What do you think of climate change?

[Theo520]

I’m seeing no solutions posted here. Why is that?

Nobody likes my solution, when I post it.

Mass produce safe and reliable nuclear plants, then swap out all coal generators. It wouldn’t be cheap but it would be affordable and still supply reliable power to the 3rd world

This is what we will do, when people and governments actually believe the threat is real

 

[LeafByNiggle]

Human activity is an almost imperceptible blip in the time frame of Earth’s 4+ billion year history. If Earth’s history were compressed into a year, industrial activity is the last two seconds of that year.

It is all the more significant then that humans brought about so much change in those last two seconds. The relative time scale during which we did this may be imperceptible when compared to geological time, but the effect is far from imperceptible. (I am speaking of more than climate change here.)

 

[Ender]

It is all the more significant then that humans brought about so much change in those last two seconds.

This assumes the point under contention: is man responsible for the modest temperature changes we have observed? Given that the warming is the result of a 1-2% change in the absorption of sunlight, a change that could be caused by perturbing any number of climate variables, concluding that it was caused by CO2 is more a leap of faith than a scientific certainty.

 

[steve-b]

No one ia denying that the climate changes naturally. The thing is, with the emission of GHG we are accelerating the effect and making it more irreversible. Evidence? Look at Venus, its atmosphere is mostly CO2 and is the hottest planet in Solar System. Look at an IR spectrogram of CO2 and methane, they both absorb thermal radiation.

Re: Venus

Excerpts from https://www.space.com/44-venus-second-planet-from-the-sun-brightest-planet-in-solar-system.html

" the Venusian surface is covered … by thousands of volcanoes, some which are still active today, ranging from about 0.5 to 150 miles (0.8 to 240 kilometers) wide, with lava flows carving long, winding canals up to more than 3,000 miles (5,000 km) in length, longer than on any other planet.

… Venus … dense atmosphere traps heat in a runaway version of the greenhouse effect that warms Earth. As a result, temperatures on Venus reach 870 degrees Fahrenheit (465 degrees Celsius), more than hot enough to melt lead. Probes that scientists have landed there have survived only a few hours before being destroyed.

The atmosphere is heavier than that of any other planet, leading to a surface pressure 90 times that of Earth

The Venusian year — the time it takes to orbit the sun — is about 225 Earth-days long. Normally, that would mean that days on Venus would be longer than years. However, because of Venus’ curious retrograde rotation, the time from one sunrise to the next is only about 117 Earth-days long from June 5, 2012, when the planet transited in front of the sun for the last time until the year 2117.

The very top layer of Venus’ clouds zip around the planet every four Earth-days, propelled by hurricane-force winds traveling roughly 224 mph (360 kph). This super-rotation of the planet’s atmosphere, some 60 times faster than Venus itself rotates, may be one of Venus’ biggest mysteries. The winds at the planet’s surface are much slower, estimated to be just a few miles per hour."

All I can say,

The earth is unique in the solar system. And science seems to be proving that
Venus isn’t like earth. AND never was , (according to science)
God put us HERE , NOT on Venus . But understanding God is above science’s pay grade.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

LeafByNiggle:

It is all the more significant then that humans brought about so much change in those last two seconds.

This assumes the point under contention: is man responsible for the modest temperature changes we have observed? Given that the warming is the result of a 1-2% change in the absorption of sunlight, a change that could be caused by perturbing any number of climate variables, concluding that it was caused by CO2 is more a leap of faith than a scientific certainty.

Please cite which scientists are saying exactly that.

 

[Ender]

Please cite which scientists are saying exactly that.

Exactly what? That all that is required to cause the warming of the 20th century is a 1-2% change in the absorption of sunlight?

 

[steve-b]

Ender:

LeafByNiggle:

It is all the more significant then that humans brought about so much change in those last two seconds.

This assumes the point under contention: is man responsible for the modest temperature changes we have observed? Given that the warming is the result of a 1-2% change in the absorption of sunlight, a change that could be caused by perturbing any number of climate variables, concluding that it was caused by CO2 is more a leap of faith than a scientific certainty.

Please cite which scientists are saying exactly that.

