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

a reply to: Xtrozero

As poison goes the electric car much worst than the gas car...lol

I don't think they are better, so we can be pretty close to agreeing.

I think we need to define the problem outside of what is seen as a controlling agenda using hyperbole as their weapon. Also, how do you have places like Asia, Russia, ME, and South America to come on board? We can swap our straws for crappy paper ones, but it means nothing in the end.

Agreed, we are cutting our own throats while other countries build coal fired energy plants. I am all in favour of getting rid of single use plastics.

Then we have the issue that the Earth's CO2 levels are the lowest in 600 million years and close to the point that plant life starts to die out, so maybe more CO2 is very good. I'm saying this to go back to my opening line we really don't even know what the real problem might be.

Pretty much agree, pollution in general, in all it's forms is my concern, I don't know that co2 is the main culprit.

Do we have an effect certainly every living thing on the planet has an effect on it, the only argument is how much.

Every model out there is nothing but a best guess, no smoking gun has been found.

I think its interesting that another part of science found a "super" earth that is believed to be more fertile than ours but runs about 15 degrees hotter than here.

I think its interesting because one side of science says any increase in temperature is horribly bad another side says warmer temps would bring increased fertility.

So which science am I supposed to follow?

a reply to: AngryCymraeg

There have never been so many of us on the planet at the same time.

Every single man , woman , and child , could fit into the State of Texas with a 1' radius around them .
Put that in your cap and sit on it .
(Old Southern sayin)
As an added bonus , at least there is not millions of dinosaurs .

We certainly affect the planet, but not necessarily to extent we're told. I learned in elementary school that humans destroyed the ozone layer and it would never recover. Well... It did. Did we make the hole? Likely. Did the earth repair itself. Absolutely. Do we cause climate change? Probably. Is it permanent? Probably not. We're late to the party for global warming. It should've happened a long time ago. Should we treat the earth better? Yes. Do I trust government measures to do so in good faith? No.

originally posted by: Irishhaf

So which science am I supposed to follow?

In the past on Earth when life exploded the most the earth was about 12 degrees hotter too.

a reply to: Xtrozero

big part of the reason I dont buy the end of everything in 12 years or whatever the number is now.

I am all for going cleaner when the tech supports it, but we aint there yet.

originally posted by: Halfswede

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: Halfswede
a reply to: quintessentone
And yet all of these environmental states appeared before and just as severe. There used to be water in death valley. Did the natives cause that with teepee fires?

True, but not at the accelerated rate over a very short period of time, now why is that?

That is not true. There are many recorded periods of very short and very extreme changes -- even worse than the last few decades.

just some very basic tracking: en.wikipedia.org...#/media/File:Vostok_Petit_data.svg

In particular look at the figure on the right with temp/CO2 etc.

Can anyone prove temp affects CO2 or is it CO2 affects temp? Which is the correlation/ causation?

Also, isn't CO2 a very small amount of the atmosphere?

As well, isn't CO2 a self correcting system in regards to plant life?

And if we're all panicked about "saving the earth" (such an idiotic line...like the earth needs humans to save it...good grief 🙄🤦‍♂️)...should we not be more concerned with less really bad chemicals on our food and less concerned with adding more plant food (CO2) to our plants?

I'm all for cleaning things up. But this hyper focus and taxations on CO2 is pretty stupid, IMO.

The crap that is permenantly released into the environment as byproducts from mining the REM for electric cars makes zero sense.

But the sheeple are onboard/ apathetic and wanting to be dominated. So here we are.

originally posted by: SRPrime

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.

Simplify and then ignore, that's what we do to the detriment of our planet and our health and lives.

originally posted by: Sparkymedic

As well, isn't CO2 a self correcting system in regards to plant life?

Maybe start a new slogan... Buy a gas guzzler and feed the plants...lol

I'm more worried about the plastics in the ocean, real pollution, clean water, good food etc...

Stealing this for back pocket thought exercises to give the naively arrogantly minded.

Well put dude. Ty

originally posted by: GenerationGap
The normal temperature of our planet is somewhere near -279 ⁰F as that is the temperature in space.
www.space.com...

Thankfully we have a nearby star we call the sun that radiates heat. But our sun has cycles. Both macro and micro cycles that fluctuate the temperature of our planet.

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

But there's no coercion available to those that seek control in that well known fact of life. Also, it's a rather common human trait to seek control even when no control is possible. It's why we pray. But I digress. Saying the temperature of our planet is beyond our control levies no access to power/money, and it makes less logical folks feeling insecure.

It's why we dance for rain, throw virgins in volcanoes, and mandate electric cars; it provides us the illusion of control. But alas, it's only an illusion.

Come late 2025 the sun enters a solar minimum cycle, and by 2030 I won't be surprised when a new batch of Global Cooling shamans and priests will be blaming a lack of human created C02 and animal CH2 for the Thames freezing solid and all we have to do to fix it is buy their new wares to save the planet.

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?

It comes down to this:

1) Are we certain that changes the concentration of CO2 (and other gases) in the atmosphere changes atmospheric temperature?

2) Are we certain that the observed changes in the concentration of CO2 (and other gases) in the atmosphere are due to human activities

3) All else being equal, based on Milankovitch Cycles, should the Earth currently be warming or cooling?

