How to talk to a climate change denier, and then what?

[deirdre]

The Ross Ice shelf melting due to Volcanic activity not global warming http://www.lermanet.com/antarcticmelt/ So how can we be deniars when all they do is lie ?

and how does that make you feel?

 

[Mick West]

The Ross Ice shelf melting due to Volcanic activity not global warming http://www.lermanet.com/antarcticmelt/ So how can we be deniars when all they do is lie ?

Antarctica is a land of ice. But dive below the West Antarctic Ice Sheet, and you'll find fire as well, in the form of subglacial volcanoes.

http://www.livescience.com/46194-volcanoes-melt-antarctic-glaciers.html

Maybe you should start a new thread on that Joe. Looks a little sketchy. Why don't you try debunking it?

 

[Joe]

Being a skeptic isn't something you apply to one side of an argument.

Being a skeptic means you apply the scientific method - specifically that you demand that claims are backed by evidence. You don't just decide you are on one side, and then demand evidence only from the other site.

sure even if the scientific method is flawed ? its a fact that clouds hold in heat at night and contrails cause a warming effect . its humidity that holds the heat .thats why its cold at nite in california compared to florida

 

[Joe]

Maybe you should start a new thread on that Joe. Looks a little sketchy. Why don't you try debunking it?

sounds like scientific fact mick .

 

[JohnJones]

The Ross Ice shelf melting due to Volcanic activity not global warming http://www.lermanet.com/antarcticmelt/ So how can we be deniars when all they do is lie ?

Antarctica is a land of ice. But dive below the West Antarctic Ice Sheet, and you'll find fire as well, in the form of subglacial volcanoes.

http://www.livescience.com/46194-volcanoes-melt-antarctic-glaciers.html

The link you provide to the LiveScience article does not support the claim that the Ross Ice Shelf melting is due to vulcanism rather than global warming. Here's a quote from that article: "West Antarctica is also hemorrhaging ice due to climate change" The strongest claim that the article can support is that vulcanism may be an additional source of melting. Thus, it provides no reason to call climatologists liars.

 

[Joe]

The link you provide to the LiveScience article does not support the claim that the Ross Ice Shelf melting is due to vulcanism rather than global warming. Here's a quote from that article: "West Antarctica is also hemorrhaging ice due to climate change" The strongest claim that the article can support is that vulcanism may be an additional source of melting. Thus, it provides no reason to call climatologists liars.

http://www.lermanet.com/antarcticmelt/ I think they are misleading the facts . They said it was melting due to a increase in Ocean Temps .

 

[Mick West]

http://www.lermanet.com/antarcticmelt/ I think they are misleading the facts . They said it was melting due to a increase in Ocean Temps .

Please don't paraphrase claims. Quote them, then debunk them if possible. But in a separate thread.

 

[Joe]

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, criticized for manipulating temperature records to create a warming trend, has now been caught warming the past and cooling the present.

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2014/06/30/n...as-the-hottest-month-on-record/#ixzz36AoHRWai

Temperature graph by Anthony Watts at http://wattsupwiththat.com/

Watts ran the same data plot again on Sunday and found that NOAA inserted a new number in for July 1936. The average temperature for July 1936 was made slightly higher than July 2012, meaning, once again, July 1936 is the hottest year on record. [Annotations in the graph are from Watts]

 

[WeedWhacker]

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, criticized for manipulating temperature records to create a warming trend, has now been caught....

No "they" haven't.

 

[Joe]

No "they" haven't.

The Evidence is above .http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/06/...uly-1936-now-hottest-month-again/#more-112190 Or here On NOAA http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cag/time-series

 

[Miles Bloomer]

A good argument against climate change deniers who can't read statistics well?

Fundamental physics and the runaway greenhouse effect on Venus.

There are polar sides to everything - that is not to say that each side is of equivalent credulity when presenting under the basis of the scientific method. Venus is a celestial body which incidentally happens to possess a large concentration of greenhouse gasses within its atmosphere - that is of comparative density to the Earth's.

The density of Venus is 5.204 grams per cubic centimeter - in comparison, the density of Earth is 5.515 g/cm3. Incidentally, it does not seem that Venus has an active core, but it's atmospheric temperature is especially jarring. This can only be an example of what is known as a ''runaway greenhouse effect'' - in which the positive feedback between the surface temperature and atmospheric opacity increases the strength of the greenhouse effect on a planet's atmosphere - eliciting its own greenhouse effect ''catalyst''.

Some people will just deny anything they do not wish to accept, no matter how much evidence is presented. Plain and simple.

Though climate change is ''normal'', the rate at which our climate is changing (since the advent of industrialization) is not.

Further reading:

http://csep10.phys.utk.edu/astr161/lect/venus/greenhouse.html
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/fact-or-fiction-runaway-greenhouse/
http://www.universetoday.com/22577/venus-greenhouse-effect/
http://www.nasa.gov/centers/ames/news/releases/2002/02_60AR.html

 

[Joe]

A good argument against climate change deniers who can't read statistics well?

Fundamental physics and the runaway greenhouse effect on Venus.

There are polar sides to everything - that is not to say that each side is of equivalent credulity when presenting under the basis of the scientific method. Venus is a celestial body which incidentally happens to possess a large concentration of greenhouse gasses within its atmosphere - that is of comparative density to the Earth's.

The density of Venus is 5.204 grams per cubic centimeter - in comparison, the density of Earth is 5.515 g/cm3. Incidentally, it does not seem that Venus has an active core, but it's atmospheric temperature is especially jarring. This can only be an example of what is known as a ''runaway greenhouse effect'' - in which the positive feedback between the surface temperature and atmospheric opacity increases the strength of the greenhouse effect on a planet's atmosphere - eliciting its own greenhouse effect ''catalyst''.

Some people will just deny anything they do not wish to accept, no matter how much evidence is presented. Plain and simple.

Further reading:

http://csep10.phys.utk.edu/astr161/lect/venus/greenhouse.html
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/fact-or-fiction-runaway-greenhouse/
http://www.universetoday.com/22577/venus-greenhouse-effect/
http://www.nasa.gov/centers/ames/news/releases/2002/02_60AR.html

HOT Venus is 67,240,000 miles From the Sun .JUST RIGHT Earth is 92,960,000 miles from the Sun .COLD Mars is 141,600,000 miles from the Sun . Now That is Plain and simple

 

[Miles Bloomer]

The average temperature of Mercury is about 442.5K, whereas Venus has an average temperature of 735K. I forgot to address the relative temperature to distance from the Sun. My apologies. It's late.

http://www.factalerts.com/venus-hotter-mercury/

 

[Joe]

The average temperature of

Mercury is about 442.5K

, whereas Venus has an average temperature of 735K. I forgot to address the relative temperature to distance from the Sun. My apologies. It's late.

http://www.factalerts.com/venus-hotter-mercury/

One also has a Thick atmosphere to hold in the heat ?

1. Because it has almost no atmosphere to retain heat, Mercury's surface experiences the greatest temperature variation of all the planets, ranging from 100 K (−173 °C; −280 °F) at night to 700 K (427 °C; 800 °F) during the day at some equatorial regions.

Which would also be a factor for all three Venus , Earth .and Mars

 

[Mick West]

Sorry chaps. There's no sense getting into an endless parade of points. If there's a specific claim that can be debunked, then start a new thread.