It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

What percentage is Man responsible for Climate Change?

page: 1
5
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 20 2016 @ 12:18 PM
link   
I don't ask this as a snarky way to antagonize anyone, I just don't quite see how we can be 100% sure of the cause without understanding all aspects of this crisis. How much of a factor is the Sun in climate Change? Any at all? Do natural cycles like El nino and La nina have a large, small, or no effect on the global climate? Is man 70% responsible, 50%? It's kind of important to know that answer as it ties directly to what kind of ability we might have to mitigate the effects.

Regardless of what it feels like at home, the global data seems to show warming. If a cooling trend were to start, I'm sure it would take years to be acknowledged, so that's not something that even needs to be discussed at this point. But this has been studied for decades now, and with all the science, all the people, and all the effort put into this topic, it just seems like we should have some way to model what's happening now, and make good predictions as is done with weather forecasting now.




posted on May, 20 2016 @ 12:26 PM
link   
IMO, 0%

the whole thing is 100% natural.




posted on May, 20 2016 @ 12:27 PM
link   
I agree with you it is super complicated.
I think the Sun is much more responsible for
many natural occurrences than we give it credit for.
My view is this and has been for quite sometime;
Man made global warming is a real thing to what extent
industry is responsible is debatable. This alleged record
heat is about to slam head long into a slumbering cooling Sun.
Cool Sun and a Warm Earth sounds to me like the recipe for
big storms.
Here's the Royal Astronomical Societies take on
the Sun's Nap happening right now
www.sciencedaily.com...

edit on 20-5-2016 by UnderKingsPeak because: sp



posted on May, 20 2016 @ 12:29 PM
link   
a reply to: network dude

I don't think any one knows at the moment, just as we can't say with 100% certainty that we are causing any climate change.

We can only look at the climate changing and come with some guesstimate as to how much we are causing.

I think the "speed" of climate change is the biggest evidence to human cause if you ask me, we are accelerating the natural cycle.



posted on May, 20 2016 @ 12:30 PM
link   
a reply to: UnderKingsPeak

See, that's kind of what I mean, "Solar activity predicted to fall 60% in 2030s, to 'mini ice age' levels: Sun driven by double dynamo". It's almost as if the sun played a big part in the ice age, so in my tiny mind, I would think it played some part in the warming as well. Thanks for that link.



posted on May, 20 2016 @ 12:34 PM
link   
a reply to: Mianeye

But knowing the number would offer us an answer as to if we even have a chance at making real changes to mitigate any of this. (I know, go green and quit burning fossil fuels, but realistically that's not an option until we have an alternative)

If our input is only 10-20%, and the rest is due to natural things like the sun, then we have no chance at all to do much. I just think finding that (and not going to jail for asking the question) is pretty important.



posted on May, 20 2016 @ 12:37 PM
link   
a reply to: network dude

Rather than getting caught up in disputes about climate change, we need to get open-eyed and real about how to best survive and thrive as a species. yes, this includes understanding our impact on these changes, but also to get real about the manipulations of science for one parties gain over another.

Whether there is some way to accurately measure the effect, human activities have altered the climate of Earth. it is absolutely indisputable that we have polluted the oceans, rivers, aquifers and the atmosphere. Can we not agree that human beings need to stop making such a mess? We can have strong economies, comfortable living conditions, and lots of entertaining technologies, AND be kind to the planet upon which we and our descendants must live. But it requires shifting the way we extract energy, produce food, and manufacture goods.

We need to wake up to the fact that the monolithic system that currently operates world economies, exploits everyone and everything all for the benefit of a very few elite individuals. As long as the general population is fat dumb and addicted to media, drugs, food, and fear, the planet will continue to be driven to destruction.

I believe it is possible to change, to evolve as a civilization. We are almost out of time. It will be hard, but not impossible. It could be beautiful, creative, and inclusive. This is not something we should wait for the GOVERNMENT to do, nor expect some benevolent corporation to do. Grassroots, in neighborhoods and towns we can plant more gardens, build local renewable power generation (lots of technology not yet being used to full potential), get out of cars and onto bikes, get off our @sses, off our electronics, and talk to each other - face to face. I pray that we and our immediate children are the ones to do it.
edit on 20-5-2016 by SeaYote because: fat fingers and adding input



posted on May, 20 2016 @ 12:45 PM
link   
a reply to: network dude

Exactly, it would be of most importance to know how much we are causing, to make a successful plan or to just let nature do what nature does and follow a long.

But, i think logic has to play a big part, not just numbers, i think it's kind of logic that we are partly fault at climate change, if you change the landscape you change the climate, maybe just locally but means a lot when there are many local areas, if you pollute it's the same thing.

We are setting our footprints everywhere, thereby changing our environment.


edit on 20-5-2016 by Mianeye because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 20 2016 @ 12:46 PM
link   
a reply to: SeaYote

Absolutely. I fully agree that we need to stop polluting, find alternative fuels, and find a way to deal with all the waste we have created, and understand what we will do with the new waste in the future.

Having said that, the way to get people on board with something as noble as that isn't to hit them over the head with a club and tax them. I'm not saying anyone is lying, but misrepresenting the facts is a likely way to put it. If we don't know how much we are responsible for, we don't know what steps to take that would make the most impact. I think we could find ways to pollute less if there wasn't a huge (political) war going on over the scientific topic. If we can't do anything drastic right now, let's move the discussion to ways to make less waste.

