Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

caraher

(6,356 posts)
8. Do you enjoy playing whack-a-mole?
Sun Dec 22, 2013, 09:09 PM
Dec 2013

The trouble with debunking every piece that comes along is that even the effort gives the lies more cognitive salience than they deserve, and it's far to easy to generate new BS that track down real science to refute it.

If you must, there are some good catalogs of "skeptic" debunkings. Skeptical Science and Real Climate are always good places to start. It's also worth knowing that Solomon has no known qualifications to make pronouncements on climate science beyond his ability to induce people to pay him to do things like promote coal:

"Coal used to be a very dirty fuel but coal has become cleaner and cleaner over the decades. Clean coal now is quite clean. Clean coal now has the same emissions profile as natural gas. Clean coal can become cleaner still. We can take even more of the pollutants out of coal and I believe we should. Clean coal, I think, is the immediate answer to Canada’s energy needs and the world’s energy needs. There are hundreds of years available of coal supplies. We shouldn’t be squandering that resource. We should be using it prudently."


A few "greatest hits" from the piece in question:

Antarctic sea ice: "Satellites measure Antarctica is gaining sea ice but losing land ice at an accelerating rate which has implications for sea level rise."

Arctic ice: Claim seems to be about cherry-picked data

The random selection of factoids about snow and cold here and there amount to nothing evidence-wise.

"2013 marks the 17th year of no warming on the planet:" Another cherry-pick

"Scientific predictions of global cooling – until recently mostly shunned in the academic press for fear of being labeled crackpot – were published and publicized by no less than the BBC" Ah yes, the famous peer-reviewed scientific journal "BBC." 'Nuff said.

The rest of the piece is cheering against solar power, for coal, and celebrating the last dying gasps of the Kyoto protocol. Really, this isn't even a particularly good "skeptic" piece...

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»Need help debunking a ske...»Reply #8