macdoc
Philosopher
For the casual reader...r-j's last posts are factually incorrect. He has provided zero support for any one of his claims and others have pointed this out.
•••
On the contrary - the reality is which is accepted and supported by the world's climate scientists in their papers.
There are 56 lines of enquiry leading to this summary... the Holocene Optimum occurred after we exited the last glacial period and was driven by our orbital position and tilt.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milankovitch_cycles
We have raised the C02 levels of the atmosphere by 40% - levels not seen for millions of years.
The global temperature has continued to warm....past the uptick shown on the first graph.
This is a result of man using fossil fuels and releasing long sequestered carbon to the atmosphere which changes the radiative balance.
If you accept..
CO2 traps IR.
Then you must follow the chain of evidence to where it leads.
It's getting warmer.
We're responsible.
Best place to start to learn the science underlying the change
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/05/start-here/
others.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/empirical-evidence-for-global-warming.htm
http://ossfoundation.us/projects/environment/global-warming/human-caused
This is a reasonably complete visual of the forces at work including some like aerosols that temporarily offset warming by reflecting incoming radiation back into space.
The red arrows are the crux of the problem.
More IR trapping by CO2.
Follow the chain of evidence that show the mechanism and the evidence for the increase in global energy.
The explanation and physics are rather simple - the evidence of the changes towards a warmer climate regime are massive.
The rest of the r-j's claim is simply conspiracy nonsense with no basis in fact whatsoever nor does he provide any supporting documents. You may draw your own conclusions about that and as a result how valid his "opinion" is regarding AGW.
It's okay to be wrong....it's not okay to persist in making factually incorrect statements in a science forum.
•••
On the contrary - the reality is which is accepted and supported by the world's climate scientists in their papers.
There are 56 lines of enquiry leading to this summary... the Holocene Optimum occurred after we exited the last glacial period and was driven by our orbital position and tilt.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milankovitch_cycles
We have raised the C02 levels of the atmosphere by 40% - levels not seen for millions of years.
How do we know that recent CO2 increases are due to human activities?
Filed under: Climate Science FAQ Greenhouse gases Paleoclimate — eric @ 22 December 2004 - (Svenska) (Español) (Français)
- See more at: http://www.realclimate.org/index.ph...uman-activities-updated/#sthash.Qms6WrZm.dpuf
The global temperature has continued to warm....past the uptick shown on the first graph.
This is a result of man using fossil fuels and releasing long sequestered carbon to the atmosphere which changes the radiative balance.
If you accept..
CO2 traps IR.
Then you must follow the chain of evidence to where it leads.
It's getting warmer.
We're responsible.
Best place to start to learn the science underlying the change
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/05/start-here/
others.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/empirical-evidence-for-global-warming.htm
http://ossfoundation.us/projects/environment/global-warming/human-caused
This is a reasonably complete visual of the forces at work including some like aerosols that temporarily offset warming by reflecting incoming radiation back into space.
The red arrows are the crux of the problem.
More IR trapping by CO2.
Follow the chain of evidence that show the mechanism and the evidence for the increase in global energy.
The explanation and physics are rather simple - the evidence of the changes towards a warmer climate regime are massive.
The rest of the r-j's claim is simply conspiracy nonsense with no basis in fact whatsoever nor does he provide any supporting documents. You may draw your own conclusions about that and as a result how valid his "opinion" is regarding AGW.
It's okay to be wrong....it's not okay to persist in making factually incorrect statements in a science forum.
Last edited:
!