Planet Moron

Cherry blossoms bloomed a few days earlier than expected meaning we're all supposed to panic or something.

Never let a crisis go to waste?

How about never let a completely benign and utterly common event go to waste!

"As beautiful as it was, the early bloom is a grim reminder of the threats that the iconic Tidal Basin faces from a changing climate."

The horror. Early cherry blossoms.

Communism could stop that.https://t.co/8aR2Np5a4W

— Steve Milloy (@JunkScience) April 10, 2021

I regret to inform you that it's true, the cherry blossoms bloomed a few days earlier this year than originally expected.

Maybe you should start getting your affairs in order.

Also, turn over control of your life to the government. That will also be necessary I'm afraid.

Assuming you don't want to die!

However, as beautiful as it was, the early bloom is a grim reminder of the threats that the iconic Tidal Basin faces from a changing climate. Already, the basin floods and inundates the famous trees' roots daily, and this will only worsen as the planet warms. Estimates show that within 50 years, high tide will rise an additional 6 inches, which is entirely unsustainable.

Excuse me for a moment, I need to run around hysterically for a while.

Okay, I feel better now.

One thing though, kind of interesting I guess if you are some kind of data nerd, that the writer did not consider particularly relevant to the matter.

The cherry blossoms have bloomed earlier than this year 4 out of the last 11 years, and on or about the same time for another 2, suggesting that this year was, as "grim reminders of the threats that the iconic Tidal Basin faces from a changing climate" go, kinda average.

I'm pretty sure we weren't supposed to notice that.

It doesn't matter, we have a scientific consensus, and as everyone knows, once you have scientific consensus it can never be challenged.

That's just what science is all about.

In 1978, my ASU geology professor Robert Dietz was still fighting against the scientific consensus that continents couldn't move. It took 70 years for academia to accept the obvious concept of continental drift - which every child understands from looking at a map. pic.twitter.com/wKtnUlCtp6

— Tony Heller (@Tony__Heller) April 15, 2021

J.

Consensus Watch - 9/15/2020

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 new data.

The argument that the latest round of wildfires inundating  the United States is completely unprecedented and directly caused by global warming is complicated by the fact that they are not, and it is not.

Not to worry, this happens all the time. Since we already have a Consensus, this becomes less a tedious exercise in experimentation and data analysis, and more a matter of focusing on what’s really important in science:

Branding.

This is not new. It was discovered very early on that simply pointing out that, “boy, it’s been pretty hot this summer,” was not nearly catastrophic-sounding enough to be any help in securing tenure or being awarded lucrative research grants. No, if you were going to foment sustainable amounts of hysteria you were going to need something more powerful, something apocalyptic that would have enormous emotional appeal and help get six-figure book deals.

Originally, “Global Warming” fit the bill perfectly. It was an easy concept to understand. The globe was warming.  The entire globe!  Plus warming is a simple concept to understand. It’s still in use today in fact, as we used it just above.

Unfortunately, it ran into some trouble when the globe refused to, you know, warm.

This was the original branding challenge that The Consensus faced, but the solution was close at hand:

“Climate Change.”

With Climate Change, pretty much everything proves your point. Warming, cooling, floods, drought, as long as something changes, the theory withstands scrutiny.

Which brings us back to the wildfires.

People have been hearing about wildfires for a long time. You need to tie the wildfires directly to global warm… sorry, old habit. You need to tie the wildfires directly to climate change somehow.

Allow us to introduce you to the greatest thing since Sharknado:

Climate Fires.

It captures the imagination immediately. Climate fires! We’re causing the climate to change, the changed climate is causing fires, creating: Climate Fires!

But wait, there’s more. Your refusal to turn over control of your lives to the government makes you, wait for it:

A climate arsonist!

This is truly science at its best. Hyperbolic, terrifying, and vilifies your opponents.

This is a game changer people. The brand extensions are almost limitless.  We won’t have hurricanes anymore, we’ll have “ClimateCanes!” And if you insist on driving an SUV, you will be a "Climate Murderer."

Proof, as if more was needed, that there’s nothing you can’t accomplish...

With science!

J.

Support The Consensus by throwing money at us!

Unless, of course, you hate the environment. 

Click on the pics below for links to T-shirts, Mugs, posters, and all kinds of other crap you do not need.

Consensus Watch – 09/2/2020

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 new data.

One of the silly little complaints climate deniers like to drag out constantly is that catastrophic climate predictions never come true, acting like it's all some big global warming fraud.

