Dana1981 asked in EnvironmentGlobal Warming · 1 decade ago

What will global warming deniers do in 2010?

It's early 2010. If Lindsey Graham's support is any indicator, the US Congress will have passed a carbon cap and trade system.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=ArRAl...

Further, the US will have signed a carbon reduction agreement in Copenhagen. As we all know deniers are in denial for political reasons, these political losses will be a huge blow. On top of that, 2009 will have been approximately the 5th hottest year on record, even in the UAH satellite data. The early months of 2010 will remain hot, particularly in the lagging satellite data. All this despite the longest solar cycle minimum in a century.

What will deniers do in this scenario? Once they've already lost the political battle and the global temperature data continues to remain at near record levels, destroying their favorite "it's the Sun" argument, what options will they have? We know they'll never admit AGW is correct, but will they become more belligerent, or will they fade into the darkness?

Update:

Geez jim, the American Conservative Union ranks Graham as one of the most conservative senators. If you don't think he's conservative, then who is?

Update 2:

pachl - last I checked, the Soviet Union collapsed about 2 decades ago. Nobody at NASA agrees with your claims, and your link to a technology blog (always my favorite source for climate science!) is nearly 2 years old.

Update 3:

"didn't you predict 2009 to set a record?"

No, I predicted a 50/50 chance that 2009 or 2010 would set a new record.

13 Answers

Relevance
  • 1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    I wouldn't get too confident about a climate bill passing. Graham just just as easily turn back to the partisan obstructionism before it's all said and done. But his words are encouraging at least.

    I concur about Jim Z's bizarre characterization of Graham not being a conservative. It seems that hardcore partisans always claim that when one of their politicians steps "out of line". They seem to have a religious devotion to their cause, like global warming deniers.

    Deniers will probably keep denying, but with the near-term political battle lost, they won't seem as loud. They won't have the same level or coverage by willing media outlets intent on fighting policy initiatives.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Mary
    Lv 4
    4 years ago

    I live within walking distance of the Pacific Ocean, and I have lived here when the alarmists/leftists were proclaiming global cooling. Over 30 years ago they started chanting global warming and predicted that where I live would have a serious rise in ocean levels, flooding lowlands, that would happen within twenty year or less. That was 25 years ago and I'm still waiting. Nothing has changed, not the ocean level, not the water temperature. The state climatologist, George Taylor, exposed the scam, and he is a real scientist, not a politician. The state governor read Taylor's report, and fired him, or tried to. Taylor wasn't politically correct. Also, I studied Earth Science in college as a minor. Also, I'm not new to science; I've spent my live working in Science and Technology. All my friends are scientists or technologists. So, don't repeat Al Gore's lies to me. This climate change hoax runs along leftist political lines, and it is fed by liars and morons. Believe it!

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    Pray for a return to La Nina, solar activity to remain low and other natural cooling factors would be my guess.

    If El Nino survives past the end of 2009 and doesn't swing back into a La Nina before say, September next year, then 2010 would be a good bet for hottest year on record.

    In that case, their typical response is to move on and be particularly shrill about something else. Maybe Al Gore will do something else blatantly hypocritical for them to use as 'proof' global warming doesn't exist.

    If we lose El Nino then I expect they will continue as they always have - even if a non-El Nino, solar minimum year comes close to breaking the record.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Eric c
    Lv 4
    1 decade ago

    Actually if you look at the 13 month average at UAH, for the year temperatures are still bellow average.

    http://www.drroyspencer.com/2009/10/september-2009...

    When you hear politicians talking about back up plans and other proposals to cap and trade, then you know they are thinking about defeat.

    "President Barack Obama is drawing up a 'Plan B' to regulate greenhouse gases if the US Senate fails to pass legislation needed to mandate the new administration to negotiate an international climate treaty at crunch talks in December, a senior official said yesterday (24 September)....The climate bill got through the House of Representatives in June, but only by a very narrow margin. Indeed, a repeat of the majority achieved in the lower chamber would not see the law through the Senate, where 60 out of 100 votes are required for approval."

    http://www.euractiv.com/en/climate-change/us-offic...

    As for the weather in 2010, I am willing to bet it will be cooler than 2009. Why? If you look at the temperature data over the past decades, after an El Nino year temperatures always fall, and after a La Nina year temperatures always rise.