It appears, Science has many POV . Multiple global ice ages ergo multiple global warmings, ALL apparently before anyone was on the planet. See this post

so I gotta ask, Is that true?

AND​

NASA says the universe is 13.7 Billion years old +/- 1% .

+/- 1% ?

just thinking out loud, I gotta ask, I’d like to see the evidence for such a precise number.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

LeafByNiggle:

Please cite which scientists are saying exactly that.

Exactly what? That all that is required to cause the warming of the 20th century is a 1-2% change in the absorption of sunlight?

No, exactly what you said. All of the implications you drew, including the conclusion that attributing the change to CO2 is just a leap of faith. Cite which scientists are saying that.

 

[prayerrider]

Rev. 8. Wormwood.
The Earth wasn’t made to last forever. Climate change or no, it’s all God’s providence.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

LeafByNiggle:

Ender:

LeafByNiggle:

It is all the more significant then that humans brought about so much change in those last two seconds.

This assumes the point under contention: is man responsible for the modest temperature changes we have observed? Given that the warming is the result of a 1-2% change in the absorption of sunlight, a change that could be caused by perturbing any number of climate variables, concluding that it was caused by CO2 is more a leap of faith than a scientific certainty.

Please cite which scientists are saying exactly that.

It appears, Science has many POV . Multiple global ice ages ergo multiple global warmings, ALL apparently before anyone was on the planet. See this post

so I gotta ask, Is that true?

AND​

NASA says the universe is 13.7 Billion years old +/- 1% .

+/- 1% ?

just thinking out loud, I gotta ask, I’d like to see the evidence for such a precise number.

I believe such evidence is available to those who are willing to research it.

As for your first observation about previous ice ages, so what?

 

[steve-b]

steve-b:

LeafByNiggle:

Ender:

LeafByNiggle:

It is all the more significant then that humans brought about so much change in those last two seconds.

This assumes the point under contention: is man responsible for the modest temperature changes we have observed? Given that the warming is the result of a 1-2% change in the absorption of sunlight, a change that could be caused by perturbing any number of climate variables, concluding that it was caused by CO2 is more a leap of faith than a scientific certainty.

Please cite which scientists are saying exactly that.

It appears, Science has many POV . Multiple global ice ages ergo multiple global warmings, ALL apparently before anyone was on the planet. See this post

so I gotta ask, Is that true?

AND​

NASA says the universe is 13.7 Billion years old +/- 1% .

+/- 1% ?

just thinking out loud, I gotta ask, I’d like to see the evidence for such a precise number.

I believe such evidence is available to those who are willing to research it.

As for your first observation about previous ice ages, so what?

IOW YOU have no answers ?

As for previous ice ages and global warmings before people were even here, (according to science) it means whether we are here or not, ice ages and global warmings, will occur. IOW we don’t control it.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

LeafByNiggle:

steve-b:

LeafByNiggle:

Ender:

LeafByNiggle:

It is all the more significant then that humans brought about so much change in those last two seconds.

This assumes the point under contention: is man responsible for the modest temperature changes we have observed? Given that the warming is the result of a 1-2% change in the absorption of sunlight, a change that could be caused by perturbing any number of climate variables, concluding that it was caused by CO2 is more a leap of faith than a scientific certainty.

Please cite which scientists are saying exactly that.

It appears, Science has many POV . Multiple global ice ages ergo multiple global warmings, ALL apparently before anyone was on the planet. See this post

so I gotta ask, Is that true?

AND​

NASA says the universe is 13.7 Billion years old +/- 1% .

+/- 1% ?

just thinking out loud, I gotta ask, I’d like to see the evidence for such a precise number.

I believe such evidence is available to those who are willing to research it.

As for your first observation about previous ice ages, so what?

IOW YOU have no answers ?

You didn’t ask a question. But no, I don’t know exactly how scientists came to the 13.7 billion year estimate, but I have no reason to doubt that if I wanted to find out, I could.

As for previous ice ages and global warmings before people were even here, (according to science) it means whether we are here or not, ice ages and global warmings, will occur. IOW we don’t control it.

