{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
1/31/2017 8:27:56 PM
9
It's real. I don't think our contribution is that well known.
English
-
"Not that well known" is not the same as being able to pinpoint the exact extent of our effect on climate change. [url=http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/8/2/024024/meta]A 2013 literature review[/url] analyzed over 4,000 published research papers on the causes of global warming. 97% of all these papers concluded that humans are causing global warming. [url=http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronomy/2012/12/11/climate_change_denial_why_don_t_they_publish_scientific_papers.html]A 2012 analysis[/url] of almost 14,000 scientific papers published over the course of 25 years found that only 0.1% of all these papers rejected that humans had an influence on climate change. [url=http://ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/syr/AR5_SYR_FINAL_SPM.pdf]The fifth version of the United Nations Intergovernmental Climate Panel[/url] did a review in 2014 of just about all recently available scientific findings in addition to evaluate research by its own members and concluded, without any doubt, that "human influence on climate change is real". [url=http://www.pnas.org/content/107/27/12107.full.pdf]A 2010 overview of research[/url] reviewed publication data of nearly 1,500 scientists and found that 97-98% of all regularly publishing climate researchers were clear in their findings that humans affect and influence climate change. [url=http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2009EO030002/abstract]A large poll of over 3,000 climate scientists[/url] found a near absolute consensus that climate change is influenced by human activity among those who research and specialize in climatology. [url=http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0270467616634958]A 2015 literature meta-analysis of studies[/url] that covered a staggering 25,000 recent scientific papers by 70,000 researchers found that only 4 authors disagreed with the notion of human-influenced climate change, meaning that literally 99.99% of all scientists researching climate changes in the last few years agree that humans definitely influence climate change. Just to let that sink in for a moment, this means that only [b]0.0058%[/b] of all peer-reviewed authors on the topic of global warming do NOT think that humans contribute to climate change. [url=http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronomy/2014/01/14/climate_change_another_study_shows_they_don_t_publish_actual_papers.html]Another literature review[/url] of the research done by nearly 10,000 scientists in 2012-2013 concluded that ONLY ONE SINGLE PERSON out of 10,000 researchers (or 0.01%) did not conclude that humans negatively influence climate change. We might not be able to accurately determine exactly how much humans have contributed to climate change, but I sincerely hope you are not implying that there is still even the slightest sliver of doubt about whether humanity has negatively affected climate change.
-
We affect the climate. Negative or not depends. Some might have better crops and some might not. But I don't think for a minute that humans have "caused" global warming. I also don't pay attention to anything from the UN or the people that "look at blah blah scientific papers" because I've seen where they manipulate the narrative. Remember they added political and economical scientists to get their 97% whatever.
-
Edited by Flee: 1/31/2017 11:29:18 PM0.0058% of all 70,000 recent peer-reviewed and published authors on the topic of climate change agree and you, with zero knowledge on the topic without having even read the paper, are going to sit here and tell them they're wrong and "manipulate the narrative". Now that's something.
-
I think you are misunderstanding me. And getting a little emotion. Jeez, Man definitely contributes to climate change. I just think the climate is making a larger swing we might be accelerating it or intensifying it. I don't think it's such a critical issue right now in the world. I am in favor of basic measures but inflicting economy harm in the hopes that it might help a tiny bit is going too far. Like imposing random CAFE standards. Chill out babe.
-
Edited by Flee: 1/31/2017 11:43:35 PMThat's more reasonable, but it's no longer a question of "might" be accelerating or intensifying it. We are doing just that. And I do think it's critical and that we should take action now that we can, but that last part is indeed policy and not fact. And you're also not entirely correct in that last part of your previous post on how they reach these high numbers. While it's possible to push a narrative, it's a steady trend in almost all of these literature reviews that the more you look at actual climatologists and people who specialize in the field of climate and environment, the higher the consensus becomes. The more you start including other scientists who are not directly involved with climate or environmental issues, the more people start disagreeing with the idea that we are negatively influencing climate change. [url=https://skepticalscience.com/debunking-climate-consensus-denial.html]This is a beautiful and very well cited overview[/url] of how the criticism of the 97% falls short. And I edited my previous post. Apologies for that. I should be signing off anyways. Cheers and have a nice day.
-
To elaborate, you believe that there's insignificant evidence to suggest that humans are impacting climate change enough to make a difference?
-
I think we can only guess at our actual impact. I also see that a political ideology likes to use it as a weapon to beat their opponents and actively persecute scientists who do t tow the line. Even if you are right and we significantly affect thing I still consider technological advance worth the price.
-
Ok, so you think it's hard for us to judge our impact. You believe that politics interfere with the research. I may be misunderstanding the last part. You're saying that assuming we do have a significant impact on climate change, you think the alleged political interference is justifiable as long as there's progress towards clean energy?
-
No I think the increase in quality of life and the technology we live with is worth the damage being done. Planes, boats, factories, cars, everything would grind to a halt if we stopped fossil fuels. I am completely in favor of green energy sources as long as government isn't spending money on it trying to force it before it's time. The private industry will do a better job when the time is right.
