oldephartte (oldephartte) wrote,

How can I convince someone climate change is not a hoax ?

How can I convince someone that climate change is not a hoax?

Bryson Reiner, studied at PhD in Biochemistry

First, look at the time frame of our data- 120 years if you believe we could actually have a summary of the global temperature 100 years ago with likely less than a few reliable temperature gauges every 10,000 square miles. But ok- I'll grant you your 120 years- now stack that up against 4.5 billion years of data that are unaccounted for- and please don't talk to me of tree rings and ice measurements. It's not even a drop in the metaphorical bucket. How many climate changes do you suspect have occurred in that time span, millions, billions? And now sky is falling because of a cooling trend that hasn't lasted a half of a century? Look, I know this argument is tired but it's appropriate- weather predictions have thousands of variables- we can't predict the weather accurately beyond 48 hours- look at colorados and NOAAs attempts to predict hurricane seasonal activity- the sum of total of their predictions being no better than chance. Our climate science is quite nascent in the whole scheme of things but yet presumes to know that the current trend will persist and then they presume to know why when they're perfectly aware of thousands of variables of which they know nothing or very little. In all honesty- the entirety of even the relatively short term predictions have fallen woefully short of any accuracy, but we are to trust them that the current warming trend will persist? They have no idea, no basis, and it's a total fallacy to assume that because we've had 30 or even 100 years of warming such a trend will continue. It's like saying because you flipped a coin 100 times and got heads every time that the next toss will also be heads. Those of you that trust this science I ask you to look up prior predictions, do the research, check the accuracy, do it with as little bias as you can shrug off, then tell me you truly believe that they can predict long term climate trends. Do you know why thats impossible, because we cant measure it. Show me one long term study of weather trends then check the outcomes- there are none, as in zero. This is a young science without even a measuring stick for comparison and accuracy but we should follow them down the rabbit hole. The irony here is sublime. Those of you who chastise Christians for their blind faith in a higher power are placing faith in a science that has yet to exhibit any merits at all. Really, have you seen any long term weather predictions, something beyond a few decades? You have not, they don't exist, and the computer models that do exist cannot be inclusive of every single variable, to do that would be to predict the future. You would have to know exactly how and when ocean currents would shift, warm and cool. Our own Gulf Stream off the Florida coast shifts weekly by miles and miles with drastic temperature and salinity shifts which has befuddled and stumped NOAA for so long that they've given up even the attempt and settle for just summarizing what is rather than what will/may be. Can these models predict the amount of deforestation that will occur in Brazil affecting O2 output, then extrapolate the exact amount of CO2 output based on Brazilian legislation that allowed for more wood harvesting due to a popular vote that went awry and elected a party bent on increasing economic growth? Can they predict the sandstorms off subsaharan Africa and the degree in which they will affect the local and global climate? Colorado and NOAA couldnt last year. Can they predict volcanic events, or deep geothermal warming and cooling- as in the center of the earth-you know, because we have a really long thermometer we can just slide into the earths core, red algal blooms and their effect on plankton and their subsequent effect on CO2? Im not even scratching the surface on the variables here but I'm willing to bet the farm that no one could predict a single one of these events long term. To predict accurate long term weather of you need to first know of, then predict how each and every variable will act and you have to get all of those right or there's a big fat cow in the ointment. It's asinine to think any model could summarize and predict the sum total of all variables to determine long range outcomes, it's literally like predicting the future on vast/global scale- seriously? Do you really believe anything or anyone has that sort of capacity? And you think faith in god is absurd. Ask the right questions, of course the climate changes often and frequently. The question should be do you believe that it's possible to predict long term climate trends, and then ask yourself- and consider mans previous attempts when mucking with the environment- should we seek to alter the trajectory of the climate.


“ the republicans have not been unified in their story. “ And there you go. If Republicans were behind a drive to lie about climate ( though some days they seem to lie about almost everything else ) then you know two things 1) the question is a political football 2) propaganda is at work. Personally, I think your view is too small. People in the U.S. have a bad case of “it’s all about us.” I do not make this just a U.S. partisan matter. Nor does the 97% consensus do a lot for me. If it were true, there would not be such disagreement. Which is another point.There should only be agreement about things that we know. Go ahead. Ask me to believe that we know what conditions are in the future. Excuse me while I have a ROFLMAO moment.

Tags: atmospheric temperature, climate, uncertain certainty
  • Post a new comment


    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.