benefited greatly from acting like both in recent years.


Whether humans are directly causing the warming or not, the proposed policy decisions are erroneous.

Anti-Climate people simply do not have science with them to claim it is not man made or the climate change is not happening other than private blog articles or fox news propaganda.

Anti-Climate people? So if you disagree with the proposed policy changes you are against the climate. This is why the discussion of climate change is going no where.

Of course the science is going to be questioned when the recommended solutions are batsh*t crazy.

nice work.

Only problem with these AGW deniers is that they never will accept the facts and stick to what they believe. I given up on convincing people thats its real so I will just wait till it bites them in the backside.....I know we are right and I know whats coming hence my depression and why i am childless and mortgage free. At least I dont have to apologise to anyone.....

Originally posted by NoHierarchy


Watts Up With Watts?

This one is well worth the watch. Watts actually put a DMCA on Sinclair for this video. Guess he didn't appreciate being exposed in such a way.

So much for transparency.

@DINSTAAR: however, many economists disagree with you.

Originally posted by DINSTAAR
This is true of all sides. Politicians thinking they are scientists, scientists delving into politics and economics and laypeople delving into all three.

Here's what I know for sure

-By their own science, recommended measures to stop climate change are fairly ineffective

-Due to my own education in economics and personal knowledge of basic economic principles, I know that the recommended policy changes are counter to sound and sustainable economics.

-Just as I do not know much about climate science, scientists need to know their limits in economics.

-Al Gore is not a scientist or an economist and has benefited greatly from acting like both in recent years.


Whether humans are directly causing the warming or not, the proposed policy decisions are erroneous.

Anti-Climate people simply do not have science with them to claim it is not man made or the climate change is not happening other than private blog articles or fox news propaganda.

Anti-Climate people? So if you disagree with the proposed policy changes you are against the climate. This is why the discussion of climate change is going no where.

Of course the science is going to be questioned when the recommended solutions are batsh*t crazy.

I think the term layman is used as somebody who doesn't really follow the issues more than the average amount. So, the layman wouldn't know much aside from headline news about climate change, economics or politics and would probably know more about things like sports and/or celebrity gossip.

Now there are non-official civilians who take more active interests in such things, as most of us here are, and I'd say we're a decent step or two above the layman in an advanced knowledge of the world. And I don't really mean that in an elitist way, but more so as a matter-of-fact.

As for promoting sustainable economics versus sustainable lifestyles... I really think that's somewhat of a false dichotomy. The two are intertwined, because at some point an unsustainable lifestyle (ecologically) will pull the rug right out from under any economic system in place and render it moot. Not to mention the basic/every-day links like resources, weather, natural disasters, etc. and their obvious/direct effects on the economy. Our first priority should be ecological sustainability, since the living/natural environment is the most BASIC necessity to human life/welfare. If the environment collapses, humans will soon follow, whether in part or in whole.

I also think it's an exaggeration to say that every proposed alternative or solution to climate change/environmental destruction is "bat#" crazy. In fact, that's absolutely untrue. Sure there are some crazy, dangerous, unworkable ideas out there, that's the nature of invention. However, there are very intelligent, real and feasible things we must do in order to reduce our footprint on this planet. Otherwise we'll continue to head off the cliff and that won't be good for any living thing.

An ecological/economic symbiosis must be reached, we very well may have to experiment with and adopt radical/fundamentally new ways of living on the planet. The nearer we get to ecological tipping points, the more we will need to favor the ecological to the economic. If we are to be smart and think long-term as a society, we'll figure out a way to accommodate both realms. As the cost/benefit ratio to humans and the environment is threatened more by ecological destruction than by economic collapse, uglier risks will have to be taken if no substantial global action is seen soon. This is not preferable, whether enacted top-down by governments or bottom-up by grassroots resistance (though I definitely prefer the latter ). If we consider ourselves so intelligent/inventive as a species, then we must put our money where our mouth is and actually INVENT/experiment, break civilization's molds and move beyond it.

Originally posted by loner007
nice work.