Find a way to promote recycling in all areas. It's a joke where I live. You have to go way out of your way to recycle anything.



posted on May, 20 2016 @ 12:57 PM
link   
a reply to: network dude

Mankind should be prepared to adapt to changes in the environment just as we always have. Nature is going to be nature and we are just along for the ride.



posted on May, 20 2016 @ 01:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: UnderKingsPeak

See, that's kind of what I mean, "Solar activity predicted to fall 60% in 2030s, to 'mini ice age' levels: Sun driven by double dynamo". It's almost as if the sun played a big part in the ice age, so in my tiny mind, I would think it played some part in the warming as well. Thanks for that link.


Some aspects of climate change cannot be mitigated certainly, it is more a matter of adapting our behaviour in order to ensure that we, as a species, can continue to adapt to climate change without further or increased environmental degradation. Reducing air emissions is highly unlikelyto prevent an axis tilt, or prevent the Inter-Tropical Convergence Zone from moving, but it will improve the overall health of the biosphere, which is good for all it's inhabitants, including us. More effective water management systems, control of the release of effluents both biological and chemical are all essential factors in reducing the harm that we are doing to fragile ecosystems on which we depend for an effective food chain. Over exploitation of ground water resources for irrigation purposes is currently a huge danger in terms of food security, particularly in the Mid-West US, and now that Californian are harvesting rain, there is even less likelihood of those major acquifers being sustainable in the long term.

The desertification that followed the end of the last sub-pluvial, when the ITCZ moved back to the southern hemisphere should have, as it had with previous sub-pluvial events, been short lived, leading to at least a partial recovery. The combination of deforestation and over-grazing of domestication livestock is believed to be a primary factor in the failure to recover, and the reason why more and more land is becoming dessicated.


Due to drought and desertification each year 12 million hectares are lost (23 hectares/minute!), where 20 million tons of grain could have been grown.


www.un.org...

Climate change may be caused, in part by our activity, it could be the planet's way of shrugging us off and have nothing whatsoever to do with us, but the degradation of our environment, of the planet's biosphere, pretty much we can identify with a slap bang in our faces the harm that we have done, and continue to do, and we can do a great deal to change that which in turn will help us to adapt to climatic and environmental changes in general.



posted on May, 20 2016 @ 01:11 PM
link   
0.000001%



posted on May, 20 2016 @ 01:14 PM
link   


thing is 100% natural.
a reply to: xuenchen so are human beings



posted on May, 20 2016 @ 01:16 PM
link   
a reply to: Metallicus

And that is what the carbon tax should be spent on, the adaption, it ain't free.

Denmark has in the latest years spent tons of money to upgrade sewers around the country, the reason for that is we are getting a lot more of torrential rain in the summer months with huge flooding as a result.

We are slowly adapting, together with improvement on various green energy and cleaner farming/ industry.



posted on May, 20 2016 @ 01:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: UnderKingsPeak

See, that's kind of what I mean, "Solar activity predicted to fall 60% in 2030s, to 'mini ice age' levels: Sun driven by double dynamo". It's almost as if the sun played a big part in the ice age, so in my tiny mind, I would think it played some part in the warming as well. Thanks for that link.


Dude you just cannot go around saying things like that. There is no money in it. What about the thousands of climate scientists whose jobs you are threatening with such outrageous ideas. Please



posted on May, 20 2016 @ 01:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: woodwardjnr



thing is 100% natural.
a reply to: xuenchen so are human beings



Obviously I'm no expert, but we do have an effect on our planets environment, when we cut down the rain forests, the lungs of the planet, fished most of the fish out of the sea and placed many species on the verge of extinction.

I definitely be more concerned if I had kids or grandchildren
edit on 20-5-2016 by woodwardjnr because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 20 2016 @ 01:19 PM
link   
a reply to: network dude

0%
The earth has always been in a state of climate change,hence the ice age and Jurassic age. Temperatures fluctuate over time and will continue to do so as it has since the earth existed, I would be worried about it if the temperatures weren't fluctuating because that would not follow the pattern of weather and temperature that have been going on for billions of years.

IMO climate change and global warming are clever ways to get people distracted from the issues that actually matter. We really don't have anything to worry about regarding global warming and climate change,unless we start dropping nuclear weapons all around the earth the earth should be around for thousands possibly millions more years.



posted on May, 20 2016 @ 01:31 PM
link   
a reply to: network dude

Well that depends on who you ask (and who finances the people you ask).

In my opinion, we do have SOME contribution to climate change, but at the same time I also think it's not enough to be of significant nature.

The earth is its own recycling machine, taking what we put in the air and distributing it accordingly. The pollution we put in the air doesn't stay there forever, actually it's pretty short lived.

One thing I do know, is that none of the doom-gloomers of climate change ever consider the benefits of a warmer earth. It actually won't be so bad, and given the fact that modern man has the ability to adapt and the benefit of modern technology, I think we will be just fine. Life tends to thrive in warmer environments.



posted on May, 20 2016 @ 01:37 PM
link   
a reply to: network dude

Climate or climate change?

If climate, the sun would be the biggest factor but since the sun isn't and hasn't done anything differently in a long, long time, likewise volcanic activity etc... for change man is the largest factor.



posted on May, 20 2016 @ 01:38 PM
link   
When was the climate not changing? Man thinks far too highly of himself. Compared to Mother Nature, we are insignificant.



new topics

top topics



 
5
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join