by Daniel Brouse
Science Denier Response of the Day (Feel free to reuse and share.)
Let’s have a pop quiz to test your scientific literacy—and whether your laughing emojis can substitute for scientific evidence.
1. Explain atmospheric ¹⁴C concentrations. What do they reveal about the sources of rising atmospheric CO₂?
2. Apply your answer using the CO₂ radiative forcing formula:
ΔF = 5.35 × ln(C/C₀) [W/m²]
Explain what this equation tells us about the radiative forcing caused by rising atmospheric CO₂ concentrations.
If natural variability is your preferred explanation, demonstrate it with evidence and quantitative analysis. Assertions, conspiracy theories about research funding, and laughing emojis are not scientific arguments.
*Show your work.* (If you are totally ignorant, reply with your foolish emojis.)
—————————————————–
Full Conversation
Climate denier said:
“Weather too hot? Global warming. Weather too cold? Global warming. Too much rain? Global warming. Drought? Global warming. What’s the question? Doesn’t matter. The answer’s the same. Global warming. To true believers in the global warming religion, everything is a sign.” IBD
I replied:
What? You need to stop following your pseudoscience gods and listen to scientists. This is what we actually say: Polar amplification → weakened equator-to-pole temperature gradients → reduced thermal contrast that helps drive and stabilize large-scale atmospheric circulation → accelerated Greenland and Arctic ice melt → freshwater input into the North Atlantic and reduced salinity/density of surface waters → disruption and potential weakening of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC) → reorganization of North Atlantic pressure fields and storm tracks → greater jet-stream waviness, slower progression, and amplified Rossby-wave behavior → more persistent blocking patterns, omega blocks, and meridional flow → stalled atmospheric rivers, prolonged heat domes, drought-flood swings, and other forms of hydroclimatic whiplash → destabilization of agriculture, infrastructure, ecosystems, and public health systems → accelerated land-ice loss and groundwater redistribution that shift mass across the planet → climate-driven mass redistribution sufficient to measurably alter Earth’s moment of inertia and contribute to changes in rotational dynamics, including a slight slowing of Earth’s rotation and changes in the length of day.
Of course, feedback coupling is not this simple. There is no single starting point, no final destination, and no clearly defined end to the network.
MILLIONS → BILLIONS → TRILLIONS
POSSIBLE FEEDBACK INTERACTIONS
FEEDBACK COUPLING IS EMERGING
We cannot yet predict precisely how all these interactions will propagate, combine, and amplify as they unfold.
THE BUTTERFLY EFFECT
A small perturbation can propagate through a complex network, producing consequences far beyond its point of origin.
Climate denier replied:
your cut and paste of the typical claims is still with zero proof of human attribution. All that has happened before. And all the grant money goes to AGW witnesses none for natural variability which is much more likely attribution. But keep worshipping at the church of global warming. That’s where the grant money goes. 
I responded:
No. Wrong answer. I’ve spent several decades researching climate science, and I’m the author of the work you’re dismissing without apparently reading it.
Let’s have a pop quiz to test your scientific literacy—and whether your laughing emojis can substitute for scientific evidence.
1. Explain atmospheric ¹⁴C concentrations. What do they reveal about the sources of rising atmospheric CO₂?
2. Apply your answer using the CO₂ radiative forcing formula:
ΔF = 5.35 × ln(C/C₀) [W/m²]
Explain what this equation tells us about the radiative forcing caused by rising atmospheric CO₂ concentrations.
If natural variability is your preferred explanation, demonstrate it with evidence and quantitative analysis. Assertions, conspiracy theories about research funding, and laughing emojis are not scientific arguments.
*Show your work.* (If you are totally ignorant, reply with your foolish emojis.)
