Technofreak:

 

tdgeek:

Your in the 2.5%

 

I'm not sure what you're saying here however I'm pretty sure there's vastly more than 2.5% of the population who would agree with the sentiments in the post of mine that you quoted.

 

I don't care what percentage I belong in. The debate on climate change isn't a popularity contest. Unlike some people I don't believe something just because it's popular.

 

The poles reflect a great deal of solar radiation away, that area is declining, water warms, exacerbating heating. The Great Water Tunnel will slow, less nutrients for marine life, causing more methane in the water, less oxygen as more methane and warner water supports less O. Its a vicious cycle caused artificially.

 

I'm not sure about your claim regarding the poles reflecting a great deal of solar radiation. It's a bit hard to explain the physics in a few sentences. Basically the because of the position of the sun relative to the poles, comparatively little solar radiation gets to the poles to start with. That's why the equatorial regions are so much warmer than the polar areas.

 

Can you explain why there wasn't an ecological disaster like is predicted in your quote when the earth was much warmer than it is now?

 

 

 

Linuxlover  

You must not have been paying attention for several decades now.

 

I've been paying attention. I've also witnessed many predictions of disaster, which never came to pass.

 

Do you remember the claim from the 1970's that global cooling was going to cause another ice age by 2000, or the prediction that by 2000 there would be 7 billion people on the earth and this number of people was unsustainable? Well there was no ice age in 2000 and we exceeded 7 billion in 2012 and we're all still here doing OK.

 

What about the 1970's prediction of wide spread famine in India, China, Pakistan, Africa and South America by 2000. Instead of widespread famine some of these countries are exporters of food.

 

There's a whole host more, which have proven to be wrong.

 

No doubt you've heard the long held claims about the negative impact of cholesterol on you health, now scientists are discovering cholesterol is actually good for you.  The reason it was though cholesterol was bad was it was always found in larger quantities in people with heart problems ergo it must be the cause of the problem. Now it's been discovered it is the body's way of fighting the problems associated with heart issues. The best analogy I've heard is always seeing a lot of fireman at a fire therefore they must be the cause.

 

So after years and years of medical science telling us to keep cholesterol down now we're seeing the message cholesterol can be good for us.

 

Yes, I've been paying attention, but I've also learned not to panic and believe every bit of "scientific fact". 

 

I do recall they thought there might be an ice age.....and to be fair they knew a lot less then than they (scientists) do now. People once thought the Earth was flat......heh...people, eh. Talking crap all the time until one day they aren't. 

as for 7 billion peoplem, it isn't sustainable. But they don't all drop dead in a minute, do they.....It takes time to poison the air, water and soil and slowly degrade the systems that support life. Along the way civil strife and war obscures the real causes. We're busy doing that right now in many parts of the world.....and climate change will help enormously, too.....driven in part by too many people (back we go to 7 billion not being sustainable). 

Yes...people have been putting up theories...and they are tested and found to be valid or not valid. Climate change is one of the valid ones. The consequences? Well...less clear....but seal levels are rising and the weather is becoming more extreme, so we can extrapolate form that if we are prudent.....or allow our continuation bias to persist until disaster comes as a "surprise" (despite decades of warning, it's always a surprise to the people who ignored the warnings). 

My paying attention comment was about the record of atmospheric gases for the past 600,000 years. You asked how we could know this.....and the way we know it isn't new and has been out there for some time.