Of course. It was predicted in 1896 by Nobel winner Svante Arrhenius.
This simple article by NASA introduces Arrhenius as the first one to predict global warming: ======= https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/features/Arrhenius Svante Arrhenius (1859-1927) by Steve Graham • January 18, 2000
A hundred years ago, Swedish scientist Svante Arrhenius asked the important question “Is the mean temperature of the ground in any way influenced by the presence of the heat-absorbing gases in the atmosphere?” He went on to become the first person to investigate the effect that doubling atmospheric carbon dioxide would have on global climate. The question was debated throughout the early part of the 20th century and is still a main concern of Earth scientists today.
======= So why did Svante Arrhenius predicted it in 1896 Because it is basic physics. Any competent student of physics who had reached the point of understanding basic kinetic theory of gases and statistical mechanics (so, basically, a second-semester freshman), should think "Duh."
This is why in a nutshell...
1. In physics, molecules consist of atoms with electrical bonds between the atoms that keep these atoms together. 2. If a molecule has only 2 atoms, then there is only one bond between those two atoms. 3. However, if a molecule has more than 2 atoms, then there are at least 2 bonds. 4. Now, this is the first thing that is important: These bonds are like rubber bands and can store energy. 5. So, the larger a molecule is, then the more bonds it will have and the more energy it can store. 6, Stored energy can be released and that causes motion. For instance, think of a slingshot. When you pull back on the rubber band in the slingshot you are putting energy into that rubber band which stores it. When you let go, the pebble in the middle is suddenly flung at high speed because the rubberband stored released its energy transferring it to the pebble. The pebble now is moving and we say it has kinetic energy (the energy of motion). 7. So, think of all these molecules with extra bonds as having all this extra energy that can cause other molecules to move faster when they collide. 8. So, as these molecules are bouncing around, they are exchanging energy with each other, but because the larger molecules can store more energy, they can release more energy so, when they bounce into smaller molecules, those smaller molecules are more likely to move faster. 9. Now, the average speed of molecules in a gas is related to the average kinetic energy of the molecules. In fact, if you double the average speed, then the average kinetic energy will go up by 4 (=2^2). 10. Now, this is the second important thing: Temperature is directly related to the average kinetic energy of the gas. So, if you can double the average kinetic energy of the gas, then the temperature doubles as well. 11. So, when you put all this together, it says that if you increase the number of larger molecules in the gas, then you will increase the temperature. 12. Remember that the molecular bonds have to store energy. Well, the sun is the major source of energy, so all these extra larger molecules in the air are just absorbing more solar energy and by colliding with other molecules ultimately raises the average kinetic energy of the air and thus its temperature.
That's global warming in a nutshell which can be summarized like this: 1. More large molecules in the air causes more solar energy to be stored in the air which 2. Is passed to all the other molecules in the air due to collisions so 3. The average kinetic energy of the molecules in the air increases and 4. Because temperature is really the same as average kinetic energy, the temperature increases.
Just to finish up... Most of the air is made up of: 1. 2-atom nitrogen, N2 (about 78%) 2. 2-atom oxygen, O2 (about 21%) 3. 1-atom argon, Ar (< 1%) But the rest of the air is made up of larger molecules - molecules with 3 or more atoms. For instance, carbon dioxide, CO2. Water (H2O) too. And many other molecules too. But notice that these are larger molecules so they can store more energy compared to the N2, O2, and Ar. These larger molecules are called greenhouse gases because of their ability to absorb and store more energy and thus raise temperature like a greenhouse.
The problem with global warming is that, since humans started burning coal and the Industrial Revolution began over 200 years ago, we have been dumping a lot of CO2 into the air during all that time, so, as a result, the temperature has gradually been going up in response to the extra CO2. This is what Svante Arrhenius was worried about because he realized that all that burning coal was dumping CO2 into the air and that CO2 would store more energy. That's why he asked the question describe in the NASA article: “Is the mean temperature of the ground in any way influenced by the presence of the heat-absorbing gases in the atmosphere?”
Global warming is very real. I'm not sure how else to put this, but this same ___basic___ physics and chemistry explains why Venus and Mars have the atmospheres that they do - and it explains what is happening now. It's not good. Don't invest in beachfront real estate.
19 February 2019 Svante Arrhenius, the Man Who Foresaw Climate Change Climate change Environment History Physics
www.bbvaopenmind.com/.../ ====== "... Throughout his career, Arrhenius followed this interdisciplinary approach, also becoming interested in different questions and phenomena in fields as diverse as meteorology, climatology and cosmology. One of the problems then in vogue in the scientific community that especially caught his interest was to find the cause of the different glaciations that the planet had gone through throughout its history. Arrhenius wanted to find out if the determining factor for these climatic events could be the concentration of CO2 in the Earth’s atmosphere. John Tyndall had already focused on this, identifying methane, water vapour and CO2 as atmospheric gases that cause the greenhouse effect.
In 1895 Arrhenius wanted to quantify this influence of CO2 on the greenhouse effect, which involved doing endless, complex and tedious calculations by hand—an activity that, apparently, served as a therapy to help him overcome his separation from his first wife. The results he obtained finally came to light in an article published in 1896. In it, Arrhenius concluded that a reduction in the atmospheric CO2 levels to half the then existing ones would result in a drop in the temperature of the planet of between 4 and 5°C, which could lead to a massive cooling like the one that takes place during glaciations.
THE RISKS OF EMISSIONS A CENTURY BEFORE But he also warned that if those same levels increased by 50%, the planet would experience a warming of between 5 and 6°C, which, as Arrhenius pointed out, meant, among other things, that Scandinavia would enjoy a more benign and pleasant climate. In addition, the article also identified human industrial activity as the main source of new CO2 into the atmosphere. Although he estimated that, at the rate of emissions at that moment, this concentration would take about 3,000 years to reach, we now know that this forecast was very moderate and optimistic.
