Anthropogenic Climate Change: Skepticism and why science is never settled

[minicarph]

we appear to be thinking at two different levels.
i suppose that's why we both miss the other's point.

Kung ganun dapat you 2 should elevator your consciousness to the middle ground

[BratPAQ]

currently watching years of living dangerously series. puro effect ng climate changes ang pinakikita, there was this pastor theyre trying to convince. the pastor is asking for the proof that the co2 is the culprit? what do they do to convince him? give him the effect of the climate change and not the cause. they even said "im willing to give my life for this cause". my philosophy 101 is almost 20 years old, but im sure the arguments they are giving the pastor are full of fallacy. not that i dont believe in climate change, yes there is a climate change, yes polar caps are melting, radical changes in weather, but they need to come up with better proof that the co2 is the culprit.

[b_9904]

currently watching years of living dangerously series. puro effect ng climate changes ang pinakikita, there was this pastor theyre trying to convince. the pastor is asking for the proof that the co2 is the culprit? what do they do to convince him? give him the effect of the climate change and not the cause. they even said "im willing to give my life for this cause". my philosophy 101 is almost 20 years old, but im sure the arguments they are giving the pastor are full of fallacy. not that i dont believe in climate change, yes there is a climate change, yes polar caps are melting, radical changes in weather, but they need to come up with better proof that the co2 is the culprit.

Short answer, co2 is NOT the only culprit.

[safeorigin]

currently watching years of living dangerously series. puro effect ng climate changes ang pinakikita, there was this pastor theyre trying to convince. the pastor is asking for the proof that the co2 is the culprit? what do they do to convince him? give him the effect of the climate change and not the cause. they even said "im willing to give my life for this cause". my philosophy 101 is almost 20 years old, but im sure the arguments they are giving the pastor are full of fallacy. not that i dont believe in climate change, yes there is a climate change, yes polar caps are melting, radical changes in weather, but they need to come up with better proof that the co2 is the culprit.

CO2 only becomes a major greenhouse gas in a greenhouse where there's sufficient quantity of it to make it have a significant effect.

BUT

people are forgetting about water vapor...



NASA - Water Vapor Confirmed as Major Player in Climate Change

water vapor drives climate change vastly more than CO2. El Nino/La Nina oscillations alone can cause major changes ranging from years to decades.

[anonemus]

Seriously, those who still doubt that there is man-made climate change at this time (going into 2016) strike me as like those who doubted that the earth is round or that the sun is the center of the universe despite the scientific evidences.

Just saying.

Peace ✌

[b_9904]

Seriously, those who still doubt that there is man-made climate change at this time (going into 2016) strike me as like those who doubted that the earth is round or that the sun is the center of the universe despite the scientific evidences.

Just saying.

Peace ✌

Short answer: The planet's climate HAS been changing on its own. If there is man made climate change then we should see a steady increase in certain areas in relation to what we are doing like temp vis-a-vis co2 levels, but that isn't happening. We see a different correlation. So, before saying there is man made climate change we must explain the disconnect.

I see alarmists as those who insist on Newton's theory of what space IS as the "truth"! (Just in case you do not know what it is: Space [as in "espasyo"] is EMPTY.)

[Vodka]

space isn't empty. it's filled w/ dark matter

[safeorigin]

space isn't empty. it's filled w/ dark matter

you say that but so far, nobody has definitively proven it exists... FUSION | The Growing Case Against the Big Bang

it strikes me that people haven't been paying attention to the historical charts posted including the irradiance profile of H2O compared to CO2.

if anything, we might be heading towards another ice age and fossil fuels are the last thing you want to rid of when it comes.

[b_9904]

space isn't empty. it's filled w/ dark matter

That is the new theory.

[dr. d]

That is the new theory.

i passed algebra.
i have problems with calculus.
i can't ride on these new-fangled concepts..

[XploY]

plant more trees and pray that china is a big sink hole, so the number 1 pollutant will be erase from the face of this planet.

[XploY]

can somebody explain it from the beginning? like from the big bang to evolution? without the empirical, theres no way we can understand the whole climate thing.

[Vodka]

can somebody explain it from the beginning? like from the big bang to evolution? without the empirical, theres no way we can understand the whole climate thing.

what are you smoking?

the bottom line is the world will be better if we didn't burn as much fossil fuels that are going to run out ANYWAY pollution sucks, really

the world should transition away from a model that requires massive population growth in order to have economic growth. overpopulaton sucks, really

[XploY]

what are you smoking?

the bottom line is the world will be better if we didn't burn as much fossil fuels that are going to run out ANYWAY pollution sucks, really

the world should transition away from a model that requires massive population growth in order to have economic growth. overpopulaton sucks, really

lol. Please provide some data, we need proof. According to beh9904, mother earth changes itself with or without human intervention. And it's evident in the last ice age, theres no fossil fuel at that time, and oh how about the core? When the core shift from north to south? Whats going to happen? It's imperative that we should begin from big bang, the foundation of everything, so WE the Filipino people can understand.

[safeorigin]

what are you smoking?

the bottom line is the world will be better if we didn't burn as much fossil fuels that are going to run out ANYWAY pollution sucks, really

ironically, that pollution is making the planet greener

Global Garden Gets Greener : Feature Articles

in case you're not aware, CO2 has been 2000% higher long before humans existed than today and the world didn't turn into Venus.

[Vodka]

ironically, that pollution is making the planet greener

Global Garden Gets Greener : Feature Articles

last time i checked we're not plants

[safeorigin]

last time i checked we're not plants

yet we're integral to the carbon cycle - it's symbiotic relationship. last time I checked, the atmosphere is 21% oxygen and 0.04% carbon dioxide.

[b_9904]

the world should transition away from a model that requires massive population growth in order to have economic growth. overpopulaton sucks, really

Yeah, that is another story and I do not think it will be about the economies of states.

Re: fossil fuels running out

So when will we be running out? Cool question, huh.

[anonemus]

The rest are here Arguments from Global Warming Skeptics and what the science really says

Naka ka tamad na to argue eh. Been doing this in my line of work for years and have personally talked with those in the IPCC.

Unfortunately, it's us in the Philippines who are at the most losing end in this biggest disaster in the history of mankind

[safeorigin]

The rest are here Arguments from Global Warming Skeptics and what the science really says

Naka ka tamad na to argue eh. Been doing this in my line of work for years and have personally talked with those in the IPCC.

Unfortunately, it's us in the Philippines who are at the most losing end in this biggest disaster in the history of mankind

You mention IPCC yet the data I linked from the start came directly from the latest IPCC report: http://www.climatechange2013.org/ima...5_TS_FINAL.pdf

turn to page 61. they pretty much state that "global warming" is on hiatus based on the historical trend. the mean increase within the period 1998-2012 is only at 0.04 degrees celcius and 0.11 degrees celcius within the period of 1951-2012. it also falls in line with the NASA data I linked.

let that 0.11 degree celcius figure sink in. as I've mentioned before, there are far more dominant drivers of climate change than CO2. The most powerful driver being water vapor.



water vapor constitute about 4% of the atmosphere compared to current levels of CO2 which is 0.04%. water vapor contributes at least 60% to as much as 95% to global heat retention depending on which source you use(American Chemical Society and US Department of Energy in this case). Meanwhile, CO2 only retains a measly 3.6% of global heat and 3.22% out of all CO2 is man-made.

If you stack all of that percentage, mankind has only contributed 0.117% to global warming. remember that 0.11 degree celcius figure? if you punch in that number, mankind has contributed 0.0001287 degrees celcius only!

do you understand the scale of insanity here?