Originally posted by Mister Fork
a) The science of meteorology is new.
Yes.
b) It is hard for meteorologists to accurately predict weather temperatures to 90% accuracy for 7 days in advance. Models and the science are getting better, but it's still a relatively new science field, similar to nuclear. How they can predict climate change 10-50-100 years from now is an interesting dilemma for the science field. A lot of us are asking the same questions based on this fact. Can they? Are they accurate? How accurate are they? Are the models being used 99.99999% accurate because it can impact the long term results over 50-100 years? Is there anything else that could cause the earth to warm?
Predicting weather temperatures is not really what this is about though. For example, we know that surface water temperature is a deciding factor when it comes to wind strenght in hurricanes. We also know that the surface temperature of the ocean is increasing. These two known facts lets us make predictions about the future.
Same with CO2 and average temperature. We know that CO2 is a deciding factor when it comes to how much heat is captured in the earths atmosphere via the greenhouse effect. We also know that the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere is getting higher and higher. These two known facts lets us make predictions about the future.
The crucial thing right now is not to know exactly how warm the average surface temperature on earth will be in 50-100 years. We know that it will be warmer, and we can make predictions based on various scenarios.
Then there are alot of unknowns. One of the big ones, without a doubt is the permafrost in Siberia. We cant know exactly when or if that one will thaw, but we can know that we will be in big trouble if it does.
So, we dont need to know the exact weather in june 2067, it is enough to know the basic facts.
c) The earth is warming, but it has cooled and warmed in patterns, and often without any explanation. It is unknown whether to 99.9% ascertain that the current warming has a specific interference from human released pollutants or a natural trend. For example, Scientists has reported that Mars is warming too but they don't know why either. But to say with a certain that it’s CO2 is hard to prove because of the relationship between the atmosphere and the planet. It’s a very hard science field. Could they be wrong? If so, what next? At what risk is the green-minded society placing their entire gambit to clean up our planet on CO2 alone?
Actually the Mars-thing has been thoroughly debunked. And it has been proven that the sun is not responsible for the current warming of earth. To put it in rudimentary terms, its getting warmer on earth, but the suns activity is diminishing.
It has cooled and warmed in patterns, but these patterns have explanations. And that is really beside the point, because as I detailed above, we do know that the concentration of CO2 is the primary deciding factor on how much heat gets captured via the greenhouse effect, and we do know that the current CO2 levels are the highest recorded in the past 600 000 years. That means it is getting warmer, and this will continue, because it will not start getting colder if CO2 levels are rising.
d) If the initiatives of a green-minded society are on a chance that perhaps a global temperature rise of one or two Celsius the next one hundred years is the issue, they need to give their heads a shake. CO2 emissions (if it is indeed causing global warming) are a symptom of much larger problem: blatant consumption of the world’s natural resources so that 5% of the worlds wealthy can become rich on the backs of 95% of the worlds poor. That issue needs to be addressed – can we start living differently than we are today to make a real impact on the world?
Whats important here is the global warming problem. Not some socialist scheeme to even out the differences between the rich and the poor. If you want to discuss stuff like that, you should find another thread.
e) You’ll have a greater chance of dying from pollution-related diseases from consumerism than global warming will even if the world’s temperature increased 5-10 degrees Celsius.
I run a greater risk at that, yes. But that is because I live where I live. If you were to talk to someone from Bangladesh, the answer would be different, because if global mean temperature rises with 2 degrees, his home will be under water. Or if you talk to someone who gets his drinking water from the Himalayas...because those glaciers will be gone in 50 or so years if we get that temperature rise. And then you will be looking at lots of thirsty Chinese and Indian guys.
