It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
I'm sure the majority (but not all) of my IPCC colleagues cringe when I say this, but I see neither the developing catastrophe nor the smoking gun proving that human activity is to blame for most of the warming we see. Rather, I see a reliance on climate models (useful but never "proof") and the coincidence that changes in carbon dioxide and global temperatures have loose similarity over time.
There is no meaningful correlation between CO2 levels and Earth's temperature over this [geologic] time frame. In fact, when CO2 levels were over ten times higher than they are now, about 450 million years ago, the planet was in the depths of the absolute coldest period in the last half billion years. On the basis of this evidence, how could anyone still believe that the recent relatively small increase in CO2 levels would be the major cause of the past century's modest warming?
global warming since 1900 could well have happened without any effect of CO2. If the cycles continue as in the past, the current warm cycle should end soon and global temperatures should cool slightly until about 2035
There is evidence of global warming. ... But warming does not confirm that carbon dioxide is causing it. Climate is always warming or cooling. There are natural variability theories of warming. To support the argument that carbon dioxide is causing it, the evidence would have to distinguish between human-caused and natural warming. This has not been done.
We are quite confident (1) that global mean temperature is about 0.5 °C higher than it was a century ago; (2) that atmospheric levels of CO2 have risen over the past two centuries; and (3) that CO2 is a greenhouse gas whose increase is likely to warm the earth (one of many, the most important being water vapor and clouds). But – and I cannot stress this enough – we are not in a position to confidently attribute past climate change to CO2 or to forecast what the climate will be in the future. [T]here has been no question whatsoever that CO2 is an infrared absorber (i.e., a greenhouse gas – albeit a minor one), and its increase should theoretically contribute to warming. Indeed, if all else were kept equal, the increase in CO2 should have led to somewhat more warming than has been observed.
Originally posted by AmosGraber
reply to post by broli
I hate to repost, but maybe you didn't read my above statements, about how the media uses the fear and paranoia to get people to accept that everything is just hunky doory. So let me re-reply to the idea you typed:
It would be my assessment too many lay people make their presumptuous conclusions while lying on their couches watching their favorite 24/7 yellow news commentator telling them human caused global climate change is some kind of paranoia fantasy promoted to only raise their taxes (their favorite tactic), making them give up their combustion engine cars, while forcing them to do things that would rob them from all that leisure time typing on a computer or lying on a couch staring at the television set.
So, I ask you, who are YOU to say that your actions, and the actions of humanity at large, do not alter and change the environment (and CLIMATE) that we live in??
Originally posted by debz325
I don't care if it is manmade or not just don't ask me to conserve energy. It is my right as an American citizen to be an energy hog, I want all my modern conveniences and I want it cheap!
Originally posted by Namaste1001
Just because it's now being taught does not prove it to be fact.
Please then explain how the other planets in our solar system are also heating up. Are they going to try and pin that on us as well and in the process tax us even further?
Originally posted by radarloveguy
Hey AmosGraber ,
please answer Namaste1001
...as far as I know , the other planets in our solar system don't
have "greenhouse gas" emission thingies ..
So how come they are heating up ?
Originally posted by misinformational
I've taken the courtesy of compiling a few quotes from some prominent and renowned scientists (albeit most aren't federally funded): .
Originally posted by Astyanax
To the OP: you're wasting your time. This lot won't ever change what we'll laughingly call their minds, because that means they've got to give up on their precious energy-gourmandizing 'lifestyles'. They've already lost the argument, not just with science but with Nature itself.