It's important to know that not EVERYONE will come around to seeing AND speaking the truth about global warming (anthropogenic climate change as opposed to natural climate change).
Some...like Joe Bastardi and many others, and PAID to deliver a certain message for the fossil fuel industry.
When I correct Joe....or point out some of his lies....or point out where he uses photoshopped images, I'm not trying to convince Joe. Joe gets PAID to say what he says....he will never change. The people I am trying to communicate with are the people who are on the website READING what Joe has said.
Here's an important article that discusses what I am TRYING to say above:
http://www.bostonglobe.com/ideas/2016/04/16/doubting-climate-change-not-enough/3aBHd9Weo9AxSmzI99LSZJ/story.html#comments
"What’s critical to addressing climate change right now is not dislodging the obstinate minority, who will likely never come around. Progress will only be made when the broad segment of the population that gets it makes its voice heard."
So when you are communication with Joe Bastardi, Anthony Watts, Steven Goddard......remember who your real audience is. The last thing that Watts/Bastardi/Goddard et want is for people to know the truth. And that is why they cut folks off who are trying to tell that truth.
Kudos to post the truth against the lie online, it's needed, there are denialista trolls on all social media.
We hit 3-ppm gained last year, the Pleistocene average 1-ppm/1000-years, big jump up at the end of the last ice-age 1-ppm/180-years, this forcing is so strong the oceans are acidifying 10-times faster than the PETM, that a mass-extinction the only geologic analog.
A recent finding that Antarctica really starts to melt fast at 600-ppm, it all melts at 800-ppm we'll be there within 130-years and the bonus is that all meaningful coral reefs are dead at 750-ppm.
At 405-ppm we are legally married to 25m/82ft of sea-level, the bride is got fatter to over 70m/230ft for all of Antarctica no sane scientist expects to stop at 600-ppm that's the latest fantasy hope.
Hope that helps frame the geologic context of why do something.
Relating to that, my project & purpose here is to restore sea-ice in the eastern basin at first thinking Bering Straits for a dam it evolved to farther south using St. Lawrence Island having less flow velocity there and enclosing an important area away from the Pacific to hold ice longer in spite of the CO2 emissions.
Analyzing why to do it, Prof. Wadhams uses it, (albedo-loss) = (20yrs CO2 radiative forcing gain).
What this says is if we stop emissions today albedo-loss supplies that same energy, 0.21-watts/m^2 over the whole planet after we stop.
So to cool the planet as planned takes removing the extra albedo and methane increases from thawing permafrost & clathrates. That implies Paris goals are 1/2 to 1/3 what they need to be of what's stated, this never came up as a public issue afaik.
The economic screaming just got louder, emission goals need to be 2-3 times higher reductions to make stated goals of "2C", what a joke expect 3-5C with or without the CO2-Removal Saint to come along and save us.
Wall Street is a racket, if it was worried about the global economy it would not allow this situation, it's not, it sees blood money more important for the world-domination game trying to prevent an economic collapse before the elections.
I started a thread on building the dam, as a coastal geotechnical viewpoint of construction methods, concerns on marine life, nutrient transport and be there for over a century:
http://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,1545.0.html