Sure, global warming was supposed to have left the Arctic free of ice by 2012. Fine, it didn’t. Climate science isn’t an exact sci…

Wait, hold that thought.

And yes, another prediction claiming that the Arctic would be free of ice in 2013 also didn’t come to pass.

The climate is complicated.

The Arctic was also not free of ice in 2014 as was originally predicted.

And yes, the same thing happened in 2015.

And again in 2016.

And 2018.

And, also 2019

This might not look good at first, but you’ll note that there was no such prediction made for 2017 when the Arctic did indeed remain covered in ice.

So, we’ll just chalk that up as a victory for The Consensus.

Apology accepted.

That brings us to 2020 and we’re sure some snarky climate denier who hates polar bears so much they probably want to kill them with their bare hands is going to point out that the prediction that the Arctic would be free of ice this year also failed to materialize.

Well, we have some news for you.

An elderly man in Massachusetts is screaming things really loudly.

There will be no peace, no justice, and no prosperity unless we stop the march to climate destruction. This is a matter of life and death. The very future of our civilization depends upon it.

— Ed Markey (@EdMarkey) September 2, 2020

It's science, people.

You see, it’s extremely important that we stay focused on the fact that the Arctic is caught in an unending “vicious circle” of melting and that the area is warming twice as fast as the rest of the globe creating a “deep wound” in our cryosphere and not permit ourselves to become distracted by the fact that none of that is true.

There is, after all, the Consensus.

J.

Support The Consensus by buying things and giving us money!

Because that's how science works. 

Click on the pics below for links to T-shirts, Mugs, posters, and all kinds of other crap you don't need.

Consensus Watch – 07/21/2020

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 new data.

The Consensus on climate change continues to come under attack despite nearly unanimous agreement among eminent celebrities well-versed in in both music and theater, that it is in fact real.

For example, there’s Bill Nye, the Actor Guy, beloved by children and parents alike for his quirky yet sober take on science, like last year when he lit a globe with a blow torch on Last Week Tonight with John Oliver observing:

“What I’m saying is, the planet’s on f—ing fire,”

How can you argue with that? You can see it with your own eyes! (NSFW, but the kids will love it!)

Despite Nye trying to patiently explain that if you disagree wth him, you are “idiots,” there are still researchers out there who for some reason continue to insist on doing, get this, research.

Like that’s going to help.

The most recent study found that wildfires have actually become less extensive, not more, over the past several decades despite predictions and claims to the contrary.

What does that have to do with anything?

The planet’s on f—ing fire!  Look at it!

Idiots.

As you can see, The Consensus remains firmly intact.

As long as we continue to believe in it.

J.

Support The Consensus by buying things and giving us money! Because that's how science works.

Shut Up, That's Why T-Shirt!

A special welcome to readers of Watts up With That, (a Planet Moron favorite) and a thanks to commenter Pat Frank for a shout out about our T-shirt.  Lots more at our Consensus Watch Cafe Press site. New content follows below, plus a very old Consensus Watch post (we'll have more in the future).

Now you have a chance to show your support for The Consensus with the Shut up, that’s why T-shirt, the perfect answer to anyone who dares to question the science behind global warming.

Consensus Watch – 05/07/2014

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 new data.

 Yesterday was a good day for The Consensus. The White House launched a new strategy for furthering its global warming agenda. Gone are the days of trying to foment hysteria by reciting dry data about the ways the planet will be affected by climate change.  From now on, they are going to try to foment hysteria by reciting the ways in which you will be personally affected by climate change.

We can only speak for ourselves, but we appreciate this more individualized approach to scaremongering. It sends the message, “We care.”

As part of this effort, they created a splashy new web site that seems to take into account the effect federal “Common Core” educational standards are going to have on the population’s reading comprehension skills.

For example, they conveniently sum up each section with a “key message,” just in case you have difficulty, as many of us do, deciphering simple, short, declarative sentences:

Key Message: Stressed Infrastructure

Infrastructure will be increasingly compromised by climate-related hazards, including sea level rise, coastal flooding, and intense precipitation events.

Frankly, we are concerned that they are unnecessarily complicating the message. More in the spirit of this document might be:

Key Message: Global warming bad.

Global warming bad bad bad.

