Jonathan Abbot writes in comments on 2013/07/23 at 12:59 pm
My 10 year old daughter just read an article in National Geographic Kids about global warming. ‘The world is getting warmer, daddy! See?’ She wouldn’t believe me when I said it wasn’t.
I told her that data is more important than written words, and showed her this page as an explanation.
We discussed how temperatures had increased but were now flat, and so when the article made the usual claims about the hottest temperatures being all in the last 10 years, we agreed it could be true but it still didn’t mean the world was still getting warmer.
She had no idea she could go online to see the actual numbers for herself, they don’t mention that sort of thing at school.
I don’t know if you ever find time to read these comments Anthony, but thank you and all at WUWT for being there and doing the work you do. It changes people.
Thanks Jonathan, that made my day, as well as lifting the spirits of those who have contributed to the many reference pages that WUWT offers.
@Brad S
dhmo.org is another good one.
Sorry – should have been @Brent S
[snip – for the record, I don’t give a rats butt what you think I should or should not do – Anthony]
jai mitchell says:
“…how one can use the information present here to indoctrinate their child to the fringe scientific view that global warming is a) not happening or b) stopped.”
Folks, observe a classic example of jai mitchell’s ‘strawman fallacy’.
To the best of my knowledge, NO ONE here ‘denies’ global warming [or cooling], or climate change in general.
One can select a short time frame in order to show anything. But in fact, the planet has been warming at the same rate since the end of the Little Ice Age. Yes, that warming halted a decade and a half ago — that is a scientific fact — but it has done so repeatedly. And between 1880 and 1910, the planet cooled.
The important point is this: during prior warming episodes the warming has been at the same rate. There has been no acceleration in global warming, despite the recent 40% rise in CO2.
Conclusion: CO2 is not the cause of any measurable global warming. QED
jai mitchell ignores that central fact in his impotent quest to show that human activity is the cause of global warming: the fact that warming has not accelerated, no matter if CO2 was low, or high. The rate of warming is the same. Thus, mitchell is arguing directly contrary to established scientific facts and observations, making his True Belief into a religion, not science.
Jai Mitchell’s problem is that Jai Mitchell believes what the “Climate Scientists” say, except some of them such as Lindzen and Curry, who, for some reason, Jai Mitchell does not believe, probably because these two do not say what all the others say. Blind faith is the ugliest side of the human character, responsible for most if not all genocide, and Jai is ready for the first book burning…
“Give me four years to teach the children and the seed I have sown will never be uprooted.”
– Vladimir Lenin
[snip]
Re: my 2:48 video link posting, sigh. I apologize for the second video link running the first video (again!) before the second video (the one about the U.S. Constitution) begins. I didn’t realize the second link was to a train of videos all linked by an “AND.” #[|o] “D’oh!”
Wish I could go edit my post to take out the first video…. BUT OH WELL.
****************************************
WAY TO GO, A-th-y! So glad Jonathan Abbot took the time to write that. Sometime, go out in the woods and find a fir (or pine) cone, pick it up and look at it lying in your hand. You see a fir cone; God sees a forest.
Keep up the GREAT work!
Yes, homeschool your children – get them out of the public school system. It is the toughest job you’ll ever love. That way you can indoctrinate your children how you see best. Yes, I purposely chose the word “indoctrinate” because that is what ALL education does.
Teach your children to ask, “What do you mean by [insert scientific term here]?” “How do you know that to be true?” “What difference does that make?” and “What if you are wrong?”
Yes, Anthony’s site makes the difference in many peoples’ lives, including mine and my childrens’ lives. Thanks for all your work Anthony.
>> Matthew W says:
>> Save your kids! Get them out of public schools!
I don’t think private schools here are any better. I do wonder what I’m going to do when my toddler reaches school age and teachers start serving him left wing, government sponsored, alarmist rubbish.
Jai:
Newton (25 December 1642 – 20 March 1727) did not live hundreds of years before Darwin (12 February 1809 – 19 April 1882). “Hundreds” means two hundred or more.
Nor did Darwin & Wallace immediately carry all before them everywhere. The French in particular resisted the “Anglo-Saxon” concept of evolution until finally persuaded of its reality by the half-American Monad.
