Climate Change Disinformation Debunked

brianlux

Taking a break from that invigoration and brisk global cooling thread, here's a good, clear, article that actually explains some of the climate disinformation as stated by congressman David McKinley (R-W. Va.) among other deniers- disinformation, for example, like the notion that global temperatures have not gone up in the last 40 years (false, the opposite is true), the false claims that sea ice is actually growing (by looking at year-round measurements, not at all true) and totally unfounded idea that climate change will have more benefit than harm (this alone shows a gross lack of understanding the basics of the science of ecology).

See link for graphs, etc.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronom ... rrors.html

I Told You So: Congressman Parrots Climate Change Denial Errors

Man, sometimes I hate it when I’m right.

This whole week I’ve been writing about how an article in the tabloid newspaper The Mail on Sunday is riddled with climate change denial nonsense, with error piled upon error. They even updated the atrocious article, making it in some ways worse—the basic mistake about temperatures increasing upon which the article was based was changed, but not corrected.

I also posted about how misinformation like this spreads through the deny-o-sphere, going from one mouthpiece to the next, changing and morphing into even more ridiculous claims. I pointed out that this kind of bilge eventually makes its way to people who have actual power.

And here we are. On Wednesday, the congressional Subcommittee on Energy and Power held a hearing on the climate change policies President Obama has announced. On the subcommittee sits a congressman by the name of David McKinley (R-W. Va.). By many measures, he is a rank-and-file Republican, sitting squarely in the middle of his party’s ideological stance. During that meeting, where important issues in climate change policies were discussed, he said this:

But here’s the reality of temperature changes over the last 40 years… Actually we can say over 40 years there’s been almost no increase in temperature – very slight – in fact […] even with increased greenhouse CO2 level emissions, the Arctic ice has actually increased by 60 percent. Also that the Antarctica is also expanding… most experts believe by 2083, in 70 years, the benefits of climate change will still outweigh the harm.



Let me be clear: What he said here is complete nonsense.

To start with, his claim that temperatures haven’t gone up in 40 years is just dead wrong. I think he was trying to talk about the flattening of temperatures over the past few years that deniers are making so much hay out of. At best, this leveling out of surface temperatures goes back 15 years or so, but certainly not 40. I might forgive the Congressman and say it was a slip of the tongue, but he says it more than once.

The reality is that since 1973 land surface temperatures have gone up a full 0.6° C in a trend so clear it’s hard to believe anyone could honestly miss it. And as I have pointed out, the recent flattening is only due to a downswing in ocean temperatures due to a natural and well-known cycle in the Pacific. Once that goes back to an upswing, land temperatures will increase once again as well.

Also, McKinley propagates the Mail’s grossly misleading claim about Arctic sea ice increasing. Last year at this time we had a record low extent of sea ice over the North Pole. This year, the ice is way, way below average, by about a million square kilometers. Sure, it’s more than last year, but that’s only because last year’s minimum was extremely low. It’s incredibly misleading to say this year’s ice recovered from that. It’s far more fair to note that this minimum is one of the lowest ever seen (the sixth lowest since satellite measurements began, and possibly for millennia).

His claim that Antarctica is “expanding” is also baloney. It’s an old denier trope, and doesn’t differentiate between sea ice and land ice. The sea ice around Antarctica grows every winter, and melts away every summer. Right now it’s winter in Antarctica, and sure enough the sea ice is at a maximum. In fact, it is at a record max: about 4% higher above the previous maximum. But this will all melt away again in the austral summer; it doesn’t really have any long-term implications for global warming (although a case can be made that warming means more moisture in the air, which can then snow out when it’s cold, ironically temporarily increasing ice extent). And note that this is happening when Arctic sea ice extent is still 30% below average.

And what of Antarctic land ice? Surprise: That’s decreasing over time, to the tune of about a hundred billion tons per year.

Finally, about McKinley’s claims that most experts think climate change will have more benefits than harm: I will be very, very surprised—shocked, floored even—if that turns out to be the case. I have not read the full IPCC report (it’s still not released), but I’ve read a draft of the “Summary for Policymakers” and did not see any mention of this (to be fair, I might have missed it, but the SfP goes over specific topics like temperatures, history, and so on). But I have to wonder what “experts” would say such a thing. Most of the climate and environmental scientists I have read say that global warming on the scale and rate we’re seeing is catastrophic; only full-blown climate change deniers have made any claims that the benefits outweigh the harm.

So there you have it: A duly-elected Representative from West Virginia sits on the House Subcommittee for Energy and Power, and can make easily-disproven and frankly ridiculous statements like that, empowered by the kind of error-riddled articles published by the likes of The Mail, just as I warned.

I was glad to see Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) call McKinley out on his statements at the end of that video excerpt, and make a clear call for more science and scientists at hearings like this. But as long as Republicans hold a majority in the House I despair of that happening; they tend to call well-known deniers to testify at these panels, and the sitting Congresspeople on those committees are overwhelmingly anti-science.

