Christopher Monckton writes
During my valedictorian keynote at the conference, I appointed the lovely Diane Bast as my independent adjudicatrix. She read out six successive questions to the audience, one by one. I invited anyone who would answer “No†to that question to raise a hand. According to the adjudicatrix, not a single hand was raised in response to any of the questions.
These were the six questions.
1. Does climate change?
2. Has the atmospheric concentration of CO2 increased since the late 1950s?
3. Is Man likely to have contributed to the measured increase in CO2 concentration since the late 1950s?
4. Other things being equal, is it likely that adding CO2 to the atmosphere will cause some global warming?
5. Is it likely that there has been some global warming since the late 1950s?
6. Is it likely that Man’s emissions of CO2 and other greenhouse gases have contributed to the measured global warming since 1950?
At a conference of 600 “climate change deniersâ€, then, not one delegate denied that climate changes. Likewise, not one denied that we have contributed to global warming since 1950.
You can count me in that 100%. I’d answer “yes” on every question. At that point, though, the science needs to come in to play. As I wrote the other week
5. The argument is about what has caused the Modern Warm Period warming.
6. And, finally, the Earth has warmed around 1.4F, but what has caused this to occur? This is the crux of the debate.
It’s not about warming. It’s not about whether greenhouse gases have contributed. It’s about how much. Warmists say mostly/solely. Most Skeptics, or, as we’re now known, Climate Optimists, say that the contributions from CO2 and other greenhouse gases are minimal. Some Climate Optimists say the contributions have been bigger, but are no danger. Regardless, if Warmists thought the danger was so great they’d change their own behavior, starting with giving up their own fossil fueled travel, instead of agitating and demanding that Other People pay the price for the Warmist’s beliefs.