Only problem with these AGW deniers is that they never will accept the facts and stick to what they believe. I given up on convincing people thats its real so I will just wait till it bites them in the backside.....I know we are right and I know whats coming hence my depression and why i am childless and mortgage free. At least I dont have to apologise to anyone.....

Hey man, don't get too down and out about it. I know it's difficult not to, I feel the same way sometimes. But debating other people is never in vain, because if you make good points, those who you battle with may not concede defeat right away, but they're left with something to chew on and if it's the truth, it may change their mind (and it does if they're open to changing it for the better).

I prefer to see the rational side of people, even if I think their views are totally irrational, even deniers (so long as they're not some kind of industry spy/plant or actually clinically insane) have a passion for the truth/science and a better world. This is why we engage in these battles, because of our conflicting convictions, but these battles are not in vain. Like you, I believe that we're on the side of right and deniers, though well-meaning, have been duped to serve the very people they believe they're fighting.

We will get to the bottom of this, and minds will be changed. Hakuna matata.

Global warming denial has little to do with science and everything to do with politics, specifically American politics. A quote by Stanton Friedman comes to mind; "don't bother me with the facts, my minds already made up."

I need to go find that program that changes we-pages into PDF's. Yet more proof that AGW is a religion and not science.

As long as the Church of Climatology keeps calling people that fail to believe in your religion "deniers" you aren't ever going to get a rational debate out of the whole deal.

Man I really hope Al Gore and the lot of them end up going to prison for what they have done to people. At first when the leak came out I laughed, now I actually feel bad for the AGW fanatics.

The fact is CRU's raw data has been thrown in the trash. The fact is without the raw data the only data that exist is the adjusted data from the now discredited "scientist". AGW isn't even a theory, it is a discredited hypothesis. The amount of collusion it took for it to even get to point where it is now is down right insane.

Then when you look at the fact that the CRU has the worlds largest collection of data that has been "trashed" and is the basis for thousands of papers the whole field of Climatology has been set back decades.

reply to post by Hastobemoretolife


Mate I do not need CRF reports to tell people about climate change. The place I live in, I face it everyday. The summers are getting hotter every year since last 4-5 years and each year they break the record of heat of previous year or 25-50 years. There are hardly any rainfall anymore, winters are just for "few weeks" now instead of months and then also you can just go out in a normal jacket in the month of December instead of stuffed woolen clothes, jackets, high boots, ear mufflers like few years ago. Extinction of animal species like Tigers, Polar bears, dolphins etc. Polar ice caps melting, drought in many areas.

One does not need any reports or hacked emails to state these, you can experience them yourself.

I am old enough to have watched the whole thing unfold since the 70’s... and the thing that has fascinated me the most is not the science (I am no scientist and admit to not understanding all the facts) It’s the human psychology!

Personally I believe the main reason for Manmade Climate Change denial is selfishness... I've seen it in so many people.

When they first hear of Climate Change is caused by our lifestyles they start to grumble...

"Oh great... I suppose the tree huggers want us to stop eating burgers and driving cars"

No sign of worry for the planet's environment, just this short sighted inward looking attitude of "I hope they don’t expect ME to change"

Then when they started hearing that in fact we ALL might have to change the way we live the anger and self pity sets in...

"Who are they to tell me what to do, this is just a form of control, if i wanna drive my 4x4 all day long it’s my business"

And then when we start to see the Climate Change denial claims we get the smug, self righteous, I knew it! Attitude.

And that’s it... opinion now set in stone.

Most people in the “developed” world have been conditioned to be consumers... we are taught, from a young age, that our life’s success can be measured by the accumulation of material wealth... Is it any surprise that people then behave like children when someone threatens to take away their toys??

I guess for me, as someone who openly admits to not fully understanding all the science, i look at it the same way as i look at the history of smoking!!
For years smoking was promoted, even by doctors in the early years! And when people first started to provide evidence for the negative health implications of smoking there was uproar! People refused point blank to believe it. We even had scientist (mainly funded by the tobacco giants) step forward and provide warped statistics and data to counter claim the health implications.

So i ask... is it worth the risk???

Will it REALLY hurt people so much to drive an electric car??? With almost 80% of the world’s population living in poverty or near poverty... is this the BIGGEST injustice you can think of???

