Printable View
So, the western ice sheet is lowering.. what about the eastern, southern and northern?Quote:
Originally Posted by cwolff
Didn't a bunch of man made global warming goofs get stuck in the ice down there because it was much thicker than they anticipated?
If we know that at one point in the Earth's history it was almost completely covered by (unfrozen) water, and there were no humans at that point...how can anyone claim to be able to quantify man's contribution to "warming" now? Who's to say it isn't natural? I don't necessarily believe mankind has absolutely no effect at all, but I really haven't seen a single shred of credible evidence that suggests we can do anything to stop climate change. It doesn't help that all the nut jobs screaming about doing something NOW all have a personal interest in it besides "saving the planet". If you don't think Al Gore is just trying to make more money off of it, you're as ignorant as the flight attendant on his private jet.
Somehow, you've managed to deny it, say there's nothing we can do about it AND blame the people trying to stop it. All this based on the "no credible evidence" excuse even though the first post in this thread is a link to a report that explains the ACC position in layman's terms.Quote:
Originally Posted by Thondalar
It makes the claim that it's man-made, but doesn't say how. Just that it is. The average surface temperature has gained 1 degree since 1850. 164 years. The AVERAGE temperature has gained 1 degree. That's a fact...everything else is speculation. "Well, we THINK it's going to go up another 5 degrees in 100 years." It's bullshit, pure and simple.Quote:
Originally Posted by cwolff
Also, you never answered my question.
Keep in mind scientists in 1950 told us we would have flying cars by the year 2000. They couldn't even predict something as simple as flying cars in the next 50 years but we're supposed to take their word for it when they say the world is going to end in 100 years?
Your question is answered in the report which I've referred you to and conveniently provided a link. You may disagree with the report but you can't say it didn't answer your question.Quote:
Originally Posted by Thondalar
See Page 5, Question 2: How do Scientists Know That Recent Climate Change is Largely Caused by Human Activities?
How do scientists know that recent
climate change is largely caused by
human activities?
Scientists know that recent climate change is largely caused by human activities from an
understanding of basic physics, comparing observations with models, and fingerprinting
the detailed patterns of climate change caused by different human and natural influences.
Since the mid-1800s, scientists have known that CO2
is one of the main greenhouse gases of importance to
Earth’s energy balance. Direct measurements of CO2
in the atmosphere and in air trapped in ice show that
atmospheric CO2
increased by about 40% from 1800 to 2012. Measurements of different forms of carbon
(isotopes, see Question 3) reveal that this increase is due to human activities. Other greenhouse gases
(notably methane and nitrous oxide) are also increasing as a consequence of human activities. The observed
global surface temperature rise since 1900 is consistent with detailed calculations of the impacts of the
observed increase in atmospheric CO2
(and other human-induced changes) on Earth’s energy balance.
Different influences on climate have different signatures in climate records. These unique fingerprints are
easier to see by probing beyond a single number (such as the average temperature of Earth’s surface), and
looking instead at the geographical and seasonal patterns of climate change. The observed patterns of
surface warming, temperature changes through the atmosphere, increases in ocean heat content, increases
in atmospheric moisture, sea level rise, and increased melting of land and sea ice also match the patterns
scientists expect to see due to rising levels of CO2 and other human-induced changes (see Question 5).
The expected changes in climate are based on our understanding of how greenhouse gases trap heat.
Both this fundamental understanding of the physics of greenhouse gases and fingerprint studies show
that natural causes alone are inadequate to explain the recent observed changes in climate. Natural causes
include variations in the Sun’s output and in Earth’s orbit around the Sun, volcanic eruptions, and internal
fluctuations in the climate system (such as El Niņo and La Niņa). Calculations using climate models (see
infobox, p.20) have been used to simulate what would have happened to global temperatures if only
natural factors were influencing the climate system. These simulations yield little warming, or even a slight
cooling, over the 20th century. Only when models include human influences on the composition of the
atmosphere are the resulting temperature changes consistent with observed changes.
Because those processes are either no longer present in the environment (e.g. anaerobic atmosphere) or are very well modeled (e.g. solar and volcanic activity). The only way for it to be natural would be if it exactly coincided with man's industrialization after not being present for at least 800,000 years, and was entirely unknown to science. Empiricism always leaves room for doubt, the question is how reasonable those doubts are.Quote:
Originally Posted by Thondalar
Hypocrisy doesn't mean the person is factually incorrect.Quote:
I don't necessarily believe mankind has absolutely no effect at all, but I really haven't seen a single shred of credible evidence that suggests we can do anything to stop climate change. It doesn't help that all the nut jobs screaming about doing something NOW all have a personal interest in it besides "saving the planet". If you don't think Al Gore is just trying to make more money off of it, you're as ignorant as the flight attendant on his private jet.
There are plenty of flying cars being built. The reason you don't own one is because the FAA doesn't want you killing yourself and a dozen kids at a playground when you crash while texting.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tgo01
Yes, I read that. Again, they didn't say how, only that it is. They made a few references to a 40% increase in CO2 production since 1970...the world's population has increased by almost 100% since 1970. Are they suggesting we stop breathing to reduce CO2 emissions?Quote:
Originally Posted by cwolff
Yes, that's what they are saying. They want everyone on Earth to take a holiday from breathing. It doesn't have to be a big break either. Something like 5 or 10 minutes of not breathing then we won't have to worry about Climate Change.Quote:
Originally Posted by Thondalar