weather patterns? once again, you are missing the point. There is factual evidence that the temperature rise is being magnified. I dont expect you to do anything different with your life; the point is that it exists.
Dont let your big IQ blind you. Yes science does have a lot of theories, but it also has data and facts that cannot be ignored. Where do you think these theories come from. Data directs scientists to estimate what happened based on the data, but at the bottom of it is accurate data. And the accurate data in this case pretty clearly points to human influences accelerating the warming process.
The global warming, climate change side continually jumps back and forth between the earth warming and the weather changing. They even say Sandy was caused by global warming, with no evidence. There have been plenty of hurricanes that just never hit land in the same area over the years. There has to be more than anecdotal evidence to call something fact or this happened so it must mean that. sent from my samsung note 2
And that's the issue, today's plants cannot absorb the CO2 from fossil fuels. True answers is we really don't know what will happen. I have rocks in my yard older than what some state is the earths age
Both sides spew nothing but theory (i would argue hypothesis), only they see their side as fact and the other side as bs. Me, I am a realist. I go by what I see and feel. I have trouble believing so called statistics from 100+ years ago, especially when the argument for global warming is measured by an increase of temperature of 1-2 degrees over a century of time. How accurate are the numbers from a century ago? Noone is arguing that it is not healthy to put some of the crap in the air we do.
and all of a sudden....Poof! http://www.ouramazingplanet.com/4171-antarctic-bottom-water-current-found.html Yet another scientific study throws a new factor into the climate change equation...ooooo what does it mean? and another slightly older yet recent revelation: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/07/120709092606.htm It's all a big crapshoot and I could argue points either way as to our effect but what's the point...life on earth will continue, or not...with or without us having an impact, minimal impact, or no impact. oh yeah - maybe the penguins can tell us right from wrong
Tfox again, we arent arguing that climate change is totally manmade, just that we are accelerating the course of things, faster than we can cope. And yes, I don't think anything good will come from this conversation as neither side will convert.
At one time there was no ice on the planet, then glaciation, a cycle but now we are rapidly warming so what species will be around for the next ice age?
Damn, how did I miss this thread? I always love a good global warming debate. And I see a lot of nonsense being thrown about in this thread.
Well get your thoughts organized and lets hear them. I'll give you a little time due to the fact that it's Monday morning and I'm sure you had a fairly susbstantial weekend beer lineup. Go....
My general thoughts: - I don't think, we as man, affect the global climate as we like to believe. Locally? Of course. But not globally. - A simple fact of science is that it takes far less energy for water to heat air, than for air to heat water. This makes me skeptical of the increase in temperature as a result of greenhouse gases. Some hypotheses suggest that perhaps the Earth's core has hot spots that come to the surface cyclically and raise the ocean's temperatures. - And if they are greenhouse gases, the #1 greenhouse gas on the planet is water vapor. Kinda hard to stop that one. Man produces a fraction of 1% of the greenhouse gases within the atmosphere.
Most topics like this I find myself on one side of the fence, but when it comes to global warming its a toss up to me. All the points being made on here have been back by "fact" by someone at some point in time. My issue is with these so called "facts". I took a class in college that tried using fact to argue evolution. My question is how accurate are these facts. I really have a problem with a scientist telling me something happened during some ridiculous time frame that often spans millions of years. How can they really know what happened 10 million years ago? To me it is all educated speculation. Sent from my SGH-T959 using Xparent Green Tapatalk 2
How so? At what point did it change from theory to fact? Not saying it isn't. But how do we really know? sent from my samsung note 2
How can they possibly confirm something that happened millions of years ago? There are far to many variables in that amount of time to account for. I'm not arguing what did or didn't happen. I just question the accuracy of these facts. Sent from my SGH-T959 using Xparent Green Tapatalk 2
Exactly the point. It is still darwins theory of evolution. Yes there are lots of examples that lead one to believe it true, but fact, it is not. sent from my samsung note 2
