3 ms·
> It is the closest to truth we can be. Not at all. We currently only fund the study of "human effects on climate". If you want to do studies on climate that c
by sintaxi 5y ago
> It is the closest to truth we can be.
Not at all. We currently only fund the study of "human effects on climate". If you want to do studies on climate that consider factors other than humans there is no funding available for that - and that is not being hyperbolic that is literally how it is. The conclusions of studies are a direct result of the funding apparatus.
If we want to get to the truth we have to fund anything that helps us understand the climate better, especially all the things that don't involve humans such as planetary and solar system cycles, cataclysms, geothermal cycles and planetary flex.
- tsimionescu 5y agoPlease stop spreading these lies or misinformation. These have all been studied, but they do not correlate with the events. The only phenomenon that fits the data we have is man-made carbon emissions. Could it turn out that quantum gravity is responsible for global warming? In principle, yes. Should we fund a new study that checks? No.
- wolverine876 5y agoCan you provide evidence for these claims? I've read about effects of the solar cycle, for example.