Extreme Earth Addendum – The Math of Anthropogenic Global Warming

Since those who argue against the reality of anthropogenic global warming (AGW) tend to resort to arguments about the math (“the math doesn’t add up!”) I thought I’d throw out a few links to clarify the true situation with regards to the mathematics of AGW. I hope these help, and I’d like to thank Mike Kaulbars for sending them my way:

What is the evidence that CO2 is causing global warming?
http://scienceblogs.com/illconsidered/2008/10/what_is_the_evidence_that_co2.php

Just in case there are any doubts about anthropogenic influence in atmospheric CO2
http://residualanalysis.blogspot.com/2008/08/just-in-case-there-are-any-doubts-about.html

Does CO2 correlate with temperature?
http://moregrumbinescience.blogspot.com/2009/03/does-co2-correlate-with-temperature.html

The CO2 problem in 6 easy steps http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/08/the-co2-problem-in-6-easy-steps/

Yet more CO2 http://tamino.wordpress.com/2008/08/08/yet-more-co2/

A role for atmospheric CO2 in preindustrial climate forcing http://moregrumbinescience.blogspot.com/2008/10/discussion-role-for-atmospheric-co2-in.html

Calculating the greenhouse effect http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2006/01/calculating-the-greenhouse-effect/langswitch_lang/sk#more-220

Of Upward Slopes and Isotopes
http://halgeranon.blogspot.com/2009/02/of-upward-slopes-and-isotopes.html

Of Upward Slopes and Isotopes (2)
http://halgeranon.blogspot.com/2009/04/of-upward-slopes-and-isotopes-2.html

Let’s accept that it behooves us all to educate ourselves as much as possible with regards to climate change. I am not a scientist. My degrees are in history and philosophy. But I can think and I can reason and one of my favorite classes in college outside of my degree areas was “Biology of the Environment” – a class which really opened my eyes to what we, as humans, are doing to our environment, either intentionally or incidentally.

If we are going to argue a point of view, we need to understand both sides of the issue, familiarize ourselves with the arguments pro and con. As a polytheist, I am all too familiar with the conservatives’ strategy of repeating obvious falsehoods in the face of all evidence to the contrary. It really doesn’t matter how many facts you pile on; they will accuse you of what they themselves are guilty of: being sheep and avoiding facts. I think the same thing has happened with the science of climate change as has happened with religion.

As I said before, evidence becomes subservient to theory. Simply stating that something is true does not make it true, no matter how often you insist upon it. You ought at least to be able to summon some facts to your side rather than saying everybody else is an idiot, or issuing a dogmatic “you’re wrong” over and over again. If you have evidence, provide it. It’s as simple as that.

Yet too many “deniers” refuse to do so. While claiming the evidence is in their favor, they refuse to provide it. While claiming that “scientific consensus” is meaningless they imply that a minority opinion carries more weight than a majority opinion (can you imagine anything more nonsensical than that???). They claim most scientists fault AGW but when proven that a consensus actually supports AGW they change their argument and claim it’s no surprise given the climate – who would dare oppose it and suffer condemnation? The fact is that there IS a consensus and the fact is that most of those “scientists” who find against AGW are not peer published and the fact is that many of them work for polluting industries, like coal, and so have a vested interest in denying AGW.

So as always, let’s educate ourselves. Whether you accept AGW as a reality or as a myth, educate yourself. Let’s look at the evidence and arrive at conclusions that are pointed to BY that evidence. Let’s look at facts, not rhetoric, and question, always question. Question with the ferocity of Socrates.