'Global warming is hoax': the world according to the BNP

[Ludwig]

I simply point out that if other planets are warming up the same as the Earth then they probably have the same root cause i.e. the Sun

Mars is not warming up due to martians using fossil fuels.

I always listen to counter-arguments, but the case for man-made climate change seems overwhelming to me.

If there's a single thing that clinches it for me, it's that, in accordance with the scientific method, scientists made predictions based on very good knowledge of physical and chemical processes, and those predictions show all signs of being correct.

If there is any remotely credible laboratory evidence that carbon dioxide is not a greenhouse gas, I'm not aware of it.

If the measured warming of our planet is due (or mainly due) to something other than increasing CO2 emissions, the obvious question is: why did scientists ever think CO2 was a greenhouse gas? Did they just make it up?

Occam's Razor says the world is warming because of CO2 emissions. Why try to find other arcane reasons for it - except that one doesn't want to believe it?

[mcewena1]

Carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas but there are others e.g. water vapour is much more of a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide.

I think if other planets are warming up too then we need to look for other causes besides carbon dioxide

[fifthcolumn]

What happens on Mars and Saturnian moon has nothing to do with Earth-bound global warming, no useful connection, nada.

Sorry biff that's just not logical thinking.

If all the planets are heated by the same sun and they are all warming then you can say there is a decent correlation between the three cases of warming.

The question that ought to be asked here is this:
Is Earth warming MORE than the other planets given it's position in the solar system, the strength of the sun's rays at that distance?
If the answer is yes, then is the difference in warming in line with that which would be predicted by the greenhouse effect.

I have no problems believing that GW has multiple root causes one of which is human emissions. To argue for a single cause when the data says otherwise is just wrong headed.

[Ludwig]

Carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas but there are others e.g. water vapour is much more of a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide.

That's missing the point.

Greenhouse gases are what make the earth habitable: without them, the planet would freeze. You will not find any scientist saying, "Greenhouse gases are bad."

The issue is how a rapid increase in greenhouse gases affects the global temperature and therefore the balance of the ecosystem.

There is NO SERIOUS DOUBT that increasing the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere increases the temperature of the biosphere. There is also very little doubt that what sounds like a small increase in global temperature - 6 degrees or even less - can have devastating consequences on the habitability of the planet.

I think if other planets are warming up too then we need to look for other causes besides carbon dioxide

You look for them if you want - meanwhile there's serious science to be done.

[WolfattheDoor]

If all the planets are heated by the same sun and they are all warming then you can say there is a decent correlation between the three cases of warming.

No, it just means there may be a correlation. Considering that the planets/moons are different sizes, different distances, have different atmospheres and have other variations (such as internal heating), we have to gather much more data before we can assume the same cause.

[Blue Peter]

Carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas but there are others e.g. water vapour is much more of a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide.

But these two behave totally different from a temporal perspective, a bit like the temporal difference between climate and weather. Water vapour can enter and leave the atmosphere very quickly (order of days); carbon dioxide's passage from atmosphere to earth is measured in centuries. So any disturbance involving water vapour can be quickly corrected, whilst any disturbance involving carbon dioxide will be with us for many lifetimes,


Peter.

[2 As and a B]

I read that he Martian icecaps are receding and some of Saturn's moons are also warming up. I can't say I've investigated it too deeply but there are some convincing arguments out there. There are lots of sites

google global warming hoax mars saturn

and then investigate

If you haven't investigated it but are convinced, then I suggest you quote your sources or stop talking about what you don't know about.

It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.

Anyway, re the sun heating up planets. Well, duh! Every day the sun heats up the earth and every night earth radiates heat back out to space - try living in a desert. Anyone who understood even the basics of how greenhouse gases moderate the earth's temperature would see the irrelevance of the warming sun claim - quite apart from the lack of evidence to back up the claim. Those that don't, should investigate.

[Andy_K]

I have to agree with Vortex on this. The BNP are most certainly not stupid.

He is claiming AGW is a hoax simply because the majority of the British public think it's being exaggerated. http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2 ... nemissions. It's a vote winner. Be the only party questioning AGW when the majority of the public doubt it, and you'll surely gain some votes. Be the party accusing government & politicians of being corrupt and using it to further their own agendas, and you'll pick up votes because most of the public is more than willing to believe that.

And Peak Oil is something with an imminent and high impact. Something that when it appears, will send many disillusioned voters their way.

Just about the only thing stopping the BNP attaining a respectable level of power at the moment, is the commonly held view that they're a bunch of racists and xenophobes.

[caspian]

Carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas but there are others e.g. water vapour is much more of a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide.

