June 21, 2006

Global Warming Reductionists: Here's Your Proof

This is an excerpt from another inspired documentary from David Attenborough and the BBC entitled Are We Changing Planet Earth.

If you have any further doubts about our role in climate change after watching this, I hope the Bush administration is at least paying you.

As Mr. Attenborough said: There you have it.


  1. I have plenty of doubts and no single source of subjective information is going to sway my opinion no matter how convincing they may sound to you.

    As long as they refuse to take into consideration that global temperatures run in cycles they will continue to have flawed data that they are using to make their conclusions.

  2. Jon:

    I know of no published climatologist that "refuses to take into consideration" global temperature fluctuations over time. In fact, if you were watching close enough, the good prof admitted such.

    Furthermore, please post some backing evidence in support of your argument from a reputable scientific source. I would like to see an example of the "flawed data" that you reference.

    I suspect there is no source. I also suspect you are following your party lines very closely. If science is truly as subjective as you say, then God help us all.

    Please see my post from the other day for an entire list of objective sources, some from the EPA and the IPCC themselves, both governmental organizations.

  3. If they honestly have taken temperature cycles into consideration than they couldn't possibly definitely blame our actions as the only cause of global temperatures changes and that my friend is exactly what they are attempting to do and they have people like you scared to death. I on the other hand don't believe in their nonsense. But if you chose to beleive it that is your thing.

  4. All I can say is WOW! Jon, you are snowed under by their lies my friend!

    Thanks for commenting on my blog. I couldn't watch the video on this one, I think it is something with my computer. I will try again later.

  5. I don't know how scared I am; I'm not hoarding food or building a bunker under my apartment complex.

    I'm also not quite sure what a "people like me" is.

    Jon, if you choose not to "believe" in the evidence-driven fact, that's your American right.

    Paula: I loved your blog! My gf is an art major and she has really opened my eyes to the complexity of the art world. I'll be sure to visit more often.

  6. I took a course in climate change this past semester. There are several natural cycles of warming. One is about 100,000 years long and is related to the eccentricity of the earth's orbit. Another is 41,000 years long and relates to the tilt of the earth's axis. Yet another is 23,000 years long and relates to how close the earth is to the sun. There are a few more too. We talked about these cycles ad naseum in my class. ALL scientists take these into account when looking at warming trends. That being said, the current natural trend should be either stable or slight cooling, based on the current natural cycles. That's not happening. Instead the climate is warming, thus countering what the natural cycles, and all of the related variables, predict. One of the professors at my college is a well known global-warming contrarian. For many years he said global warming was not occuring. He actually testified before Congress several times on this issue. However, in the last several years he has changed his mind. This is a quote from him, a well-resepcted scientist who used to disagree with global warming: "It is scientifically inconceivable that after changing forests into cities, turning millions of acres into farmland, putting massive quantities of soot and dust into the atmosphere and sending quantities of greenhouse gases into the air, that the natural course of climate change hasn't been increased in the past century." He now thinks that although global warming is occurring it won't have much of an effect. But pretty much every scientist in the world thinks the climate is warming--based on solid evidence. Jon, since you're not a scientist I can see why you're not persuaded. But doesn't the fact that the entire scientific community is pretty much in agreement about this mean anything to you? To read actual scientific writing about this (instead of stuff on TV) visit www.realclimate.org. And read this too: http://tinyurl.com/5fdqg