You can't really explain climate cycles to Global Warming Hoax Deniers.
The best you can do is simply point out to them that if it wasn't for such cycles, there'd be no such thing as The Great Lakes, Niagara Falls, Yosemite National Park or The United Kingdom.
All these natural wonders were either carved out by advancing and retreating glaciers or were covered in ice a mile high as recently as 10,000 years ago.
Science is never been settled. It never has and never will.............
The scientific method - scientific inquiry - is never settled. Its nature is to be forever open to challenge, investigation and upheaval. The idea of “settled science” is nonsense.
If man made global warming were scientifically provable it would not be necessary to invoke extremist ideology to advance it. That it does not stand on its own merit as scientifically provable forces its adherents to resort to threats and intimidation. They thereby relinquish the field of reason and science for the rarefied gasses of elitist tyranny.
I expect they’ll start burning climate change heretics at the state any day now.
This all has gotten so absurd, they can’t even see how, even if they are 100% right, they are making a mockery of their case by their hysteria.
Robert F Kennedy Jr was the epitome of their shaking trembling rage against being challenged in any way, even on the issue of personal contributions to the coming climate cataclysm (in their minds), in an interview during their recent march in NYC. Honestly, if he were off camera I think he would have strangled that reporter. He could barely restrain himself from doing it on camera.
In 2012 he had Stephen Moore on to discuss rich guys who say they want their taxes to go up vs rich guys like Romney who say they don't, and Moore who was well prepared creamed Hayes.
Stephen Moore nukes MSNBC Chris Hayes on rich liberals wanting to pay higher taxes (7/8/12
Along with calling them “climate alarmists”, they should be labeled “Lysenkoists”.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trofim_Lysenko
Trofim Lysenko created a pseudoscientific movement in the Soviet Union that rejected the known science of genetics in favor of a form of “forced evolution” that fit perfectly with the doctrines of communism.
The idea that plant, animal and human genes could be forced to change to adapt to their new environment. Thus, if a government forced its people to conform and obey enough, they would conform, at the genetic level, and future generations would be born into obedience and conformity. Their very genetic pattern would change to obey government dictates.
Which was a tyrannical communist fantasy.
In any event, good biologists in the Soviet Union were horrified at this b.s. “science”, but were forced to agree with it at the point of a bayonet. Many who stood against Lysenko were sent to gulag prisons, and some were killed outright.
And the communists had no problem with that at all. And as with climate alarmists, they were obsessed with the idea that their philosophy *creates* reality, not just describes it. Therefore, if our doctrines say that cats can be crossbred with rabbits, they can, despite any evidence to the contrary.
If they believe that socialized medicine is far better than privatized medicine, it is, because it must be, despite any evidence to the contrary.
And if they believe that MMGW is an undisputed fact, then it is, despite any evidence to the contrary.
So James E. Hansen, Michael Mann, and many others are nothing more than Lysenkoists. Their “science” exists only to support the prejudices of their politics. And those that disagree with them are unreasonable, irrational, and “hooligans” opposed to “the greater good”.
And that they be forced to shut up, imprisoned, or even killed, is necessary for “the greater good.”
And they would have no problem with that at all. For such is the nature of pseudoscientific tyrants.
An ironclad rule of thumb is that all science is settled . . . . until it isn’t.
Have we had higher average world temps in the past? Yes we have. Then how can we all still be here if higher temps meant complete catastrophe?