“30,000 Global Warming Petition” Debunked

We can always count on DeSmogBlog to call out the lies of global warming deniers – and explain why they’re wrong in a way that’s easy to understand, and backed up by facts. They’ve done it again with the “30,000 Global Warming Petition” that’s being touted by skeptics as evidence that the scientific community shares their doubts about anthropogenic global warming.

Kevin Grandia delves into the petition’s sordid beginnings, the inability to verify any of the identities of the so-called ‘experts’ that signed the petition and the fact that out of all the signers, only .001% actually have a background in climatology – 39 out of 30,000.

When I think I’m having chest pains I don’t go to Dermatologist, I go to a Cardiologist because it would be absurd to go to skin doctor for a heart problem. It would be equally absurd to look to a scientist with a background in Medicine (of which there are 3,046 on the petition) for an expert opinion on the science of climate change. With science broken down into very narrow specialties a scientific expert in one specialty does not make that person an automatic authority in all things science.

In this way the logic of the 30,000 petition is completely flawed, which isn’t surprising given its questionable beginnings.

The petition and the documents included were all made to look like official papers from the prestigious National Academy of Science. They weren’t, and this attempt to mislead has been well-documented.

Along with the petition there was a cover letter from Dr. Fred Seitz (who has since deceased) a notorious climate change denier (and big tobacco scientist), who over 30 years ago was the president of the National Academy of Science.

Read more about why this petition reeks of bullshit over at DeSmogBlog.

Link [DeSmogBlog]

DeSmogBlog Debunks the Global Warming ‘Skeptics Handbook’

Global warming skeptics love to make ill-informed, illogical claims borne from a total lack of understanding of actual scientific concepts. So, it’s no surprise that many of them are now waving around print-outs of “The Skeptics Handbook” by Joanne Nova [PDF] in an attempt to back up their point of view. DeSmogBlog debunked the main points in “The Skeptics Handbook” in a series of three posts, including the old “temperatures haven’t warmed over the last decade” argument.

From DeSmogBlog:

The real measure we should be keeping a close eye on is how much heat the oceans are absorbing. And, wouldn’t you know it, their heat content has steadily increased since 1999. That’s a problem because, as Real Climate’s Gavin Schmidt explains, ocean heat content trends reflect “the planetary radiative imbalance” – that the planet is absorbing more heat from the sun each year than it is losing.

Oceans exert a moderating influence on the climate by soaking up extra heat; therefore, if they take in a little more heat then usual, surface temperatures will tend to fall slightly (even though the planet’s overall heat content is going up). On the other hand, if the oceans absorb less (something that could happen more often if we keep the heat on), surface temperatures will increase.

But, wait, skeptics will say: All of that is beside the point because the Vostok ice cores have now clearly demonstrated that temperature leads CO2 – so rising CO2 emissions can’t be blamed for higher average temperatures. Not quite.

“The strongest evidence for the radiative effect for CO2 (and CH4, N2O, etc) is from laboratory experiments,” said Dr. Schmidt. “The strongest evidence for a significant climate sensitivity is from the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM), when ice sheets covered the planet (about 20,000 years ago), and that has not changed.”

The lead/lag issue that Nova is referring to is only evidence of a strongly coupled system – not evidence that CO2 has no effect, he explained.

DeSmogBlog also tackles the “CO2 in the atmosphere doesn’t cause global warming” argument and the greenhouse signature argument. The explanations are refreshingly scientific, considering that so much discourse on global warming is based on a few oft-repeated sound bites that reveal a lack of understanding of the topic at hand. Check out parts 1, 2 and 3 and be sure to click on the links to the RealClimate.org articles as well.

Link [DeSmogBlog]

Greenpeace Crashes Coal Meeting with Fake Identity

It’s like Silverleaf Resorts in reverse! Greenpeace got into the 2008 McCloskey Coal USA conference by posing as a pro-coal organization. Calling themselves the Institute for Energy Solutions, Greenpeace was able to become a co-sponsor and set up a booth at the conference. The McCloskey group figured out who they were, but decided to let them speak anyway.

From Reuters:

Greenpeace spokesman Carroll Muffett was allowed to speak against coal as a polluting fuel for a few minutes, and the team manned a booth offering information and anti-coal paraphernalia.

“It’s a lot of value for the money,” said Muffett of the $8,500 co-sponsorship fee that made the Greenpeace front group publishers of the conference brochure.

In the brochure, an ad for the fake Institute seems pro-coal, but if readers go to the www.tomorrowsenergytoday.org website, they are redirected to www.coal-is-dirty.com.

The Greenpeace team handed out business cards that read: “The Institute for Energy Solutions is a joke. So is clean coal.” The cards were signed Greenpeace.

Awesome! We’re glad to hear they were able to get their message out. Of course, they did manage to offend a few people by using Muffett’s 9-year-old daughter and two boys aged 10 and 11 to hand out athsma inhalers and masks. Muffet rebuffed the criticism by declaring that the real issue is the fact that the coal industry causes athsma in children.

Props to our friend Kevin Grandia of DeSmogBlog for getting his Coal-is-Dirty.com site linked up!

Link [Reuters]
Photo credit: Flickr user greenpeace.italia

45 Scientists on list of ‘500 with Documented Doubts’ Say F-You to Global Warming Deniers [Updated!]

Shock of all shocks! Many of the scientists on the list of ‘500 scientists who don’t believe in global warming’ not only didn’t even know they were on the list, they want everyone to know that they believe the exact opposite. Deniers of global warming have been using this for what seems like ages already, claiming that if so many scientists back up their stance, it gives more credence to the idea that global warming isn’t real. They didn’t bother to fact-check and confirm the list, but DeSmogBlog did, and here’s part of what they found:

I am horrified to find my name on such a list. I have spent the last 20 years arguing the opposite.”
Dr. David Sugden. Professor of Geography, University of Edinburgh

I have NO doubts ..the recent changes in global climate ARE man-induced. I insist that you immediately remove my name from this list since I did not give you permission to put it there.”
Dr. Gregory Cutter, Professor, Department of Ocean, Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, Old Dominion University

I don’t believe any of my work can be used to support any of the statements listed in the article.”
Dr. Robert Whittaker, Professor of Biogeography, University of Oxford

What makes these findings even more incredible is that so many scientists came forward to deny that they had doubts about global warming within just 24 hours of receiving an email from DeSmogBlog. They’re up to 45 out of 500 – nearly 10%.

What’s really funny about this is, global warming deniers have accused the rest of us of pulling evidence out of our asses saying none of the data we have so far supports the reality of global warming, and here they are with their ‘facts’ being disproven. Great job, DeSmogBlog!

UPDATE: DeSmogBlog got a response from The Heartland Institute, the organization responsible for the inaccurate list of scientists who supposedly don’t believe global warming is real. They’ve withdrawn their claim of having identified 500 scientists with ‘documented doubts’, but won’t apologize! From DeSmogBlog:

Heartland President Joseph Bast rationalizes that aside from the misleading headline, “none of the articles and news releases produced by The Heartland Institute or the Hudson Institute (the original source of the lists) claims that all of the scientists who appear in the lists currently doubt that the modern warming is man-made.”

DeSmogBlog debunks Basts’ lame excuses with a smackdown that can’t really be argued with. Check it out at DeSmogBlog.

Link [Environmental Graffiti] + [DeSmogBlog]

Photo credit: Flickr user Akuppa