Comments on: Not Even Wrong

By: Thomas Fischbacher

Thomas Fischbacher — Mon, 21 Sep 2009 12:13:22 +0000

It’s quite interesting to see how Singer works. Essentially, no matter what it is (climate, CFCs, tobacco, etc.) and how bad the data look like, it will always be possible to dream up some interpretation that is not immediately refuted by the data we have, and essentially says “stay the course – we are not on the wrong track”.

As this always is possible (if you just come up with a sufficiently crazy model *after* the data is in), his behaviour essentially is a textbook example for a systematic lack of professional ethics.

By: pete

pete — Sun, 20 Sep 2009 22:53:40 +0000

Winds, ice motion root cause of decline in sea ice, not warmer temperatures
http://uwnews.washington.edu/ni/article.asp?articleID=7070

Less Ice In Arctic Ocean 6000-7000 Years Ago
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/10/081020095850.htm

So did humans cause it back then too? Or is it just that the climate is not static, it has been warmer than it is today before and it will likely be so again. You realize they used to grow grain on Greenland don’t you? Too cold for that today.

By: Zamia1

Zamia1 — Sat, 19 Sep 2009 20:28:26 +0000

Fred Singer’s book “Unstoppable Global Warming” predicted that the Arctic ice would not melt any further (written ~ 2005). The ice keeps melting, despite deniers’ present claim that we are now in a cooling cycle!

By: a permaculturist

a permaculturist — Thu, 17 Sep 2009 03:46:27 +0000

I am a permaculturalist, I read your site regularly. These so called denialists bring up good points and you and your off hand dismissals just look silly. Permaculture is great and we need it to save our environment and to survive peak oil. But the whole global warming thing is quite questionable and quite frankly a distraction. Even if true its affects are often blown way out of proportion.

By: Isaac

Isaac — Fri, 11 Sep 2009 14:56:17 +0000

When reading through these denialists comments I had the impression they were all written by the same person.

I agree with Craig totally that it doesnt matter if you believe in it or not, if we dont change massively very quickly due to a multitude of converging factors, civilization as we know it, and likely most of everything else will be finished.

Which makes one wonder, what is the end game of the powers that be? I wonder if a few of those underground cities were made unlivable somehow, things might change?

By: Craig Mackintosh

Craig Mackintosh — Fri, 11 Sep 2009 03:56:20 +0000

Hi Ed. Never fear. From my looking at the stats, these people all arrived via two dedicated climate denial websites (that I won’t link to, as I’m not interested to promote them). One of the gang has obviously discovered the post, and has then sent his mates around as well to gatecrash the party. The incoming visits are mostly to this post address with /#comments on the end of the link – which means they’re a rent-a-crowd type group following a link provided by one of their own, by someone directing people directly to his comment rather than to the post itself.

Think of it as a dark cloud passing by. It will pass.

I had enough of battling denialists on a previous site I was editing. For me, it’s a meaningless argument (to some extent) as all the other issues we face (soil and water depletion and contamination, peak energy issues, pollution, economic catastrophe, population growth, etc. etc.) all share the same solutions that would also solve climate change. Deny climate change if you want, but do recognise that it matters not – the same solutions need to be applied, and NOW, regardless. If someone denies all these other issues as well, or makes light of their significance, then their agenda is clear – keeping the status quo at all costs.

By: Ed Straker

Ed Straker — Fri, 11 Sep 2009 03:24:12 +0000

I am really shocked that the main blog of permaculture is not immune from GW denialists. We are truly doomed.

By: Marcin Gerwin

Marcin Gerwin — Mon, 07 Sep 2009 06:21:25 +0000

Oh, my… I had no idea there were so many climate sceptics visiting this website The article about “irreversable” climate change due to CO2 emissions that George is refering to is available on-line, you can read it yourselves:
http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2009/01/28/0812721106.full.pdf+html

The point that authors of this article try to make is that even though some CO2 will be quickly removed following the stop of human emissions, it does not mean that concentration of CO2 will quickly drop to the pre-industrial level. See the graph here:
http://www.pnas.org/content/suppl/2009/01/28/0812721106.DCSupplemental/0812721106SI.pdf#nameddest=SF2

What is also important is that the oceans will slowly release accumulated heat not just over the years, but over the centuries, thus keeping global average temperature on the increased level.

By: Steven Buiey

Steven Buiey — Fri, 04 Sep 2009 13:11:32 +0000

Monbiot and the retarded nature by which he conducts his polemical view of what is a wholly naturally cyclic phenomenon ensures that the history books will record him among many others as complete buffoons led by their noses by a political agenda that serves only big industry.
I am heartened by many of the comments I have read here.

By: Thomas Fischbacher

Thomas Fischbacher — Fri, 04 Sep 2009 09:57:19 +0000

Just a comment on Fred Singer’s book “Unstoppable global warming”. It really pays to spend an hour or so to do a little bit of background research on “Fred Singer”.