Arrhenius warned of the risks of the growing CO2 emissions by man and the consequent climate change, almost a century before the world decided to fight global warming. Despite all its serious implications, his study was largely ignored at the time. It was not until the 1970s, when the greenhouse effect began to emerge as a real and imminent concern, that the work of the Swedish scientist was given the value that it deserved. ..." ======
The above except has this: " The results he obtained finally came to light in an article published in 1896."
This is the article hyperlinked to that sentence. It is a copy of Arrhenius's paper:
On the Influence of Carbonic Acid in the Air upon the Temperature of the Ground Svante Arrhenius Philosophical Magazine and Journal of Science Series 5, Volume 41, April 1896, pages 237-276.
This deserves best answer. A concise explanation of the physics of climate change which is also the title of a recent book by Lawrence Krauss (do yourself a favour) and includes a lot of this information.
I believe that our climate changes over time. It has done that for as far back as we can determine.
The question that separates people or triggers them is: is current climate change caused by the activities of our species and would it revert to a pre-existing state if we eliminate our activities?
For me, the answer to the second question is unknown.
No. However, certain concerns that are brought up by the "belief" do warrant investigation. Global warming was debunked back in the mid 90's (I know because I was a little kid at the time and still remember the broadcast...) There is also the fact that all of human civilization only contributes 1%, 2% if you want to push it, of the total carbon on the planet, the other 99% is produced by the planet itself, which has been known and proven for decades. Also, we are carbon based lifeforms, meaning that we actually need the carbon to survive. Plants absorb the carbon in the air and then separate the carbon from the oxygen and other elements spew out breathable air for us. Plants actually grow faster and bigger with more carbon, not less. We humans have next to no effect on the weather, which has been proven to be driven mainly by the Sun. Without it, we grow cold and die, but there would be very infrequent, mild weather patterns still due to other factors. There is no such thing as a "weather scientist", there are however meteorologists and climatologist, and most of them disagree with climate change. That is what climate does, it changes, which is due to many, many factors other than us. The continents drift, volcanoes erupt, meteors impact the Earth, etc., all of which change the geology of the Earth which in turn changes the air currents and temperatures of the surrounding areas which changes the weather. The seasons change due to the tilt of the Earth and its position relative to the Sun. In mid January, the Earth is closest to the Sun, but the Northern Hemisphere is tilted away from the Sun, so it's the same amount of light, but covering a much larger/spread out area, thus Winter occurs in the Northern Hemisphere while Summer occurs in the Southern Hemisphere. Take a meteorology or an astronomy, not astrology, course and learn it for yourselves. Before anyone argues with me, if you can call it that, please note that I'm an mechanical engineer, meaning that I not only deal in hard science, but the practical application of it to solve problems in the real, not political, world. I just specialize in mechanics, but my skills can be applied to a multitude of fields. Climate change came about as a talking point to gain funding for companies and research from governments, as in political nut jobs with absolutely no experience in science. Take away their power to fund or defund scientific research, and you'll see that research return to hard science and take leaps and bounds. Also, scientific "consensus" once said that the world was flat, food for thought...
Almost everything you just wrote is wrong. Global warming wasn't debunked. You are in a pretty severe state of denial. In fact, the opposite of what you are saying has been proven and contrary to what you wrote, most climatologists accept that human activity, namely burning fossil fuels and releasing CO2 among other factors is the main contributor to the changes in temperature we are currently experiencing. A mechanical engineer is not a climatologist. The evidence is against you. Wake up to yourself and stop watching fox news.
@OfDeath First, Mr. Private Profile, you are assuming that I am wrong, not offering any evidence to refute me. Second, I actually know how to read and interpret the data that is used, can you? What do you do? What is your training? You have offered nothing to give yourself credibility, and you are assuming that I watch Fox News, even though you do not know me, what I watch, my methods, my experiences, my tastes, nor preferences. Also, what do you watch? Where do you get your information? What research or experiments have you done? Third, the Earth goes throughs periods of heating up and cooling off, which you would know if you actually knew any science. There is this thing called the Historical Record, you might want to brush up on it before your next response. Historical data has shown that what is happening is normal and on schedule. Also, the data that supports your claims was collected back in the 70s & 80s if I recall correctly and was later admitted, by the people who gathered that data, to be horribly flawed. Check your facts! Fourth, which climatologist? Who in the scientific community, not the corporations mind you, actually support this? Fifth, "Wake up to yourself and stop watching fox news," is bad grammar, it should be written as, "Wake yourself up and stop watching Fox New," Fox News is the name, it should be capitalized. Learn how to read and write English properly!
@OfDeath Sixth, mechanical engineering can be applied to just about anything, which you would know if you knew anything about the field. Just to a few of my skills: Thermodynamics, Fluid Mechanics and Fluid Dynamics, Dynamics, Vibrations, Machine Design, Physics, Mathematics, Materials Science, Heat Transfer, and Coding. That is by no means and exhaustive list. I can tell you how the weather affects things, not just speculate on it. Also, who do you think designs the machines that climatologist and meteorologists use to collect data? The mechanical engineers! They tell us what they want to measure/examine, and the constraints that go with them and we design the machines, fabricate them and program (write the code for) them, test them, redesign and recode as needed, and ultimately make their equipment for them... and everyone else. Show some respect for the people who not only solve problems through science, but basically design everything you use in your life! What was the last thing you designed and actually worked? Seventh, Meteorology is the short-term study of weather events, typically up to a few weeks, whereas Climatology is the long-term study of those events. Basically, both study weather in the sense that they predict what happens to a certain degree of accuracy and past events to determine trends and patterns. You clearly have not looked at what a climatologist actually is or does. Use your brain, not your tongue!
