How can I convince my uncle, who is a physicist, that we all contribute to Global Warming?
He always tells me that it’s “nonsense” but I don’t believe him. I’m no scientist, but I just know that we do contribute to it a lot but I just can’t convince him. Otherwise, why would there be such a lot of scientists know it for fact.
Any links for what I should tell him would be awesome, cause I want my family to be more aware.
Thank you.
July 17th, 2010 at 11:36 am
I think you would be wasting your time. He is one of those intellectuals without a grain of common sense. He’s hopeless.
July 17th, 2010 at 11:39 am
First you are going to have to show him some kind of conclusive scientific evidence that we are the cause of global warming. Since there is none you are out of luck. You see there is something we all use to learn in school that I guess they stopped teaching, the scientific method. Alarmist have circumvented the scientific method and threw a whole lot of “evidence” out and simple made the claim that since there is more CO2 it’s obvious that all this weather we are having is a direct result of man’s use of fossil fuels.
July 17th, 2010 at 12:11 pm
Show him the add with the black baloons coming out of the t.v. and electrical appliances, i dunno.
My brothers the same D:
Ask him if he uses electricity, technology, then show him the link that shows the burning of fossil fuels and show him some videos/pictures of fossil fuel going into the environment/oceans.
He contributes to that???
July 17th, 2010 at 12:27 pm
Learn about radiative forcings and then talk to him about it. That’s the physics behind how we know humans are causing global warming.
A radiative forcing is basically something which causes an imbalance between the incoming and outgoing energy on Earth. When there’s an imbalance, the planet either warms or cools. For example, if solar output increases, that’s a positive radiative forcing, and the planet warms in response. Right now by far the dominant radiative forcing is from the increasing amount of greenhouse gases (mostly CO2) in the atmosphere (caused mainly by humans burning fossil fuels).
See the link below for further details. This is the basic physics behind man-made global warming, and it should be sufficient to convince any physicist that at least we’re causing the current global warming.
July 17th, 2010 at 1:24 pm
global warming, or climate change, as the poeple who propogate this crap are now calling it since they realized they were wrong, is political science. physics, on the other hand, is real science. leave your uncle alone. he has more important things to do.
July 17th, 2010 at 2:18 pm
do not! he is smart! gobal warming is not real!
July 17th, 2010 at 3:02 pm
Maybe you should listen to your uncle, who obviously knows more than you.
The problem you have is that you’ve been brainwashed by the multi-billion dollar AGW propaganda campaign, which has been orchestrated by Wall Street finance oligarchs (Soros, Rockefeller, Gore, et al.) in order to induce people to accept their neo-fascist, mass-murderous agenda.
The solution is to cut out all corporate media (what I call the “MSM detox”), and realize who really owns and controls the news outlets, the politicians, etc. You should also look into the claims oligarchs have made in the past, which are virtually identical to the Warmist hysteria.
For instance, the oligarchy in the ancient world organized the Trojan War because the wretched masses were supposedly “smothering the breast of the earth.” That’s right, these contemptible scumbags have been saying that the earth is “overpopulated” SINCE 1000 BC.
Once you’ve educated yourself as to what’s really going on here, you can resume limited corporate media consumption with a healthy dose of skepticism – in other words, realizing that their job is to brainwash and program you.
After you’ve come to understand that, and the basics of the oligarchs’ agenda, the whole thing makes sense. By their own admission, the Warmist hysteria is a neo-pagan death cult:
“The fate of mankind, as well as of religion, depends upon the emergence of a new faith in the future. Armed with such a faith, we might find it possible to resanctify the earth.” – Al Gore, writing in “Earth in the Balance”
“In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. All these dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy then, is humanity itself.” – From leaked Club of Rome documents
“What if Mary is another name for Gaia?
Then her capacity for virgin birth is no miracle,
it is a role of Gaia since life began.
She is of this Universe and, conceivably,
a part of God. On Earth, she is the source
of life everlasting and is alive now;
she gave birth to humankind
and we are part of her.”
- “Sir” James Lovelock
July 17th, 2010 at 3:44 pm
Actually, the planet has gone through cycles of warming and cooling.
THIS is FACT based on EVIDENCE.
The argument is over HOW MUCH effect man is having on these cycles.
