« Weekend Book Report – A War Like No Other | Main | Representative David Obey: Principled Fiscal Disciplinarian »

December 01, 2009

CONSENSUS WATCH – 12/01/2009

An ongoing series dedicated to vigorously monitoring emerging threats to The Consensus that global warming is real, caused by humans, and must be addressed at all costs.

Because without consensus, scientific conclusions would remain vulnerable to data that hasn’t been properly scrubbed of ideological impurities.

Clearly, The Consensus has come under some pressure recently with the unauthorized release of computer files from the Climate Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia, despite the fact that they consist of little more than a decade of accumulated data, communications, and models that implicate scientists and research institutions the world over in a potential conspiracy to fake data, suppress contrary evidence, and punish those who question human-caused global warming.

Like that’s somehow “newsworthy” all of a sudden.

Given this, Consensus supporters must be prepared with persuasive counterarguments to effectively parry the unfortunate questions the release of these files is bound to raise.

For example, let’s say someone comes up to you at work and says:

"Wow, did you hear the CRU threw away all the original data on historic temperature readings leaving no actual evidence of any kind to support the notion that humankind's emissions of carbon dioxide has in any way resulted in the planet warming beyond natural norms?"

To which you can reply, drawing on your own extensive knowledge and experience in the area of climate research:

 "The science is settled!"

See how easy that is? Just remember to say it authoritatively so the listener will know you’re telling the truth.

Let's try another.  What if your brother-in-law comes over for dinner and casually mentions:

"I hear Phil Jones, one of the principle proponents of anthropogenic global warming and the director of the CRU is stepping down over allegations that he rigged data to support his climate change theories."

You can simply retort:

"While that may be so, most of the world’s population will be wiped out if leaders fail to agree on a method to stop global warming!!"

Ouch.  That's going to leave a mark. Just remember, the most important thing is that you address their questions with specific examples of your passion and provide clear evidence of your emotional commitment to the issue. This will enhance your credibility.

One more.  What if a neighbor casually mentions that:

"It looks like climate scientists simply deleted data sets that failed to produce temperature graphs that fit their preconceived notions regarding climate change."

Don’t panic, you can turn that argument right back at them by making these specific points:

"The shrinking ozone hole will dramatically increase temperatures in the Antarctic!"

"Major cities are threatened by rising sea levels!!"

"The polar bears are eating each other!!!"

"It costs $1200 to shake Al Gore’s hand!!!!"

As you can see, the informed Consensus Watch supporter has nothing to fear from a robust dialogue with global warming deniers. 

After all, you have the facts on your side.

J.

Bookmark and Share

December 1, 2009 at 04:52 PM in Global Warming with CONSENSUS WATCH | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451c1dc69e20120a6f8bf29970b

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference CONSENSUS WATCH – 12/01/2009:

Comments

The comments to this entry are closed.