@OfDeath Before you act all high and mighty, let me remind you (and everyone else for that matter) that Xper Levels are a measure of your shared content on this site, so being a "master" essentially means you have no life or that you have been here way too long, either way you have shared way too much. Also, your MHO% (Most Helpful Opinion) is relatively low...
Also, I will not respond anymore to you, or anyone who thinks that they know better without making an actual argument with evidence to back up said argument. You are not worth my, nor anyone else’s, time.
Ok. Listen to me you condescending ignoramus, this is not a place where grammatical accuracy is expected of anyone and for your information "wake up to yourself" is a colloquially accepted way of expressing the desire for one to come to their senses. You'll find book titles using that exact word arrangement. This is not a 19th century English grammar school. Your own incorrect use of capital letters all through your last response would be fun to go over and expose your immediate and embarrassing hypocrisy but I won't do that, because it is irrelevant to the topic at hand.
Reeling off a list of things you are allegedly capable of as part and parcel of your profession, does not add veracity to your erroneous opinions. Nor does questioning my own profession, my participation in the development of scientific instruments or whether or not I know the difference between climatology and meteorology (which I do). If you knew what I did, you would probably think twice about challenging my ability to understand scientific data. What you have done is state known facts which are not relevant to anthropogenic climate change and then imply that information refutes the notion that human activity is causing the measurable rise in average temperature we are currently observing. Obviously humans are not responsible for all the carbon on earth considering there are billions upon billions of tons of it and the overwhelming majority of that is under the ground. The earth also does experience climate cycles but despite what you believe, the plantet was not due for the temperature increase it has experienced over the last 120 years. Orbital patterns, volcanic activity and solar luminosity have not been sufficient to trigger the increase in temperature earth is currently experiencing. All indications point to human activity as being the overwhelmingly most likely cause for that.
The fact you have not mentioned is that the level of CO2 in the atmosphere has almost doubled since 1750 and close to 100% of that extra CO2 is a direct result of human activities like burning fossil fuels. It is a fact that increasing CO2 levels in the atmosphere has the effect of increasing the average surface temperature due to the physics of radiative forcing. Something a self proclaimed expert of physics as you claim to be should understand. That has been known about for over 100 years and is not some kind of left wing conspiracy to force governments to provide funding for an unnecessary scientific agenda. That data supporting it is also being collected right now and has been being collected seriously for about the last 50 years and not just from the 1980s. It wasn't admitted to be false either, in fact, it has been backed up by further and continuing research. Refined? Yes. Refuted? No.
Your claim that "global warming was debunked in the 90s" is flat out fallacious. This is mainly what I was referring to when I told you almost all of what you said was wrong. Yes, you did state some factual information but you stated irrelevant information and you began with a blatantly erroneous falsehood. Yes photosynthetic eukaryotes can potentially grow larger in atmospheres with higher concentrations of CO2 but we have been decreasing the amount of vegetation on earth through mass deforestation while increasing the amount of atmospheric CO2 so the remaining vegetation is storing less CO2 and creating less O2 which leaves a higher ratio of free CO2 in the atmosphere to contribute to the greenhouse effect. Global warming was certainly not debunked and is continuing for the foreseeable future. All the current evidence proves that beyond reasonable doubt and that information is readily available to you. There is no need for me to present it to you here when you are perfectly capable of doing your own research if you so dare to shatter your fragile state of voluntary ignorance. This information is literally everywhere and the fact you can't accept it, yet claim to be able to accurately read and interpret data is laughable. Please stop encouraging ignorance by spreading disinformation. If you don't want to respond to me because you don't think I'm "worth your or anyone else's time" then don't, but at least open your mind to possibilities outside of your misinformed bias and look at the actual evidence. Just don't open it so wide that your brains fall out. Hopefully it is not already too late which wouldn't be an unwarranted suspicion.
Of course I believe in climate change but I believe the scientific research being told is bull shit! The world has literally shifted we didn’t have seven continents millions of years ago. The whole earth has made massive shifts through it’s life without human life. Humans habitat changes act science research can not and will not change that it’s a FACT. Global temperatures climate around the world has also changed around the planet before we even had humans thats also a FACT. The ability to give 💯% accuracies to even weather isn’t even possible. They have give a pretty good idea by satellite 🛰 and get it pretty good most the time but that’s not accurate 💯 is accurate. They can maybe go out a few week but as the get farther away there isn’t any want they can tell. So for a idiot to buy the shit they sell I laugh saying in 11 years the earth is destroys who said that a stupid drunk bitch congress women bartender. It’s political that was it is feed the fear of the scared and weak minded scared the already fragile people who suffer mental health issues. My advantage I don’t have mental heath issues I’m not scared I go by fact. I don’t care what is political it’s how it effects and not taking bullshit. Anyways I really went off on yeah 😜
This is a silly question along with "do you believe 1+1=2?" and "Do you believe circles are round?"
A more pertinent question is "what do you believe the cause to be and how fast is it going to get bad?"
The climate has fluctuated tens of thousands of times in the last couple of billion years. It has been both five degrees hotter and five degrees colder that many times. I live in Florida 50 feet above sea level and I have fossil seashells all over my back yard which my geologist friend informs me is proof that the sea levels used to be more than 50 feet higher than they currently are. The question isn't "is there climate change?" The question is "what is causing it?" and that is a combination of things. The sea level today is a couple of inches higher than it was 40 years ago but 40 years ago it was lower than it was 300 years ago. It is constantly changing.