Incidentally, we are heartened to note that it looks like the people proofreading the site have already gone through Common Core:

Among the other claims are:

Key Message: Climate Risks to People

Heat waves, coastal flooding, and river flooding will pose a growing challenge to the region’s environmental, social, and economic systems. This will increase the vulnerability of the region’s residents, especially its most disadvantaged populations.

This point can’t be stressed enough: It is our most disadvantaged populations that will find themselves at a disadvantage. It’s just one of the many disadvantages of being disadvantaged.

Well, unless, you are a member of a “native community,” in which case you are probably okay given your “deep cultural history of adapting to change.”

Key Message: Native Communities

The cumulative effects of climate change in Alaska strongly affect Native communities, which are highly vulnerable to these rapid changes but have a deep cultural history of adapting to change.

 Which, it should be emphasized, is not at all patronizing stereotyping. It would only be patronizing stereotyping if you said it.

Regardless, the web site is more than just shout outs to Democratic constituency groups. It also contains supporting data.

Take this chart, for example.  Look at those projections! Wow!  Even the lower of the two data sets suggests that temperatures are set to soar! It makes us want to go out and personally dismantle a coal plant with our bare hands.

Okay, sure, if you look really, really closely at the actual observational data as charted by the green line, the last 15+ years have experienced absolutely no warming whatsoever. 

But that is probably all part of an effort to improve temperature projection qualitify.

No doubt, while this is all good news for The Consensus, challenges remain. Efforts to try to convince people that they are facing imminent peril from increasing global temperatures, rising sea levels, disappearing polar sea ice and more frequent extreme weather events, will continue to be complicated by the fact that none of these things are true.

But that’s not what’s important. What’s important is, it’s the Koch brothers’ fault.

Key Message: Koch brothers are bad.

Koch brothers are bad bad bad.

J.

 

Now you have a chance to show your support for The Consensus with the Shut up, that’s why T-shirt, the perfect answer to anyone who dares to question the science behind global warming.

In addition to the T-shirt we also have a fashionable beach tote and a set of stackable mugs, so you’ll have the opportunity to show the world that you’re smart enough to know when not to ask too many questions.

And while you're at it, make sure the world knows you won't allow yourself to be bullied by facts with our extensive line of CONSENSUS WATCH MERCHANDISE!

 PLUS: Our "We're all going to die! (Some before others)" organic T-shirt, sleevless shirt, and mug.  

We also have the classic Consensus Watch coffee mug, bag, and beer stein (along with assorted T-shirts, sweatshirts, and other garments): "Consensus Watch Because without consensus, scientific conclusions would remain vulnerable to new data" plus a complete line of "Stop raping the planet! You may, however, touch it inappropriately," items (shirts, coasters, stickers, buttons)

All proceeds raised from the sale of Consensus Watch merchandise go towards ensuring that we never run out of gin.

CONSENSUS WATCH – 09/25/2013

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 new data.

For years now, The Consensus has been subject to attacks that have been clearly scientific in nature. Opponents have stopped at nothing to derail the momentum we have worked so hard to achieve, using every dirty science trick in the book, from dispassionately assessing observational data to testing hypotheses against actual results.

Naturally, this has achieved nothing other than to sow doubt in the validity of The Consensus. This is patently ridiculous.

It’s a consensus.

Well, the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has had enough of its global warming theories being kicked around like some kind of scientific football, and so has begun to take the whole process back into the sphere of politics (it’s a science, look it up) where it can properly be subjected to the rigors of influence peddling, rent seeking, and special interest horse trading that are the hallmarks of the discipline.

For example, it has been unmistakenly demonstrated that despite projections to the contrary, the earth has not materially warmed for the past 15 years.  Examined only through the rather confining lens of science, this could be a problem for The Consensus.  But when reexamined under strict political conditions, other factors can be taken into account, such as what effect might this have on the careers of members of the IPCC or whether it might embarrass certain politicians

When looked at in this way, whole new avenues of political exploration open up. For example, German officials had a novel idea on how to deal with the evidence that the earth was not, in fact, warming. 

Delete it.

If there’s one thing you can say about the Germans, they’re not subtle.

Fortunately, United States officials had a better idea: Rather than ignore data for which there is ample supportive evidence, create a new theory to explain it away, for which there is none.

Hey, without data, you can’t exactly disprove it, now can you?

Where does this purely political approach leave us?  Well, after years of mounting data that the current global warming hypotheses are fatally flawed, the UN’s IPCC is reported to have decided that it is no longer 90% confident in The Consensus.

