Skip to main content

View Diary: Don't Call Them "Climate Skeptics" -- They're Climate Deniers, Period (125 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Pielke, Lindzen, Curry, Spencer, Svensmark etc. (0+ / 0-)

    There are a number of others and they all make somewhat different arguments.  They are skeptics rather than deniers in that they agree that the planet is warming and that SOME of the warming is caused by increasing atmospheric CO2 from fossil fuel burning.

    Where are we, now that we need us most?

    by Frank Knarf on Mon May 07, 2012 at 10:44:45 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Spencer is also an evolution denier (4+ / 0-)

      Which is frankly even more ridiculous. If you believe humanity came from Adam and Eve and all the species were cramped in Noah's Ark, sorry but you ain't no scientist.

      Freedom is the freedom to say two plus two make four.  If that is granted, all else follows. -- George Orwell, 1984. Now on Twitter.

      by kindler on Mon May 07, 2012 at 10:57:07 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  How is this skeptical? (0+ / 0-)

      If you admit the planet is warming and that some of it is from man made CO2 emissions, I'm afraid I don't see how this is skeptical.

      There are plenty of legitimate arguments about the rate of warming, but I don't someone who agrees that the planet is warming and that it's man made, would fall into the category "skeptic" that the deniers are trying to use for cover.

    •  Spencer and Lindzen (0+ / 0-)

      have the idea that clouds might become a negative feedback, although they have different reasons. They therefore think that climate sensitivity is low.
        Svensmark just doesn't seem to like CO2 as a forcing. First he liked solar forcing, then when correlations went the other way, he went for cosmic rays and clouds.
        I haven't read much of Curry and Pielke. They seem pretty mainstream but seem reluctant to really commit to AGW.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site