4 ms·
Great. One idiot with the non-scientific view that the HCGW theory is unproven get's all the headlines, but scientists with real scientific skepticism are igno
by IanDrake 12y ago
Great. One idiot with the non-scientific view that the HCGW theory is unproven get's all the headlines, but scientists with real scientific skepticism are ignored.
- eric_h 12y agoIt's astonishing to me that people would even believe, given the tremendous changes humankind has affected on the planet, that humanity hasn't already had a massive impact on the way global climate systems work. Just because climate change has happened in the ancient past without human intervention doesn't mean we can't be the cause of it now. All of that carbon that was sequestered underground for millions of years is now being injected into the atmosphere - how can you believe it won't have an impact?
- IanDrake 12y ago>how can you believe it won't have an impact? For one, that's not how science works. Science isn't about belief, it's about proof. Two, because you're not considering the scale of the issue. You're so focused on the absolute tons of CO2 humans produce that you've completely discounted how much is naturally produced. If you want to think about global warming more scientifically (skeptically), I suggest a site like http://www.nipccreport.org http://www.nipccreport.org.
- eric_h 12y agoYes, of course. I recognize that science is not about belief - my point is simply that this joker is making claims based on belief - how could he not even consider that humanity would have an impact on the global climate? I picked CO2 as but one of many changes humanity has wreaked upon the earth. The list is of course vastly longer than just that.