I don’t think there’s too many skeptics out there who don’t think the world has warmed for the past century. There is reason to suggest the global temperature record may be unreliable, but not to the extent that this negates the observed warming. Yet, warmist Richard Muller has refuted this non-argument that there has been no warming at all, now claiming that the skeptics have no argument. It is the ultimate strawman.
As we all know, skeptical arguments revolve around the causes of warming, not the simple fact of warming. Muller either does not grasp this concept (begging the question; has he even listened to a skeptic?), or is being deliberately dishonest.
Many warmists have not listened to a skeptic make their case, and are believe the question is as simple as:
- do you deny carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas?
- do you deny it will warm the planet?
- do you deny the planet has warmed?
Of course, the real question is: how much warming will carbon dioxide cause? Why does this ignorance exist? Is it the lack of a mainstream platform for skeptics to air their arguments, or the demonisation by alarmists? Probably both.