<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Global Warming Evidence &#8211; EcoSalon</title>
	<atom:link href="https://ecosalon.com/tag/global-warming-evidence/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://ecosalon.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 20 Aug 2024 18:05:20 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=4.8.25</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Top 10 Global Warming Denier Arguments Debunked: Part 2</title>
		<link>https://ecosalon.com/top-10-global-warming-denier-arguments-debunked-part-2/</link>
		<comments>https://ecosalon.com/top-10-global-warming-denier-arguments-debunked-part-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Mar 2010 18:22:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Stephanie Rogers]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Culture]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[climate change]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[climategate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[global warming]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Global Warming Denial]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Global Warming Evidence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Global Warming Skeptics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News & Culture]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Stephanie Rogers]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ecosalon.com/?p=34382</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>So you&#8217;ve got the facts to rebut global warming denial arguments like &#8220;Al Gore wants our money&#8221;, &#8220;But it&#8217;s snowing!&#8221; and &#8220;Warming sounds good to me.&#8221; From here on out, things get a little more complicated. Claims that use the sun&#8217;s influence on the Earth&#8217;s climate, Antarctica&#8217;s ice gain, reliability of temperature data and supposed&#8230;</p>
<p>The post <a rel="nofollow" href="https://ecosalon.com/top-10-global-warming-denier-arguments-debunked-part-2/">Top 10 Global Warming Denier Arguments Debunked: Part 2</a> appeared first on <a rel="nofollow" href="https://ecosalon.com">EcoSalon</a>.</p>
]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://ecosalon.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/iceberg.jpg"><a href="https://ecosalon.com/top-10-global-warming-denier-arguments-debunked-part-2/"><img class="alignnone size-full wp-image-34550" title="iceberg" src="http://ecosalon.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/iceberg.jpg" alt="iceberg" width="455" height="337" /></a></a></p>
<p>So you&#8217;ve got the facts to rebut <a href="http://ecosalon.com/top-10-global-warming-denier-arguments-debunked-part-1/">global warming denial arguments</a> like &#8220;Al Gore wants our money&#8221;, &#8220;But it&#8217;s snowing!&#8221; and &#8220;Warming sounds good to me.&#8221; From here on out, things get a little more complicated. Claims that use the sun&#8217;s influence on the Earth&#8217;s climate, Antarctica&#8217;s ice gain, reliability of temperature data and supposed evidence of cooling are  based on a thin understanding of how climate science works.</p>
<p>There&#8217;s no doubt that the world is warming. Get a grip on reality with our debunking of the top 10 denier&#8217;s claims &#8211; and click on the links to read the studies and analyses that support the scientific consensus for more information. (<a href="http://ecosalon.com/top-10-global-warming-denier-arguments-debunked-part-1/">Click here</a> for the first part in this series.)</p>
<p><strong>5. Antarctica is actually gaining ice, not losing it</strong></p><div id="inContentContiner"><!-- /4450967/ES-In-Content -->
    <div id="div-gpt-ad-1430927735854-0">
    <script type="text/javascript">
    googletag.cmd.push(function() {
      googletag.display("div-gpt-ad-1430927735854-0");
      googletag.pubads().refresh([adslot4]);
    });
    </script>
    </div>

    <!-- ES-In-Content
		<script type="text/javascript">
		GA_googleFillSlot("ES-In-Content");
		</script>--></div>
<p>Melting at the Earth&#8217;s poles has long been considered a major warning sign of global warming, so when two recent studies indicated a slowing of overall surface warming across Antarctica &#8211; and even some ice gain &#8211; skeptics took it as solid proof of their point. The problem is, <a href="http://climate.nasa.gov/news/index.cfm?FuseAction=ShowNews&amp;NewsID=242&amp;rn=news.xml&amp;rst=2444">NASA satellite data shows</a> that Antarctica has been losing more than 24 cubic miles of ice each year since 2002.</p>