Fortunately, the seeds of LIES, such as those told by that monster, V. I. Lenin, wither under the blazing light of the TRUTH.
Evil has its day, but truth stands the test
of
time.
*****************************************
Human CO2-caused global climate change is SO OVER. That’s why its priests and priest-wannabes scream so shrilly these days.
Screamer: B-b-b-b-ut human-caused climate change is REAL!!!!!
WUWT Scientist: The data say otherwise.
S: [flinging self to floor, prostrate, kicking and pounding fists] It’s real, it’s real, it’s real!! LOOK AT THE ARCTIC PEOPLE!!!!!!!!!!!
WS: The Arctic People, I assume you mean by that polar bears, are doing just fine. Why don’t YOU look at the ANTarctic, S.
S: Snakes!!! Creationists!!! ggggrelllaes;oafshsghhggssdkkevnanknvbwehbvjdddllllllllllllllllghffffffmmmpplplplplplprrr…. [frothing at mouth, becomes inarticulate]
WS: [as calmly as ever] S, you need to chill, man.
S: HOW CAN I THEPLANETISWARMINGEVERYSECOND!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
WS: S, go throw a fit on someone else’s site for awhile. You are starting to bore me. Plus, that talkative Janice Moore will write all this up and take up too much space again and THAT is a pain.
S: [SNIP]
S: [SNIP]
S: [SNIP]
End of transcript.
dbstealey says:
July 23, 2013 at 3:45 pm
To the best of my knowledge, NO ONE here ‘denies’ global warming [or cooling], or climate change in general.
————————————————————————–
I deny that the supposed point 8 degree C temperature increase / anomaly in the last hundred years can be statistically separated from the instrument error, observation error, statistical variability and actual temperature variability. There is so much noise in the system that using the data we have to discern ANYTHING is bull.
The data is crap. The averages / means are crap. The reported standard error of the mean is TOTAL crap. The data does not meet the statistical requirements for anything. The variance of N=1 equals infinity and that fact remains that over 90% of the data has a non-random, non-replicated single maximum and a single minimum per day and the average or mean of these two values does not equal the average or mean temperature of that day.
“Climate is what you expect, weather is what you get” is how the saying goes. But climate is a function of the artificial temporal and geographical boundaries applied. There is no question that everything changes, but we have serious problems measuring that change, defining the change, and understanding what reasons there are for the change.
PS: And Monad’s dad was an Huguenot.
jai mitchell says:
“I have seen…”; I have … witnessed…”, and so on.
In addition to his Strawman Fallacy, mitchell relies upon his contrary [and bseless] assertions. That is True Belief. Religion. But it certainly is not scientific evidence.
But assertions do not make statements true. Mitchell needs to quote those folks making his putative statements. Also, mitchell fails to note that I have made my position consistent, and clear: Since the LIA, the planet has warmed — and it has warmed at the same rate whether CO2 was low, or high. I posted charts showing that fact, proving that CO2 has no measurable effect on global warming.
Nothing in jai mitchell’s response addresses those facts. Further, I posted charts, based on empirical observations, proving that global warming since the LIA has not accelerated, while mitchell, on the other hand, has only made assertions; beliefs, saying: “Your criticism of the rate in warming is similarly not true…”. Note that I posted verifiable scientific evidence showing that the rate of global warming has remained within the same parameters, no matter what the CO2 concentration was. jai mitchell needs to review the links I posted, and argue with the Wood For Trees database if he disagrees. As I pointed out, mitchell operates based on Belief, not on science.
And mitchell continues on with his Strawman Fallacy: “To claim that CO2 doesn’t cause warming is to deny the most basic tenants [sic] of science developed by Svante Arrhenius…blah, blah, &etc.”
Mitchell needs to quote [ie: to cut and paste my statements, verbatim] where he claims that I stated CO2 does not cause global warming. Better yet, mitchell needs to admit that his reading comprehension is no better than his scientific understanding, which is nil.
In fact, I have always pointed out that CO2 causes no measurable warming at current concentrations. I even posted a chart showing that fact. At current concentrations, simply adding more CO2 to the atmosphere makes no measurable difference to global warming. None. The effect of CO2 at current concentrations is so minuscule that it cannot be separated from natural background noise; it so small that it is not independently measurable.