That previous warmings had nothing to do with man does not mean this warming has nothing to do with man.

 

[steve-b]

steve-b:

LeafByNiggle:

steve-b:

LeafByNiggle:

Ender:

LeafByNiggle:

It is all the more significant then that humans brought about so much change in those last two seconds.

This assumes the point under contention: is man responsible for the modest temperature changes we have observed? Given that the warming is the result of a 1-2% change in the absorption of sunlight, a change that could be caused by perturbing any number of climate variables, concluding that it was caused by CO2 is more a leap of faith than a scientific certainty.

Please cite which scientists are saying exactly that.

It appears, Science has many POV . Multiple global ice ages ergo multiple global warmings, ALL apparently before anyone was on the planet. See this post

so I gotta ask, Is that true?

AND​

NASA says the universe is 13.7 Billion years old +/- 1% .

+/- 1% ?

just thinking out loud, I gotta ask, I’d like to see the evidence for such a precise number.

I believe such evidence is available to those who are willing to research it.

As for your first observation about previous ice ages, so what?

IOW YOU have no answers ?

You didn’t ask a question.

As for previous ice ages and global warmings before people were even here, (according to science) it means whether we are here or not, ice ages and global warmings, will occur. IOW we don’t control it.

That previous warmings had nothing to do with man does not mean this warming has nothing to do with man.

My post presumes the question

where is the evidence properly referenced?

 

[Theo520]

This is a good read on the problem

Why we do nothing to prepare for climate change - Fabius Maximus website

 

[LeafByNiggle]

LeafByNiggle:

steve-b:

LeafByNiggle:

steve-b:

LeafByNiggle:

Ender:

LeafByNiggle:

It is all the more significant then that humans brought about so much change in those last two seconds.

This assumes the point under contention: is man responsible for the modest temperature changes we have observed? Given that the warming is the result of a 1-2% change in the absorption of sunlight, a change that could be caused by perturbing any number of climate variables, concluding that it was caused by CO2 is more a leap of faith than a scientific certainty.

Please cite which scientists are saying exactly that.

It appears, Science has many POV . Multiple global ice ages ergo multiple global warmings, ALL apparently before anyone was on the planet. See this post

so I gotta ask, Is that true?

AND​

NASA says the universe is 13.7 Billion years old +/- 1% .

+/- 1% ?

just thinking out loud, I gotta ask, I’d like to see the evidence for such a precise number.

I believe such evidence is available to those who are willing to research it.

As for your first observation about previous ice ages, so what?

IOW YOU have no answers ?

You didn’t ask a question.

As for previous ice ages and global warmings before people were even here, (according to science) it means whether we are here or not, ice ages and global warmings, will occur. IOW we don’t control it.

That previous warmings had nothing to do with man does not mean this warming has nothing to do with man.

My post presumes the question

where is the evidence properly referenced?

That’s easy. In academic journals.

 

[goout]

As for previous ice ages and global warmings before people were even here, (according to science) it means whether we are here or not, ice ages and global warmings, will occur. IOW we don’t control it.

This is the elephant in the room that everyone pretends not to notice.

 

[edwest211]

A very bad idea. I am aware of the newer designs and it’s still a bad idea. Solar, wind and geothermal. Safe, clean, renewable.

 

[steve-b]

My post presumes the question

where is the evidence properly referenced?

LeafByNiggle:

That’s easy. In academic journals.

OK

what journals? Reference(s) please, properly referenced

 

[steve-b]

steve-b:

As for previous ice ages and global warmings before people were even here, (according to science) it means whether we are here or not, ice ages and global warmings, will occur. IOW we don’t control it.

This is the elephant in the room that everyone pretends not to notice.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

steve-b:

My post presumes the question

where is the evidence properly referenced?

LeafByNiggle:

That’s easy. In academic journals.

OK

what journals? Reference(s) please, properly referenced

Science journals. I’m not going to do all your research for you. But I will make two suggestions:

1. Start with the NASA website where this data is presented and see if they reference any research.
2. Go to your local public library and ask to see the reference librarian. Their job is to help people find information, and they will go to great lengths to help you find the information you need.