The position taken by some, that man contributes a SIGNIFICANT amount, is a THEORY, NOT a proven FACT, at this time.
It is JUST POSSIBLE that he knows a bit more than YOU do, unless you have more degrees and experience than HE does.
July 17th, 2010 at 4:08 pm
we have co2 level proof from 650,000 years ago ice cores showing c02 concentrations. from this a graph showing then til now can be drawn. the average was significantly lower than our current levels. i can’t remember the ppm off the top of my head. the difference in world average temp in the previous ice ages we have had was only a few degrees c. look up the carbon cycle. then think about how much we put additional into the environment. its like having 2 gallons of water. you can pour 1 gallon into the other over and over. but when you add more than a gallon it will overflow. leading to excess amounts of co2
July 17th, 2010 at 5:03 pm
sorry, he is right.
July 17th, 2010 at 5:11 pm
How sad. I attended a physics conference in 1986 where an elderly physicist was honored for his career achievements. From his acceptance speech it was quickly apparent to all present that both age and his love of red wine had taken their toll and he was no longer the scientist he once was. During the customary question period, the senior scientists had the courtesy not to ask penetrating questions. Most followed their lead and paid the usual respects. One brash student looking to enter grad school commented on the elder scientist’s difficulty (and ended his career on the spot as senior researchers determined that the junior’s name ended two t’s rather than one). Treat your uncle with respect and dignity, but don’t trouble him with science anymore.
July 17th, 2010 at 5:24 pm
Make a montage of Dana’s answers. If Dana’s answers don’t convince him, then at least your uncle and your whole family can have a good laugh.
July 17th, 2010 at 6:04 pm
Have him read this which proves an enhancement to the greenhouse effect as a result of greenhouse gas concentration increases. This is direct confirmation of the forcing mechanism mentioned by Dana.
Spectral signatures of climate change in the Earth’s infrared spectrum between 1970 and 2006
Abstract
Previously published work using satellite observations of the clear sky infrared emitted radiation by the Earth in 1970, 1997 and in 2003 showed the appearance of changes in the outgoing spectrum, which agreed with those expected from known changes in the concentrations of well-mixed greenhouse gases over this period. Thus, the greenhouse forcing of the Earth has been observed to change in response to these concentration changes. In the present work, this analysis is being extended to 2006 using the TES instrument on the AURA spacecraft. Additionally, simulated spectra have been calculated using LBLRTM with inputs from the HadGEM1 coupled model and compared to the observed satellite spectra.
July 17th, 2010 at 6:54 pm
Buy him a subscription to Science magazine, and challenge him to educate you by pointing out the flaws in the articles and studies on climate change as they are published. He may educate himself in the process.
July 17th, 2010 at 7:19 pm
Stop being a brainwashed global warming nazi and face the inconvenient truth that global warming is a lie.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=5086
July 17th, 2010 at 7:37 pm
Doesn’t matter as Dana, Dawei, Gwen, the true alarmists on this site say that physicists don’t matter as they are not climatologists even though the keep citing that AGW is based on physics therefore their assumptions are correct.
You have been misled.
July 17th, 2010 at 7:52 pm
Your uncle is a scientist, so he should respect the process of peer review.
In peer reviewed studies, there is absolute consensus: Global warming is real, it’s caused by human activity, and it is a threat. In fact, there’s NOT ONE published peer reviewed study shedding doubt on global warming.
The “dissenting” scientists are merely offering opinions, which is not nearly the same as a peer reviewed study where methods, data, and conclusions are critiqued by experts and flaws must be corrected before publication. Unfortunately, Joe Public doesn’t understand the difference between opinion and peer review, so in the mainstream press there appears to be a debate about the reality of global warming.