Well pretty much the entire globe apart from the USA believes it.
The USA have made it a political point scoring thing.
remove the politics and look at the science.
even worse is looking at not just global warming but the impact of man on animals, insects such as bees, fish, reefs.
people can believe what they want however if pretty much the rest of the world recognises the problem, quite possibly there is a large problem,
the huge issue is going to be when oil use drops snd electric increases, countries that a high oil producers are going to see their economies shrink, slammed or collapse entirely.
so even of a person does not believe in global warming and the scientist around the world, well if you live in an oil producing country you are potentially shagged
Yes, the climate has been changing for thousands of years between hotter and colder. To the extent that man has an effect on it has yet to really be determined. I’m not against the possibility that perhaps we may, but I have yet to see the blatant evidence. I’ve been warned that “we only have 10 years to enact major changes or it’s over!” Now since the 1980s and we are still about the same temp. And the Lefts hypocrisy is on full display as they do not address the real polluters- China and India. They are are only concerned with western countries for some reason.
Has there ever been a point in time when the climate was not changing?
Entire nations were supposed to be completely submerged 20 years ago if we didn't take immediate, drastic action according to the UN in 1989. No drastic action was taken, in fact barely even minimal action was taken and no nation is under water or for that matter even close. If the Earth was only years away from being uninhabitable due to the climate it would be easy to tell that just by stepping outside.
Global cooling I mean global warming I mean climate change is just another boogeyman the ruling class uses to keep the masses afraid. Once they can't squeeze anything more out of COVID they will be back to climate alarmism. Luckily the masses don't seem all that interested in making any real changes in the name of climate alarmism so unlike COVID, they don't seem to be afraid of it, even if they're dumb enough to believe it.
I understand, that science is not a belief system or an idology. It is a method to carefully and objectively use evidence to find answers. If that method is followed and replicated and consistently returns the same answers... It doesn't require my "belief" it just is.. Anthropomorphic global warming doesn't need my belief. It's happening whether I believe it or not.
Yes. In my lifetime I have witnessed a significant change in climate where I live, and it's quantifiable. The growing season is longer and crops that could never be grown here before are now regularly cultivated. It boggles my mind that (a large number of) the farmers who grow those crops still deny climate change, even as they've adjusted what they grow due to climate change.
climate change fear is a scam to put 4 trillion dollars in a bucket so the democrates can steal from it... there's always been fear of climate change from 24 years after jesus to 1976 check it out they had a real scare back then until now... changes in the weather and extreme weather has always happend... so do research... oh i forget the neatherdals destroy history.
It’s a real thing yes, The way we should fight it is adaptions like moving building sea walls using nuclear energy and nature gas. Instead of something like a carbon tax, if you think China and India are going to sigh onto that I’m sorry you are very mistaken.
carbon emissions are good for developing worlds. Most places in Africa will need to continue using fossil fuels for another 100 years
by the way I heard a stupid argument being taught on Nickelodeon suggesting that mining is environmental racism. Expect you need to mine in order to get the Materials in order to build solar and wind power. So if mining is racist all ways humans can get energy is racist don’t fall for that trap
if you think "Forrest Management" in sweeping the forest so fires dont happen, and the glaciers melting just like that, in addition to smog and storms like Hurricane Sandy aren't due to "Climate Change" and no snow... where snow is suppose to happen (like in TEXAS) ...
All of the predictions that these "scientists made in 1990, 2000, 2010 have not come to pass. However this has gone on so long people don't remember when we keep saying the effect is 10 years out. Many people will no longer be alive or were too young to remember todays prediction when we create tomorrows "final warning"
the climate is constantly changing, mostly due to the sun. burning gas or coal has nothing to do with it.
I wish greenies would get us all aligned around cleaning the trash out of the ocean. That actually makes sense and people of all beliefs could get together around that.
I do. The abnormal weather and the natural disasters that we see happening every year are the proof that climate change is real and needs to be stopped. We are destroying our planet and leaving a burden to future generations. Unfortunately since there is a lot of money involved in these changes that need to be done and most people are not willing to have a different lifestyle to save Earth this issue will never be solved.
More than half of our icebergs have disappeared are ozone there is going and all our government officials and all other country officials thinks that is just a big game that all this stuff happens for other reasons so I said why don't we stop everything that we're doing to make these things happen and let's just see if you need proof you need to stop all the bullshit in order to get the proof
Climate change aka human induced warming of the planet? Yes humanity is a factor are we to take all the blame no, but we definitely tipped the planet over the edge. We are effectively as we speak are forcing the earth to undo what an estimated 550 MILLION Years of evolution by killing off the Biology on the planet.
Chances are humanity isn't going to do anything to help the planet till either cities collapse or half the current continents are under water.
climate change is normal it's been happening since the beginning of time. we've had ice ages and hot climates for millions of years. when we find worlds like our we'll see it's totally normal. hell astronomers found lake beds on mars and saturn's moons.
Climate change is a NATURALLY occurring thing. As of right now we are 11 to 14 thousand years overdue for an ice age, it’s coming, you can tell because the planet has to go into greenhouse mode before the Gulf Stream and jet stream reverse bringing the ice age. It’s been going like that in cycles for millions upon millions of years and will continue to do so. man made? Not at all, yes humans contribute, our oceans are trash heaps and need to be cleaned. no, if humans were responsible we would have destroyed the planet between 1944 and now with all the nukes we’ve popped off. Gaia can take care of herself and when she’s had enough she will cause humans to go extinct.