The answers being:

1) Yes, this has been known for nearly 200 years now. The theory* has never been disproven (though I am sure many people would like to be able to do so)

www.bgs.ac.uk...

2) Yes, there is no other explanation (though I am sure many people would like to provide one, if they could). we know the composition of the atmosphere is changing and we know human activity is producing more CO2 (and other gases) than would otherwise be released in the the atmosphere.

3) Overall, we should be experiencing a slight cooling (and corresponding increase in polar ice) due to changes in the Earth's declination - what is known as the neoglacial. This cooling however is not expected to result in a full blown glacial.


Yes, the global climate and atmospheric temperature can change through natural cycles. However, just because humans may die of natural causes, does not mean no-one has ever been murdered by another human.


* theory as in scientific theory, not idea or guess

a reply to: network dude

Like sands through the hourglass...

When it comes to early earth epoch, no. Cyanobacteria were responsible for oxygenating our planet, they took CO2 from our atmosphere and converted it to O2.

Then over countless years, photosynthetic plants took over, then 02 levels skyrocketed, and much of our planet was covered plant life, which trapped CO2, and that will lead me having to resort to caps lock.

FOSSIL FUELS ARE NOT DINOSAURS! THEY ARE DEAD PLANTS FROM THE CARBONIFEROUS ERA, AND PLANTS STORE CO2. WE HAVE ELEVATED CO2 LEVELS BECAUSE WE ARE BURNING LONG DEAD PLANTS.

This should be entry level knowledge to any child attending school.

I'm 100% sure asteroids becoming meteorites have been responsible for all climate change and the last one icy that stuck earth is simply just melting.

originally posted by: Thecakeisalie

FOSSIL FUELS ARE NOT DINOSAURS! THEY ARE DEAD PLANTS FROM THE CARBONIFEROUS ERA, AND PLANTS STORE CO2. WE HAVE ELEVATED CO2 LEVELS BECAUSE WE ARE BURNING LONG DEAD PLANTS.

This should be entry level knowledge to any child attending school.

It seems that many now think the process is quicker than in 100,000 years or less. Also, people are starting to realize there is a massive amount of oil in the earth and we are only taping the easier top of it. What this means is oil and gas will outlast its use as tech at some point moves us away from it as the primary energy source.

originally posted by: Thecakeisalie
a reply to: network dude

Like sands through the hourglass...

When it comes to early earth epoch, no. Cyanobacteria were responsible for oxygenating our planet, they took CO2 from our atmosphere and converted it to O2.

Then over countless years, photosynthetic plants took over, then 02 levels skyrocketed, and much of our planet was covered plant life, which trapped CO2, and that will lead me having to resort to caps lock.

FOSSIL FUELS ARE NOT DINOSAURS! THEY ARE DEAD PLANTS FROM THE CARBONIFEROUS ERA, AND PLANTS STORE CO2. WE HAVE ELEVATED CO2 LEVELS BECAUSE WE ARE BURNING LONG DEAD PLANTS.

This should be entry level knowledge to any child attending school.

If we continue increasing C02, we will have more plants, thus providing a fuel source for a future generation of Earthlings that will grow up believing oil came from Dinosaurs. Everything is a cycle.

a reply to: network dude

The only thing responsible for the change in our climate is the Sun. The Sun is the big domino. Man doesn't even register a blip on the radar screen of climate change. However, TPTB with their world governance agendas, can pay for any "science" they want to push their false fear campaigns to push agendas.

I know you know this. I just wish folks would spend 15 minutes educating themselves.

originally posted by: quintessentone
a reply to: notcisjustnormal
Actually with the advancements in genetics men can now create children

No. They can't.

Some insane 'scientists' doing insane things with DNA fragments in a test tube doesn't mean that a man can have sex with another man resulting in pregnancy, then actually nurture a growing baby inside their womb. and finally giving birth to a healthy child.

When that day comes, then and only then will your silly, irrational arguments cease being silly and irrational.

God help you in denying the science that tries to warn us to save lives and humanity.

God help those who choose to believe in the fake religion of scientism and the lies spewing from the mouths of their false prophets.

originally posted by: Type1338
a reply to: network dude

The only thing responsible for the change in our climate is the Sun. The Sun is the big domino. Man doesn't even register a blip on the radar screen of climate change. However, TPTB with their world governance agendas, can pay for any "science" they want to push their false fear campaigns to push agendas.

I know you know this. I just wish folks would spend 15 minutes educating themselves.

I don't think you understand. 97% of scientists all agree man determines the weather and climate. We have amazing powers. We are awesome.

Climate change science is a shell game where we are forced to pay more for everything while those companies that sell us everything get richer. An electric car as emits more CO2 in it's lifetime then combustion vehicle does.

a reply to: network dude

Nope.
It's only the guys that use weather manipulation tech on the rest of us.
noaa

In the late 1940's and 1950's many deemed "the deliberate or the inadvertent alteration of atmospheric conditions by human activity", also known as weather modification, as a promising science of the future. Currently, the most common form of weather modification is cloud seeding, which increases rain or snow, usually for the purpose of increasing the local water supply. Weather modification can also have the goal of preventing damaging weather, such as hail or hurricanes, from occurring.