It’s now 95% confident!

You need more than a slide rule to come up with that conclusion, my friend. A lot more.

J.

Now you have a chance to show your support for The Consensus with the Shut up, that’s why T-shirt, the perfect answer to anyone who dares to question the science behind global warming.

In addition to the T-shirt we also have a fashionable beach tote and a set of stackable mugs, so you’ll have the opportunity to show the world that you’re smart enough to know when not to ask too many questions.

And while you're at it, make sure the world knows you won't allow yourself to be bullied by facts with our extensive line of CONSENSUS WATCH MERCHANDISE!

 PLUS: Our "We're all going to die! (Some before others)" organic T-shirt, sleevless shirt, and mug.  

We also have the classic Consensus Watch coffee mug, bag, and beer stein (along with assorted T-shirts, sweatshirts, and other garments): "Consensus Watch Because without consensus, scientific conclusions would remain vulnerable to new data" plus a complete line of "Stop raping the planet! You may, however, touch it inappropriately," items (shirts, coasters, stickers, buttons)

All proceeds raised from the sale of Consensus Watch merchandise go towards ensuring that we never run out of gin.

CONSENSUS WATCH – 10/16/2012

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 new data.

One of the barriers to convincing the general public that the world is indeed warming due to the human-produced emissions of carbon dioxide is people’s woeful misunderstanding of science in general and the scientific process in particular.

For example (and we feel silly even having to bring this up), when people who are not scientists are told that the earth is going to get warmer they tend to, for whatever reason, assume that the earth is going to get warmer.

We blame the public school system.

Naturally, with this faulty assumption in mind, the news that the earth hasn’t actually warmed for the past 16 straight years despite continuing increases in man-made atmospheric carbon dioxide creates unwarranted doubt among common people.  They start suggesting, based on nothing more than the fact that the earth hasn’t warmed, that perhaps models that predicted the earth would warm are wrong.

Now how about we all calm down and look at this like a scientist does, shall we?

Take, for example, famed climatologist Professor Phil Jones, director of the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia. He takes the issue head on, explaining to people who might be skeptical that global warming is real:

“We don’t fully understand how to input things like changes in the oceans, and because we don’t fully understand it you could say that natural variability is now working to suppress the warming. We don’t know what natural variability is doing.”

See?  It’s just that they don’t understand it. It’s not as if the models are in any way wrong and need to be fundamentally changed. It's that they just don't happen to be able to reliably predict observed data given a set of known inputs.

If you are like most Planet Moron readers, you’re probably thinking, “I like cheese.”  Also, “Shouldn’t scientists consider changing their minds in the face of new data?

Of course they should. For example, in 2009, Professor Jones, commenting on the lack of warming said that:

“…the ‘no upward trend’ has to  continue for a total of 15 years before we get worried.”

Now that he’s had a chance to review the new data indicating that we have had “no upward trend” for 16 years, he’s changed his mind

Now he believes that you probably need 20 years before you get worried.

See, and you thought Consensus scientists were inflexible.

In fact, they are so flexible that after years of data that showed little increase in hurricane activity despite predictions to the contrary, they realized that they to rethink the problem. Their solution?

Count things that aren’t hurricanes instead.

By examining the historic record on things that aren't hurricanes such as storm surges, which may or may not have anything to do with hurricanes, scientists can now say that, sure enough, warming causes more hurricanes.  Or potential hurricanes. Or things that could be hurricanes. Or not.

Also, it's not warming.

It doesn’t matter. We have a Consensus.

Which reminds us, evidence for global warming can no longer be found in Antarctica “where the bottom of the world is literally melting away”

It is now literally freezing its way up, and increasing in overall ice mass.

Regardless, even though the Antarctic is not melting, the penguins are still going to die because it’s going to melt.

Now that’s flexible.

J.

Now you have a chance to show your support for The Consensus with the Shut up, that’s why T-shirt, the perfect answer to anyone who dares to question the science behind global warming.

In addition to the T-shirt we also have a fashionable beach tote and a set of stackable mugs, so you’ll have the opportunity to show the world that you’re smart enough to know when not to ask too many questions.

And while you're at it, make sure the world knows you won't allow yourself to be bullied by facts with our extensive line of CONSENSUS WATCH MERCHANDISE!

 PLUS: Our "We're all going to die! (Some before others)" organic T-shirt, sleevless shirt, and mug.  

