RealClimate Rebuts the Contrarians
article: RealClimate Rebuts the Contrarians
Copenhagen COP15 Conference December 2009RealClimate.org is an extremely useful and accurate website run by professional climatologists. It has excellent, though sometimes technical, responses to many of the fallacious contrarian arguments. There are also inline responses to contrarian comments.
N.B: For an explanation of the model results in the graphic - which provide a very powerful argument against the contrarians - see below.
RealClimate responses to common contrarian arguments:
- Michaels misquotes Hansen
- Antarctic cooling, global warming? (
) - What does the lag of CO2 behind temperature in ice cores tell us about global warming? ()
- Are Temperature Trends affected by Economic Activity?
- Fox News gets it wrong
- Michael Crichton’s State of Confusion ()
- Michael Crichton’s State of Confusion II: Return of the Science
- Climate Change Disinformation
- Will-full ignorance
- George Will-misled and misleading
- The global cooling myth ()
- Strange Bedfellows ()
- Myth vs. Fact Regarding the "Hockey Stick" (
) - What If … the “Hockey Stick” Were Wrong? ()
- Water vapour: feedback or forcing? (
) - How much of the recent CO2 increase is due to human activities? ()
- Inhofe and Crichton: Together at Last!
- How to be a real sceptic
- The Wall Street Journal vs. The Scientific Consensus ()
- Senator Inhofe on Climate Change
- CO2 Fertilization
- Calculating the greenhouse effect
- Good climate debate FAQ
- Bush on “The Fundamental Debate”
- Incurious George
- Heat Rising at the Washington Post
- Open Thread on Lindzen Op-Ed in WSJ
- Lindzen: point by point
- Thank you for emitting
- Global cooling, again
- Cuckoo Science ()
- English vineyards again….
- Avery and Singer: Unstoppable hot air
- Inhofe’s last stand
- Swindled! (
) - Swindled: Carl Wunsch responds ()
- Does a Global Temperature Exist? (
) - Lindzen in Newsweek
- The lag between temperature and CO2. (Gore’s got it right.) (
) - Beck to the future
- The weirdest millennium
- Curve manipulation: lesson 2
- Oregon Institute of Science and Malarkey
- BBC contrarian top 10
- Les Chevaliers de l'Ordre de la Terre Plate, Part I: Allègre and Courtillot ()
- Les Chevaliers de l’Ordre de la Terre Plate, Part II: Courtillot's Geomagnetic Excursion ()
- The global cooling mole () (
) - Impressions from the European Geophysical Union conference 2008
- Freeman Dyson’s selective vision
- Once more unto the bray
- Not the IPCC (“NIPCC”) Report ()
Ref:
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2004/12/index/
NOTE:
The graphic shows backtesting of climate models against historical temperature data for 100 years, by continent, from the 2007 IPCC science report. The black lines are data, blue represents natural effects only (including solar), and red represents all effects - anthropogenic and natural. The bands indicate model uncertainties.
Natural effects alone (blue) DO NOT reproduce the historical global temperature data (black).
All effects (red) including both anthropogenic (human) and natural effects DO reproduce the historical global temperature data (black).
Passing this important test shows that the climate models ARE realistic, but only provided that human-generated effects are included.
The results show that human (anthropogenic) effects have DOMINATED natural effects over the last 30 years, during which time global warming has become manifest.
These successful model results provide an extremely powerful argument against the contrarians, and for mainstream climate science.
Ref (shows larger graphic): http://www.ipcc.ch/graphics/syr/spm4.jpg
