7 thoughts on “What Climate Deniers Sound Like to Normal People”
Reblogged this on http://www.seanmunger.com and commented:
This amusing video by Girl Pants Productions puts in perspective just how bizarre and illogical the beliefs and arguments of climate change deniers are. It’s worth a few minutes of your time. Thanks to the Climate Denial Crock of the Week blog, which is one of the best blogs out there shining a light on the idiocy of denialism.
The biggest reason for 97% of climate scientists to agree with the doctrine of the IPCC is that they work for one of the 48+ non-profit organizations ringing the bell for the political front. Most people who graduate with a degree in climatology will become meteorologists because there is no real job for them other than these political think tanks. The 2,500 climatologists are out numbered by millions of scientists having a variety of reasons for denying the human-induced cause.
Testing the green house hypothesis that high frequency light passes through glass and is converted into low frequency heat that can’t escape shows that there is not sufficient conversion to explain the heat gain in a green house. The biggest factor in warmth in a green house is that the glass blocks the wind.
In Gore’s video, he uses two graphs from the ice core projects showing temperature and atmospheric carbon dioxide. The reason he did not over lay these two for a better comparison is because the cause and effect are opposite of what he is selling. It takes a warm trend to allow carbon dioxide to be allowed into the atmosphere. (It has to do with lighter gases being allowed to rise higher so heavier gases can “fit.”)
There are only a few specific frequencies of radiation that are affected by carbon dioxide. These will never be able to escape the atmosphere no matter how much carbon dioxide we remove. And when 100% of these frequencies are ‘trapped’ there can not be more heat gain with more gases trapping what;s already trapped…..
wow. This is indeed what climate deniers sound like to normal people.
There is not a single statement here that can be supported by any reliable source whatever.
See how this fits into your universe.
unless you are doing satire. are you doing satire and pretending to be stupid?
Maybe he is doing satire, but he’s not very good at it so I vote for his simply being stupid. His “science” is particularly dumb. Stan has a lot of stupid things to say about AGW, some of which can be found here:
“There are only 2,500 graduated climatologists working for the organizations spouting human-induced warming. Others are working outside their field because there are no real jobs for the field of study invented as part of the sale of this lie about GW. They are out numbered by millions of scientists. One group of American scientists who signed the anti-Kyoto petition numbers 31,400”. (STAN CITES THE OREGON PETITION—LMAO)
“Chemists understand that CO2 can only be affected by less than seven-tenths of a percent of the infrared radiation trying to leave the planet. The only frequencies that can be affected by CO2 will never leave the atmosphere no matter what the quantity of CO2 because they are also blocked/refracted/absorbed by other gases; therefore making CO2 irrelevant to the argument”. (WHAT?)
“Physicists understand that higher evels of atmospheric CO2 requires lighter gases like H2O to be forced higher in the atmosphere where cloud formation can reflect more solar radiation, having a cooling effect.” (DOUBLE WHAT?)
“Biologists understand that plant mass is converted from gas molecules, and that higher levels of CO2 will allow plants to grow stronger, faster, and require less water. It is not a pollutant”. (STAN IS AN IDSO LOVER!)
“The scientists coming up with the original hypothesis of the greenhouse effect did enough research to eliminate it as a possibility. The idea was that high frequency light would pass through glass but be absorbed inside by something that would convert the light energy to lower frequency heat energy that could not pass through glass. Experimentation showed that there is not enough frequency transfer to explain the heating of the inside
of the GH. The real heat gains are from the glass blocking the wind.” (THE BEST OF ALL).
PS Forgot to say that one shouldn’t stay with Stan too long—-reading Stan’s crap is harmful to one’s own mental health.
Reblogged this on http://www.seanmunger.com and commented:
This amusing video by Girl Pants Productions puts in perspective just how bizarre and illogical the beliefs and arguments of climate change deniers are. It’s worth a few minutes of your time. Thanks to the Climate Denial Crock of the Week blog, which is one of the best blogs out there shining a light on the idiocy of denialism.
The biggest reason for 97% of climate scientists to agree with the doctrine of the IPCC is that they work for one of the 48+ non-profit organizations ringing the bell for the political front. Most people who graduate with a degree in climatology will become meteorologists because there is no real job for them other than these political think tanks. The 2,500 climatologists are out numbered by millions of scientists having a variety of reasons for denying the human-induced cause.
Testing the green house hypothesis that high frequency light passes through glass and is converted into low frequency heat that can’t escape shows that there is not sufficient conversion to explain the heat gain in a green house. The biggest factor in warmth in a green house is that the glass blocks the wind.
In Gore’s video, he uses two graphs from the ice core projects showing temperature and atmospheric carbon dioxide. The reason he did not over lay these two for a better comparison is because the cause and effect are opposite of what he is selling. It takes a warm trend to allow carbon dioxide to be allowed into the atmosphere. (It has to do with lighter gases being allowed to rise higher so heavier gases can “fit.”)
There are only a few specific frequencies of radiation that are affected by carbon dioxide. These will never be able to escape the atmosphere no matter how much carbon dioxide we remove. And when 100% of these frequencies are ‘trapped’ there can not be more heat gain with more gases trapping what;s already trapped…..
wow. This is indeed what climate deniers sound like to normal people.
There is not a single statement here that can be supported by any reliable source whatever.
See how this fits into your universe.
unless you are doing satire. are you doing satire and pretending to be stupid?
Maybe he is doing satire, but he’s not very good at it so I vote for his simply being stupid. His “science” is particularly dumb. Stan has a lot of stupid things to say about AGW, some of which can be found here:
https://disqus.com/by/stankulp/
and here:
http://ecowatch.com/2015/03/23/worst-climate-denier-congress-inhofe/
“There are only 2,500 graduated climatologists working for the organizations spouting human-induced warming. Others are working outside their field because there are no real jobs for the field of study invented as part of the sale of this lie about GW. They are out numbered by millions of scientists. One group of American scientists who signed the anti-Kyoto petition numbers 31,400”. (STAN CITES THE OREGON PETITION—LMAO)
“Chemists understand that CO2 can only be affected by less than seven-tenths of a percent of the infrared radiation trying to leave the planet. The only frequencies that can be affected by CO2 will never leave the atmosphere no matter what the quantity of CO2 because they are also blocked/refracted/absorbed by other gases; therefore making CO2 irrelevant to the argument”. (WHAT?)
“Physicists understand that higher evels of atmospheric CO2 requires lighter gases like H2O to be forced higher in the atmosphere where cloud formation can reflect more solar radiation, having a cooling effect.” (DOUBLE WHAT?)
“Biologists understand that plant mass is converted from gas molecules, and that higher levels of CO2 will allow plants to grow stronger, faster, and require less water. It is not a pollutant”. (STAN IS AN IDSO LOVER!)
“The scientists coming up with the original hypothesis of the greenhouse effect did enough research to eliminate it as a possibility. The idea was that high frequency light would pass through glass but be absorbed inside by something that would convert the light energy to lower frequency heat energy that could not pass through glass. Experimentation showed that there is not enough frequency transfer to explain the heating of the inside
of the GH. The real heat gains are from the glass blocking the wind.” (THE BEST OF ALL).
PS Forgot to say that one shouldn’t stay with Stan too long—-reading Stan’s crap is harmful to one’s own mental health.