If you look back in time there are events that take place in cycles. The earth rotates on a 24 hour cycle, it rotates the sun on a 365 day cycle, and if you get closer to home there are weather cycles too. Back in 2016 we had a flood in the south and they called it a 1 in 200 years event. It has happened before for them to use the 200 year reference. Cycles and patterns happen naturally in nature. Is global warming one of them? maybe depending on who you ask. A Politian may say it is real but a person who really studies weather patterns might say not it isn't real. However what they are not saying is that all of the concrete and roadways help to warm the atmosphere too. The more we expand the more we create hot spots. That is why it is warmer in the city then it is outside of the city a few miles.
Climate change is inevitable. However, I think what you're asking is due I believe in human induced climate change? And my answer is yes. The research has been done and the results are in. Humans are contributing to the polluting and warming of the planet.
To TheBigGuy9 who blocked me to get the last word in order to protect his mental fragility, let it be known the response to his misinformed denial still exists here if he wishes to see it: Nobody has said increasing co2 is the ONLY thing which causes climate change but it is the main contributor to current anthropogenic climate change. It is also not a scam by intellectuals. Frankly you're embarrassing yourself by making such a suggestion. That link you provided is not a list of disproven claims, it is a list of purported "scares" as the article puts it and most of them are actually true except for the ones regarding "global cooling" a few of which conveniently show up in 1975 which supports exactly what I told you in my last response. What you just did which is use links to unsubstantiated bias is the exact definition of special pleading. As far as "climate gate" goes, the information in those emails was confirmed by fact checkers to have been taken out of context by the very climate change deniers who conveniently stole information they didn't understand and then claimed it to be part of a conspiracy and leaked it right before the Copenhagen convention. Those people also embarrassed themselves. So once again, you have been mislead and yes, you have clearly been mislead by right wing conspiracy theories being spread by right wing media. Nobody else reports that sort of bullshit. By the way, don't assume my political affiliation because that is not what climate change is about and it also has nothing to do with Obama care. It is about science and the ship has sailed and speaking of ships, the science expedition which got stuck in unexpected conditions never claimed to be a cruise ship. That is disinformation which resulted from Chinese whispers inspired by science deniers' mockery of the fact a research expedition fell victim to the thing they were expected to know about.
Still to BigGuy9: The science emphatically shows that anthropogenic climate change is real. You seem to have an inchoate understanding of the relationship between CO2 and photosynthetic eukaryotes, so here is a very easy to understand explanation among a few other explanations of why the things you believe are disinformation in no uncertain terms: www.wwf.org.uk/.../10-myths-about-climate-change
@TheBigGuy9: Yes the technology to trap and store carbon from the atmosphere exists and is being used and needs to be used more and improving the efficacy of that technology warrants serious investment. However, current CO2 emissions are far greater than how much this technology can currently store. CO2 is also not the only anthropogenic contribution as we have already established. Sure, scientists may also be corrupted like anyone else but to suggest the sheer magnitude of data from a multitude of research organisations and independent studies which when all compared against each other clearly support the discovery that increasing CO2 levels in the atmosphere correlates to a rise in average surface is nothing but left wing conspiracy is a reductio ad absurdum. Whether you like it or not, anthropogenic climate change is real, has been proven and if you can't accept it, there might be something wrong with you.
ask the grouse and snow shoed rabbits of northern Scotland. they’ll tell you yes. Or the polar bear driven so far south they are breeding with grizzly bears at higher rates then ever before. Ask the attic Fox whose fur changes white in fall , trigger by the shirting of the day. They turn white before snow falls on much of their territory affecting their ability to hunt.
I am honestly not sure, I've heard two different views
My brother and mother beileve in it and some of my friends don't.
I personally believe we need to start having a more responsible view of what we are doing to the environment. Climate change may not exist but that does not mean we don't move forward and start decreasing our ecological footprint. The less pollution in the world, the better
We get a lot less snow each year, and what is there is sprinkled over a much longer period, the only people who are stuck having to rely on beliefs for this subject, all live closer to the equator. I don't have to believe shit, I just look in the backyard each winter because I was here long enough to see the difference.
27.1K opinions shared on Society & Politics topic.
It is not caused my mankind. Climate has had ups and downs for centuries. It is a scam perpetrated by the left to rip off billions of dollars from US taxpayers and flush it down some black hole while the rest of the world laughs.
I think it would be happening regardless of weather or not we were here.. The earth has always gone through warm periods, and cold periods, that will never change, no matter how bad the global warming nut jobs want it to.
Yes. Climate always changes, either due to Nature's own doings or because of man's input into the climate system. When mankind inputs into the climate system, if there already IS natural global warming going on, mankind would likely accelerate that process. If global COOLING were going on, our activities could possibly REVERSE that trend, and manmade global WARMING would ensue because of our inputting into the climate system.
That wasn’t it. The 1970 Clean Air Act gets rid of real pollutants. The new one that’s created is bogus. CO2 is no pollutant. This is a scam manufactured by intellectuals. Listen and learn https://youtu.be/rweblFwt-BM
Sure I do. It's been going on for millions of years now. History tells us that Canada & a large portion of the U S was covered by an ice sheet up to a mile or more thick.
Yes the climate always changes, co2 keeps heat from escaping, but more co2 doesn't drive climate change. I watched a documentary about it. We should concentrate on product waste and packaging and plastics. Co2 is a red herring.
With all due respect, if you watched a documentary that stated there is no link between an increase in CO2 and average temperature rises, that documentary was wrong.
The Earth is degrading in its orbit and eventually will be a barren and frozen like Mars is now. The problems we have are many, plastic garbage, environmental destruction, species loss, devolution and rampant parasitism. Carbon dioxide is not one of these. Ask yourself, is it hotter: A in a parking lot or B in Forest. Our entire relationship to the planet has to change. The cars on the road are having much less effect than the roads themselves!
