out of curiosity, are we 100% sure man is responsible for climate change?

a reply to: visitedbythem

Well this was also part of the speculation with the report on the drifting axis, but it was a lot more complex, so they couldn't directly say it was "the" reason, but one of the reasons.

I think they know more than they are willing to disclose and less than needed to prevent or change anything.

originally posted by: CoyoteAngels
a reply to: flice

Since the magnetic poles are related to the molten core, something is causing that core to slide around?

I picture a top, with a wobble. How it spins and sometimes dips, recovers and continues to spin?

I think it's a much more powerful force than us peons.

Well again, we aren't talking magnetic poles, we are talking actual physical poles. They are suggesting the long term prognosis is geographic North Pole, is moving towards Greenland / Iceland.

Because of our pumping of ground water to the surface as well as melting ice.

But I'm trying to understand wether a shift in Geo pole, would also affect the Earths tilt in relation to the solar orbit?

The way I see it, we could maintain the tilt, but still get a new rotation. Atleast some of the other planets are like that.
This would cause a major change in the seasons and climate zones on Earth.

I also want to point out that climate and the agenda behind all the fear mongering is done by those who have already shown a great disdain for the liberty and happiness of the average world citizen. Look at how Trudeau treats Canadians for an example, and he's a card carrying lunatic about climate ideology. A majority of state governors in the USA are pushing the same crap, but never helping people suffering from ANY other of the big problems.

The same people who mandated firing state and government employees if they didn't jab up with risky experimental formulas are the ones onboard with a climate agenda, or any agenda that will limit freedom of travel and many other liberties.

Most if not all in authority who gravitate towards the climate "opportunity" haven't helped solve any other problem like homelessness, or pick any other thing is causing different peoples to suffer in some form.

Control freaks! Who get off by becoming powerful enough through these mass deceptions to control others having power over them. And making fortunes from it too.

Know the tree by its fruit.

originally posted by: flice

originally posted by: CoyoteAngels
a reply to: flice

Since the magnetic poles are related to the molten core, something is causing that core to slide around?

I picture a top, with a wobble. How it spins and sometimes dips, recovers and continues to spin?

I think it's a much more powerful force than us peons.

Well again, we aren't talking magnetic poles, we are talking actual physical poles. They are suggesting the long term prognosis is geographic North Pole, is moving towards Greenland / Iceland.

Because of our pumping of ground water to the surface as well as melting ice.

But I'm trying to understand whether a shift in Geo pole, would also affect the Earths tilt in relation to the solar orbit?

The way I see it, we could maintain the tilt, but still get a new rotation. At least some of the other planets are like that.
This would cause a major change in the seasons and climate zones on Earth.

As far as Earth's temperature goes, or any other planet in our solar system, changes in the poles on the sun are far more influential than anything, man made or not, occurring on our planet.

www.livescience.com...

Are we 100% sure man is responsible for climate change?

No, but we are 99.9999% certain changes and fluctuations within the sun are responsible for climate change on Earth.

originally posted by: AngelHeart
[snip]

It's the sun. But keep believing the illusion if it makes you feel better. Just don't force that faith on the logical folks that don't buy into that false religion.

ice age disappeared without humans. climate is always changing. do we contribute? yes. can we stop it? probably not. a reply to: network dude

its been known about since 1896 so we've had plenty of time to verify it from many angles, its simple, burning stuff creates carbon dioxide and over time carbon dioxide builds up in the atmosphere, and carbon dioxide warms up the air, so with how much we burn to support modern civilization its warming fast.

the whole concept of warming being part of some natural cycle that ensures balance is nonsense, there's no balance in nature, everything is always on the brink of collapse and life is very fragile, just because its functioned for millions of years means nothing, humanity isn't like other creatures, we are smart enough to influence life on a scale no other is capable of, our industry is more than enough to eventually suffocate all life and vaporize the oceans, and we've been causing climate change for thousands of years, the biggest example is the sahara desert, normally desertification takes millions of years but because us it only took a few thousand years to turn the sahara from a wet rainforest into a desert, so its not like this is something new, the new part of it all is the scale of our civilization and the fact its still growing.

why so unwilling to change how we do stuff if there's cleaner ways to do everything we need?

a reply to: GenerationGap

The solar magnetic poles have an 11 year cycle, I believe.

I think there is mass confusion about all this. Its important to distinguish which type of pole you are talking about.

Dane Wigington has some good info has anyone checked out his stuff?
YouTube
Website

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: network dude
I ask this as in the recent past, there was some ambiguity. it wasn't 100%, but they were pretty sure.
So when we make policy, is it really a good idea to make policy based on an unknown variable? The climate is a complex thing. The Sun, the moon, the oceans, the wind, the tectonic plates, animal migratory patterns, all could have either a small or a large effect on the climate.

We are coming out of an ice age. Or as our government states, we are still in one.

Like all the others, the most recent ice age brought a series of glacial advances and retreats. In fact, we are technically still in an ice age.

link to climate.gov

And if you look at the map in the link, it shows where the ice was at the peak of the last ice age. If you notice the details, you may see that the land mass was greater as well, and when the ice sheets melted, the ocean level raised. All this happened, without man's influence. knowing that, and understanding that there could even be factors to this that we never even thought of, can we say with total certainty that we completely understand MAN is responsible for the current warming?

I guess it depends on whether or not you believe in science or in this case climate science.

Scientists predict global temperature increases from human-made greenhouse gases will continue. Severe weather damage will also increase and intensify.

So when does commons sense prevail? Are rising temperatures worldwide happening? Is weather more severe and increasing in intensity? Are people commenting in unison "This is unprecedented" "It's never been this bad before" "Never seen anything like this before in my long lifetime" "The skies are no longer in alignment".

