Confronting Malicious Ignorance (2/2) - a look at Idso's co2science game

The manmade global warming discussion is supposed to be about learning how our planet's climate system operates, yet rather than discussing the actual details of our planet's geophysical system, all they come up with is frothing at the mouth and that tribalism.  Here's a sampling of comments I've received in the past few days.  Which I follow with some observations of my own.  

After that I share a trove of information about a favorite source of self-certain authority among the climate science denying crowd, the shady Idso family cottage industry "co2science-org" and "Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change."

I'm sharing my experience, hoping it may help others better understand and confront that Republican/libertarian hostility and revulsion at learning about our planet, it's biosphere and the climate system we depend on.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Bull shit they will not debate as the skeptics have the data and the alarmists have nothing but GCMs.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Because co2science-org is an organization of actual scientists that reference scientific literature.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Maybe you should take your head out of the sand and acknowledge the fact that a lot of evidence supports skeptical arguments. But no, you'll just cherry-pick some false graph from some alarmist blog and act like you proved me wrong. Jeez, you people are worse than creationists...

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

I object to the claim that humans have caused a majority of the observed warming since the beginning of the industrial revolution. 

Confronting Malicious Ignorance (1/2) - a look at Poptech's game

Another diversion, but so it goes.  My YouTube profile must be growing, as reflected by the creepy clowns crawling out of the woodwork to take pot shots at me, reminds me of some cheap zombie horror movie.

A favorite meme is: CO2 levels were greater in the deep distant past, as though that has anything to do with today's world and the reality of adding ~3 billion metric tons of CO2 on top of the natural flux into our climate system every month after month.  One would think Republican types would know all about accumulating compounding interest and what that can do to numbers in a hurry - it doesn't just work that way in the financial world.  Why they ignore such simple rational fundamentals, is beyond me.

Another favorite, goes like this:

CC writes:  

Great so you object.  Now do you have any objective evidence to support what you believe.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Dude (I'll going to start using the generic Dude for multiple YouTube characters) writes: 

A lot, actually.

http://www.co2science.org/subject/c/co2climatehistory.php

Here's a small (but informative) collection of evidence. If needed, I can provide a lot more.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

CC writes:

All you folks seem to point to co2science, watts up with that, has it become your bible or something?  It's run by the Idso Clan who are paid spokesmen for Heartland Institute and ExxonMobil - it has been shown to dishonestly represent the science.  But that's all you got - and you refuse to look beyond your smug little certitude.

But, learning requires some times getting out and assessing the reality going down on this one and only planet of ours - that we depend on for everything.  A bit of healthy self-skepticism would go a long way too.

~ plus~

What about all the information and detailed explanations and the hundreds of referenced papers that are collected in there???

https://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/wg1/WG1AR5_Chapter05_FINAL.pdf - 

also see:

Heartland Institute and its NIPCC report fail the credibility test 

Posted on September 9, 2013 by Climate Science Watch 

http://www.climatesciencewatch.org/2013/09/09/heartland-institute-nipcc-fail-the-credibility-test/

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Dude writes: 

The IPCC? You are really going to reference people who still believe in the hockey stick graph and a 97% consensus? OK.

Here's a lot more papers (1,350+):

www.populartechnology.net/2009/10/peer-reviewed-papers-supporting.html