<p>The &#8220;discrepancy&#8221; boils down to two things: first, there&#8217;s a big difference between land ice and sea ice. Sea ice is increasing, but it&#8217;s not because Antarctica is cooling &#8211; in fact, the Southern Ocean is warming faster than any other ocean on earth. It&#8217;s due to <a href="http://www.skepticalscience.com/antarctica-gaining-ice.htm">a series of events</a> including the hole in the ozone layer and wind currents pushing sea ice around.</p>
<p>Second, scientists suspect that Antarctic ice shelves are being eroded from underneath by warming seas, and satellites can&#8217;t measure under the ice. While there&#8217;s not much happening in East Antarctica, which is a high, dry desert making up 2/3 of the continent, West Antarctica &#8211; a series of ice-covered islands that rest on the ocean floor &#8211; is retreating at a dramatic pace, especially along the southern portion of the Antarctic Peninsula.</p>
<p>The Peninsula is the furthest point from the South Pole, so its deterioration could be a sign of what&#8217;s to come for the rest of the continent.</p>
<p><strong>4. &#8220;˜Climategate&#8217; proves it&#8217;s all an elaborate scam</strong></p>
<p>When hackers stole emails written by climate scientists at the University of East Anglia&#8217;s Climatic Research Unit (CRU) in November of 2009, skeptics hailed it as &#8220;the final nail in the coffin for global warming.&#8221; To much of the public, the content of some of the emails seemed damning: the scientists, including Phil Jones, joked about physically harming opponents and referred to their work in terms that seemed to boast of intentionally manipulating data.</p>
<p>But the quotes were clearly taken out of context. Few people took the time to read the emails in full before deciding that their contents proved global warming a scam.</p>
<p>While <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/cwire/2010/03/02/02climatewire-climategate-scientist-admits-awful-e-mails-b-66224.html">Jones himself admits</a> that the personal attacks in some of the emails were &#8220;awful&#8221;, <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/12/12/climate-change-science-no_n_389783.html">an extensive independent examination of all 1,073 emails</a> by the Associated Press and a panel of moderate climate scientists found no evidence whatsoever that the science of global warming was faked.</p>
<p>An Academic Board of Inquiry at Pennsylvania State University also <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/feb/03/climate-scientist-michael-mann">cleared scientist Michael E. Mann</a>, who was also a prominent figure in the hacked emails, of any wrongdoing in his widely criticized use of the word &#8220;trick&#8221;. &#8220;The so-called &#8216;trick&#8217; was nothing more than a statistical method used to bring two or more different kinds of data sets together in a legitimate fashion by a technique that has been reviewed by a broad array of peers in the field,&#8221; the panel said.</p>
<p>Since so-called &#8220;˜Climategate&#8217; fizzled, skeptics have homed in on a new target: a few minor errors in a report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). That&#8217;s an entire article in itself &#8211; <a href="http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2010/02/ipcc-errors-facts-and-spin/">get the facts and spin from the experts at RealClimate.org</a>.</p>
<p><strong>3. There&#8217;s no consensus among scientists </strong></p>
<p>The 31,000-strong &#8220;˜<a href="http://www.petitionproject.org">Petition Project</a>&#8216; is proof that there&#8217;s no scientific consensus on climate change! Except that it&#8217;s not. <a href="http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=19980501&amp;slug=2748308">An investigation by the Seattle Times</a> into the &#8220;˜scientists&#8217; who signed the petition found that dozens of names were made up including &#8220;Perry S. Mason&#8221;, &#8220;Michael J. Fox&#8221;, &#8220;John C. Grisham&#8221; and Spice Girl &#8220;Dr. Geri Halliwell&#8221;.</p>
<p>Only 0.1% of the Petition Project signers <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kevin-grandia/the-30000-global-warming_b_243092.html">have a background in climatology</a>. An unrelated survey found that 97.5% of actual climatologists who actively publish research on climate change <a href="http://tigger.uic.edu/~pdoran/012009_Doran_final.pdf">believe that human activity is a significant contributing factor</a> in changing mean global temperatures.</p>
