How to Talk to a Global Warming Skeptic

You know, there is one thing missing from all of that.
Fact. Scientific equations.
The same thing missing from every single argument for CO2 causing global warming.

First off, I’d like to point out that quite a couple of your articles conflict with each other. Articles that state that isolated examples don’t necessarily disprove it, but then they give references to isolated examples to prove it. Silly.

Look, I’m no moron, I have a very reasonable request. There is one thing I need, I need real, scientifically reason why CO2 is the monster. That’s it. And nobody will give it. Nobody. And you seem to have a lot of information, so maybe you’ll give it to me? Equations, direct mathematical proof of it. This is it, and this is the real way to deal with a global warming skeptic. That’s all. You don’t need all that trash arguments (listen, different sources give different evidence, if you don’t refute their evidence and just claim yours is right–then you’ve done nothing).

I doubt you’ll grant me this though. I doubt, simply because others have granted me proof against it… here:
http://www.junkscience.com/Greenhouse/

I love the environment, and I want to do a lot for it. But fighting CO2 isn’t the way. I’m ticked off at the severe uncountable articles that state global warming is pretty much, causing everything. I know the difference between global warming and things like overfishing. I know deforestation of rain forests is far larger a problem. Basically, my whole argument sums up to this post I made:
http://apowg.blogspot.com/2009/01/everything-about-global-warming.html

I await your reply.

Reply

I did indeed take a good look at that, in fact, I read a lot of all your articles.

But the article you pointed out, didn’t prove the monster was CO2. Predicting an increase is meaningless. I can predict and make large claims too. What if, I at the time, predicted an increase of temperature because of plastic trash? I then should also then have my claim immediately attributed to the cause of global warming by that standard. Predictions, mean nothing, unless you have proof of correlation.

And there again, is what is missing. Correlation. Okay, we have global warming. I can say sure, perhaps we’ve increased in temperature. What I’m saying though, is that CO2 isn’t the cause. That our other incredibly bad and disastrous habits are the ones really to blame.

I want direct, irrefutable evidence of correlation. Not graphs saying oh, CO2 increased and temperature increased! It MUST BE TRUE! Nay, because deforestation has also increased, human population has increased, destruction of habitat for living space has drastically increased, specie devastation has drastically increased.

Here’s the quote: “based on well-established laws of physics”. What are those? What are those? That’s what I want. That’s what nobody ever says. That’s what has never, ever, been given.

Oh, and please, with the first link I gave above, if you find a valid argument against those equations I would be equally pleased as well. That is the strongest, most firm evidence I have against CO2 global warming. That is the strongest, everybody has, against CO2 global warming.

It’s important here to understand what I’m saying. We both say there is a problem. There is. What is different here is the cause and therefore the solution.

Reply