This matters, folks. This is our future we’re talking about, and from top to bottom, people who flatly deny reality have infiltrated the system, with just enough influence to obstruct any real progress. This must change if we’re ever to fix this looming and globally critical problem.

polaris_x

yup ... sadly ... the truth no longer is relevant nor are facts ... people continue to post ridiculous stuff and are too lazy to actually comprehend what they are actually posting ...

hey ... here's an article that says global warming is caused by ants eating leftover pizza ... cool ... gonna post it ...

lukin2006

I don't have time to read this ... I have to go put gas in my Hummer then give it a wash and wax.

JimmyV

I heard the polar bears are thriving.

brianlux

polaris_x wrote:

yup ... sadly ... the truth no longer is relevant nor are facts ... people continue to post ridiculous stuff and are too lazy to actually comprehend what they are actually posting ...

hey ... here's an article that says global warming is caused by ants eating leftover pizza ... cool ... gonna post it ...

All because of Two Bad Ants!

backseatLover12

Sometimes people don't want to hear the truth because they don't want their illusions destroyed. ~ Nietzsche

brianlux

Here's a brief but interesting article illustrating first-hand difficulties that are beginning to show up as a result of climate change:

http://350.org/about/blogs/interesting- ... cross-asia

Interesting results from a new climate change survey across Asia

The BBC media action surveyed 33,500 people across 7 countries of Asia (India, China, Vietnam, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Indonesia, Nepal), over a span of 3 years, on their perceptions of climate change based on their lived experiences of its impacts. With an approach that focused on the effects people noticed or felt in areas of food, water availability, agricultural productivity etc (and other direct impacts of climate change), the Climate Asia survey revelead some useful results.

46% of over 20,000 surveyed felt that human activity was behind climate change. But a higher number contributed it to population growth and tree felling (68% and 65% respectively). Insofar, climate change communication has been majorly around its extreme weather consequences. This survey digs deeper into the day to day impacts on some of the indispensable needs of food, water, health and housing. Another useful statistic reveals that the three main motivators for people to take action on climate change, in India for instance are; health, a better future for children and a basic need to survive. It reflects the hard realities of climate change impacts on the day to day living of billions across the developing world. The survey goes into quite some detail across various variables of population, gender, resource availability, media exposure etc to throw unique light on the lived experience of climate change Asia.

The survey comes with a toolkit for NGO's, media and policy makers to use the data and develop communications around climate change. It is not an issue that can remain to be abstract and in the distant future but a clear and present danger that needs a swift response.

Last-12-Exit

lukin2006 wrote:

I don't have time to read this ... I have to go put gas in my Hummer then give it a wash and wax.

that's he funniest thing I've read all day.

brianlux

Last-12-Exit wrote:

lukin2006 wrote:

I don't have time to read this ... I have to go put gas in my Hummer then give it a wash and wax.

that's he funniest thing I've read all day.

What even funnier is that hummers don't need gas, just red flowers.

Hummmmmmmmmm!

brianlux

brianlux wrote:

Last-12-Exit wrote:

lukin2006 wrote:

I don't have time to read this ... I have to go put gas in my Hummer then give it a wash and wax.

that's he funniest thing I've read all day.

What even funnier is that hummers don't need gas, just red flowers.

Hummmmmmmmmm!

^^^^ Dumb joke. :roll:

Jason P

JimmyV wrote:

I heard the polar bears are thriving.

They are leading a chill life.

lukin2006

I know you're trying to serious Brian ... but for as for myself I'm tired of reading this and that on climate change, it should be pretty obvious something's wrong.

brianlux

lukin2006 wrote:

I know you're trying to serious Brian ... but for as for myself I'm tired of reading this and that on climate change, it should be pretty obvious something's wrong.

I have to admit I tire of hearing and reading about it. The news never gets better and like you say, something is obviously wrong. The reason I keep doing it (here and elsewhere) is to try to convince others that we would be wise to do what we can to lessen our carbon output and to remind myself of the same. I know I can do better. To use an analogy: If we let the issue goes to sleep with the gas on, we die sooner than later.

So if my posting about climate change is bothersome and not useful, everybody here should tell me and I'll pack my bags on that one and try elsewhere. Oh, but only as long as F4F and GF do the same.

mickeyrat

brianlux wrote:

lukin2006 wrote:

I know you're trying to serious Brian ... but for as for myself I'm tired of reading this and that on climate change, it should be pretty obvious something's wrong.

I have to admit I tire of hearing and reading about it. The news never gets better and like you say, something is obviously wrong. The reason I keep doing it (here and elsewhere) is to try to convince others that we would be wise to do what we can to lessen our carbon output and to remind myself of the same. I know I can do better. To use an analogy: If we let the issue goes to sleep with the gas on, we die sooner than later.

So if my posting about climate change is bothersome and not useful, everybody here should tell me and I'll pack my bags on that one and try elsewhere. Oh, but only as long as F4F and GF do the same.