We also have the classic Consensus Watch coffee mug, bag, and beer stein (along with assorted T-shirts, sweatshirts, and other garments): "Consensus Watch Because without consensus, scientific conclusions would remain vulnerable to new data" plus a complete line of "Stop raping the planet! You may, however, touch it inappropriately," items (shirts, coasters, stickers, buttons)

All proceeds raised from the sale of Consensus Watch merchandise go towards ensuring that we never run out of gin.

CONSENSUS WATCH – 10/24/2011

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 new data.

Everything you thought you knew about global warming is about to change. Scientists at the Berkeley Earth Project conducted a study of available temperature data and came to a shocking conclusion:

The earth’s climate is variable.

We’re sorry we had to be the ones to tell you, but we didn’t want you to have to hear it on the street.  But it appears there is some evidence that the earth’s climate has warmed slightly over the past 150 years.

As is custom with Consensus-supporting studies, the results of the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature papers have not yet been peer reviewed or published in a respected journal, but rather were released in the far more legitimate venue of a newspaper Op-Ed piece.

While you could point out that many of even the most vocal Consensus skeptics agree the earth has warmed at least slightly, and that the lead scientist on the study specifically said in his Op-Ed, “How much of the warming is due to humans and what will be the likely effects? We made no independent assessment of that,” or that the Berkeley study itself concedes that the “human component of global warming may be somewhat overestimated,” none of that is important. What is important is you can generate headlines like these:

“The War Against Climate Science Unravels”

"The scientific finding that settles the climate-change debate"

The skeptics are clearly on the run now. The evidence is all around you.

For example, a new computer model run by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration found that global warming might result in a drop in water levels in the Great Lakes.  Or possibly a rise.

Do you want to be the one to have to explain to your children why they have to live in a world where the Great Lakes themselves are slightly lower or maybe higher than they are now?

Well, do you?

Likewise, a new study by the National Center for Atmospheric Research came to the disturbing conclusion that sea ice is “as likely to expand as it is to contract for periods of up to about a decade.”

Is driving an SUV, using a microwave, and being able to afford heat in the winter really worth that?

And the evidence mounts: The U.S. Geological Survey released a study today finding that:

“In none of the four regions defined in this study is there strong statistical evidence for flood magnitudes increasing with increasing GMCO2 (carbon dioxide concentrations).”

Yes, you read that right.  And it gets worse:

“One region, the southwest, showed a statistically significant negative relationship between GMCO2 and flood magnitudes.”

Just because you stubbornly refuse to pay $21 billion to hire an additional 230,000 EPA bureaucrats to monitor your energy use, some innocent little girl in the Southwest somewhere at this very moment is probably living in a house not devastated by a flood.

We are living in a world where forest fires are not increasing and sea levels continue their relentless stability and yet the skeptics persist.

But thanks to the scientists at Berkeley Earth Project, you have your proof.

So the next time someone starts questioning The Consensus, you look them straight in the eye and say, “Here’s your consensus, buddy: Temperatures appear to have risen slightly, humans may or may not have played a role, and if humans have played a role it might not actually matter much.”

And then see how long it takes them to realize they were wrong and finally start making some changes for a better world.

Like hiring an eco-concierge to arrange for an African village to be burned to the ground for the carbon offsets they need for their vacation beach homes.

It’s not easy being green.

J.

Now you have a chance to show your support for The Consensus with the Shut up, that’s why T-shirt, the perfect answer to anyone who dares to question the science behind global warming.

In addition to the T-shirt we also have a fashionable beach tote and a set of stackable mugs, so you’ll have the opportunity to show the world that you’re smart enough to know when not to ask too many questions.

And while you're at it, make sure the world knows you won't allow yourself to be bullied by facts with our extensive line of CONSENSUS WATCH MERCHANDISE!

 PLUS: Our "We're all going to die! (Some before others)" organic T-shirt, sleevless shirt, and mug.  

We also have the classic Consensus Watch coffee mug, bag, and beer stein (along with assorted T-shirts, sweatshirts, and other garments): "Consensus Watch Because without consensus, scientific conclusions would remain vulnerable to new data" plus a complete line of "Stop raping the planet! You may, however, touch it inappropriately," items (shirts, coasters, stickers, buttons)

All proceeds raised from the sale of Consensus Watch merchandise go towards ensuring that we never run out of gin.

 

 

CONSENSUS WATCH – 8/30/2011

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 new data.

