Have you examined the science for yourself? It's pretty damn solid for a "scam"... The basic physics of global warming were established around 1860. You can conduct an experiment yourself to see that CO2 traps heat. Have you seen the pictures of the great coral reef lately? It's dead. Ocean acidification is happening at an alarming rate (the ocean absorbs a lot of CO2 which acidifies it).
Remember the hole in the o-zone layer and how governments had to come together to ban certain aerosol chemicals? Did you question scientists then? Was that tyranny? The hole is now repairing itself thanks to the cooperation of the global community. Looks like they were right about that one.
You are right, it is forever changing, but the change since industrialization and the burning of long buried fossil fuel sources is absolutely unprecedented for this planet. We are the first life forms to exploit this energy. You're a fool if you think that digging up billion year old carbon deposits and burning them to satisfy the modern energy demands of 7 billion humans is the same as a butterfly flapping its wings. We are greater than a natural force. We have transcended nature. We can split the atom.
We can compare the composition of our atmosphere against air trapped in ancient permafrost that is hundreds of thousands of years old, and it shows that since the industrial revolution the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere has more than doubled. There has not been this much CO2 in the atmosphere in around 15 million years, and we've accomplished that in about 200 years. That makes sense, since we're digging carbon out of the ground and burning it (you'd have to be a moron not to draw the connection).
Additionally, our sun is in a cooling cycle right now, yet the earth is warming. Climatologists are not ignorant to the fact that the earth's systems are dynamic, nor are they ignorant to the fact that the sun is dynamic, yet there is an overwhelming consensus that anthropocentric climate change is real and happening. The evidence is obvious to anyone with an open mind who investigates, so I expect that you're just ignorant about the research.
If CO2 is heat-trapping, and we've increased atmospheric composition from 180PPM to 420PPM since we began burning it, what do you think will happen? You don't even have to think, you just have to look at oceanic and atmospheric temperature measurements. We've been smashing records for about 20 years straight now.
If you want a balanced (not as extreme as the tree-huggers, not as dismissive as the right-wing) analysis of the actual science, I recommend watching this video series from a former correspondent for New Scientist. He is very good at breaking the peer reviewed research down. He takes the piss out of both sides of the argument. It's real, but it's not Hollywood Catastrophe real. Still, it's something we must deal with. If you don't have the time and don't wish to view it, then you've demonstrated you have no interest in the truth. So please stop posting this bullshit.
The truth hurts, doesn't it? It's infinitely easier to invent bullshit than it is to dig up all the sources and data necessary to debunk lies. No wonder the internet is such a shithole. Oi.
Science based on government funding is suspect. I would be happy to take a look at any real science not based on a predetermined outcome in order to secure more government grants.
Michael Crichton was a doctor, not a climatologist, and he outraged 100% of the scientists he interviewed by cherry picking and mischaracterizing their research and interviews in his horrible book "State of Fear", which I only got 50 pages into because its prose alone were unreadable. This essay is based on the same shameless cherry picking. Go Google what the people he interviewed had to say about how he twisted their words. The man was fucking senile when he wrote that book. Mind-blowing that anyone would consider him an authority on science. Hilarious.
If Michael Crichton is who you turn to for truth, then please staple your mouth shut and have your fingers surgically grafted together. Humanity will be better off without your "intellectual" input. Government science and grants put man on the moon and is the only current avenue for innovation. The private sector does not innovate at all. Thanks for your "supporting evidence" that comes in the form of a shitty novel that's twice as long as it has to be and is full of lies according to everyone he interviewed for it.
No. Just a reasonable person who likes to read about facts. If you think novelists or Doctors are scientists, you need a wake up call. My doctor might be a nice guy, but he believes the great flood happened, literally. I already read (or at least tried to) the Crichton garbage many years ago. Why don't you watch that video series and get back to me? Upvoting your own comments is pretty tacky by the way.
Have you examined the science for yourself? It's pretty damn solid for a "scam"... The basic physics of global warming were established around 1860. You can conduct an experiment yourself to see that CO2 traps heat. Have you seen the pictures of the great coral reef lately? It's dead. Ocean acidification is happening at an alarming rate (the ocean absorbs a lot of CO2 which acidifies it).