Human caused climate change, as promoted by the loony left, is a lie. To believe the lie a person would have to be utterly ignorant of both history and science.
@djfhsjk No, it does not. Just one of the volcanoes in Iceland spews out as much so-called greenhouse gases in a week as the whole of humanity does during a year. The climate of the planet changes constantly, mainly due to solar activity. For example, the planet is much cooler now than it was just 400 years ago, at the end of the Mediaeval Warm Period. The effect of human activity on the climate is so small that it can hardly be measured. The climate change spruikers are liars and useful idiots.
"Just one of the volcanoes in Iceland spews out as much so-called greenhouse gases in a week as the whole of humanity does during a year." Nope. "Overall, volcanoes release less than 2% of the equivalent amount of CO2 released by human activities." climate.nasa.gov/.../
I believe that so-called "climate change" is NOT something that needs to be dealt with. Mankind is NOT causing the planet to "warm" or "cool". These are natural cycles that Earth has been going through from the beginning.
I do not , because summers are not as hot as it was when I was kid. Also , most records that are broken were from the 1800's. We had maybe 10 million people (which environmental people say mostly causes it. We had very few factories. No cars. Just think about what I said and I think is shoots the theory down in flames.
Personally I think its VASTLY subdued in my opinion I think we are in a state that is far worse than scientists actually believe. After all geologic studies have shown that earth has been through periods of time with NO LIFE on land. So it wouldn't take much for earth to eventually end up uninhabitable. And possibly another one of those strange planets with hyper heated atmospheres.
One might wonder WHY TF then would scientists downplay natural events that threaten human lives? Its simple, to avoid a single word. "Panicking."
The one thing that humanity is actually good at beyond being the largest extinction since like the dinosaurs. XD.
Let TheBigGuy9 know that I have answered his bullshit on my own opinion and his puerile attempt to get the last word by blocking me only serves to demonstrate the magnitude of his pathetic denial.
@TheBigGuy9 Let TheBigGuy9 know that I have answered his bullshit on my own opinion and his puerile attempt to get the last word by blocking me only serves to demonstrate the magnitude of his pathetic denial. -from ofdeath
The @ don’t work for anyone, genius. Remember when AOC and others said we have 12 years to live if we don’t tackle climate change then she walked it back saying you would need the brain of a sea sponge to believe that? Every single one of you took her serious. The fact that you cannot see how the con even works shows you aren’t part of the manipulation. You actually do believe it.
I can see all your posts and all your messages. You didn’t read the 120 years of failed predictions? Of course not. ClimateGate how NOAA faked warming. That’s too many anomalies to chalk it up as a coincidence. And you said yourself that the myth busters episode wasn’t in the atmosphere. But they said themselves that it proved global warming was real. Then you say you know more than Thomas Sowell? How is electric energy going to replace the over 6000 petroleum products including YOUR PHONE! Yes, your phone is partly made from oil.
Do you even know where oil comes from? It’s naturally made in the earth. Naturally. We don’t have enough minerals and metals to make all this stuff. Do you even know what goes into making a Tesla battery? Do you know how many minerals and metals are needed and how they are acquired? Slaves. Even CNN reported on it and that’s just for one resource.
Looks like more people disagree with you than agree. It’s not even CO2 that warms things. It’s water vapor. Then you factor in that we humans occupy not even one percent of the earth. You have oceans that are miles deep and a sky that is miles up into space. CO2 is heavier than air. You never grown before? Plants love a ppm up to around 1700 and you double your yield on that alone. Imagine starving wildlife and plants.
I find it odd that you believe in God, but can’t connect the dots that everything god put on this earth is connected. That carbon is literal plant food.
How does CO2 cause temp change if the temp changes before CO2 changes?
It's probably just more delusional bullshit anyway. That's the thing with climate change deniers, they're just morons whose opinions have been invalidated by scientific discoveries.
@TheBigGuy9 You're right. Take away petro feedstocks and we can say farewell to Bakelite phenolic pot handles, lipstick, nylon and many other synthetic fibers (for carpets, Halloween costumes, etc), candles (ta-ta romance) aspirin, vitamins, detergents, golf balls, sneakers and even some sex lubes!
@TheBigGuy9 you are a coward trying to hide behind the block feature in order to shield yourself from receiving rational responses to your misinformed opinions. There is nothing bad about being wrong as long as you accept your ignorance and attempt to learn. If you care to look at my answers on MY opinion (and you also may respond there and I will not block you) I have addressed your 120 years of failed predictions link and shown why it is nothing but spin and biased disinformation and even that it proved what I told you about Peter Gwynne's article in 1975. Your comment about AOC is irrelevant. It is also erroneous because AOC's actual quote was "the world is gonna end in 12 years if we don't address climate change". Now, bear in mind that she wasn't speaking literally. She meant 12 years from now is the point of no return if we continued on our current trajectory. The truth is she is wrong, although it will mean it will take much longer for the climate to return to normal once we reach carbon neutrality and we are talking in the thousands of years here. That means thousands of years of more intense extreme weather events. In fact, if we had stopped all emissions in 2010, the climate will continue to show the effects humans have triggered for about 1000 years. So putting aside politicians like AOC, the real climate scientists have made predictions about ice sheet loss and sea level rises which have actually been exceeded! This is real and is not some kind of crazy conspiracy.
