Talking Truth to Climate Consensus

Watts Up With That?

By Rud Istvan

A sound bite summary*

The climate consensus now has two derogation levels for those who disagree. Climate ‘contrarians’ like Bjørn Lomborg disagree about mitigation policies. Climate ‘deniers’ like Judith Curry disagree about the underlying climatology. The consensus does not any want any disagreement, since their science is ‘settled’ and solutions ‘clear’. They decline to engage (Schmidt/Spencer), disappear comments (Real Climate, the Guardian), refuse to host comments (LATimes), and loudly allege a fossil fuel funded ‘denier’ conspiracy (Grijalva). But they cannot avoid encountering skeptics. Following are some possible skeptical ‘silver bullets’.

There are basic consensus points that most ‘deniers’ “97%” agree with.

· Yes, climate changes. Millennially, we are in the Holocene interglacial, not the preceding ice age. Centennially, we are warming out of the Little Ice Age (LIA); London’s last Thames Ice Fair was in 1814. We are not yet back to Medieval Warm Period (MWP) warmth…

View original post 833 more words

This entry was posted in economics on by .

About Jim Rose

Utopia - you are standing in it promotes a classical liberal view of the world and champion the mass flourishing of humanity through capitalism and the rule of law. The origin of the blog is explained in the first blog post at

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.