Don't forget domestication and propagation. Cows and breeding produces a significant amount of greenhouse gasses.
Then it would follow that global warming would have been a real problem a couple centuries ago when there were vast herds of bison covering hundreds of square miles. There were far, far more bovine critters roaming around then than there are now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Funetical
I expect if you are going to peddle something as truth, regardless of what it is, you should have evidence. That's what science is.
Exactly! So having a preconceived conclusion and fudging and omitting data in order to arrive at that conclusion -- and ostracizing anyone who speaks out against what you're doing -- isn't scientific at all. It's nonsense. But that's exactly what the anthropogenic global warmers have done.
For any who research the names and money trails behind the AGW movement, it quickly becomes pretty clear this is about politics and money, not science or love of the environment.
Then it would follow that global warming would have been a real problem a couple centuries ago when there were vast herds of bison covering hundreds of square miles. There were far, far more bovine critters roaming around then than there are now.
It was, Bearing Strait ring a bell? It was an ice bridge. Know what happened? It melted. Know why? It got hotter.
Since we started documenting it, we have more or less proven climate shifts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian
Exactly! So having a preconceived conclusion and fudging and omitting data in order to arrive at that conclusion -- and ostracizing anyone who speaks out against what you're doing -- isn't scientific at all. It's nonsense. But that's exactly what the anthropogenic global warmers have done.
For any who research the names and money trails behind the AGW movement, it quickly becomes pretty clear this is about politics and money, not science or love of the environment.
Agreed, I'm just asking for science, pure and simple, neither side is giving me any, I'm only getting are nu-uhs and uh-huhs, and that ain't what I'm after.
It's over thousands and thousands of years, which we weren't even recording meteorological data. So no one can prove a thing, it's all speculation and theories.
__________________
Discover Scentsy at Lucky Lucy Scentsy Products - an independent Scentsy consultant!
Of course there's climate shifts - as far as something to compare them to, we have absolutely zero 100% confident evidence. All we have are best guesses.
__________________
Discover Scentsy at Lucky Lucy Scentsy Products - an independent Scentsy consultant!
I mean we have our data of temperature fluctuations, of course. But we don't have data further back than what we can 100% know as a control example to compare those to, to know if we're causing it, or if it's just a natural flux of temperature.
__________________
Discover Scentsy at Lucky Lucy Scentsy Products - an independent Scentsy consultant!
The earth's climate has changed many times over the eons; even before man was around. Without some periods of "global warming" north america would still be a glacier field. Yes we humans have introduced some chemicals and temps have gone up a few degrees but noone has shown a 100% correlation between the two. Some days I think we give ourselves too much credit; I believe we are not capable of "destroying the world". What we might be capable of is making the environemnt unfit for humans. Wonder what the next dominant species would be?
The earth's climate has changed many times over the eons; even before man was around. Without some periods of "global warming" north america would still be a glacier field. Yes we humans have introduced some chemicals and temps have gone up a few degrees but noone has shown a 100% correlation between the two. Some days I think we give ourselves too much credit; I believe we are not capable of "destroying the world". What we might be capable of is making the environemnt unfit for humans. Wonder what the next dominant species would be?
Quite plausible and; as for the next dominant species...........the answer may not be known for eons-----------especially with our birthrate plummeting as we speak (more and more nations are now at ZPG or lower).
I don't know anyone with their head screwed on right who denies that climate change occurs, either on a global scale or in a localized fashion. The issue today is whether or not man has a measurable impact on climate change. In light of the fact that we have solid evidence of warming and cooling periods prior to the industrial revolution and in light of the fact temperatures are rising on other planets and moons in the solar system, it is disingenuous to suggest man is responsible for a warming trend on earth, particularly when the data that might support that argument need to be fudged in order to support the idea.
If the warmers can come up with something other than "the earth is warming" and provide some sound argument that man is causing it, then fine -- we need to do something pronto. But they haven't, and when you look at those who fund and foster many environmental movements it becomes pretty clear this is a political and economic issue, not an environmental one.
Linear Mode
