Deniers vs Consensus, neat image (read authors comments):

[joshcryer]

(Sorry if this inline is too big for you, it's a small file, but the dimensions are huge. It looks fine at the pitiful resolution I browse at so I trust no one minds.)

http://www.informationisbeautiful.net/visualizations/climate-change-deniers-vs-the-consensus/

From the comments:

My conclusion is “what a nightmare”. I was generally shocked and appalled by how difficult it was to source counter arguments. The data was often tucked away on extremely ancient or byzantine websites. The key counter arguments I often found, 16 scrolls down, on comment 342 on a far flung realclimate.org post from three years ago. And even when I found an answer, the answers were excessively jargonized or technical.

My comments:

For someone like me, understanding the data is second nature, I am a curious person at heart and I don't mind spending my free time learning about stuff and educating myself. But how it must be for the vast majority out there. They just take the denialists at their word and that's it. It's a shame.

[joshcryer]

1. Unrec's? Why? C'mon! Read the guys blog:

http://www.informationisbeautiful.net/2009/the-climate-deniers-vs-the-consensus/

I’m fascinated by climate deniers. How could anyone deny the climate change is happening? What evidence is there? Surely it’s unambiguous?

Curious, I investigated the key statements made by climate denialists and sought out the counter-views, as presented by climate research scientists. The result is this image.

(This a new and updated version of the spread on Climate Skepticism from my book The Visual Miscellaneum)

[OKIsItJustMe]

5. It seems a bit out-of-date at this point

When it comes to scientists, even the skeptics don’t deny the Earth is warming. They simply question the degree to which humanity is responsible for it.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=115&topic_id=223108&mesg_id=223108

[joshcryer]

6. Nah, denialists are all over the board. If it's not questioning the data, it's questioning the...

...integrity of the scientists, etc.

[jimlup]

2. Thanks This is a good summary

Kick and Rec!

[silverweb]

3. Bookmarked for later study.

Thanks for posting this! :hi:

[beardown]

4. Pretty looking summary, but...

by it's layout it gives both sides of each argument equal standing, regardless of the volume or quality of the science behind the positions.

It's similar to a chart showing a debate about whether or not the Earth is round. On one side you'd have the flat Earth position saying that if the Earth were round then everyone in the southern hemisphere would fall off and on the other side that gravity holds us on the Earth. Equal arguments on the chart, but totally unequal on the science.

Not to say that there isn't some real science questioning aspects of global warming, but the over whelming consensus says it's real and it's influenced by man.

[joshcryer]

7. Yeah, I know. What I took from it was that we need to be more diligent and spread the knowledge.

We are being steamrolled by simple concepts.

It would be interesting to do a similar graph on Flat Earth Theory, actually. You'd say things like "If the Earth were round the speed of rotation would make people fly off." Then you'd explain Galileo's experiment whereby he envisions dropping a ball from a moving ship (the ball follows something similar to a sine curve as it falls and bounces). It would show how "intuition" and misleading direction can screw up the thought process.