I look forward to your next thread then. :corn:

lukin2006

brianlux wrote:

lukin2006 wrote:

I know you're trying to serious Brian ... but for as for myself I'm tired of reading this and that on climate change, it should be pretty obvious something's wrong.

I have to admit I tire of hearing and reading about it. The news never gets better and like you say, something is obviously wrong. The reason I keep doing it (here and elsewhere) is to try to convince others that we would be wise to do what we can to lessen our carbon output and to remind myself of the same. I know I can do better. To use an analogy: If we let the issue goes to sleep with the gas on, we die sooner than later.

So if my posting about climate change is bothersome and not useful, everybody here should tell me and I'll pack my bags on that one and try elsewhere. Oh, but only as long as F4F and GF do the same.

It is useful to try and get people to treat the planet better ... I just don't see how we can tackle the big picture when we can not get enough people on board with the doing the little things, like using trash containers. Once I stop seeing coffee containers and fast packages all over the place then maybe I'll start to believe that the bigger picture can be approached with some seriousness.

Hugh Freaking Dillon

lukin2006 wrote:

It is useful to try and get people to treat the planet better ... I just don't see how we can tackle the big picture when we can not get enough people on board with the doing the little things, like using trash containers. Once I stop seeing coffee containers and fast packages all over the place then maybe I'll start to believe that the bigger picture can be approached with some seriousness.

every cause starts small......the worthy ones grow........

brianlux

lukin2006 wrote:

It is useful to try and get people to treat the planet better ... I just don't see how we can tackle the big picture when we can not get enough people on board with the doing the little things, like using trash containers. Once I stop seeing coffee containers and fast packages all over the place then maybe I'll start to believe that the bigger picture can be approached with some seriousness.

I hear what you're saying but changes sometimes happen where you least expect them. For example, my wife and I attended a 350.org event here in Eldorado County, CA, (the second most conservative county in the state) this evening. When I heard there was a 350.org event (called "Draw the Line Day) nearby I almost flipped. I had organized an event about 8 or 10 years ago and the turn out was very small- mostly friends I had convinced to show up. So I took my show on the internet road and promoted books for use in schools and disseminated information (which is sort of what I do here re. environment) and gave up on the local scene. Well, low and behold it had thrived here just fine with neither my involvement or influence. We showed up at the event and were pleased to see a much better showing that I had anticipated. My first words when I got there were, "Wow! I don't know there were other 350.org members in the county let alone this many!" It was very uplifting!

I'm hoping 350.org will post our photos on their web site so I can provide some glimpse of what we did. It was related to this:

http://act.350.org/event/draw_the_line/create/

ldent42

One thing that's always bugged me about the consumer-targeted "do your part" planet saving campaigns is that IIRC, which I very well may not, the vaaaaaaaaaaaaast majority of environmental pollution that's screwing up our planet is industrial. So it would make much more sense to attack the problem on the industrial level rather than try to convince everyone to take home their groceries in bags made out of cloth. Especially since if they don't carry their groceries home in plastic bags they're gonna have to BUY garbage bags. Which is just weird. And counter productive.

brianlux

duska3419 wrote:

One thing that's always bugged me about the consumer-targeted "do your part" planet saving campaigns is that IIRC, which I very well may not, the vaaaaaaaaaaaaast majority of environmental pollution that's screwing up our planet is industrial. So it would make much more sense to attack the problem on the industrial level rather than try to convince everyone to take home their groceries in bags made out of cloth. Especially since if they don't carry their groceries home in plastic bags they're gonna have to BUY garbage bags. Which is just weird. And counter productive.

Taking one's own cloth bags is an easy transition, an easy habit to get into. I don't even understand the problem with that one.

However, much of what you say here is true and you make some good points but the other side of this is that industry often creates cheap non-durable crap that none of us needs so if we focus on what we can do- cut back our consumption, look for serviceable used or durable new goods- certain industries will have to change or die.

Also, I would point out that the action described in my post above does target industry- the oil industry. In fact, many of the major league conservationist-environmental groups mainly target industry. To name a few:

350.org.
Natural Resources Defense Council
Union of Concerned Scientists
Greenpeace
Sea Shepherd

All the goodie two shoes save a tree bag talk is fine and most of that is easy easy easy to do, but the serious organizations are up against much bigger industry foes.

unsung

lukin2006 wrote:

I don't have time to read this ... I have to go put gas in my Hummer then give it a wash and wax.

Make sure you drive around with your windows down and A/C blasting.

ldent42

brianlux wrote:

Taking one's own cloth bags is an easy transition, an easy habit to get into. I don't even understand the problem with that one.

as far as i can understand if you don't get plastic bags from the store, you gotta buy garbage bags that come in a box like hefty brand or something. So I dont understand the point of portraying one sort of plastic bag as unnecessary and bad to use when the result is having to waste money on another kind, which is part of an industry which is part of the problem anyway.

also, for clarification, i just mean i dont understand it.

sorry this post has been written pre-coffee.