Quote:
Originally Posted by Azred
But the generic term "climate change" gives people the ability to claim that anything that happens is proof that they were right, whether all the ice melts or we have a mini ice-age.
I have read some of the articles and studies and they all do the same thing--they begin with the premise that human beings are causing a problem and then show how the data proves their point.
The weather will take care of itself; we are not capable of wildly influencing it no matter how much our over-inflated senses of ego tell us otherwise.
|
Give
specific examples of "articles and studies." Actual things we can discuss, not just some wave of your hand that is supposed to support whatever you are saying. I think you have gross misunderstanding of the entire process. If you have indeed read papers and articles and came to that conclusion, let us both come to that conclusion; I'm willing to keep an open mind about such things. But my suspicion is that you aren't understanding the proper context and have misunderstood various aspects.
Also I don't think it is hubris to say we are capable of altering the climate on a global scale. Human's have already altered a significant number of systems on this planet already. We've significantly altered the lithosphere, biosphere, arguably the hydrosphere. Humans have completely altered the nitrogen cycle around the world, we're accelerating the extinction of species to historic levels. We've dramatically altered the natural landscapes all over the world, and a lot of natural ecosystem processes have completely changed due to humans.
When we inhabit a large chunk of the habitable land on this planet, and people think we aren't capable of altering large scale processes, that is a bad argument. We have already, and climate, which is dependant on so many variables, can also be affected (and data is pointing in the direction that we are doing so).