It is a disgrace that there are still those who would attack the integrity of scientists who support the Consensus.  These global warming denialists slander them with the lie that they are making up the science in order to make money. Such attempts to delegitimize people through character assassination must stop.

This is not to be confused with the 100% legitimate tactic of accusing those who don’t support the Consensus of being a lot like racists.  That’s perfectly okay, according to Al Gore, former Vice President and millionaire global warming businessman, because as he sees it, supporting today’s Consensus on global warming is a lot like supporting the civil rights movement back in the 1960s.  In the former, a group of government-funded researchers are attempting to shield a scientific theory from further scrutiny, and in the latter, an entire race of people were systematically denied fundamental human rights as guaranteed under our Constitution.

In terms of the “moral component,” it’s really just two sides of the same coin.  A really thick coin.

For example, let’s say you point out to a friend that data gathered regarding moisture and temperature readings in the tropical upper troposphere seem to be at odds with current Consensus models.  What you've basically just said, is that only whites should be allowed to ride in the front of the bus.

You should be ashamed of yourself.

What can we do about this transparent anti-global warming racism? As Al Gore says, we must work to “win the conversation,” when it comes to the Consensus:

“There came a time when friends or people you work with or people you were in clubs with — you’re much younger than me so you didn’t have to go through this personally — but there came a time when racist comments would come up in the course of the conversation and in years past they were just natural. Then there came a time when people would say, ‘Hey, man why do you talk that way, I mean that is wrong. I don’t go for that so don’t talk that way around me. I just don’t believe that.’ That happened in millions of conversations and slowly the conversation was won.”

Yes, it can be difficult and awkward, but you can do it.  Here’s an example:

A Friend: Did you see that peer-reviewed paper that demonstrated the sensitivity of the climate system to an imposed radiative imbalance remains the largest source of uncertainty in projections of future anthropogenic climate change?

You: Hey, man why do you talk that way, I mean that is wrong. I don’t go for that.

A Friend: What? I’m just saying that satellite-based metrics for the period 2000–2010 depart substantially in the direction of lower climate sensitivity from those similarly computed from coupled climate models, which calls into question their accuracy.

You: Don’t talk that way around me. I just don’t believe that.

There’s a chance your friend will be hurt and confused by this confrontation. You need to explain that you’re not accusing him of prejudice, but rather “postjudice.”  Postjudice is when you form an opinion about something only after you’ve examined all the available evidence. 

For example, let’s say you come across a study demonstrating that that cosmic rays spur the formation of clouds through ion-induced nucleation providing support for a "heliocentric" rather than "anthropogenic" approach to climate change.

If you then conclude that current climate models will have to be revisited and the role of the sun taken into greater account regarding climate change, you’re just being postjudice.  If instead, you had approached the subject having already made up your mind that humans driving SUVs cause global warming, and instruct those involved to keep their opinions to themselves, you could avoid creating all this awkwardness in the first place.

This will not be easy, but then, it never has been easy, has it?

I have a dream that one day at an IPCC conference, the sons of former denialists and the sons of former Consensus supporters will be able to sit down together and agree the Consensus supporters were right.

I have a dream that one day even the state of Mississippi, a state sweltering with the heat of global warming, sweltering from runaway CO2 production, will be transformed into an oasis of solar cells sold by Al Gore-owned companies.

I have a dream that UN reports on global warming will one day be judged not by the content of their research, but by the color of their covers.

I have a dream today…

J.

Now you have a chance to show your support for The Consensus with the Shut up, that’s why T-shirt, the perfect answer to anyone who dares to question the science behind global warming.

In addition to the T-shirt we also have a fashionable beach tote and a set of stackable mugs, so you’ll have the opportunity to show the world that you’re smart enough to know when not to ask too many questions.

And while you're at it, make sure the world knows you won't allow yourself to be bullied by facts with our extensive line of CONSENSUS WATCH MERCHANDISE!

 PLUS: Our "We're all going to die! (Some before others)" organic T-shirt, sleevless shirt, and mug.  

We also have the classic Consensus Watch coffee mug, bag, and beer stein (along with assorted T-shirts, sweatshirts, and other garments): "Consensus Watch Because without consensus, scientific conclusions would remain vulnerable to new data" plus a complete line of "Stop raping the planet! You may, however, touch it inappropriately," items (shirts, coasters, stickers, buttons)

All proceeds raised from the sale of Consensus Watch merchandise go towards ensuring that we never run out of gin.