@TheBigGuy9 Lol, you imbecile, of course I know where petroleum comes from and that mining and petroleum products are currently necessary in the manufacturing of basically everything we use. That is not some kind of mic drop statement and it is totally irrelevant to the veracity of anthropogenic climate change. Science is being used to develop new technology all the time and we can already make computer chips which aren't silicone based. They're not as fast as are current silicon based chips but they have the potential to be even faster and utilise higher amperage than silicon. However, don't lose sight of the fact that anthropogenic climate change is real just because we still use a lot of petroleum and mining reliant products. It is possible to develop technology which allows us to mine with very low emissions to give ourselves time to discover more sustainable manufacturing techniques.
@TheBigGuy9 Where energy production comes from renewable sources also lowers the net emissions of the manufacturing of batteries for EVs and they emit less CO2 than convential vehicles over their life time by a factor which is still lower even when you include the manufacturing of the batteries and the mining of their materials - especially where the energy used for that comes from renewable sources and plants which use carbon capture technology. https://www. carbonbrief. org/factcheck-how-electric-vehicles-help-to-tackle-climate-change By the way, humans cover 10% of the earth's surface and growing, not 1%. Yet another fact you thought you knew but didn't. Don't forget water covers about 70% of the earth's surface and that is also growing because of thermal expansion and polar ice melting due to global warming currently being caused by anthropogenic climate change! Lol I can't believe it is so hard for you to be able to recognise this. You must either severely brainwashed or just incredibly dumb.
@TheBigGuy9 No, there are more in the scientific community who agree with me than who don't. Yet another one of your trademark fallacious statements. Water vapour? Yeah I knew about that. You think someone as well read as me wouldn't know basic facts like that. So as we release more CO2 and that heats up the atmosphere and the oceans what do you think will happen? You guessed it, MORE WATER VAPOUR will be released into the atmosphere and drive the warming even more! I can't believe you thought that was some kind of argument AGAINST climate change. You are unbelievably misinformed and ignorant. My religious views have nothing to do with the veracity of anthropogenic climate change.
@TheBigGuy9 So ignoring the fallacious statement you just made that God is responsible for everything bon earth, I will address your additional misinformed and irrelevant statement about CO2 being plant food. I have already linked you the information you need about that in my opinion but since you are so stupid, I will spell it out for you here: yes, photosynthetic eukaryotes absorb CO2 and release O2 as a byproduct. However, mass deforestation is occuring and mass CO2 emissions are simultaneously occuring as a result of human activities. There is not enough vegetation to absorb that much CO2 and that means MORE CO2 in the atmosphere! Which leads to global warming. How does CO2 lead to global warming byou ask? Due to the physics of radiative forcing. Look it up and actually learn something. Please actually do some research before you come up with anything else you think is an argument. If you actually do proper research, you will realise that your opinion is wrong. You have no argument against what is confirmed science. I don't want to be mean but it is for your own good. People like you do nothing but serve to stultify human progress and hinder normal people's efforts to do the right thing for future generations and as far as Massageman goes, you are an utter disgrace. Companies with any ounce of ethical integrity fire people who spread pernicious disinformation like you. @gag revoke this deplorable moron's status as editor. It is not a good look for your company.
You’re one of those cancel culture guys. So emotional you can’t debate in good faith. Perhaps it’s why I blocked you. Well, I don’t work for any company.
Did make close to a mil from Aurora Cannabis from 2016-2018 with 25k. Now in Eth which my current balance is north of 7mil.
@TheBigGuy9 I'm not a cancel culture guy. That would be more your area since you're so fond of blocking people who can refute your bullshit. This conversation is not about god. Come back when you have an actual argument to show why anthropogenic climate change isn't real.
That’s why I am who I am. I follow God’s rules. I’m not perfect, not even close. Most likely will go to hell, but I get it. You do know a block only prevents you from talking to me directly, right? Once you hit reply, all your messages pop up.
@TheBigGuy9 attempting to change the subject won't validate your opinion. The ship has sailed and it has been proven beyond reasonable doubt that anthropogenic climate change is real. Like I told you already, go and do some research and actually learn something instead of being voluntarily ignorant and embarrassing yourself. Recognising someone who holds a position of power might abuse that power as a result of misinformed bias and pointing out that person being in a privileged position is detrimental to a community is not the same as cancelling them. He can say what he is not fit to be an editor on G@G.
You don’t think that it’s possible to pay off a bunch of people to push a certain agenda and have the media agree with it isn’t possible? But you didn’t answer me. How does A cause B if B happens first? A being temp and B being CO2?
@TheBigGuy9 If you read through my responses you'll find I have answered your stupid question. The answer is that CO2 is not the only thing which can raise the temperature but it is what has caused the current rise. Look up radiative forcing. Learn something and stop embarrassing yourself. Your conspiracy theories are completely unfounded. You are deluded.
And you do know that the epa is able to bypass Congress to make any rule or regulations on the public it deems fit, right? That’s a back door to forcing compliance. Hence Climate Racism.
@TheBigGuy9 He is wrong. Here is just one of many sources backed by competent scientists and a tremendous volume of tested, compared and confirmed evidence which shows that. royalsociety.org/.../
Not all scientists are funded by the government and there are checks and balances in place which prevent scientists from recognising erroneous information. Their claims have to be tested against other experiments, be repeatable and peer reviewed in order to be considered valid. Climate racism would be more like the fact that most of the countries which contribute the least CO2 to the atmosphere will be the ones which will and already are being hit by the impacts of it.
@TheBigGuy9 it's quite sad that you don't realise how severely you have been misinformed by right wing propaganda. Please stop listening to people like that guy in your video who are spreading disinformation which has already been refuted.
