Quote:
Originally Posted by Erick Estrada
So what is incidental and what is natural?
|
If you don't know the answer to that then you really aren't in a position to form an informed opinion on the subject...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erick Estrada
If there was no climate change we would be sharing the earth with dinosaurs and thousands of other spiecies of life that roamed this planet many years ago under different global climates.
|
Sure, no one claims that climate doesn't change by itself in the absence of human influence either. This is the same fallacy as Mel's just in the opposite direction. Just because X is changing because of Y now doesn't mean that Y is the only thing that can change X.
As I replied to Mel, there are a number of forcings that influence climate, all of them have to be studied and tracked in order to be able to attribute a specific event to a specific combination of forcings.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erick Estrada
I don't think anyone debates that man may play a small role in climate change but if we all lived in tents and igloos and rode horses since the 1800's to now we would still be facing changing climates today.
|
How can you say that when you earlier ask the question about what portion of climate change is natural? If you don't know the answer to that question you can't make this statement (well you can, but it's based on ideology rather than science). Without some support for this claim, it's nothing more than an argument from personal incredulity. Which forcings are sufficient to counteract the directly observed forcing due to increased CO2?
Which aspect of the basics do you disagree with? The basic physics of CO2 and electromagnetic radiation? The measured concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere? The source of that CO2?