2011-05-30 14:29:45A 'Dear Denier' letter
John Cook


Got this email from UQ scientist Ove Hoegh-Guldberg who regularly gets emails asking for papers to "prove AGW":

I thought I would ask you whether or not you have a standard package of papers that you would recommend.

I replied with:

I guess the Guide to Skepticism (http://sks.to/guide) is my terse summary of the peer-reviewed evidence, particularly the graphic of the human fingerprints on climate change on page 1 (which is heavily referenced). Does that fit the bill? Perhaps that information could be repackaged in some way to meet such a purpose?

Ove replied with:

Looking at this, I think you're right. We need a 'Dear denialist," letter based on this clear treatment (with a list of references at the bottom). I am going crazy here and get ready to leave for the United States.  I wonder if you have someone in your network who might write something like this.

So I was hoping to whip up a short document that just outlaid the peer reviewed papers that provide evidence for human caused warming, in a logical sequence (we're raising co2 levels -> co2 traps heat -> etc). Basically grab the papers out of the Guide to Skepticism. But I'm just struggling to find the time to get to it. If anyone else wants to troll through the Guide and any SkS blog posts that contain relevant papers and produce a not-too-long document that just lays out the peer-reviewed evidence in a short, clear, readable fashion, would be great. In fact, would make a nice blog post too.

Come to think of it, this pending blog post would make a good starting framework but simplified.

2011-05-30 14:57:10
Ari Jokimäki


I have written about the observational side of the issue. My article might give some pointers (see my paperlists for more references).

2011-05-30 16:10:07
Glenn Tamblyn


Possibly add some of the key theoretical papers as well. Plass, Revelle & Suess 1957, Manabe & Wetherald 1967

2011-05-30 16:20:49
Rob Painting

The letter should perhaps use the historical development of climate science as it's framework. Starting with Fourier, along the lines of Spencer Weart's "The Discovery of Global Warming". That way we're more or less saying "Look here dumbass!, the first thing scientists did was to consider if natural variation might be responsible! It isn't, look at all this stuff and STFU!"