I can see it from your point of view. That’s the thing. I’ve entertained it from myriad perspectives. You don’t think those gases ever go up to space or completely dissipate? Since the beginning of time we have exhaled CO2. I just don’t think God would make it so that the CO2 we exhale would kill us
@TheBigGuy9 fuck you're dumb. I don't have time to explain things like the carbon cycle to you. You're so obdurate that it is a waste of time trying to reason with you. Bye. And my apologies to Jesus_is_the_guey for having this flood his notifications. Same apology to wowgirl.
I’m still perplexed by this though. And do your best to read this. It is eye opening.
Your viewpoint is that this is happening now at a record pace and anything we can do to stop it is what’s needed? That’s it, right? If it is, you’re too nice of a person and very naive.
Me: I’m not saying it’s not true, but is it happening at record pace? Is their any upside to someone that has a different agenda. Someone who wants full compliance and control of everything? Is there any way this can be perverted? You do KNOW that is the end game for someone, right? There is currently people in our USA that want all of us lock n step.
Could someone with ulterior motives find a way to make this look real? What would be an upside to that? Well, there’s money. That’s in the top 1-3 things just about everyone wants in life. So there’s that. And rationalization is the second strongest human drive. You know that, right?
Tell me something. We as people today. Are we more prone to sit together amongst one another and be really friendly and at the end of EVERYTHING we end up split down the middle? Or do we make our own assumptions about each other and come to a plethora of other conclusions? One is easier than the other. Hint: most people are going to take the easier route. They’re going to take route that they can think of RIGHT NOW.
@TheBigGuy9 You're a deluded nut bag. Don't talk to me anymore. The irony of the response before your last one almost had me in stitches. Global warming is apparent to everyone with a thermometer and a historical record of past temperatures. Scientists have even more tools than that and they all match and they agree with the known physics of radiative forcing in regards to increasing CO2 levels in the atmosphere which can also be measured and compared to data from the past and compared with other methods which all show the same results. It is not up for debate. The cause and the effects are now known. You obviously have made a choice to remain voluntarily ignorant. Let's just hope you never hold public office. That's the last you will hear from me. May the 4th be with you.
Yea I do believe man has had an impact on our climate. And anyone doubting that answer this. isn't it better to have renewable clean energy even if climate change is irrelevant than to be wrong and be fucked?
I believe the climate changes. I believe we should be good stewards of the environment. I don’t think we should let some countries pollute at will while we in the West bankrupt ourselves.
Global warming isn’t natural, it’s caused by people and huge companies. If we don’t stop it soon the planet will be unlivable. But evil people ignore it.
@chrissykerdock Why don't do some research and see what's going on in Antarctica? It's not a joke, it's not a meme, and it has nothing to do with politics. Before you or I were born, Jacque Cousteau warned of the changing ocean climate, and how it was and would affect life on Earth. No one gave a shit, and now 3/4 of the world's reefs are in MAJOR decline or fubar. Today, even though scientists do not agree on every aspect of global warming, they DO agree that mankind has had a lot to do with the changes. They all don't agree on how much, or where it might lead.
So if you want to find those who say "nah, it's nothing, it's normal", go tie your horse to their wagon and you'll have some traction. Personally, I do NOT believe you can continually poison your own environment with impunity, and act like we don't live in an enclosed eco system that is both delicate and complex. Memes and politicians have NO say in these matters - this is for serious people tackling a difficult subject.
@chrissykerdock It's not going to happen in my lifetime, but it will happen. When the reefs die and the oceans change, then you're fucked, so enjoy it while you can.
@exitseven Then why did all scientists from power companies, that had an agenda to prove it false, all come to the conclusion it was real? No study attemting to disprove it held up to scrutiny. If they do show that it's not real there are easily noticeable problems with their methods or calculations?
thirty years ago this was not a thing and there were no catalytic converters on cars and coal burning factories were everywhere. Now all of a sudden with all the regulations against air pollution our atmosphere is more polluted? That either means that catalytic converters and other scrubbing technologies do not work or that these studies are skewed.
@exitseven and humanity's effect on it from poluants specifically? I saw a diagram of high and low each day a year for 20 years. There was an overall increase in overall temperature each year. Not much, but it was happening. We had an uncommonly severe winter, but it's already pretty summery now. It was in the mid 80s today where I am.
I think the pollution was worse 30 or 40 years ago. California had photochemical smog all the time. That does not happen anymore. Rivers and streams were loaded with pollutants. I used to see smokestacks spewing pollution all over the place. You never see this anymore. There are two possibilities, either man made climate change is not real or that foreign countries are doing all the damage. Either way, the Paris Climate Boondoggle will not help anything and will just rip off American Taxpayers.
@exitseven we don't see it anymore because we're learning to be cleaner. Honestly China is worse, but we aren't good. We can be better which is not a bad thing.
Global warming caused by humans is backed by a lot of research so it can be considered a fact. Similar changes we see right now might have happend in the past but over period of milion of years not centuries.
Girl's Behavior 
Guy's Behavior 
Flirting 
Dating 
Relationships 
Fashion & Beauty 
Health & Fitness 
Marriage & Weddings 
Shopping & Gifts 
Technology & Internet 
Break Up & Divorce 
Education & Career 
Entertainment & Arts 
Family & Friends 
Food & Beverage 
Hobbies & Leisure 
Other 
Religion & Spirituality 
Society & Politics 
Sports 
Travel 
Trending & News 
u +1 y
+1 y
+1 y
+1 y
+1 y
+1 y
+1 y
+1 y
+1 y
+1 y
+1 y
+1 y
+1 y
+1 y
+1 y
+1 y
+1 y
+1 y
+1 y
+1 y
+1 y
+1 y
+1 y
+1 y
+1 y
Most Helpful Opinions