When does common sense prevail? We've had giant storms, and great floods; super hot climates and ice cold ones; all long before people.

Correlation =/= Causation. We also had more C02 in the atmosphere back when dinosaurs roamed the earth, that's why they were so big. That was millions of years before people.

The oldest person on earth has only been alive for ~100 years and they haven't seen the whole world. So no; it may not be unprecedented. It probably happened before technology and industry; but we didn't have computers and sensors to collect data. Our history or recorded phenomenon is only less than 50 years old. What we discovered with this technology is the great flood; raging hot burning fires, gigantic super cell storms; the entire topography of the planet changed before people. So why is it any less probable that it's happening naturally and people are a coincidence?

How is it "common sense" to know something you couldn't possibly know?

Here is what I DO know. People are trying to CHANGE the climate as the climate is changing. If people are responsible for changing the climate; it's because they are trying to change the climate. Maybe if we just stopped trying to change the climate, the climate would stop changing. Or maybe you know; the climate is just changing naturally; we don't have crystal balls, and there are way too many variables to control for. Climate science doesn't stand up to scrutiny, and is bought and paid for. Peer reviewed repeatable experiments needs controls; you can't control the universe; the distance from the sun, the orientation of the planet, the suns temperature as it burns out....

So how could you accurately measure the impact of mankind? All you can do is correlate, you cannot prove cause. Correlation doesn't equal causation. First thing they teach you in a science class.

originally posted by: namehere
its been known about since 1896 so we've had plenty of time to verify it from many angles, its simple, burning stuff creates carbon dioxide and over time carbon dioxide builds up in the atmosphere, and carbon dioxide warms up the air, so with how much we burn to support modern civilization its warming fast.

the whole concept of warming being part of some natural cycle that ensures balance is nonsense, there's no balance in nature, everything is always on the brink of collapse and life is very fragile, just because its functioned for millions of years means nothing, humanity isn't like other creatures, we are smart enough to influence life on a scale no other is capable of, our industry is more than enough to eventually suffocate all life and vaporize the oceans, and we've been causing climate change for thousands of years, the biggest example is the sahara desert, normally desertification takes millions of years but because us it only took a few thousand years to turn the sahara from a wet rainforest into a desert, so its not like this is something new, the new part of it all is the scale of our civilization and the fact its still growing.

why so unwilling to change how we do stuff if there's cleaner ways to do everything we need?

Carbon dioxide doesn't "Build up" it gets consumed. Or did we miss biology class. Trees and plants breath carbon dioxide. Air is what plants create. Without C02 there is no air; because without C02 there are no trees. C02 is necessary to support life; and we're trying to get rid of it.

We're carbon based life forms; we exhale carbon dioxide. Tree's consume our carbon dioxide, and generate oxygeon. If we deforrested too much; the answer isn't to stop driving cars; it's to plant more trees. The people behind the agenda happen to hate humans and believe in depopulation. No wonder they want to remove C02; which is essential for life.

a reply to: GenerationGap

Whatever goes on with the sun is what is going to always dictate 99.9999% the temperature on our planet.

Mostly true, however vulcanism can cause astonishing changes!

When Yellowstone or some other caldera blows, it's going to get dark and cold for a very long time.
There's also a negative side.

www.science.org...

www.realclearscience.com...

I realize that "science" is currently a dirty word on ATS, where finger pointing and blaming someone is the accepted operating procedure at present.

New Ice Age

In 1971, global cooling was the climate threat du jour. Dr. Murray Mitchell of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration stated that the planet’s temperature had decreased by “one-half a degree Fahrenheit” since World War II in the 1971 article, titled “New Ice Age?” Claims of longer and harsher winters in Europe since 1940 were also cited. German meteorologist Dr. Martin Rodewald predicted that if this weather pattern continued, Europe “would be covered with the glaciers of a new ice age by the turn of the century.” In 1971, this was the science.

I also remember a major news magazine at the time published a dire article about the coming ice age. Being in upstate New York it seemed possible as we had some very harsh winters at the time.

Then I moved to Texas and experienced 40+ days over 100 degrees.

I felt safe from the encroaching ice age predicted for 2000.

Now with some years on me its not hard to see weather and climate go in cycles, some short enough to recognize, some longer but its redily apparent that younger people always think what they are immediately experiencing is something new when in fact its just part of the cycle,

a reply to: network dude

i regard climate change as a tower of babylon situation

ancient peoples perceived watchers and protectors in the sky, so they pulled together and build a tower to find them

modern peoples perceive doom and ruin in the climate, so they pull together and build a industry to combat the millenial turning of seasons

war is peace

No, we're not 100% sure.

Because Humans are only aggravating it.

Climate has been changing for 12,000 years since the end of the last Ice Age.

Sea levels have risen up to 300 feet in the last 12,000 years, but only about 30 feet since Roman times.

I'll let you do the math on that.

a reply to: network dude

Who was "pretty sure?"

If you actually read what "they" reference about a "consensus," the only consensus was man COULD be responsible. Not that man is responsible.

But real easy to say 97% consensus man is the cause if you ignore the fact the vast majority of those scientists were willing to accept the idea that man is not the cause...

That's called "narrative." Otherwise known as propaganda. Carbon credits, baby! Al Gore's carbon-based economy. To go with cryptocurrency, perhaps?

a reply to: network dude
You can't deny that we are making the environment worse. We need to clean up our act up a little bit but the people in charge right now just want you to be a slave.

a reply to: Crackalackin

You can't deny that we are making the environment worse.

About as much as an ant fart in my 3 car garage would .