{"id":21,"date":"2007-02-28T15:40:28","date_gmt":"2007-02-28T20:40:28","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/climate411\/2007\/02\/28\/water_vapor_fallacy\/"},"modified":"2008-04-22T12:51:56","modified_gmt":"2008-04-22T17:51:56","slug":"water_vapor_fallacy","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/climate411\/2007\/02\/28\/water_vapor_fallacy\/","title":{"rendered":"The Water Vapor Fallacy"},"content":{"rendered":"

ignoratio elenchi <\/strong>n.<\/em>
\nA logical fallacy of presenting an argument that may in itself be valid, but has nothing to do with the proposition it purports to prove. Also known as “irrelevant conclusion”. [Lat. ignorance of refutation.<\/em>]<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

In her comment to our Exxon post<\/a>, Beth Wellington raises an important question: What can we do to make sure that our kids are being taught the real facts on climate change? Her question reminded me of a recent incident, and leads me to award this week\u2019s Ignoratio Elenchi Award to an unknown teacher from an unspecified state. Let me explain.<\/p>\n

A few weeks ago I was visiting with a senator about actions his state could take to prepare for national legislation on climate change. He suddenly changed the subject and said he had a science question. It seems the senator\u2019s 11-year old son came home one day and announced that he learned in school that the whole global warming thing was hype. He said that the most significant greenhouse gas in the atmosphere is water vapor – not carbon dioxide – and therefore it makes no sense to cap emissions of carbon dioxide. How, asked the senator, should he respond to his son?<\/p>\n

The water-vapor argument is a classic Ignoratio Elenchi fallacy. Yes, water vapor in the atmosphere contributes significantly to global warming. But this doesn’t mean that carbon dioxide need not be capped!<\/p>\n

The amount of water vapor in the atmosphere is not directly affected by human activities. It’s controlled by atmospheric temperature – the higher the temperature, the more water the air can hold. When carbon dioxide – which is directly affected by human activities – is emitted into the atmosphere, the atmosphere warms slightly. But that modest amount of warming sets up a perverse amplification process: carbon dioxide emissions warm the atmosphere, which leads to more water vapor in the atmosphere, and thus more warming. It’s a vicious cycle.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

We know from satellite measurements that this amplification process is, in fact, occurring. Water vapor in the atmosphere has increased over the past 25 years as carbon dioxide emissions have increased and the atmosphere has warmed. The only way to stop global warming is to stop the emissions of carbon dioxide, and that is why we must cap carbon dioxide emissions.<\/p>\n

The senator\u2019s son got his information from a teacher, and while I’m sure the teacher\u2019s intentions were good, he or she got it very wrong. Yes, water vapor in the atmosphere strongly increases global warming, but it doesn’t follow that carbon dioxide emissions need not be capped. Hence this week’s Ignoratio Elenchi Award goes to this unknown teacher.<\/p>\n

Next time I\u2019ll tell you about something I’m doing to help make sure teachers have the real scoop on climate change.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