Remember the hole in the o-zone layer and how governments had to come together to ban certain aerosol chemicals? Did you question scientists then? Was that tyranny? The hole is now repairing itself thanks to the cooperation of the global community. Looks like they were right about that one.
I just know that the earth is not static, it is forever changing. Does man affect the earth? Does a butterfly flapping its wings change the wind?
You are right, it is forever changing, but the change since industrialization and the burning of long buried fossil fuel sources is absolutely unprecedented for this planet. We are the first life forms to exploit this energy. You're a fool if you think that digging up billion year old carbon deposits and burning them to satisfy the modern energy demands of 7 billion humans is the same as a butterfly flapping its wings. We are greater than a natural force. We have transcended nature. We can split the atom.
We can compare the composition of our atmosphere against air trapped in ancient permafrost that is hundreds of thousands of years old, and it shows that since the industrial revolution the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere has more than doubled. There has not been this much CO2 in the atmosphere in around 15 million years, and we've accomplished that in about 200 years. That makes sense, since we're digging carbon out of the ground and burning it (you'd have to be a moron not to draw the connection).
Additionally, our sun is in a cooling cycle right now, yet the earth is warming. Climatologists are not ignorant to the fact that the earth's systems are dynamic, nor are they ignorant to the fact that the sun is dynamic, yet there is an overwhelming consensus that anthropocentric climate change is real and happening. The evidence is obvious to anyone with an open mind who investigates, so I expect that you're just ignorant about the research.
If CO2 is heat-trapping, and we've increased atmospheric composition from 180PPM to 420PPM since we began burning it, what do you think will happen? You don't even have to think, you just have to look at oceanic and atmospheric temperature measurements. We've been smashing records for about 20 years straight now.
If you want a balanced (not as extreme as the tree-huggers, not as dismissive as the right-wing) analysis of the actual science, I recommend watching this video series from a former correspondent for New Scientist. He is very good at breaking the peer reviewed research down. He takes the piss out of both sides of the argument. It's real, but it's not Hollywood Catastrophe real. Still, it's something we must deal with. If you don't have the time and don't wish to view it, then you've demonstrated you have no interest in the truth. So please stop posting this bullshit.
Thanks for fielding this one @misfortunecookie, I'm trying to get to bed...
The truth hurts, doesn't it? It's infinitely easier to invent bullshit than it is to dig up all the sources and data necessary to debunk lies. No wonder the internet is such a shithole. Oi.
Science based on government funding is suspect. I would be happy to take a look at any real science not based on a predetermined outcome in order to secure more government grants.
Take a look at this essay by Michael Crichton the religion of global warming: https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~kw/crichton.html
Michael Crichton was a doctor, not a climatologist, and he outraged 100% of the scientists he interviewed by cherry picking and mischaracterizing their research and interviews in his horrible book "State of Fear", which I only got 50 pages into because its prose alone were unreadable. This essay is based on the same shameless cherry picking. Go Google what the people he interviewed had to say about how he twisted their words. The man was fucking senile when he wrote that book. Mind-blowing that anyone would consider him an authority on science. Hilarious.
If Michael Crichton is who you turn to for truth, then please staple your mouth shut and have your fingers surgically grafted together. Humanity will be better off without your "intellectual" input. Government science and grants put man on the moon and is the only current avenue for innovation. The private sector does not innovate at all. Thanks for your "supporting evidence" that comes in the form of a shitty novel that's twice as long as it has to be and is full of lies according to everyone he interviewed for it.
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/may/11/tech-innovation-silicon-valley-juicero
You work for a government? University?
No. Just a reasonable person who likes to read about facts. If you think novelists or Doctors are scientists, you need a wake up call. My doctor might be a nice guy, but he believes the great flood happened, literally. I already read (or at least tried to) the Crichton garbage many years ago. Why don't you watch that video series and get back to me? Upvoting your own comments is pretty tacky by the way.