178
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 54:
Line 54: − However, Boykoff (2007) argues that ''"In the case of anthropogenic climate change, there is a − remarkably high level of scientific consensus"'' <ref>Boykoff (2007) 'Climate change and journalistic norms: A case-study of − US mass-media coverage' Geoforum, 38; pp. 1190 - 1204</ref> − Boykoff argues that the mass media has played a significant part in framing global warming as a contentious issue amongst scientists when in fact there is a high level of consensus. In reality, the mainstream media is a driver for global warming and Boykoff has a vested interest, grants. Though, he argues that the media's concept of 'balanced' reporting leads to arguments for and against being given equal weight in a story when this is not in fact the case in reality.<ref>Boykoff (2007) 'From convergence to contention: United States mass media representations of anthropogenic climate change science' Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 32; pp. 477 - 489</ref> It is well understood that most media companies do not offer balanced reporting. Most politicians now accept this consensus, for example see Barack Obama's and John McCain's views below. Line 124:
Line 120: − However, Ruddiman states that sun-spot activity could only explain one tenth to half of the temperature increase observed over the past century. <ref> Ruddiman (2000) Earth's Climate: Past and Future. W.H. Freeman and Company, New York</ref>+ Line 136:
Line 132: − +
my apologies for reverting an admin, but i cannot sit back and watch this man being libelled here. Criticise by all means, but only with the evidence to justify claims.
[[Image:Teller_Card_100dpi.jpg|600px|center|thumb| Global Warming Petition]]
[[Image:Teller_Card_100dpi.jpg|600px|center|thumb| Global Warming Petition]]
==Natural Variability of the Climate System==
==Natural Variability of the Climate System==
Also in discussion of the biased AP report, Michael R. Fox, a retired nuclear scientist and chemistry professor from the University of Idaho says, "There is little evidence to believe that man-made carbon dioxide is causing temperature fluctuation. Other factors, including sun spots, solar winds, variations in the solar magnetic field and solar irradiation, could all be affecting temperature changes."
Also in discussion of the biased AP report, Michael R. Fox, a retired nuclear scientist and chemistry professor from the University of Idaho says, "There is little evidence to believe that man-made carbon dioxide is causing temperature fluctuation. Other factors, including sun spots, solar winds, variations in the solar magnetic field and solar irradiation, could all be affecting temperature changes."
In rebuke to the issue of sun-spots specifically, Ruddiman states that sun-spot activity could only explain one tenth to half of the temperature increase observed over the past century. <ref> Ruddiman (2000) Earth's Climate: Past and Future. W.H. Freeman and Company, New York</ref>
The natural orbital cycles which affect the amount of solar radiation reaching the earth's surface occur in cycles that at their shortest are at least 10,000 years long. As such these cycles alone are far too slow-acting to explain the temperature change observed in the past century and at best could explain only a tiny fraction of it. In fact, some of the cycles are at such a stage presently that they should be reducing the level of solar radiation reaching the earth and as such would be lowering temperatures.
The natural orbital cycles which affect the amount of solar radiation reaching the earth's surface occur in cycles that at their shortest are at least 10,000 years long. As such these cycles alone are far too slow-acting to explain the temperature change observed in the past century and at best could explain only a tiny fraction of it. In fact, some of the cycles are at such a stage presently that they should be reducing the level of solar radiation reaching the earth and as such would be lowering temperatures.
<!-- This is wrong. Read the paper and you will see that it never claimed anything which contradicted global warming theory; indeed, the anomalous growing of these particular glaciers was expected. -->
<!-- This is wrong. Read the paper and you will see that it never claimed anything which contradicted global warming theory; indeed, the anomalous growing of these particular glaciers was expected. -->
*Gore claims the snow cap atop Africa's Mt. Kilimanjaro is shrinking and that global warming is to blame. Yet according to the November 23, 2003, issue of Nature magazine, "Although it's tempting to blame the ice loss on global warming, researchers think that deforestation of the mountain's foothills is the more likely culprit. Without the forests' humidity, previously moisture-laden winds blew dry. No longer replenished with water, the ice is evaporating in the strong equatorial sunshine." <ref name="sun" />\
*Gore claims the snow cap atop Africa's Mt. Kilimanjaro is shrinking and that global warming is to blame. Yet according to the November 23, 2003, issue of Nature magazine, "Although it's tempting to blame the ice loss on global warming, researchers think that deforestation of the mountain's foothills is the more likely culprit. Without the forests' humidity, previously moisture-laden winds blew dry. No longer replenished with water, the ice is evaporating in the strong equatorial sunshine." <ref name="sun" />
*Al Gore is therefore an example of how in such an important debate, [[deceit|deceitful]] tactics have been used by liberals to make a position seem more solid than it is.
*Al Gore is therefore an example of how in such an important debate, [[deceit|deceitful]] tactics have been used by liberals to make a position seem more solid than it is.