Breitbart/Delingpole: 400 science papers just DEBUNKED global warming.  Potholer54 takes a closer look.
Posted: 01 November 2017 10:46 PM   [ Ignore ]
Sr. Member
Total Posts:  1608
Joined  2016-12-24

Here’s a closer look at an example of the sort of deliberate and certainly malicious fraud in action that too many accept.
Breitbart who has successfully seduced tens of thousands of people with rage and descent into an fantasy alt-reality where everyone is their enemy,
brings us Delingpole who concocted this story,
which Peter Hadfield has dutifully deconstructed for us.
I’ve added some notes.

Have 400 papers just DEBUNKED global warming?
YouTube’s potholer54

Peter Hadfield responds to a recent meme running through the blogosphere.

Delingpole: “Now 400 Scientific Papers in 2017 Say “Global Warming Myth”

0:30 -  Dateline: Breitbart
0:40 - Delingspole admits to being both disinterested and ignorant regarding climate science. 

1:10 -  MacExpert - Kenneth Richard - “NoTrickZone”

1:50 -  Li et al.,2017 (ancient history, irrelevant)
Yndestad and Solheim, 2017 (also ancient history, irrelevant)
Tejedor et al.,2017 (later)

2:55 -  Carbon dioxide concentrations over the holocene (12,000 years)

3:10 -  Considering sun and CO2 as heaters

3:30 -  Short term variability

5:40 -  Conroy et al.,2017 (precipitation variability - Tibet)
Verdon-Kidd et al.,2017 (variability of rainfall - Australia)

5:45 -  Belohpetsky et al.,2017 (El Nino, La Nina cycles - nothing new)
Park et al.,2017 (AMO - nothing new)
Lim et al.,2017

6:45 -  Tejedor et al.,2017
“… making the study area a potentially vulnerable region to anthropogenic climate changes by anthropogenic forces, i.e.,
increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases (Lionello et al.,2006a)

7:20 -  Abrantes et al.,2017
“… Today’s climate goes through a warming shift caused by the increased release of human-generated greenhouse gases, such as CO2…
Williams et al.,2017
“… increasing anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases to the atmosphere characterize the period with the best data coverage,
and global temperatures during this period are exceeding the estimates of natural variability(Bindoff et al.,2013). 
Therefore, anthropogenic climate change may be influencing our current understanding of the drivers …”

8:20 -  Gray et al.,2017
“Clearly, the global mean surface warming in response to the SC is modest compared to effects of other external forcings. 
It is certainly much smaller than the radiative forcing associated with anthropogenic increases in GHG concentration.”

8:30 -  Zawiska et al.,2017
“However, the anthropogenic impact on the climate is regarded as most important driver of the climate warming in 20th century. 
It is caused the increased emission of greenhouse gases to the atmosphere.  Since the 18th century the carbon dioxide concentrations increased 31%. 
This is mainly due to industrial activity and the burning of fossil fuels.”

8:40 -  Wang et al.,2017
“… As for the most important long periodic signals of 1000 years, a reasonable speculation is that they represent the impacts of
greenhouse gases on the climate system.  … Thus, it should be considered that this millennial signal may be an impact of GHGs.”

8:45 -  Summary

The question of the century is, what is it that makes so many people refuse to want to learn anything? 

Or more importantly why aren’t there masses of students and others dedicated to pitching in a little -
How about a bit of Intellectual Confrontation?
Intelligently, constructively, but insistently, confronting the sort of crap that Delingpole, Breitbart, Watts, etc, (with a little Russian Love)
churns out by the bushel and spreads through the blogs and public media with impunity?

Why is he/they not opposed with rational intellectual fact based constructive confrontation.  Everywhere he turns.
Expose their base dishonesty and disinterest and inadequacy when it comes to actually understanding this topic of utmost importance.
Confront the malicious slanders with fact after fact.
The public climate change debate is supposed to be about learning, why not get a little militant about demanding a respect for honestly representing science,
even if you disagree with it, make your disagreements facts based and honest.

Act like our f’n future depends on it - because it really does.  Giving in only guarantees the worst possible pathway into an already rough future.