ignoratio elenchi n. A logical fallacy of presenting an argument that may in itself be valid, but has nothing to do with the proposition it purports to prove. Also known as “irrelevant conclusion”. [Lat. ignorance of refutation.] In her comment to our Exxon post, Beth Wellington raises an important question: What can we do to …<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":15,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[95],"tags":[],"coauthors":[],"class_list":["post-21","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-basic-science-of-global-warming"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\nThe Water Vapor Fallacy - Climate 411<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/climate411\/2007\/02\/28\/water_vapor_fallacy\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"The Water Vapor Fallacy - Climate 411\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"ignoratio elenchi n. A logical fallacy of presenting an argument that may in itself be valid, but has nothing to do with the proposition it purports to prove. Also known as “irrelevant conclusion”. [Lat. ignorance of refutation.] In her comment to our Exxon post, Beth Wellington raises an important question: What can we do to ...\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/climate411\/2007\/02\/28\/water_vapor_fallacy\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Climate 411\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2007-02-28T20:40:28+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2008-04-22T17:51:56+00:00\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Bill Chameides\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Bill Chameides\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"2 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.edf.org\\\/climate411\\\/2007\\\/02\\\/28\\\/water_vapor_fallacy\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.edf.org\\\/climate411\\\/2007\\\/02\\\/28\\\/water_vapor_fallacy\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Bill Chameides\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.edf.org\\\/climate411\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/9f5fbd8173161c5a6f7b0319be658b0b\"},\"headline\":\"The Water Vapor Fallacy\",\"datePublished\":\"2007-02-28T20:40:28+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2008-04-22T17:51:56+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.edf.org\\\/climate411\\\/2007\\\/02\\\/28\\\/water_vapor_fallacy\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":475,\"commentCount\":3,\"articleSection\":[\"Basic Science of Global Warming\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.edf.org\\\/climate411\\\/2007\\\/02\\\/28\\\/water_vapor_fallacy\\\/#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.edf.org\\\/climate411\\\/2007\\\/02\\\/28\\\/water_vapor_fallacy\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.edf.org\\\/climate411\\\/2007\\\/02\\\/28\\\/water_vapor_fallacy\\\/\",\"name\":\"The Water Vapor Fallacy - Climate 411\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.edf.org\\\/climate411\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2007-02-28T20:40:28+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2008-04-22T17:51:56+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.edf.org\\\/climate411\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/9f5fbd8173161c5a6f7b0319be658b0b\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.edf.org\\\/climate411\\\/2007\\\/02\\\/28\\\/water_vapor_fallacy\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.edf.org\\\/climate411\\\/2007\\\/02\\\/28\\\/water_vapor_fallacy\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.edf.org\\\/climate411\\\/2007\\\/02\\\/28\\\/water_vapor_fallacy\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.edf.org\\\/climate411\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"The Water Vapor Fallacy\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.edf.org\\\/climate411\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.edf.org\\\/climate411\\\/\",\"name\":\"Climate 411\",\"description\":\"Blogging the science and policy of global warming\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.edf.org\\\/climate411\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.edf.org\\\/climate411\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/9f5fbd8173161c5a6f7b0319be658b0b\",\"name\":\"Bill Chameides\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/bac98415e9c06f185f4cb60754d82d498c204e2918f8d43912c0a034ae57ba50?s=96&d=mm&r=g4d18299e79bcedd6bb3a81941c16d9e1\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/bac98415e9c06f185f4cb60754d82d498c204e2918f8d43912c0a034ae57ba50?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/bac98415e9c06f185f4cb60754d82d498c204e2918f8d43912c0a034ae57ba50?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Bill Chameides\"},\"sameAs\":[\"http:\\\/\\\/environmentaldefense.org\\\/page.cfm?tagID=874\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.edf.org\\\/climate411\\\/author\\\/bchameides\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"The Water Vapor Fallacy - Climate 411","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/climate411\/2007\/02\/28\/water_vapor_fallacy\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"The Water Vapor Fallacy - Climate 411","og_description":"ignoratio elenchi n. A logical fallacy of presenting an argument that may in itself be valid, but has nothing to do with the proposition it purports to prove. Also known as “irrelevant conclusion”. [Lat. ignorance of refutation.] In her comment to our Exxon post, Beth Wellington raises an important question: What can we do to ...","og_url":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/climate411\/2007\/02\/28\/water_vapor_fallacy\/","og_site_name":"Climate 411","article_published_time":"2007-02-28T20:40:28+00:00","article_modified_time":"2008-04-22T17:51:56+00:00","author":"Bill Chameides","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Bill Chameides","Est. reading time":"2 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/climate411\/2007\/02\/28\/water_vapor_fallacy\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/climate411\/2007\/02\/28\/water_vapor_fallacy\/"},"author":{"name":"Bill Chameides","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/climate411\/#\/schema\/person\/9f5fbd8173161c5a6f7b0319be658b0b"},"headline":"The Water Vapor Fallacy","datePublished":"2007-02-28T20:40:28+00:00","dateModified":"2008-04-22T17:51:56+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/climate411\/2007\/02\/28\/water_vapor_fallacy\/"},"wordCount":475,"commentCount":3,"articleSection":["Basic Science of Global Warming"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/climate411\/2007\/02\/28\/water_vapor_fallacy\/#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/climate411\/2007\/02\/28\/water_vapor_fallacy\/","url":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/climate411\/2007\/02\/28\/water_vapor_fallacy\/","name":"The Water Vapor Fallacy - Climate 411","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/climate411\/#website"},"datePublished":"2007-02-28T20:40:28+00:00","dateModified":"2008-04-22T17:51:56+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/climate411\/#\/schema\/person\/9f5fbd8173161c5a6f7b0319be658b0b"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/climate411\/2007\/02\/28\/water_vapor_fallacy\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/climate411\/2007\/02\/28\/water_vapor_fallacy\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/climate411\/2007\/02\/28\/water_vapor_fallacy\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/climate411\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"The Water Vapor Fallacy"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/climate411\/#website","url":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/climate411\/","name":"Climate 411","description":"Blogging the science and policy of global warming","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/climate411\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/climate411\/#\/schema\/person\/9f5fbd8173161c5a6f7b0319be658b0b","name":"Bill Chameides","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/bac98415e9c06f185f4cb60754d82d498c204e2918f8d43912c0a034ae57ba50?s=96&d=mm&r=g4d18299e79bcedd6bb3a81941c16d9e1","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/bac98415e9c06f185f4cb60754d82d498c204e2918f8d43912c0a034ae57ba50?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/bac98415e9c06f185f4cb60754d82d498c204e2918f8d43912c0a034ae57ba50?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Bill Chameides"},"sameAs":["http:\/\/environmentaldefense.org\/page.cfm?tagID=874"],"url":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/climate411\/author\/bchameides\/"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/climate411\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/21","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/climate411\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/climate411\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/climate411\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/15"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/climate411\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=21"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/climate411\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/21\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/climate411\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=21"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/climate411\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=21"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/climate411\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=21"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/climate411\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/coauthors?post=21"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}