My name is Tony Heller (aka Steven Goddard). I’m a professional climate change denier and I use this blog to blow the whistle on deniers like myself and others.
I run this blog as public service for those interested in the climate change debate. This particular blog post is for the average layperson who isn’t heavy into science but still thinks there’s a chance that man-made climate change might not be happening. As a reforming climate change denier, I want to help convince you that climate change is real and that it’s a very big deal.
So are you ready? Let’s go.
The first thing we have to do is pre-screen you to determine if your brain has the requisite reasoning abilities. Please read over the following statements and determine which ones you agree with or apply to you:
- I have a “Live Free or Die” flag, piece of clothing, sticker or other item with this slogan on it (exception made for those with cars licensed in New Hampshire).
- I would need more evidence, but I believe it’s possible the moon landing was a hoax and/or 9/11 was an inside job.
- Sometimes I find myself nodding my head as soon as I hear the voice of Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, or Judge Jeanine.
- I have purposefully sat down and watched or listened to an entire show with one of the aforementioned hosts.
- Government is inherently evil and free markets are the only solution to any and all of mankind’s problems.
- I worry there the United Nation’s socialist agenda will usurp power from my country.
- I have spoken or written the term “jack booted thugs” to describe the Obama administration or any of its agencies.
- I have attended a Sarah Palin or Donald Trump rally.
- The only way to stop a bad guy with a guns is to give everybody a gun.
- There is a major Rupert Murdoch news outlet in my country.
- I am an American.
OK, how’d you do? If you answered “yes” or found yourself agreeing with two or more of the statements above, I cannot guarantee with 100% certainty that you can be convinced that climate change is real. But you should continue anyway and see what happens. If you answered yes or agree with 3 or more statements above, you do not appear to have any logical capacity whatsoever. You might as well stop here. Sorry.
Oh, one more thing. If you are offended by any of the statements above, you are also disqualified for having absolutely no sense of humor.
Everyone else, step this way, please…
Phew! Congratulations you’ve passed the pre-screening. Ready to become a convert? You’re just a few paragraphs away. Let’s go!
So, there’s these network of thousands upon thousands scientists around the globe. You know what scientists are right? Yeah, a lot of them are probably the ones you wouldn’t have been caught dead with at the high school prom. Well, anyway, these scientists are super, super smart and highly educated. They love nothing better than to analyze shit to death. And nothing gets their rocks off more than discovering new truths about the universe and the world we live in. Doing statistical analysis for hours on end is their equivalent of binge TV watching.
Many of these scientists are devoted to studying the climate. Over many decades, they have deployed super-sophisticated technology to help them monitor, study and predict what’s happening to the earth’s environment. Every five years, an organization called the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), established in 1988 and overseen by the United Nations, convenes to analyze and assess all the peer-reviewed scientific papers. The IPCC is set up specifically to look at the problem of climate change.
As you can imagine, it’s incredibly difficult to pull together all the studies and information that has been collected. As you also might suspect, such an undertaking isn’t without its problems. Sometimes egos and politics can get involved and there’s arguments over who should be in on the process and which evidence is worth considering. But that’s to be expected. The IPCC is run by people not computers, after all. But by and large, the work gets done and done very well. The end result of all this work is a snapshot of the best available scientific knowledge about global warming called an Assessment Report (AR).
The fifth and most recent report from the IPCC, referred to as “AR5,” says we are 95% sure global warming is man-made and that we’re probably in a world of hurt if we don’t take action. You can read it yourself as much of it is written in fairly plain language.
So there you have it. You can now clear your brain about questions over whether climate change is real. You are now free to start worrying what to actually do about it.
Now some will argue that you shouldn’t believe “appeals to authority” like the IPCC reports. Well, yes you should believe the IPCC reports because the IPCC’s ultimate authority is data and the best scientific analysis of that data available. And at the end of the day, science is the ultimate authority we should all listen to because it is the absolute best approximation of reality we have.
Before you go, one last thing. When you start Googling around and doing your own research about global warming you’ll run into people like me with all kinds of crazy crackpot graphs, data and arguments that purport to show climate change is a hoax. You might be tempted to read some of it to try and figure out for yourself what our evidence is and if it has any weight. But don’t. I’m telling you it’s a total waste of time. You don’t spend hours upon hours analyzing the evidence from the 9/11 Truthers to prove them wrong, do you? Of course not. You know 9/11 Truthers are crackpots full of bizarre political conspiracies. Similarly, you don’t give every lunatic yelling in the park or on the street corner a fair hearing to determine if what they say is accurate, do you? It’s exactly the same thing with climate change. All you need to know is that the vast majority of the very, very smart and passionate climate scientists who study this issue for a living know almost beyond a shadow of a doubt that climate change is a very, very serious problem that we cannot afford to ignore.
If you still don’t believe climate change is a real threat and you passed our pre-screening, please indicate in the comments below the reasons why you are still in doubt so I can do a brief exit interview with you and make the proper adjustments to the pre-screening questionnaire that you somehow managed to slip past. Thank you!