    So no Cap and Trade and temperatures falling in 2010. I would say it will be a good year for skeptics.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 1 decade ago

    You are crowing about the possibility of paying trillions of dollars to foreign governments and gutting the U.S. economy.

    for what, something that may or not happen in 100 years.

    and can not be proved that it could have any effect on future climate change.

    wow you want everybody to fall on a sword over a group of billionaires wish to have a world socialist society and control over the worlds energy use!

    were do do get your wages from dana?

    you on the payroll for carbon propaganda

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    We will continue to wait for good science.

    And hey, didn't you predict 2009 to set a record? And now you are going against the Farmer's Almanac for early 2010. This should be good. You're a regular IPCC GCM.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    Dana, in 2010 I'll still be wishing to hell there was some real global warming, because all I'm seeing everywhere I travel is cold, cold, cold.

    Here in Prague we didn't even have one summer day from the start of June until well into the middle of July! Just this week we've hit record lows.

    Let me pose a question to you: what will you do in 2012 when Soviet (and many NASA) scientists believe we will enter a period of global cooling? (see links below)

    Here's an excerpt:

    "The temperature of the troposphere, the lowest and densest portion of the atmosphere, does not depend on the concentration of greenhouse gas emissions—a point proved theoretically and empirically. True, probes of Antarctic ice shield, taken with bore specimens in the vicinity of the Russian research station Vostok, show that there are close links between atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide and temperature changes.

    Temperature fluctuations ALWAYS RUN somewhat ahead of carbon dioxide concentration changes. This means that WARMING IS PRIMARY. The ocean is the greatest carbon dioxide depository, with concentrations 60-90 times larger than in the atmosphere. When the ocean’s surface warms up, it produces the “champagne effect.” Compare a foamy spurt out of a warm bottle with wine pouring smoothly when served properly cold.

    Likewise, warm ocean water exudes greater amounts of carbonic acid, which evaporates to add to industrial pollution—a factor we cannot deny. However, man-caused pollution is negligible here. If industrial pollution with carbon dioxide keeps at its present-day 5-7 billion metric tons a year, it will not change global temperatures up to the year 2100. The change will be too small for humans to feel even if the concentration of greenhouse gas emissions doubles. "

    Next Dana, how do you explain the following if temperatures are supposedly rising (from second website below): "Over the past year, anecdotal evidence for a cooling planet has exploded. China has its coldest winter in 100 years. Baghdad sees its first snow in all recorded history. North America has the most snowcover in 50 years, with places like Wisconsin the highest since record-keeping began. Record levels of Antarctic sea ice, record cold in Minnesota, Texas, Florida, Mexico, Australia, Iran, Greece, South Africa, Greenland, Argentina, Chile -- the list goes on and on.

    No more than anecdotal evidence, to be sure. But now, that evidence has been supplanted by hard scientific fact. All four major global temperature tracking outlets (Hadley, NASA's GISS, UAH, RSS) have released updated data. All show that over the past year, global temperatures have dropped precipitously.

    A compiled list of all the sources can be seen here. The total amount of cooling ranges from 0.65C up to 0.75C -- a value large enough to wipe out most of the warming recorded over the past 100 years. All in one year's time. For all four sources, it's the single fastest temperature change ever recorded, either up or down."

    C'mon Dana, something is amiss with Global "Warming", wouldn't you say?

    • Login to reply the answers
  • JimZ
    Lv 7
    1 decade ago

    Lindsey Gramnesty is John McCain's poodle. He is not a conservative and he is a typical moderate sticking finger in the wind to see which direction he should face today. There are no great moderates. There are no moderates on Mt. Rushmore. Moderates are a bane to conservatives because they provide cover to the left to suggest there is bipartisan support. I am sure that there are democrats that are skeptical of AGW being significant or harmful as well but that is ignored by those like you seeking the illusion of a consensus. If there was a consensus or anything close, the senate wouldn't have voted unanimously to kill Kyoto. Since then, the evidence has been piling up that AGW has been grossly exaggerated. Your belief that a solar minimum will cool the planet overnight is unfounded. Cooling is a much bigger threat than warming.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    The Republican congress elected in 2010 will be able to cancel that order.

    We'll see if the global temperature data continues to remain at near record levels. I doubt it, and it's not looking good for you this winter season.

    Wow... looks like multiple alter-egos are in use today.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • BB
    Lv 7
    1 decade ago

    I really don't know what they will do...... nor do I know what the 'Man-did-it' climate Hippies will do if a Cooling trend continues.

    Climate science is in its infancy and needs to be allowed to develop beyond its current state of speculation based on questionable (I'm being nice) 'science'.

    Once that is accomplished, only then should we consider volunteering to gut our economy and national security.

    This 'chicken little' crap is getting to be annoying.

    • Login to reply the answers
Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.