@thatguyoverthere You seem very confident about that. What is it that gives you the confidence?
@thatguyoverthere Please tell me exactly what you believe, and if I think your evidence is convicing, I promise I will change my mind.
@thatguyoverthere@shitposter.club
@thatguyoverthere I don't think CO2 is the biggest enemy to life either. In fact I don't think I've ever heard anybody say that. Give me your best evidence for why Climate Change isn't anthropogenic, and if it is convincing, I will change my mind.
I don’t know about my “best evidence” as there isn’t just one factor at play, and again this is a very tedious ask. It’s not really my job to convince you, and even if I did we’re just too idiots talking on the fringes of the internet so it’s really not that important if you change your mind to me. That said I do find this topic an interesting one so I’ll give you what I can while I have my first cup of coffee for the day.
Climate Change poses the biggest threat to humans in our evolutionary history and Carbon Dioxide seems to be its biggest perpetrator.
It’s not even that I necessarily think human activity has zero impact on climate, but there are other factors which are all but ignored. The fact is the climate has never been static on Earth. As I understand it we are on the tail end of a “Little Ice Age” which was very likely not caused by human activity. When we say that climate change is anthropogenic we are ignoring factors like solar cycles and (potentially related) volcanic activity. This year was actually a really good example. In January we saw the Tonga volcano eruption in the pacific ocean eject something insane like 26 Trillion gallons of water into the atmosphere, much of it reaching the upper atmosphere. It also had an impact on the electromagnetics, wind, and other factors that play into our climate. Later in the year Europe seemed to be suffering a pretty good drought while parts of southern Asia were inundated with rain and flooding. Instead of considering that this volcano had any impact (scientists have stated it would have a warming effect at least for the next decade or so) we call this summer evidence that our activity is the problem.
Volcanic activity is likely linked to solar patterns, and the sun’s activity can also play a role directly (as well as greater galactic factors), but these problems are outside of human control and so apparently not worth looking at too closely. Scientists do study them thankfully, but whenever they say something that might suggest that these factors contribute (perhaps more than humans) they are discredited by “consensus” among more popular scientists.
Now I understand that we should focus on our own harmful behaviors rather than fretting over things we have no control over, but I argue that climate is not the area where we have the greatest impact. I think our decision to use chemicals that disrupt living systems and potentially alter DNA (thus permanently changing those living systems) is a far greater problem. Oddly there is no one trying to come up with a better receipt printer although we do here occasional grumblings about microplastics.
https://web.archive.org/web/20120919181158/http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2012/2012GL051260.shtml
The temperature in the time period 1400–1800 C.E. was on average 0.52 ± 0.28°C colder than the last 100-year average. This amplitude is about half of that seen at Greenland Summit (GRIP). This result is consistent with the idea that the LIA was a global event, probably caused by a change in solar and volcanic forcing, and was not simply a seesaw-type redistribution of heat between the hemispheres as would be predicted by some ocean-circulation hypotheses.
At the end of the day, I think Earth goes through cycles of heating and cooling. The historical record shows that pretty clearly. We are currently (and have been for a couple hundred years) on a warming path, but this is normal behavior. The systems at play are incredibly complex, and modern scientists tend to take a myopic approach to studying climate starting from a position of “It’s our fault” and building up the evidence to support that position. Picking on these few centuries as incredibly abnormal doesn’t really seem accurate. Instead it seems like a tool of control.
And like I said, we do have behaviors that we should curb because they are damaging to the Earth (atmosphere included). The way most food is produced these days is incredibly destructive, but this is largely due to policies and practices put in place by regulators and enabled by subsidies. We could produce less waste if we used more regenerative farming practices, but we’d get smaller yields and need food to be produced more at a local level which would have a negative impact on retarded global trade policies.
I’ve used up almost all of my space on this post, and now I have to go take a shit.
@thatguyoverthere
I'm not sure why you posted that article. I wasn't asking you to convince me that people can post fake news on the internet. I don't need to be convinced of that.
What I was asking you is, why you don't think that humans burning fossil fuels has any effect on climate change.
> It’s not even that I necessarily think human activity has zero impact on climate
< why you don't think that humans burning fossil fuels has any effect on climate change.
I wrote a lot and laid out my thinking quite clearly. If you don't care to engage it thats cool. I said before it's not my job to convince you.
@thatguyoverthere Sorry I didn't see the second article. I will read it after breakfast and get back to you.
@thatguyoverthere Sorry I was still half asllep when I replied to you, and I didn't see the whole post. I read what you wrote and i read the linked article. We could keep going back forth throwing facts at each other, but I don't think that will help either of us to evolve our perspectives. So I'm just going to ask you one more question. Hypothetically, what would change your mind?
Some military order goes out, are the soldiers to believe what it means?
