Per the study
" sea temperatures in a natural warm period about 125,000 years ago were ‘indistinguishable’ from today"
wait what? I thought this was man-made…but instead, the earth has been doing this for hundreds of thousands of year…
And here you have the greatest hoax ever played…
You realize this is bad, the study actually agrees with climate scientists and disagrees with you, right? It goes on to suggest they are UNDERESTIMATING the consequences of climate change. No hoax, this case shows what has historically happened when there were temperatures similar to now and what can be expected.
“Those who have the ability to make a difference have the responsibility to do so.” Thomas Jefferson
How can global warming be man made when it has happened for hundreds of thousands of years…
I don’t think anyone would/could argue against global warming or climate change. The topic that causes debate is the effect humans have on it. Are humans causing an increase in the speed in which the global climate is changing?
15’ Ocean Kayak Scupper Pro
quote:
Originally posted by Fishb8How can global warming be man made when it has happened for hundreds of thousands of years…
This is like saying “trees have fallen over for thousands of years… how can deforestation be man made?”
Is it that hard to understand or are you being obtuse?
I at least feel the Trump administration is going to actually move forward with science based policies in regards to global climate change. Even the soon to be head of DOE agrees that man is at least partially to blame for GCC.
So MAN is going to stop/change global climate change that has been occurring forever?
I don’t think the argument has been made that man can STOP global climate change. The question would be, is there something that can be done to reduce mans influence on it?
15’ Ocean Kayak Scupper Pro
Arguing with stupid makes me tired, but I am feeling punchy today so I will bite.
If you agree, like most of published science, that man has contributed to global warming:
We can identify the likely causes and try to limit them incrementally. I think its worthwhile to reduce air pollution and at least ATTEMPT to address the issue, considering the impact. Carbon credits 
are a scam, but finding ways to either incentivize reduction in pollution through extra $, or penalize excess pollution through $ penalties would be good. The market does not respond to this well on its own because the benefits (energy sales) are privatized and the negative effects (pollution) are socialized… there is little financial incentive to behave responsibly otherwise.
If your head is so far under the sand that you can’t begin to understand how digging up millions of years of carbon (35 billion barrels of oil per year) and poofing it up into the stratosphere could possibly affect anything… IE assuming that it is “just natural” for the sake of argument, despite the scientific community’s long and detailed stance:
Even if we make ZERO impact on climate, there are significant side benefits like creating new kinds of high paying energy jobs (tech sector, installation, construction), improved infrastructure, and improving air quality in population centers and industrial centers.
As for “can we even make an impact??” - we have done some amazing stuff. Sent people to the moon. Dug a mine almost 3 miles across and 3/4 mile deep. Tunneled through mountains to put in roadways. Developed supercomputers from abacus to “Watson” in less than seventy years. Sent a man in a sub 6.8 miles underwater to the bottom of the deepest hole on the planet. Surely we have some technology and capacity to give it a shot?
Would you just lie down if an asteroid was very slowly heading towards earth? Or would yo
man is the only species that has done the Earth not one single favor…our goal should be simple…how can we cause less harm? I don’t care if cow farts have added a billion tons of methane to the atmosphere for the last 2 million years, if man adds half a billion, then let’s figure out how to reduce that…
The Morris Island Lighthouse www.savethelight.org
Man’s effect on global warming is like cutting the faucet on in your sink at full blast, and then worried that it’s going to overflow because “man” added a drop of water out of an eye dropper.
quote:
Originally posted by mhebbardArguing with stupid makes me tired, but I am feeling punchy today so I will bite.
If you agree, like most of published science, that man has contributed to global warming:
We can identify the likely causes and try to limit them incrementally. </font id=“size3”> I think its worthwhile to reduce air pollution and at least ATTEMPT to address the issue, considering the impact. Carbon credits
If your head is so far under the sand that you can’t begin to understand how digging up millions of years of carbon (35 billion barrels of oil per year) and poofing it up into the stratosphere could possibly affect anything… IE assuming that it is “just natural” for the sake of argument, despite the scientific community’s long and detailed stance:
Even if we make ZERO impact on climate, there are significant side benefits like creating new kinds of high paying energy jobs (tech sector, installation, construction), improved infrastructure, and improving air quality in population centers and industrial centers.
