Well, let's stop beating around the bush. In another thread (which you can find here [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.826703-Poll-Do-you-believe-in-global-warming?page=1]) the question of Global Warming was issued. A lot of posts were in the vein of "It exists but the real question is if it is human made..." and ramble. But the answers have not ignited a real discussion and the poll hasn't shown the divided opinion. SO here we are. Is the current climate change a direct consequence of human actions?
My take
And that may be it for the time being. Not that much (bot that little either) but those are some of the important points I wanted to share to start the debate.
It is a sensitive topic, so please, remain civil at all times as per forum rules. A discussion may be fun but only if we sahre arguments, not inslutls.
Captcha: "don't stop", well I guess I have to keep going then.
My take
Of course it is.
First. Scientific consensus swings that way. Yeah, it isn't a warranty, but is shows something. IN twenty years, almost all the people dedicated to studying climate aer in a consensus that it is cuased by humans. Peer-review literature is almost exclusively in favour of this posture. The list of scientists against the idea is small, and composed largely by people not directly related to the field.
Second. The correlation between the increased emmision of greenhouse gasses and increase of global average temperature is hard to ignore. While yes, correlation does not imply causation as xkcd puts it "but it wiggles its eyebrows suggestively". It is hard to ignore that the increase of CO2, Methane, FLCs and others start exactly when the anomaly in temperature starts. We also know that these gasses can cause a rise in temperature in a planet, as shown in the case of Venus, where greenhouse gasses make it the hottes planet in our Solar System. The fucntions of said increased absorbtion may be "slow" (logarithmic for CO2, square root for CH4, from what I gather) but they are still unbouded functions that suggest that an increased output of said gasses affects the amount of radiation that is leaked back out into space. Also the increase in methane by the agricultural industry seems to make this even worse as it makes more radtation saty (at least we aren't using FLCs anymore, those gro linearly).
Third. If it was the Sun's increased radiation then we should be able to make some simple esperiments for confirmation. We can monitor the temperatures of Mercury, Venus, Mars and the Moon and see if there has been any noticiable changes. Mercury and Venus are closer to the Sun and the changes would be far greater tha our won, while in Mars and the Moon we have better equipment to look for temperature fluctiations. There hasn't been any evidence that the temperature of those planets ahs change in the last half century we've been observing them and where the increases in our own has been more pronounced than ever in record.
Fourth. Medival Warming Period. While the recorded temperatures in Europe where higher uring several years, globally the increase isn't comparable to what we are experienceing these years. The local increase might've been important but is wasn't a global phenomenae, it was rather local, just that we have good recors of that specific place.
Fifth. Local time variations of climate, like "This years' summer was the coolest one in fifty years" are not valid arguments. There are fluctiations in the temperatures, which means that even with a rise tendency not every summer must be hotter than the last one. Also, most of the heat that we notice doesn't affect us, it goes to the water. Melting polar caps and glaciers, aside form large bodies of water absorb most of the heat, meaning that the weather may no seem that different, but the changes are happening and are worrisome, as the increse in wter levels and change of currents coudl have huge enviromental effect on our world, not only for humans. Also, as noted in the fifth point, those variations are local things, not global.
Sixth. Climategate wasn't a thing. There is no big sicentific conspiracy and the quotes were miend from a much larger amutn of supporting evidence of the changes. THe scientific community had knowledge of most of the facts stated. The lack of context also diminishes any claims that the quotes show any kind of conspiracy.
First. Scientific consensus swings that way. Yeah, it isn't a warranty, but is shows something. IN twenty years, almost all the people dedicated to studying climate aer in a consensus that it is cuased by humans. Peer-review literature is almost exclusively in favour of this posture. The list of scientists against the idea is small, and composed largely by people not directly related to the field.
Second. The correlation between the increased emmision of greenhouse gasses and increase of global average temperature is hard to ignore. While yes, correlation does not imply causation as xkcd puts it "but it wiggles its eyebrows suggestively". It is hard to ignore that the increase of CO2, Methane, FLCs and others start exactly when the anomaly in temperature starts. We also know that these gasses can cause a rise in temperature in a planet, as shown in the case of Venus, where greenhouse gasses make it the hottes planet in our Solar System. The fucntions of said increased absorbtion may be "slow" (logarithmic for CO2, square root for CH4, from what I gather) but they are still unbouded functions that suggest that an increased output of said gasses affects the amount of radiation that is leaked back out into space. Also the increase in methane by the agricultural industry seems to make this even worse as it makes more radtation saty (at least we aren't using FLCs anymore, those gro linearly).
Third. If it was the Sun's increased radiation then we should be able to make some simple esperiments for confirmation. We can monitor the temperatures of Mercury, Venus, Mars and the Moon and see if there has been any noticiable changes. Mercury and Venus are closer to the Sun and the changes would be far greater tha our won, while in Mars and the Moon we have better equipment to look for temperature fluctiations. There hasn't been any evidence that the temperature of those planets ahs change in the last half century we've been observing them and where the increases in our own has been more pronounced than ever in record.
Fourth. Medival Warming Period. While the recorded temperatures in Europe where higher uring several years, globally the increase isn't comparable to what we are experienceing these years. The local increase might've been important but is wasn't a global phenomenae, it was rather local, just that we have good recors of that specific place.
Fifth. Local time variations of climate, like "This years' summer was the coolest one in fifty years" are not valid arguments. There are fluctiations in the temperatures, which means that even with a rise tendency not every summer must be hotter than the last one. Also, most of the heat that we notice doesn't affect us, it goes to the water. Melting polar caps and glaciers, aside form large bodies of water absorb most of the heat, meaning that the weather may no seem that different, but the changes are happening and are worrisome, as the increse in wter levels and change of currents coudl have huge enviromental effect on our world, not only for humans. Also, as noted in the fifth point, those variations are local things, not global.
Sixth. Climategate wasn't a thing. There is no big sicentific conspiracy and the quotes were miend from a much larger amutn of supporting evidence of the changes. THe scientific community had knowledge of most of the facts stated. The lack of context also diminishes any claims that the quotes show any kind of conspiracy.
And that may be it for the time being. Not that much (bot that little either) but those are some of the important points I wanted to share to start the debate.
It is a sensitive topic, so please, remain civil at all times as per forum rules. A discussion may be fun but only if we sahre arguments, not inslutls.
Captcha: "don't stop", well I guess I have to keep going then.
