Bombshell Claim: Scientists Find "Man-made Climate Change Doesn't Exist In Practice"

Gordon_R said:
Breaking cover.

Oh, great:
1. The sunspot cycle theory of climate change. A paper from 1997!
2. If you can't blame the earth's geomagnetic reversal, then blame the sun's magnetic field!

Back to lurking.
Click to expand...
1) 1997 isn't that long ago. Or do you believe the earth is a significantly different place today than it was back then. Enough to discredit any scientific findings of that time?
2) yeah sure budy. The sun doesn't affect our weather and climate. That's just an unproven theory.
What you list there isn't mutually exclusive. Everything has an impact.
 
pinball wizard said:
Your point? The vast body of everything is founded on what Newton did in 1687.
Click to expand...

False analogy.
1. A lot of Newton's theories have been repeatedly tested and confirmed.
2. Some of Newton's theories on the particle nature of light are flat out wrong.
3. Einstein pushed out the bounds of Newton's theories, leading to Relativity Theory.
4. Newton knew nothing about electricity, magnetism, particle physics, etc.

rietrot said:
1) 1997 isn't that long ago. Or do you believe the earth is a significantly different place today than it was back then. Enough to discredit any scientific findings of that time?
2) yeah sure budy. The sun doesn't affect our weather and climate. That's just an unproven theory.
What you list there isn't mutually exclusive. Everything has an impact.
Click to expand...

Ditto. What I just said above.

Gingerbeardman said:
Wait. Are you... are you denying that the Sun's activity influences the Earth?
Click to expand...

Another false dichotomy. One theory does not undermine another.
 
Cius said:
The whole denying man made climate change this is like watching a village of idiots arguing. People pushed against a tree until it fell over causing havoc and damage. Some then say we should not be pushing against tree's as they may fall over. Then the idiots start saying how do we know it was us pushing it that caused the tree to fall. Tree's sometimes fall over without people being around. Lets blame the wind.

And as always: https://xkcd.com/1732/
Please just look at the slope of the line right at the end as compared to any other time in human history.
Click to expand...

That is intellectually dishonest.
The graph starts at 20000 BCE. Which is a tiny blip on the planet's climate history. For example the place where the XKCD graph starts is within the coolest part of 65 million years. Limiting the scale to 20000 years ignores events like the
Paleocene–Eocene Thermal Maximum, (which we all know was caused by SUVs and coal power stations).


65_Myr_Climate_Change.png


Even 65 million years is a blip on the radar for the earth's history.

Geologic_Clock_with_events_and_periods.svg


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Earth
 
flippakitten said:
Well, it's really just the two anti vaxxers that believe climate change is only caused by nature.

using nothing but a bad article and a 5 page pdf where 4 of 5 cited sources are from the same authors...
Click to expand...
If you managed to read the first paragraph of the bad article, you would realise the claim isn't that climate change is caused by only nature.
 
Gordon_R said:
False analogy.
Click to expand...

No. It's a perfectly valid analogy that recognises and allows for the fact that the scientific landscape is constantly changing as new theories are proven or disproven and new facts come to light. Doggedly sticking to what you think you know is not necessarily correct.
 
konfab said:
That is intellectually dishonest.
The graph starts at 20000 BCE. Which is a tiny blip on the planet's climate history. For example the place where the XKCD graph starts is within the coolest part of 65 million years. Limiting the scale to 20000 years ignores events like the
Paleocene–Eocene Thermal Maximum, (which we all know was caused by SUVs and coal power stations).


Even 65 million years is a blip on the radar for the earth's history.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Earth
Click to expand...


Hmm, shifting the goalposts by a few billion years!

What is the meaning behind the John Maynard Keynes quote "In the long run we are all dead"
Click to expand...
https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-m...-Keynes-quote-In-the-long-run-we-are-all-dead

rietrot said:
If you managed to read the first paragraph of the bad article, you would realise the claim isn't that climate change is caused by only nature.
Click to expand...

If you read the title of this thread, that's exactly what it implies!
Bombshell Claim: Scientists Find "Man-made Climate Change Doesn't Exist In Practice"
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
konfab said:
That is intellectually dishonest.
The graph starts at 20000 BCE. Which is a tiny blip on the planet's climate history. For example the place where the XKCD graph starts is within the coolest part of 65 million years. Limiting the scale to 20000 years ignores events like the
Paleocene–Eocene Thermal Maximum, (which we all know was caused by SUVs and coal power stations).


65_Myr_Climate_Change.png


Even 65 million years is a blip on the radar for the earth's history.

Geologic_Clock_with_events_and_periods.svg


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Earth
Click to expand...
The thing with that graph that confuse some people is the amount of data we have today vs a thousand years ago. If we didn't just plot the average for a long periods in the past the graph would probably jump around throughout not just at the end.
 
konfab said:
So the only valid timescale to look at is the one that validates your hypothesis?



Ironic that you post a quote by Keynes, who popularised the concept of unlimited government deficit spending. You know taking resources from the future and using them now?
Click to expand...

Irony! That's exactly what climate denialism involves. Burning coal now, and leaving the mess for the next generation...
 
Bryn said:
I stopped at this point:

zerohedge.png


Can we please avoid such news sources.
Click to expand...
Can we please avoid newsgaurd as they seem to be bias. Another one that needs other people to help him to think.
 
konfab said:
That is intellectually dishonest.
The graph starts at 20000 BCE. Which is a tiny blip on the planet's climate history. For example the place where the XKCD graph starts is within the coolest part of 65 million years. Limiting the scale to 20000 years ignores events like the
Paleocene–Eocene Thermal Maximum, (which we all know was caused by SUVs and coal power stations).
Click to expand...
20 000 years of stability, the whole point of that graph was to show just how drastic the recent change is compared to natural cycles. Look at the slope of the graph for 20K years vs the last 100. As always you people never answer that.

Believe what you want. Climate change is mostly man made and is mostly the result of what we are doing to the atmosphere. The majority of the world's scientists agree with me.
 
rietrot said:
Can we please avoid newsgaurd as they seem to be bias. Another one that needs other people to help him to think.
Click to expand...
It's not that NewsGuard is biased, but that right wing news sites tend to be propaganda machines.
 
Bryn said:
It's not that NewsGuard is biased, but that right wing news sites tend to be propaganda machines.
Click to expand...
Saying Newsguard is not biased is like saying you prefer to get your impartial political talking points straight from the DNC.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X