With new videos uploaded every second, one can lose one’s life within Youtube and constantly be falling behind. It is hard to find the wheat amid all that chaff. Perhaps this can help: Greenman3610 (Peter Sinclair) provides some pretty high-quality wheat.
Now at 13 videos, Sinclair has taken it on himself to produce “The Climate Crock of the Week”, focusing a lens on a specific element of global warming denier / skeptic misrepresentation and deception, dissecting the truthiness and providing substantive (and traceable) responses to that deceit. Whether dealing with The Myth of Global Cooling being a scientific consensus or the oft-cited petitions questioning global warming or others of this weekly series, Peter successfully weaves in amusing clips from popular culture into referencing of serious scientific studies in his solid debunking of deniers’ deceptions.
Here is one that takes on one of those tough, quite complex issues: the strawman argument that CO2 buildup follows, not drives, global warming. This is worth the nine minutes.
In this, Peter covers the three key long term planetary elements (Precession (change in the earth’s rotational axis); Obliquity (the change in the actual axial tilt); Eccentricity (the change in the earth’s orbit)) that work together to drive cooling and warming of the globe … that is, drive cooling and warming absent human activity. These three are cyclical and can drive major global change when the cycles amplify each other. This last occurred for an ice age 20,000-10,000 years ago. And, they will next reinforce each other 20,000-30,000 years from now. When these have occurred, for warming, carbon dioxide (and methane) begins to be released as the earth (land and oceans) begins to warm. While the CO2 helps amplify the warming signal from these Precession/Obliquity/Eccentricity combining (the Milankovitch Cycle), CO2 release ‘naturally’ follows (to begin). But the scientific studies deniers use, as Peter outlines, to argue this point highlight that human release of CO2 (and other GHG emissions) is a game changer, that they can force warming. The deniers have cherry picked and misrepresented the original scientific research … as you will see is (WHEN!) you watch Peter’s video.
Honestly, I find the quality of these videos improving, with an ever surer editing touch. My one complaint (communicated to Peter) is that transcripts would be useful, enabling
Others include:
Climate Denial Crock of the Week – Party Like It… (May-19-2009)
Climate Denial Crock of the Week – Ice Area vs V… (May-15-2009)
Climate Denial Crock of the Week – Mars Attacks (Apr-18-2009)
Climate Denial Crock of the Week – Medieval Warm… (Apr-13-2009)
Climate Denial Crock of the Week – The Great Pet… (Apr-10-2009)
Climate Denial Crock of the Week – ‘It’s cold. S… (Mar-27-2009)
Climate Denial Crock of the Week – The ‘Urban He… (Mar-20-2009)
4 responses so far ↓
1 ken // Jun 13, 2009 at 8:54 pm
This video shows that long term Milankovitch cycles drive our climate, not C02. Great we agree on this. AGW skeptics use the 800 year delay for what it is, an 800 year delay. The planet warms or cools 800 years before a corresponding rise or fall of C02. This shows that C02 does not drive climate but rather has a minor role in climate throughout history. Your video agrees with this.
The human released C02 climate forcing part of the study is a theory, it is speculation and has never been observed empirically. You can call it cherry picking if you like. It’s still only a theory yet AGW believers cling to it like it’s fact. What the skeptics want to see from the AGW crowd is why should we pay to reduce C02 emissions when you agree that the driving force of earth’s climate is not C02?
It’s confusing to us. You agree that the earth’s climate changes without humans, but there is this unsubstantiated C02 forcing theory so now we must pay trillions. This is why the skeptics remain skeptics, we have nothing to prove, it rest upon the AGW Believers to prove that elevated C02 will change our climate, as yet their science does not do that.
We believe the trillions should be used for something real. Think about this; in Northern Alberta they are building a $5billion pipeline just to sequester C02. Just think how many malaria mosquito nets could be bought with this money.
It’s an outrage! But no we’re going to blow it on C02 instead.
2 Watt’s Up With Suppressing Honest Skepticism // Jul 28, 2009 at 2:21 pm
[…] excellent “Climate Denial Crock of the Week” series (see, for example, this GESN post) highlighted how Watts’ work is fundamentally […]
3 But, but (from the Watts) « Greenfyre’s // Jul 28, 2009 at 5:36 pm
[…] Peter Sinclair’s excellent “Climate Denial Crock of the Week” series (see, for example, this GESN post) highlighted how Watts’ work is fundamentally […]
4 Roger Pielke Sr speaks on Climate Crock: Laugh or cry? // Jul 29, 2009 at 8:43 am
[…] excellent “Climate Denial Crock of the Week” series (see, for example, this GESN post) highlighted how Watts’ work is fundamentally […]