itt post 'non-intuitive' consequences of climate change

[Daily Routine]

Originally Posted by 10906987358702

whatever caused it before humans existed i imagine

didn't happen like this more than a few times and never by the same thing
always by some aberration

why are you so opposed to this probability

[Daily Routine]

Originally Posted by kitsch

nate i am not a fan of this new posting formatting

i understand you might think its more pomo because of the text shape

but these double line breaks really are essential to separate your points of emphasis

I don't thinks its more pomo you doofus, you don't get me one bit

I cancelled my internet subscription a while ago so I've been posting from my smart phone

any changes in style are a direct result of ergonomics

[Daily Routine]

Originally Posted by RouteOne

global warming is not caused by humans

zealotry

[10906987358702]

Originally Posted by Daily Routine

didn't happen like this more than a few times and never by the same thing
always by some aberration

why are you so opposed to this probability

there's been a spike in temperature every hundred thousand years or so for quite a while and this one is in line with that cycle

any explanation of the historical ones is likely to be a just so story

im opposed to this probability because there isnt and couldnt be evidence to support it

[Daily Routine]

there is evidence as well as a thorough understanding of the basic mechanisms

and no that's not exactly true, global warming isn't a "natural cycle" and it has only happened like this a few times

it has always and will always require the force of some event, it doesnt just happen - that makes no sense
that same page Chris keeps citing addresses this issue but I'm not gonna bother myself to find it

[kitsch]

Originally Posted by Daily Routine

I don't thinks its more pomo you doofus, you don't get me one bit

I cancelled my internet subscription a while ago so I've been posting from my smart phone

any changes in style are a direct result of ergonomics

Obv im not being a tool on purpose

[10906987358702]

Originally Posted by Daily Routine

there is evidence as well as a thorough understanding of the basic mechanisms

so post the evidence

Originally Posted by Daily Routine

and no that's not exactly true, global warming isn't a "natural cycle" and it has only happened like this a few times

any event that has caused climate change in the past was a natural event

arguably anthropogenic climate change would also be a natural event

regardless the cycle exists and this current period fits

[Daily Routine]

the evidence is that we know that co2 is a greenhouse gas
we know the history of levels and understand their source
we know how greenhouse gasses affect global mean temperature
we know that the recent rise in greenhouse gasses correlates more strongly than anything else with the recent rise in temperature and that this is congruent with our understanding of how things work

we know what is the best guess

and don't equivocate on the meaning of natural
past rises in temperature were always the result of some unusual, singular event, not some natural phase pattern. Temperature rises like this don't just happen - something we also fully understand - they're always the result of some massive input or redistribution of energy. This isn't like a pendulum type thing

[Daily Routine]

Originally Posted by kitsch

Obv im not being a tool on purpose

huh

[Jandarhwaal]

ITS NOVEMBER OF COURSE IT GONNA BE COLD AS FUCK
a

[RouteOne]

123

[10906987358702]

Originally Posted by Daily Routine

the evidence is that we know that co2 is a greenhouse gas
we know the history of levels and understand their source
we know how greenhouse gasses affect global mean temperature
we know that the recent rise in greenhouse gasses correlates more strongly than anything else with the recent rise in temperature and that this is congruent with our understanding of how things work

we know what is the best guess

and don't equivocate on the meaning of natural
past rises in temperature were always the result of some unusual, singular event, not some natural phase pattern. Temperature rises like this don't just happen - something we also fully understand - they're always the result of some massive input or redistribution of energy. This isn't like a pendulum type thing

wtf dude you whine about me equivocating on what is natural and then you go and do it

what is natural is what happens

even if you dont think natural is the right word for that then what would that have to do with anything

these events have been happening in a pattern

this event fits with that pattern

and you stating this stuff about what we understand isnt evidence, in fact you've given me no more information than i had before i asked for it (i.e. a number of people think this is what is happening)

though i dont hold out much hope since your standard of evidence seems to on the level of we have more of these two things now, one must have caused the other

ridic

[Daily Routine]

they haven't been happening in a regular pattern

[10906987358702]

400,000 years ago - temperature spike
300,000 years ago - temperature spike
200,000 years ago - temperature spike
100,000 years ago - temperature spike
today - temperature spike

even if this wasnt the case the evidence is still ridiculous

[Astronaut]

Originally Posted by Jandarhwaal

ITS NOVEMBER OF COURSE IT GONNA BE COLD AS FUCK
a

it's in the 80's F here tomorrow

[Daily Routine]

Originally Posted by 10906987358702

wtf dude you whine about me equivocating on what is natural and then you go and do it

what is natural is what happens

even if you dont think natural is the right word for that then what would that have to do with anything

these events have been happening in a pattern

this event fits with that pattern

and you stating this stuff about what we understand isnt evidence, in fact you've given me no more information than i had before i asked for it (i.e. a number of people think this is what is happening


though i dont hold out much hope since your standard of evidence seems to on the level of we have more of these two things now, one must have caused the other

ridic

atmospheric co2 levels topping 390ppm etc
its all correllation and understanding causation
what I described is as much evidence as you could have for any other possibility
I'm not going to give you a full data set

[10906987358702]

i dont think you understand the causation

i think you believe in it because you think you should

[Daily Routine]

the causation is stupidly simple

I think you don't believe in it either cuz you don't wanna or you see an exhaust pipe and think to yourself "THAT'S causing global warming?! pfffft get real"

so this is going nowhere

[10906987358702]

you think the causation is simple because you don't understand it

no well informed proponent would claim that the mechanisms involved arent incredibly complex

[Daily Routine]

their manifestation is irreducibly complex

but the principles themselves aren't

which basically goes for everything everywhere