Its selfishness in my opinion!

The other thing that makes me laugh is the self appointed experts we see on here... Happily posting graphs, data and quotes from “scientists” as if they know for a FACT all that is going on.
I would guess that 99% of the people who have “researched” the science behind this topic have done it with a biased opinion and don’t actually know what they are talking about. They simply regurgitate second hand theories and data, from people they have never met, that backs up their opinion!
And this applies to both sides of the argument.

For me, it’s simple, i don’t know for a fact that driving a gas guzzling car will affect the environment... but I would rather not take the risk if there is a chance it could!!
I just don’t like playing dice with the world.

Originally posted by DINSTAAR


-Due to my own education in economics and personal knowledge of basic economic principles, I know that the recommended policy changes are counter to sound and sustainable economics.

Yes, we have seen how sound and sustainable OUR economies have been lately.
What economy based on a non renewable energy source is actually sustainable, because our economies are reliant of Fossil Fuels.

My Govt. currently subsidizes fossil fuel costs relating to transport and electricity for industry and business at a cost of 10 billion annually.
This is not sound or sustainable.

Of course the science is going to be questioned when the recommended solutions are batsh*t crazy.

Batsh*t crazy solution is doing nothing. It is dwelling in apathy inspired by the likes of those that these excellent videos challenge.

Here is another simple look at solutions.


OP S&F.

[edit on 30/11/09 by atlasastro]

reply to post by Hastobemoretolife


Just debunk the Videos then.

Your rants are old.

Blah blah blah Religion blah blah blah Gore, Blah Blah blah E-mails. Blah blah NWO.

Show the fraudulent work in the Emails. I have asked you before.
Just point out the peer reviewed work that is fraudulent.

Debunk the Videos.

Should be easy.





[edit on 30/11/09 by atlasastro]

This nice little video sums up how i'm feeling on the whole issue.

reply to post by woodwardjnr


Now that was funny

I am sending that to everyone i know!

reply to post by loner007


Sorry I don't understand what mortage free has to do with climate change, and that sort of statement is exactly the sort of thing that makes people question it.

Yes we need to do something more than we are doing about polution, but the crap n tax is not the answer. The believers need to show they mean it too, like not take jets all over the world.

One trip by Obama would cover the carbon needs of an average family for a while, tell him to stay home some and help save the planet ... or Al Gore could go a much needed diet (vegan).

Truth is earth has not warmed much last 5-10 years, but there are changes and those changes are in the rest of the solar system too, somehow I don't think we caused too much CO2 on Mars.
I would suggest science spend some time on that, but I don't trust them anymore.

I read an interresting article about this very subject in my local news paper. Take a look:

www.ottawasun.com...

Cheers!

How can some people, other than crooked politicians and their supporters, still waste time trying to debunk the debunkers ???

After the hacked emails, it is CLEAR that BOTH SIDES AGREE that temperature has been cooling for the last 10 years. When both sides agree, only idiots keep arguing.

It's just that those caught with their hand in the bag are still trying to put a brave face and continue the charade, but the emails prove they KNOW they are lying.

It's pathetic. There is nothing to prove or disprove anymore, just to send to jail those who lied, hid and twisted data, pressured and fired honest scientists ... at least if we want to have a chance to stop the current madness.

The people who are trying to make us aware of our carbon footprint,and are trying to tax the skin off us because of global warming are driving round the place in armoured motorcades,allowing the dumping of radio active waste in the third world,and flying about in private jets.

So why the hell should we believe a damned word they say?

Now I am all for preserving the planet for future generations,but how is paying massive taxes to corrupt governments going to preserve anything other that their own filthy rich bank balances?

Look at the last economic disaster these people created for us all-that was after we gave them all our tax money for generations and they still manage to cock it up...
It will be the same with the climate-we will lovingly give our money to the utter bastards who control this world thinking they will save us,only to find out a few years from now they have spent/lost/stolen all the money and the planets in a worse state than before.
But the elite will be richer.Surprise surprise!!


[edit on 30/11/2009 by Silcone Synapse]