I mean how do you explain the ice caps melting? That’s been extremely well documented as have other effects on the Earth. We’ve studied the effects of greenhouse gases since the 1970’s and the science has been proven repeatedly in the decades. Despite how many people have tried to disprove it.
We know for a fact that CO 2 traps solar heat and we know that the global temperature has started rising since the widespread use of those gases. It’s not a coincidence that the global temperature has risen since we started using these gases that trap solar heat. That’s not nature doing its normal cycle, that’s manmade acceleration. Pumping out excess amounts of gases that don’t belong in our atmosphere.
The last time the Earth had an ice age, the global temperature only had to fluctuate 5 degrees Celsius. This fluctuation in temperature happened over the course of thousands upon thousands of years. Our current global temperature has fluctuated 1.5 degrees Celsius in just over a hundred years. If the implications of that don’t concern you, I don’t know what will. A century from now? It’s likely we will be at or very near 3 degrees Celsius. More then halfway in temperature fluctuations then what the last ice age was in just 200 years.
Of course some people make money off a of climate change or being environmentally friendly. Capitalism turns everything into a commodity to be sold. So If you’re against that, then be against it. But I hate to break this to you but people make money from being anti climate change as well. So your opinion about money cuts both ways. Conservative politicians are not exempt from that. Does the media overreact and over sensationalize? Sometimes yes, because they’re chasing headlines and ratings as usual.
Don’t let your cynicism of people distract you from scientific fact. At this point denying climate change is denying decades of peer reviewed scientific consensus. To deny climate change, is to deny science. You owe it to your children and your grandchildren to leave them a better world than the one you grow up in. Because as it stands now, things are going to get far, far worse.
Hypothetically speaking, we could be on the verge of decreased solar activity and/or increased volcanic activity, both of which are known to happen and could potentially drastically reduce global temperatures for several years; and neither of which we have any control over.
Such an event would surely put a wrinkle in the current global warming model... 🤔
@wildbill83 Yes they were Christians....who were publicly shamed and humiliated by other Christians in higher places of power for thinking outside of conservative values. I fail to see your point and I'm not even sure why you continue to discuss religion.
I see that you're assuming this instrument must be literally hanging over an active volcano. If volcano disruption has skewed the readings then how is it that we haven't gotten a measurement like this in 55 years? That's a lot of time for volcanos to skew our readings isn't it? It's almost like scientists takes these kinds of things into account when they record their data. Because they do.
Your cherry picking ice core data to push your narrative. The amount of CO 2 and oxygen varies specifically on what the actual date is and geological era the sample is taken from. The levels of oxygen and carbon go up and down based on the era. Here is a chart depicting the measurement of ice core data that comes from the Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center measuring emissions across a timespan of 8000,000 years. This by the way, includes the last ice age we had in it's data. You will note how fast and quickly the emissions rise as soon as we hit the modern era. At a rate NEVER seen before in the geological timeline.
To say that "miniscule fluctuations in temperature could more likely be attributed to solar activity" is completely your own conjecture. You don't know that at all whatsoever. Scientists again, have taken this into account already when they record their data. You seem to think that you're the only one in the room who has thought of this being a variable in the data collection process.
Those radiological assumptions are based on physical and observable evidence. If you're so skeptical of it then what is your alternative to modern day advances in Radiology and Dendrochronology? Do you have a better solution? The Bible perhaps? Please don't ignore this point, tell me what your better alternative to these methods are. The so called inaccuracies of radiogeneic dating don’t discredit the technique itself because every technique we use was calibrated against each other and found to be acceptable within statistical error under the best of given circumstances. The margin of error is minor. We have tested this again and again on objects that WE DO KNOW THE DATE OF. We know for a fact that the calibration error is minor because we have tested it again and again and again. Which is why we still use it. And as time goes on and has gone on, the margin of error becomes smaller and smaller as technology advances.
You seem to think that because science isn't perfect 100% of time. It isn't reliable at all whatsoever and use that way of thinking to justify your own worldview. The scientific consensus is....that climate change is very real. To go against global warming is to go against over half a century of data and experiments involving observable evidence. Climate change deniers have no peer reviewed academic evidence from the scientific community itself. It's all hearsay and only relies on emotion instead of facts. You're not much better then a conspiracy theorist. It's good to be skeptical but there's a difference between skepticism and downright denying what you're seeing in front of you because it doesn't fit your worldview.
I’m afraid you haveThat backwards Every source of information that we have from satellites down to researchers in the field, can clearly show. That it is real. This is the hottest July on record for the entire planet. I’m sorry that you were afraid, and that you want to make it all go away. But ultimately facing the truth will give you a future
@SatyrService You tell the fools, my friend. They cannot see what is right in front of them. Hiding in their holes. Full of ignorance. Blind to the truth. Blind to facts.
@Harmony People who live in ignorance cannot change thrir narrow minds. Nor can we. This planet is dying. Mankind is killing it. If we all do not change. We all suffer together. Then we die. Some will die in ignorance. Others will die knowing the truth. Death is death. I shall speak the truth until I die. Those who live under rocks have no brains.
Yeah, Where does the money for climate research come from? Fair question - it comes mostly from the National Science Foundation; about $450 million per year.
Equally fair question: where does the money for climate denial come from? The US oil industry makes about $110 billion per year; coal another $20 billion. Big Oil spends $3.6 billion per year on advertising; a sum equal to about 8X the whole NSF climate budget. You're not naive enough to believe none of that money goes to propaganda, are you?
The Co2 model could very well be flawed, correlation doesn’t always equal causation and we could be seeing atmospheric Co2 as coincidental to climate changes rather than an overarching cause. Not enough is known about how our planet reacts to changes in its environment.
Solar radiation and cosmic ray densities could have a significant impact on our planet’s climate and atmosphere and this avenue of climate change sources has been studied extensively with equally significant implications for our climate having been postulated.
If Co2 is the major cause of planetary climate change then we’re probably already too late to stop it because the planetary cycles of atmospheric movement and sea water temperatures have been in motion for decades and would take many decades to reverse and such drastic shifts could generate new problems for humanity, In the meantime the effects of current conditions will be felt for many decades ahead regardless of what we do in ten years or even a hundred.
This message was deleted by the author of the main post.
I agree climate is changing, just like it has since time began .I don't believe banning gas stoves ,ceiling fans or cows is going to have any effect on climate.
I’ve been looking into it for over 20 years actually, the food industry causes so many issues. I get Asthma related symptoms but I don’t have asthma when I eat or am near the chemicals in products. I had to research it because at the time I got no where with my doctors.
I’m a researcher, my son was under a paediatrician for two years when he was 1/3 years old, put on medication for 2 years that did nothing! (20 years ago) he blamed my sons diet, I knew it wasn’t and I ended up healing my son myself without medication, it took me 1/2 weeks. At the time I trusted the doctor, I regret wasting 2 years trying to do what they said.
Which is why now I don’t trust doctors, they are text book educated, not all doctors know how to heal and medicine isn’t always the answer.
It makes alot of money. We have ready visual access to the whole world now very easily in this world. . So its very easy to push a narritive on the masses.
@ElwoodBlues The world goes through natural changes. Tge only reason you see things now you wouldnt of even heard of 20 years ago is because of the internet. Anyway its opinion based subject and were all entitled to one. All of us. And thats my opinion. If it divides us rather than respect each others views on the matter then someone wins because division really does rule.
