Skip to main content

The journal Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics published a new paper, which has apparently caused confusion in the deniersphere. The subject of the paper is the stratosphere, the layer of atmosphere above the troposphere. The troposphere is where GHGs trap heat, so climate change theory holds that, in response to GHG emissions, the troposphere should warm while the stratosphere cools.

The paper confirms a cooling trend in the stratosphere over the past 52 years, which you'd think deniers wouldn't want to highlight. However, they use this as a chance to claim scientists don't really know what causes stratospheric cooling. In a Hockey Schtick post, the author says, "fans of anthropogenic global warming don't agree as to why GHGs would cause the stratosphere to cool and the troposphere to warm." The post then points out how the paper found a little (not statistically significant) cooling in part of the troposphere in the early 20th century.

What this all amounts to, according to the Hockey Schtick, is that the paper fails to provide evidence for climate change, even though it confirms a prediction of climate science.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  This behavior is predicted by the theory (8+ / 0-)

    of Cognitive Dissonance, which I Diaried yesterday in my Grokking Republicans series for the Readers and Book Lovers Group. I explain Cognitive Dissanance theory, as laid out in the book When Prophecy Fails, by Festinger, Riecken, and Schachter.

    The theory they developed predicts that when a religious or ideological cult prediction requires a commitment on the part of believers that is hard to undo, when the prediction is specific and it is easily verified that it failed, and when believers have a strong support network,the failure of such a prediction causes the group to double down, to deny any and all evidence, to latch on to the flimsiest excuses, and to publicly proclaim its faith loud and long. They tested their theory with great success on a UFO cult prediction of global catastrophe. In the case of Global Warming, the commitment is to huge investments in fossil carbon resources and technology, and to political nonsense such as the claimed War on Coal, which is fairly real, taken as a war on coal miners, which it is not.

    But we are at Grid Parity, where wind has become cheaper than coal or oil and competitive with natural gas, and costs for wind continue to decline. Now that it is a matter of real money, no amount of political pressure can keep utilities from buying wind power, as the Koch brothers found out when failing to quash wind in their deep-red home state of Kansas. The market has spoken. Although it may take a few years for the MSM to notice, this story is widespread in the financial press, even the WSJ (though not its Editorial page).

    A clear example of the theory is Poll Unskewing. After Romney plainly lost the 2012 election, the poll unskewers decided that it was due to massive voter fraud, because their numbers could not possibly be wrong, because a Romney victory was a necessity. Since there is no evidence for any Republican CT including voter fraud, it follows that there is a massive coverup in each case, and coverups of the coverups.

    And so on, for every issue where various Republican factions are on the wrong side of history and public opinion both. Obamacare is a job killer, no matter how many million jobs have been created since the ACA was passed and signed into law. Benghazi!

    Back off, man. I'm a logician.—GOPBusters™

    by Mokurai on Tue Aug 05, 2014 at 08:34:01 AM PDT

  •  "deniersphere" -- what a great word! (6+ / 0-)

    captures that alternate universe perfectly

  •  Climate denial is supposedly driven by concern for (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Roger Fox, Gwennedd, myboo

    the economy. Actually most strategies for reducing CO2 emissions increase efficiency or "energy productivity" which conservatives should embrace as enthusiastically as they have labor productivity.

     Pollution is compelling evidence of waste and inefficiency. People who associate pollution with economic well being are defending negative externalities by hiding them in misleading rhetoric. This is the basic motivation of the Koch Brothers political $peech.

    Cities are good for the environment

    by citydem on Tue Aug 05, 2014 at 11:38:56 AM PDT

  •  Deniers gonna deny. nt (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Gwennedd

    "The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power. Now do you begin to understand me?" ~Orwell, "1984"

    by Lily O Lady on Tue Aug 05, 2014 at 11:39:54 AM PDT

  •  Stupid is as stupid does. Repubs do stupid. (0+ / 0-)

    Increasing amounts of GHGs trap more heat in the troposphere. The stratosphere, which is above the troposphere gets less heat from the troposphere below.

    That's the simple explanation, which ignores the increase in the speed of the Brewer Dobson circulation.

    Climate scientists understand what's going on pretty well. Deniers don't understand much beyond their own nose.

    “Industry does everything they can and gets away with it almost all the time, whether it’s the coal industry, not the subject of this hearing, or water or whatever. They will cut corners, and they will get away with it. " Sen. Jay Rockefeller, D, WVa

    by FishOutofWater on Wed Aug 06, 2014 at 04:14:42 PM PDT

Click here for the mobile view of the site