Skip to content
HHackerTube.videoSurprise me

13 Misconceptions About Global Warming

13 Misconceptions About Global Warming on HackerTube: recommended by 2 Hacker News commenters across 3 separate months, 2014–2021.

Veritasium

explainer · dated

Open on YouTube

Veritasium debunks common climate change myths in under seven minutes, with references to NASA and published research. Topics include CO2 sources, sea ice and 1970s predictions of cooling.

Why Hacker News recommends it

Used as a short, well-made rebuttal to common global warming arguments in climate threads.

people recommended it
2
separate months
3
strong recommendations
1
discussed on HN
2014–2021
“It's a great video, you should at least watch it.”
— dwaltrip, Dec 2016, in “Arctic Is Warming At 'Astonishing' Rates, Researchers Say”

What HN commenters said

6 Hacker News comments link this video. Each one links back to its thread.

dwaltripDec 2016Strongly recommends

Veritassium debunks this claim on climate change, along with a dozen others, in less than 7 minutes in an informative and entertaining way. It's a great video, you should at least watch it. ▶ this video In short, during the 70s, there were some papers on global cooling. But even then, there was still 6 times more papers on global warming. Science overall has been looking in the correct direction for a long time now. The narrative isn't changing.

in “Arctic Is Warming At 'Astonishing' Rates, Researchers Say” · View on HN

dwaltripJul 2021Recommends

That’s actually a myth. Global cooling was a small minority of published papers in climatology at the time. They were many more papers discussing warming. Source: [link] P.S. I learned this watching the excellent video by Veritasium on climate change misconceptions: ▶ this video

in “Sixty years of climate change warnings” · View on HN

jdhendricksonNov 2014Recommends

I've linked a short well made video below which addresses your arguments. TLDW Just because man's emissions are relatively small in comparison to the over all natural emissions does not mean they don't affect things. I implore you, (as you seem a reasonable fellow who values science) to give it a watch and see if you still feel the same way. I'm willing to watch or read any counter argument you care to link if you will do me the same courtesy. ▶ this video

in “Starfish are dissolving up and down the West Coast” · View on HN

dwaltripDec 2021Cites it

Far more scientists were talking about global warming in the 70s than a new ice age. Source: [link] I learned of this from Vertasium's video on global warming myths: ▶ this video

in “Arctic Ocean started getting warmer decades earlier than we thought” · View on HN

NiceWayToDoITAug 2021Cites it

13 Misconceptions About Global Warming ▶ this video The Last Time CO2 Was This High, Humans Didn’t Exist [link] CO2 – Why 450 ppm is Dangerous and 350 ppm is Safe [link] And of course this one: [link]

in “World to hit temperature tipping point 10 years faster than forecast” · View on HN

sinxoveretothexOct 2016Cites it

Humans are not the primary source in the tricky sense that someone looking to deny the evidence couldn't deny. But they are the primary source of the net emissions or, in other words, the increase of CO2 levels. It's a bit like if your neighbor produces just enough grain for a year's worth of food for his family of 10 and you steal just enough for yourself. Technically, you aren't the primary source of the decrease in food, but you are the primary (and only) source of the fact that your neighbor's food supply are lower than needed. ▶ this video [link] [link] [link]

in “CO2 levels mark 'new era' in the world's changing climate” · View on HN

Topics & tags

Climate science & climate changeScientific method & science communicationglobal warmingclimate mythsco2science communication