Just because there have been natural changes doesn't prove all changes are natural, nor does it prove they are tolerable.
The important words.
-
Features
Climate Change(d)?
- Thread starter Jimmy Higgins
- Start date
DBT
Contributor
Even the Mythbusters tested different CO2 levels using sealed glass tanks with a standard heater for each tank, where the temperature was directly related to the CO2 level, where higher CO2 equated to a higher temperature in that tank.
southernhybrid
Contributor
Obviously, denial is your preferred way of seeing things that you don't like. The photo is just an example of how much ice has melted in the polar bear's habitat. If an article that had input from 82 arctic scientists isn't about science, why don't you tell us where you get your scientific information. Nobody wants this to happen, but sadly the evidence is overwhelming. You remind me a little bit of my brother in law who told my husband several years ago that he can't believe in climate change because he has grandchildren. That was just another way of saying I don't want to believe this because it means that future might be awful for my grandkids, so I'll keep taking trips all over the world, spending mindlessly, while pretending that none of this is happening. I've already said that I think it's hopeless, so I guess at this point it doesn't matter what people like you, my brother in law and the far right believe. But, denial isn't going to change the fact that the climate is rapidly changing, primarily from human activity.
TSwizzle
I am unburdened by what has been.
The picture is a prop for the propaganda. Polar bears are actually thriving.
Last edited:
TSwizzle
I am unburdened by what has been.
When you make false assertions about my position as you repeatedly have, you can't be whining about me correcting you every time.
Let's put some scale to this.
What do you think the difference is between the norm and the last ice age?
6 degrees
And compare the current situation to the Paleocene-Ecoene Thermal Maximum. That really upset the applecart.
5 to 8 degrees
And fossil fuels are expected to likely do more.
Elixir
Made in America
Yup. The kiddies are in for some rude surprises. By the time today’s ten year olds have grandchildren, the “new normal” will be something unrecognizable to people like me - who will, mercifully, be long gone.
Disagree--I see "BLM" as racist. Lives matter, period, don't single out one group. There's no racial bias in police shootings. BLM is about protesting police shootings of blacks, justified or not.
Oh, come on now!
Clearly the light salmon section of this graph is as big as the powder blue section:
And ignore the fact that we have a fair amount of undercounting due to cases where it causes a clot and they drop dead often not being counted.
(And don't blame me for the color choices!)
And the opinions of teenagers are an accurate representation of reality? There is a massive amount of disinformation on the internet, a lot of it state driven.
The worst case climate predictions certainly could take us out. Not directly, but due to the fighting that would inevitably result.
Shadowy Man
Contributor
Fine. I am not hung up on the word “denier”. I don’t care about the pedantry on that. You can call yourself whatever.
But, you are just plain wrong on the science. And you have not shown one iota of evidence to support your position.
Since this is a science forum and not a politics one, we would expect you to show up with scientific evidence and not simply outrage at what politicians say.
Elixir
Made in America
We would be sorely disappointed if we expected that. I’ve been here for over a decade you’ve been here for more than 2 decades, and that poster has never shown any comprehension of science. But if you want some far right talking points, you came to the right place.
There is no scientific debate about anything more than exact numbers.
What there is is a massive disinformation campaign designed to make people think it's not settled science. Same thing we saw with cigarettes.
That's got to be quack science!
Note: "politicians" and "activists"--the former say what people want to hear and the latter exaggerate, neither is useful beyond pointing to something that might be an issue. Pay attention to the scientists! Note that they are a lot harder to understand because they present nuances rather than one-sentence absolutes.
By then it will be too late. There's a huge inertia.
Your response is rarely to science in the first place (you focus on the activists) and you have never done more than deny the science when actually addressing it.As I said in my previous post, I have responded to the "science" in this thread.
So unless you have something new to say, I guess you are done.
Elixir
Made in America
The problem is that those other factors are pretty much stable or cyclic over a fairly short period. You don't get to say global warming has stopped every fall, nor do you panic about it every spring. Above the cyclic stuff we have two drivers of change--atmospheric gases and solar warming. The latter will eventually be apocalyptic but it's a very slow thing and not relevant within the observed lifespan of the human race.
That leaves the atmosphere. CO2 and CH4. The latter is actually a lot nastier because most of the CO2 window is already blocked. (And it's a very good thing it is blocked--the 33 degrees of warming we get from it are essential in making our planet habitable.)
Only reason we know it has?? I've seen the growing season change in the time we have lived in this house. A fraction of a degree translates into considerable shifts in when to grow what.