<p>26 scientific organizations and the Academy of Sciences from 19 different countries <a href="http://www.ucsusa.org/ssi/climate-change/scientific-consensus-on.html">all support the consensus</a>, and a survey of all peer-reviewed abstracts on the subject of global climate change published between 1993 and 2003 found that not a single paper rejected the consensus position.</p>
<p><img src="http://ecosalon.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/glenn-beck-global-warming-denial.jpg" alt="glenn-beck-global-warming-denial" width="455" height="263" /></p>
<p><strong>2. It hasn&#8217;t warmed for over a decade</strong></p>
<p>This wholly inaccurate argument is a favorite of Glenn Beck and his ilk. Here are the facts.</p>
<p>1998 was a record-breaking, blazing hot year. Since average global temperatures haven&#8217;t quite reached those levels since, some critics have claimed that the Earth hasn&#8217;t continued to warm over the last decade &#8211; or even that the Earth is in a cooling period.</p>
<p>That&#8217;s just wrong. Though there were several years in the past decade of <em>relatively</em> cooler global temperature averages, that has to do with normal short-term climate variability caused by climate events like <a href="http://www.pmel.noaa.gov/tao/elnino/el-nino-story.html">El NiÃ±o</a> and <a href="http://www.pmel.noaa.gov/tao/elnino/la-nina-story.html">La NiÃ±a</a>. The combination of global warming and El NiÃ±o produced the dramatic spike in 1998, while La NiÃ±a has contributed to slight cooling in years like 2008 &#8211; which was still the <strong>10th warmest year on record</strong>. In fact, <a href="http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2010/jan/HQ_10-017_Warmest_temps.html">NASA research has found</a> that the last decade was the warmest on record and 2009 temperatures reached near-record levels despite an unusually cold December in parts of North America. Or, put in simple terms: a year of record breaking heat (1998) followed by a decade more of still-record breaking heat isn&#8217;t cooling. It&#8217;s record breaking heat.</p>
<p>Moreover, surface temperatures aren&#8217;t everything. The entire planet, including the oceans, is accumulating heat. <a href="http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-cooling.htm">Skeptical Science</a> puts the data in terms that are easier for the layperson to understand: the amount of heat that the oceans have accumulated since 1970 is roughly the equivalent of &#8220;190,000 nuclear power plants pouring their energy output directly into our oceans.&#8221;</p>
<p><strong>1. It&#8217;s all the sun&#8217;s fault</strong></p>
<p>In 2004, <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3869753.stm">a group of researchers announced</a> that the sun is increasingly active, and that a rise in the number of sunspots corresponds to the rise in temperatures over the last century. Of course, global warming skeptics jumped on this as an easy explanation for warming.</p>
<p>But the fact is, the sun has shown a slight cooling trend &#8211; in direct opposition to the warming trend on Earth. Naturally, the sun does have a lot of influence on the Earth&#8217;s climate, and during the 1150 years for which scientists have records, temperatures on this planet closely correlated with solar activity. It was right around 1960 that the Earth&#8217;s temperatures began to break away. <a href="http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009JGRD..11414101B">Numerous</a> <a href="http://rspa.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/464/2094/1387.abstract">peer-reviewed</a> <a href="http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0901/0901.0515v1.pdf">studies</a> <a href="http://www.pnas.org/content/104/10/3713.full">have concluded</a> that the sun&#8217;s role in warming trends is, in fact, negligible.</p>
<p>Images: <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/nickrussill/146760299/">Kurt Russill</a>, <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XP1-JzU_auM">Fox News/YouTube</a></p>
</p><p>The post <a rel="nofollow" href="https://ecosalon.com/top-10-global-warming-denier-arguments-debunked-part-2/">Top 10 Global Warming Denier Arguments Debunked: Part 2</a> appeared first on <a rel="nofollow" href="https://ecosalon.com">EcoSalon</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>https://ecosalon.com/top-10-global-warming-denier-arguments-debunked-part-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>9</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

<!--
Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: https://www.boldgrid.com/w3-total-cache/

Page Caching using disk: enhanced 

Served from: ecosalon.com @ 2025-11-05 15:30:33 by W3 Total Cache
-->