3 ms·

Because it's entirely plausible that most of the warming is natural and not anthropogenically forced. If that's the case, then we're doing real harm to the poor

• kaybe 7y ago
  Why do you think that is plausible? What natural drivers are there that would be able to do that?
  • aldoushuxley001 7y ago
    We're coming out of an ice age, so it's to be expected that temperatures should be warming naturally and without any human intervention. In fact, it would be very worrying if that weren't the case. The question though is how much of the current temperature increase is natural or human-caused (e.g. via greenhouse gas released from human activity). Trying to figure out what percent of the warming we're seeing is natural or man-made is a reallly tough question, of course. In regards to natural drivers, it's tough to pinpoint specifics, but of course ocean cycles, solar cycles, etc. But the reality is we're really not sure what caused the previous ice age we're coming out, nor are we sure (despite what people will say) what are the primary drivers of current temperature changes. The fact is that climate science is a very difficult undertaking. It's entirely possible that natural temperature increase has flatlined and all the warming is caused by greenhouse gases released by humans, but I find that to be wholly unrealistic. It's significantly more likely that the warming is part natural and part human-caused. Which brings me back to the question of: How much of the warming is attributable to humans vs. natural factors. I know that didn't fully answer your question of what natural drivers could be resposible, but that's part of the ongoing (not settled) research.