How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic: Responses to the most common skeptical arguments on global warming

Hansen wants the skeptics thrown in jail–Did James Hansen really want to try the climate skeptics?

(Part of the How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic guide)   Objection: In his June 23, 2008 testimony before the United States Congress, James Hansen called for the punishment of climate change skeptics for “crimes against humanity.” This is a mockery of free speech, the antithesis of scientific investigation, and a clear indication that […]

Was there another breathless announcement of another phony record, and another quiet retraction?

(Part of the How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic guide) Objection: In October 2008, Al Gore’s science adviser, James Hansen announced yet another “hottest” month on record. After all the alarmist banner headlines sank in, yet another “correction” quietly contradicted this, and October was not particularly warm after all. This is yet another example […]

‘Global warming comes from within’–Is heat at the Earth’s core the real cause of global warming?

(Part of the How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic guide) Objection: We all live on a thin crust that floats on a huge ball of molten iron, and at its core, the Earth’s temperature is over 5000 degrees C! It’s pretty far fetched to think a few parts per million of CO2 can have […]

Summer ice in the Arctic has recovered–Was the Arctic ice retreat a climate anomaly?

(Part of the How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic guide) Objection: Sea ice at the north pole recovered a whopping 9.4 percent from 2007 to 2008 despite the doom and gloom predictions of the alarmists. Yet another wheel falls off the global warming bandwagon. Answer: It is true that the minimum summer ice extent […]

Is the American Physical Society a crack in the climate change consensus?

(Part of the How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic guide) Objection: The American Physical Society with tens of thousands of member scientists no longer believes that the science of global warming is conclusive. So what about that so called consensus? Answer: The APS has not reversed its position on climate change: Emissions of greenhouse […]

Is the IPCC so wrong their theories contradict a basic laws of physics?

(Part of the How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic guide) Objection: The so called “Greenhouse Effect” which is the underpinning of the entire theory of anthropogenic global warming claims that greenhouse gases in the upper atmosphere absorb outgoing long-wave radiation from the surface and reradiate it back, thereby warming the climate. But the upper […]

In 2008, did temperatures drop as much as they rose over the whole 20th century?

(Part of the How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic guide)   Objection: Temperatures plummeted over the last year (2007-2008). If you look at this data from the Met Office Hadley Centre you can clearly see that in one year alone global temperatures dropped .6°C, an amount equal to the entire warming over the 20th […]

Only if you ignore fossil fuel emissions

(Part of the How to Talk to a Global Warming Skeptic guide)

Objection: The United States absorbs more CO2 into its land than it emits into the air. The world should be grateful.

Answer: As often the case, at the heart of this talking point is a grain of truth. But it does not serve the purpose for which it's been enlisted. According to the U.S. Department of Energy land-use changes in the U.S. between 1952 and 1992 have resulted in a net absorption of CO2. But this is only true of natural CO2 -- the natural flux of CO2 into and out of forests and peat bogs and soil, as well as carbon that's been sequestered as lumber and other wood products. These fluxes are actually much larger than anthropogenic emissions, but they go both ways, whereas fossil fuel burning only emits carbon.

‘Climate change mitigation would lead to disaster’–Not really, but this may be lesser of two evils

(Part of the How to Talk to a Global Warming Skeptic guide)

Objection: The kind of drastic actions required to mitigate global warming risk the destruction of the global economy and the deaths of potentially billions of people.

Answer: Is this supposed to mean the theory of anthropogenic global warming must be wrong? You can not come to a rational decision about the reality of a danger by considering how hard it might be to avoid. First things first: understand that the problem is real and present.