But a True Believer reads whatever he wants to read, which is often very different than what was written.
milodonharlani says:
“Besides which, the hottest temperatures have not all been in the last 10 years, not in nature, that is, whatever the cooked books from GISS, etc”
What is really depressing is that WUWT and many other scientific sites still uses GISS, HadCrud etc as some sort of data which is in some way relevant to reality, when they KNOW that is not the case. 🙁
Jai Mitchell,
“I have also witnessed daily assertions that global warming has stopped. This is, of course a complete fallacy as the ocean heat content and sea level (as well as land-based glacial melt) evidence has shown”
Once again, blind faith. Trenberth’s missing heat, found in the deep oceans! We have no data of the temperature of the deep oceans from before the ARGO floats began sending data in 2004. The first three years of the ARGO project clearly showed cooling oceans before the operators decided that their calibrations had been imperfect. ARGO floats only descend to 2000 meters anyway, not actually the deep oceans at all. which of course have many areas deeper than 8000 meters.
I wish you would look at the data you cite with a critical mind, wondering, “Is it really true?” Since you merely recite the meme from the CAGW “Climate Scientists,” you reveal yourself to all here as NOT Having Thought This Through…
Janice Moore, Thanks!
I love how “still just a bill” features a hands-together prayer gesture. And one of the bills in committee is armed with a shotgun. There was no political slant implied, it was just not a big deal to include mainstream cultural artifacts.
Thanks for the movie links, i just showed them to my amused kids.
But did you notice that in “I’m just a bill”, the entire underlying premise is that it’s GOOD to pass new laws? You’re HAPPY for the bill when he passes. You root for him to pass. Never is it suggested that perhaps it would be better for poor bill to die.
Now THAT was an interesting conversation with my son…
======================================================================
You forgot to mention the millions and millions of dollars paid to reach certain conclusion.
One tree ring makes a 100 year consensus? I’m sure Dr. Lamb would have agreed.
Folks, Jai’s comment is a perfect example of the indoctrination you need to teach your kids to see through.
The alarmists are impervious to reason; impervious to empirical evidence that proves them wrong; impervious to the stink of Climategate. They simply don’t care how much evidence you throw at them, or how many times you prove them to be liars in blogs, newspapers and journals. They don’t care because the point of the exercise is to get this poisonous dogma drummed into the minds of children who, through innocence and naivety, are not equipped to challenge it, let alone ask important and searching questions.
Why does anyone even respond to Jai. Let him comment and let it lie. He is wasting your time that you could spend positively. Time spent analyzing and responding is lost.
Jonathan,
Given your 10 year old daughters recent understanding of available data sources that provide adequate refutation of the popular ‘man made global warming’ meme, do you think she could help Jai Mitchell to a similar epiphany?
dbstealey and others have tried extensively to help Jai break the grip of fervent indoctrination, to little avail. Perhaps a child’s simplicity might effect the deprogramming break through with Jai, where adult reason has not?
Thanks for your touching vignette,
MtK
Wayne,
It is always good to examine your arguments to make sure you are not just going through the motions and keeping the same old memes. This is what I enjoy in the rebuttals to folks like Jai Mitchell, those rebutting put forth arguments backed by data and we are all able to look and see that the misdirection and subterfuge used by CAGW believers is just that: misdirection and subterfuge. One day, we may have someone put the charts together to make a rebuttal and we all go “hmm, that doesn’t look right” and something new may come of it. Of course I understand your point about time wasting, life is short.
Well, Jai has come here to comment, and done so politely. Howver, Jai’s response reminds me of Heidi Cullen’s to the Senate committee, when the question was put to the floor as to whether anyone would defend the President’s statement that warming was “accelerating.”
No one responded for at least ten seconds, until Dr. Cullen dived off-topic and started talking about “extreme weather,” and other such topics. I was disappointed that she wasn’t brought up short on her remarks and made to answer the question that was actually asked, instead of allowing her to go on about “deep ocean temperatures” and other poorly-measured metrics.
What mechanism allows heat to be transferred from the atmosphere to the deep oceans without heating anything between? Plate tectonics wallowed for four decades in geologic conversation because there was no mechanism to explain it; why should CO2 warming get a pass on the same issue?