I think if other planets are warming up too then we need to look for other causes besides carbon dioxide

Let me ask you one thing. Do you honestly believe that many thousands of scientists all over the world have overlooked this? Or instead do you believe that they're engaged in a massive conspiracy to suppress the truth? (A not particularly effective conspiracy it seems.) Either you are implying that all of these experienced scientists are spectacularly stupid or that they are engaged in a dastardly plot to keep knowledge suppressed, presumably to protect their jobs.

Frankly, either of these suggestions beggars belief. If you have some other theory as to why scientists might be ignoring or suppressing such evidence, please explain.

[goslow]

what's all this about other planets got to do with it? By the way, Venus almost all C02 atmosphere and runaway greenhouse effect, Mars very thin CO2 atmosphere.

My impression is that most (>75%?) of the UK population do accept the basic idea of AGW but are passing the buck when it comes to doing something about it. Not enough a clear and present danger.

[fifthcolumn]

No, it just means there may be a correlation. Considering that the planets/moons are different sizes, different distances, have different atmospheres and have other variations (such as internal heating), we have to gather much more data before we can assume the same cause.

We don't need to gather any more data. We have data showing it's happening on other planets.

That means SOMETHING other than just the greenhouse effect is DEFINITELY HAPPENING.

The science of this is just as basic as the science of the greenhouse effect.

The problem is when you take it as a black or white issue because there's a hell of a lot of politics involved deciding on which side of the fence you sit on.

One other vociferous poster is convinced it's all human emissions and has the blinders on to other causes. He even goes on to claim it's the only proper science.

Hello, I have a science degree and I say it's not the ONLY proper science.

Possible causes of the global warming:
Human Emissions
Natural Emissions
Solar Cycles of Some Sort
Sun Heating up in some way
Greenhouse effect (water vapour, c02, methane etc)
Something happening to the atmosphere other than the greenhouse effect

All of these are possibilities and they may all be happening simultaneously and in fact most models assume there are feedback loops which will aggravate things.

The point is, though, in the end, GW is unfixable. The only one we can reasonably do something about is Peak Oil and in that sense the BNP are right. Though they are fascist nazi scum.

[biffvernon]

We need an emoticon that denotes frustration at a thread that repeats arguements that were settled years ago (decades ago in the climate science community), so that the whole palaba does not have to be endlessly repeated. Gavin Schmidt's recent post on RealClimate is relevent to this emotion. He called his article Groundhog Day

[WolfattheDoor]

We need an emoticon that denotes frustration at a thread that repeats arguements that were settled years ago (decades ago in the climate science community), so that the whole palaba does not have to be endlessly repeated. Gavin Schmidt's recent post on RealClimate is relevent to this emotion. He called his article Groundhog Day

[MacG]

Carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas but there are others e.g. water vapour is much more of a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide.

I think if other planets are warming up too then we need to look for other causes besides carbon dioxide

Let me ask you one thing. Do you honestly believe that many thousands of scientists all over the world have overlooked this? Or instead do you believe that they're engaged in a massive conspiracy to suppress the truth? (A not particularly effective conspiracy it seems.) Either you are implying that all of these experienced scientists are spectacularly stupid or that they are engaged in a dastardly plot to keep knowledge suppressed, presumably to protect their jobs.

Frankly, either of these suggestions beggars belief. If you have some other theory as to why scientists might be ignoring or suppressing such evidence, please explain.

Funny how I discovered a new huge hole in the AGW-crowd argumentation. They seem to claim two things at the same time:

1) The theory behind CO2 induced AGW is so simple and straightforward that it is beyond debate and only an idiot would argue against it.

2) The theory behind CO2 induced AGW is so complex so it is best left to the experts and not questioned by mere mortals.

Which way is it?

[mcewena1]

Frankly, either of these suggestions beggars belief. If you have some other theory as to why scientists might be ignoring or suppressing such evidence, please explain.

In offer no explanation. If you read my original post you will find I said there are sites that quite logically debunk global warming. If you look for them. I read that other planets are warming up. I haven't investigated this so I can't say if it's true or not.

BUT if it is true

then something else is happening. Maybe alongside the greenhouse gas effect or not. Scientists come out with theories and predictions al the time that's what they were trained to do. Many times they are proved wrong when more knowledge is gathered. It doesn't mean they were stupid when they came out with their ideas. On the contrary.

To question main stream beliefs means you are almost automatically subject to ridicule and so requires a certain amount of confidence in yourself and your beliefs. My beliefs about PO have been ridiculed many times. Hopefully I am wrong. Hopefully the future is not going to be as grim as I think