As for “can we even make an impact??” - we have done some amazing stuff. Sent people to the moon. Dug a mine almost 3 miles across and 3/4 mile deep. Tunneled through mountains to put in roadways. Developed supercomputers from abacus to “Watson” in less than seventy years. Sent a man in a sub 6.8 miles underwater to
quote:
Originally posted by Fishb8maybe, likely, possible are not science.
Yes they are.
Meteorology is science based on predictive modeling for weather.
Geology + anthropology + archeology work on predictive carbon dating models, inference, and association in absence of proof.
Biology and organic chemistry work on predictive modeling for genetics, drug interactions.
There is a whole field of science in quantum physics and computing that can’t actually be measured. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Measurement_problem
Just some examples off the top of my head.
I am sure you are smarter and more knowledgeable than everyone in those fields - so I am afraid I can’t help ya.
I’ll hit the lights on my way out.
I know I am not smarter in those fields. But also know scientist do not agree. so you pick a side. I believe this rock has survived long enough that our extremely small number of years on, is doubtful to destroy it. our scientist use 100 years (or so) as a predictive pattern. that is like using a single person as a predictive measure of how every human will act.
It is an extremely small sampling.
You will not find an anti man made climate change study that isn’t funded by a fossil fuel company.
I’m not a scientist, as a matter fact it was my worst subject in school. So I’ll try to explain this in simple terms.
It’s a nice a fall day. You get home after work. The temp is starting to drop a bit, but it’s a nice 70 degrees inside.
You turn on the lights and TV. Turn on the stove to start making dinner. Open the door to the frig a couple times to get stuff out and you hear the compressor kick on.
The next thing you know you hear the A/C start, your thermostat is set at 72.
“Simple is as simple does” – Forrest Gump smartest man I know.
[quote]
Yes they are.
Meteorology is science based on predictive modeling for weather.
Geology + anthropology + archeology work on predictive carbon dating models, inference, and association in absence of proof.
Biology and organic chemistry work on predictive modeling for genetics, drug interactions.
There is a whole field of science in quantum physics and computing that can’t actually be measured. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Measurement_problem
Just some examples off the top of my head.
I am sure you are smarter and more knowledgeable than everyone in those fields - so I am afraid I can’t help ya.
[quote]
"Metrology is the science of measurement and includes all theoretical and practical aspects of measurement.
Metrology is defined by the International Bureau of Weights and Measures (BIPM) as “the science of measurement, embracing both experimental and theoretical determinations at any level of uncertainty in any field of science and technology”
War Eagle 115 yamaha 4 stroke
quote:
Originally posted by Bonzo72man is the only species that has done the Earth not one single favor…our goal should be simple…how can we cause less harm? I don’t care if cow farts have added a billion tons of methane to the atmosphere for the last 2 million years, if man adds half a billion, then let’s figure out how to reduce that…
The Morris Island Lighthouse www.savethelight.org
Remember the billion buffalo early Americans slaughtered? That has given us our carbon credits for the next 500 years.
We are coming out of an Ice age and our Climate will warm up. If not that means Earth is cooling off and dieing. In that case man needs to make some extra green house gases.
“If Bruce Jenner can keep his wiener and be called a woman, I can keep my firearms and be considered disarmed.”
quote:
Originally posted by blackhawk961[quote]
Yes they are.
Meteorology is science based on predictive modeling for weather.
Geology + anthropology + archeology work on predictive carbon dating models, inference, and association in absence of proof.
Biology and organic chemistry work on predictive modeling for genetics, drug interactions.
There is a whole field of science in quantum physics and computing that can’t actually be measured. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Measurement_problemJust some examples off the top of my head.
I am sure you are smarter and more knowledgeable than everyone in those fields - so I am afraid I can’t help ya.
[quote]
"Metrology is the science of measurement and includes all theoretical and practical aspects of measurement.
Metrology is defined by the International Bureau of Weights and Measures (BIPM) as “the science of measurement, embracing both experimental and theoretical determinations at any level of uncertainty in any field of science and technology”
War Eagle 115 yamaha 4 stroke
Bo, you are missing some letters if you are trying to figure out whether or not metEOrology uses predictions…