Al Gore Calls 'Bullshit' On Climate Denial 'Crap'

[bananas]

Run time: 01:17 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T6-RWOOBLdQ   Posted on YouTube: August 08, 2011 By YouTube Member: climatebrad Views on YouTube: 19426   Posted on DU: August 10, 2011 By DU Member: bananas Views on DU: 1631

 

http://thinkprogress.org/romm/2011/08/09/291600/al-gore-calls-%E2%80%98bullshit%E2%80%99/

AUDIO: Al Gore Calls ‘Bullshit’ On Climate Science Deniers Who Push “The Same Crap Over And Over And Over Again”

By Joe Romm on Aug 9, 2011 at 10:38 am

Last week, Vice President Al Gore “call B.S. on global warming naysayers.” TP Green sets the stage for Gore’s blunt remarks:

Gore described the story told in Merchants of Doubt, how corporate interests have manipulated scientific institutions and the news media to defend everything from cigarettes and acid rain to global warming pollution. Big Tobacco “succeeded in delaying the implementation of the surgeon general’s report for 40 years – 40 years!” he said. “In every one of those 40 years the average number of Americans killed by cigarettes each year exceeded the total number of Americans killed in all of World War II: 450,000 per year. My sister was one of them. … It was evil, evil, evil.”

Gore then denounced the climate science deniers:

The model they’re using in that effort was transported whole cloth into the climate debate. And some of the exact same people — I can go down a list of their names — are involved in this. And so what do they do? They pay pseudo-scientists to pretend to be scientists to put out the message: “This climate thing, it’s nonsense. Man-made CO2 doesn’t trap heat. It may be volcanoes.” Bullshit! “It may be sun spots.” Bullshit! “It’s not getting warmer.” Bullshit!

There are about ten other memes out there. When you go and talk to any audience about climate, you hear them washing back at you the same crap over and over and over again. They have polluted this — There’s no longer a shared reality on an issue like climate even though the very existence of our civilization is threatened. People have no idea! And yet our ability to actually come to a shared reality that emphasizes that this matters — It’s no longer acceptable in mixed company, meaning bipartisan company, to use the goddamn word “climate.” They have polluted it to the point where we cannot possibly come to an agreement on it.

Hear! Hear!

[elocs]

1. Long thread about it posted here yesterday with 177 Recs:

http://upload.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1698719

[bananas]

6. Thanks, I missed that thread.

With the satan sandwich debt deal and the London riots, it's been easy to miss stuff.

[stockholmer]

2. Andrew Revkin, the major NYT AGW writer just bailed out on the 'artic ice death spiral' theory

http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/08/08/on-arctic-sea-ice-and-warmth-past-and-future/

"But even as I push for an energy quest that limits climate risk, I’m not worried about the resilience of Arctic ecosystems and not worried about the system tipping into an irreversibly slushy state on time scales relevant to today’s policy debates. This is one reason I don’t go for descriptions of the system being in a “death spiral.”

The main source of my Arctic comfort level — besides what I learned while camped with scientists on the North Pole sea ice — is the growing body of work on past variability of conditions in the Arctic. The latest evidence of substantial past ice variability comes in a study in the current issue of Science. The paper, combining evidence of driftwood accumulation and beach formation in northern Greenland with evidence of past sea-ice extent in parts of Canada, concludes that Arctic sea ice appears to have retreated far more in some spans since the end of the last ice age than it has in recent years.
…
Michael MacCracken, a veteran climate modeler and chief scientist at the Climate Institute, noted on the Google group on geo-engineering that this new paper adds credence to proposals for an Arctic focus for managing incoming sunlight as a way to limit greenhouse-driven impacts. (Personally, I don’t see this kind of effort going anywhere unless and until climate impacts trend toward worst-case outcomes.)"


snip

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2 major global warming scientists and IPCC consultants (Dr Murry Salby and Dr Judith Curry) are now backtracking on the AGW theory as well

There is quite a bit of buzz surrounding a talk and pending paper from Prof. Murry Salby the Chair of Climate, of Macquarie University. Aussie Jo Nova has excellent commentary, as has Andrew Bolt in his blog. I’m sure others will weigh in soon.

In a nutshell, the issue is rather simple, yet powerful. Salby is arguing that atmospheric CO2 increase that we observe is a product of temperature increase, and not the other way around, meaning it is a product of natural variation. This goes back to the 800 year lead/lag issue related to the paleo temperature and CO2 graphs Al Gore presented in his movie an An Inconvenient Truth, Jo Nova writes:


Over the last two years he has been looking at C12 and C13 ratios and CO2 levels around the world, and has come to the conclusion that man-made emissions have only a small effect on global CO2 levels. It’s not just that man-made emissions don’t control the climate, they don’t even control global CO2 levels.

Salby is no climatic lightweight, which makes this all the more powerful. He has a strong list of publications here. The abstract for his talk is here and also reprinted below.


http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/08/05/the-emily-litella-moment-for-climate-science-and-co2/

http://judithcurry.com/2011/08/04/carbon-cycle-questions/

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And finally a major new study of long term data from NASA is causing ripples as well. Climate change forecasts have for years predicted that carbon dioxide would trap heat on Earth, and increases in the gas would lead to a planetwide rise in temperatures, with devastating consequences for the environment. But long-term data from NASA satellites seems to contradict the predictions dramatically. Dr. Roy Spencer is a research scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville and U.S. science team leader for the Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer on NASA’s Aqua satellite.

"The satellite observations suggest there is much more energy lost to space during and after warming than the climate models show," Spencer said. "There is a huge discrepancy between the data and the forecasts that is especially big over the oceans."


http://www.uah.edu/news/newspages/campusnews.php?id=564



------------------------

the study

http://www.mdpi.com/2072-4292/3/8/1603/pdf

On the Misdiagnosis of Surface Temperature Feedbacks from
Variations in Earth’s Radiant Energy Balance

[Kennah]

3. Wow!

Al Gore is Mr. Even Keel. The slam on him in 2000 was that he's the guy who's more wooden than the Secret Service Agents guarding him.

Obviously, he's pissed off, but I wonder if he's not tipping the hand of worry. Worried that we're backsliding on the climate and running out of time. And it worries me a lot that he's this worried.

[BackToThe60s]

4. K&R!

[certainot]

5. RW radio stations make denial acceptable and are shamefully are endorsed by many universities

that broadcast their athletics on them

unfortunately the left ignores talk radio.

[kimsarah]

7. You tell 'em, Al

You'd be a better Energy Secretary than the one we've got now.