19 thoughts on “Tony Heller’s Guide for Convincing Yourself That Climate Change is Probably a Very Big Deal”
Don’t give up the good fight for freedom Tony! 50 scientists, including my hero Fred Singer, recently published the Heartland Institute’s NIPCC report concluding that the global warming crisis is over. After their thorough unbiased analysis, they said that the EPA relies heavily on the UN’s falsified reports, and that environmental groups refuse to admit they were wrong – because it was never about the science for them.
Great find, Charles!
I see the “N” in “NIPCC” stands for “nongovernmental.” That’s great because we all know government is evil. I think I will give this report some serious consideration.
Problem is, their site was so convoluted I couldn’t tell where to find the report summary. Perhaps you can point me in the right direction.
Given that Craig D. Idso is a lead author and Joe Bastardi is a chapter reviewer, you will certainly be convinced.that more CO2 is only beneficial.
Click to access one_page_summary_of_ccr-ii.pdf
I guess that settles it. 50 scientists helped put the report together. Why are we even wasting our time?
I was just watching that Idso fellow on the Heartland video. He looks like a God-fearing man. I know he must be doing the Lord’s work. God Bless him.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I knew it: http://article.wn.com/view/2015/07/11/Scientist_Craig_Idso_makes_biblical_case_for_CO2_goodness/
LikeLiked by 1 person
Oh, yeah, bring on the Bible Thumpin’. http://www.co2science.org/education/reports/stewardship/StewardshipandSustainableDevelopment.pdf
Looking at Freddy’s appearance on http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/63592897
He says wants to combat the coming ice age using the “greenhouse effect” with artificial contrails in the lower stratosphere.
Let’s just say this is a man that doesn’t appear to be in his prime.
He’s looking for “young men and women in their 40s and 50s” to help lead up the project. Seriously.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It’s difficult for us lesser intellects to follow logic from such great minds. Therefore I fill in the gaps in my comprehension with what I already believe to be true. The moderator, BTW who is blessed with a fabulous sense of humor, hands out business cards with 10 reasons why man is not warming the globe. He then introduces my hero, Dr. Singer, who immediately says not to worry about CO2 because a 5 degree Celsius warming will be good for Canadians and Siberians immediately before he says the Earth is cooling. He then proposed an expensive exotic future invention to counteract the catastrophic coming ice age because (guessing here) GHG forcing is a weak forcing compared to the Milinkovic Cycle forcings.
Therefore, Dr. Singer reinforced my belief that “atmospheric physicists” are lying about radiative transfer, and that 50,000 mainstream Earth “scientists” are in cahoots with the Warmist Industrial Complex – led by Al Gore.
Yes, true visionaries.
As a global warming $cientologist I resent the implication that I can’t adjust data I don’t like. Since I deny that there has been a pause for 18 years in temperature you might think that I am the true denier. But there’s nothing wrong with waiting to see how the numbers look before deciding that they need to be “adjusted”. So I resent the implication that I am “denying” the pause. The data is whatever I matches my narrative. I do not “deny” the pause because the pause has now been erased…just like those people in those pictures with Stalin.
It’s a free country, my friend. You can do whatever you like. And we are free to think you’re a nutter, too. Don’t take that away from us!
You are free to think that there was a pause too. Even though we waited 18 years, we have erased the pause. It no longer exists. It became too problematic. There’s no “denying” that.
But unfortunately there’s also no “denying” that the pause is detrimental to our “cause”.. can really only say, we’re trying to erase it ,bucephelus.
The Stack Model, published in Principia Scientific, is a brilliant scientific breakthrough! It indeed more accurately model climate without the so-called “greenhouse gas effect”. If it weren’t for the strangle hold the Warministas have on Earth “science” it would surely win the Nobel Prize. How clever it is to remove convective energy flow by modeling energy transfer on the moon by simulating an atmosphere on the moon as a stack of chicken wire.
We should alert the media that mainstream models virtually ignore convection’s role in moving heat through the troposphere. The IPCC’s evaluation of climate models (chapter 9) only refers to convection 35 times.
“As is shown by the stack model, the evacuation of heat from the planet is rather by convection from the surface of the planet to the upper layers and from thereon by radiation to outer space – thanks to the IR-active gasses with three or more atoms per molecule, like H20 vapor, CO2, CH4, O3, N20…” Overturning Planck’s Law of Black Body Radiation is another huge breakthrough. Who knew that only IR active gasses emit radiation?!
With a name like Principia Scientific, I feel secure stating that these guys must know what they are talking about. Latin for the win!
My mistake, I just looked through the Principia Scientific’s site. I’m certain now it’s just a parody site like mine.
If that’s the case, Principia Scientific has taken parody to a tedious extreme. IMO, they are presenting ingeniously creative, occasionally conflicting, theories that disprove the greenhouse effect. They obviously know a thing or two about science. Given that their peer review process is open to the public, it’s very tempting to help them identify a few of their overlooked details. As someone who believes that any science that might call for government action leads to communism, that is my patriotic duty.
Yes, I am of similar sentiment to you charleszeller. As a dumb, reactionary, fat , ugly, filthy rich, cigar huffing, misogynist, capitalist pig…I consider it my patriotic duty to point out flaws in science that I deem a piece of crap.
Slender handsome rich capitalists, such as myself, applauds your effort.