This article will tell you more about global warming and peer review:
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/306/5702/1686
July 17th, 2010 at 8:16 pm
Yeah, your uncle is a wise man. Its a political hoax. Despite what tree hugger’s will tell you. There is no scientific data for it. (By the way, its no longer “Global Warming”. Its “Climate Change” now. You wanna know why the heck they changed it kiddies? They were *gasp* wrong! Its getting cooler. Yeah, this cycle of hot and cold has been going on for basically ever. Global Warming is so tuesday of last week.) Sure, we all give off CO2, but plants and animals do too. So basically if you wanna stop it that way you better A. Stop breathing. B. Kill most of the animals and plants. and C. Die. Oh, also you have to stop eating meat, stop using electricity, not wear clothing, and don’t cut the cheese. All these attribute to “Global Warming”. And if everyone did all that, it would only affect the temperature by about 3 degrees at most after a few decades. But rest assured, the government can fix it. And all it takes is a few trillion in tax dollars! What a deal, huh?!? Yes, the Caps and Trade bill. My, my. Can’t wait! *note the sarcasm* And if you’ll look back in history, one of the hottest times was in the Middle Ages in England I believe. (Cause you know back then they were all just nasty, video-game playing, littering, Co2 emitting, mother nature hating, coal using, gasoline burners who used their radio waves to kill the ozone). But rather than all of them shriveling up and dying because the Earth had a fever, they prospered. Al Gore didn’t tell you that one, huh? Now, I’m all for taking care of the Earth, but all this Global Warming crap is just, well crap. Political crap at that. And those scientist you mention, they have agendas just like the rest of the politicians. Why do you think they get paid so well? So, yes. I realize this is probably not going to get me 10 points, but hey. I was honest. I hope your uncle doesn’t change his mind..
July 17th, 2010 at 8:49 pm
If you look at how the scientific method is followed in alarmist communities, you’ll see why he says that.
How the method should be followed:
1. Ask a question- Is global warming man-made?
2. Do research- over time, the Earth’s average temperature has fluctuated greatly
3. Construct a hypothesis- Global warming is/isn’t man-made
4. Test hypothesis- run several experiments.
5. Make conclusion- if you are able to get the same results the majority of the times, draw conclusion
6. Publish data- other scientists can view and critique results
How alarmists follow it:
1. Ask question- is global warming man-made?
2. Draw conclusion- say it is, and create inaccurate equations to say it is
3. Test hypothesis- run several tests. It’s next to impossible to come up with the same results multiple times, so they omit data that doesn’t support them
4. Publish data, but dishonor and refuse to talk to skeptics.
As you can see, this a why your uncle, a scientist, knows alarmists are wrong, because he knows how they get their “facts”
And please note, if you count water vapor (which many alarmists don’t, since they can’t pin it on mankind), only about 0.28% of all greenhouse gasses are man-made. In fact, most of the one’s you hear about (CO2, methane, N2O) are mostly natural. The only exception would be CFC’s, which are mostly man-made.
0.28%, most of which is natural? Believe me, you don’t want to be the mindless AGW alarmist zombie that Dana1981 and his toadies are.
And you’re lucky, since you have someone you can ask about this stuff. A lot of people (such as me) don’t, so what they do is rather than research, they listen to what the majority of the people around them say, and that’s probably what you’re doing. Since you’re uncle’s a scientist, maybe you should ask him to teach you more about the science involved in climatology.
July 17th, 2010 at 9:44 pm
not to be rude.. but have you or anyone else that will read this think about what the world has been doing since the last ice age?? the world has been getting warmer.. the earths temp. will cycle and continue to do so.. maybe humans contribute to the effects of the warming.. but the earth will continue to get warmer with or without us.. you would think that the human race would see this and adjust instead of trying to fight something that cannot be changed..who knows maybe overall man has prolonged the global warming effect that we are seeing now.. or have we increased it??
July 17th, 2010 at 10:25 pm
Let say your NOT a doctor but your convinced your Uncle who is a Doctor has Cancer. He has had test done which show there is no signs of Cancer – but you are convinced he must have cancer because the nice people who talked at my school said that my uncle has cancer – and why would they LIE TO ME?
I think your uncle the physicist an actual scientist KNOWS much more then you and if he says it is nonsense maybe you should ask him to explain to you WHY it is nonsense. Maybe he can explain how the Sun Spots when very active cause a rise in Global Temperatures and now that there are very few in the solar minimum that will last to 2030 we are already seeing Global Temps plummet. Maybe he can tell you of Prof Richard Lindzen MIT work where he collected data for 20 years and it proved that there is NO greenhouse effect. The CO2 rise was met with a radiation to space rise which negated any possible temperature rise. The lack of “hot spots” in the atmosphere also backs up the other data showing NO GREENHOUSE EFFECT.
Maybe you should stop playing scientist and listen to one.
July 17th, 2010 at 10:45 pm
watch this link with him and see what he has to say