[Climate Change] Lake Erie up to 60% Covered in Ice

I think Climate Change is real.
*I* however am unsure of the cause of it.
Whether there is a Cause or if it is part of a Cycle.

Rocket River

Spoiler

 

So I think Climate Change as a label is a bit of a misnomer. There has always been climate change...I think that's inarguable, right? We know there were alligators at the poles at one point, right?

 

yeah it is nuts when in the 80's it was all about the next ice age.. then in the late 90's to 2000's it was all about global warming and everyone is going to burn to death. And now it's just climate change. Looks like the govts/scientists have their bases covered now. Regardless if it's getting warmer or cooler, they have a term they can use to keep asking for money. Yay!

 

Of course. Whats laughable is watching the liberals flop around from 'new ice age coming; give us your money to stop it' to 'global warming; give us your money to stop it' to 'the climate is gonna change; give us your money to stop it'. Surely this last doom prediction will stick. Surely.

 

Not at all what informed liberals or the consensus of scientists in agreement about the state of climate change have to say about the matter. Educate yourself, pick up a science textbook, or leave the study to the adults who's actual career it is to study the science.

 

Remember when the 'consensus' was the earth was getting colder? Remember when the 'consensus' was we should all eat 6-8 proportion of breads a day (the food pyramid)? Remember when the 'consensus' was the earth was flat?

There is no consensus amongst scientist on climate change. BTW.....Your such an adult.

 

You sound like someone who reads only the cover of a book and thinks that they know exactly what the book is about.

 

http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

As a student of science, almost every single professor I had in my upper level science courses said that there was overwhelming evidence regarding climate change and the science behind how humans are adversely affecting it. While I may not be on the side of those who seem to think about how extreme the effects will be and how soon we may see them, to say that it is a hoax would be the literal definition of ignorance.

 

Your college professors told you the climate would be different in the future? how radical?!?!?!?!

nobody disputes this. What they dispute is how it will be different.

Also please don't throw out the title 'professor' like that has some weight to it.

 

I think the idea of "consensus" among scientists about anything other than the most broad of topics is ridiculous. For example, you might get consensus that the climate is changing, but no way do you get consensus as to why, or how, or by how much, or how/if it can be stopped.

Science is fun in that in almost every field with every new discovery, the books are re-written. What is seen as "obvious" one day, might be seen as completely stupid the next.

 

They stood on the point that the climate would change due to human causes; most notably the emission of fossil fuels; most notably the new shipping lanes that have opened due to melting ice caps in the north pole. These new shipping lanes pollute out so much soot that deposits on ice, thus decreasing its albedo, and increasing the melting rate of areas like Greenland. If you go there today, you will see mass amounts of glaciers calving off into the ocean at a rate unprecedented to us. The effects you might ask? Increasing sea levels to the point that many economic centers of the world will be displaced. As far as the myth that the right has established in which liberals believe in a coming ice age from climate change... idk where that comes from.

 

The scientific consensus is that man's actions are contributing to climate change. I, for one, think it's absolutely absurd to not think that we are affecting the environment. We have hundreds of millions of cars operating 24/7 365. That, to me, is like a man made volcano. The idea that there are no consequences to that is just not realistic.

 

ugh.

climate change is happening, it IS real. That is not what is being disputed. The only questions surrounding the situation is whether or not man or nature are responsible for it.

However, to be completely ignorant of the evidence that Man's actions are having an effect on nature is resoundingly disappointing. YES, climate change is cyclic...and YES, man's actions ARE also affecting the climate negatively. Man AND Nature are responsible for it.

However, don't you think its worth limiting the impact that man is having on the Earth so that our world can Naturally correspond and compensate for cyclic changes?

yes, regulations will have some negative economic impact..but that impact is likely to be much less than the long-term economic impact of an environment that is not friendly to our current way of life.

 

Sure, it's reasonable to think that might have some effect, but how much of an effect? Is human contribution what's driving "climate change" or is it more a natural process? Can we reverse the effects of "climate change"?

That's where the "consensus" falls apart.

 

that right wing magazine Time pushed the myth too



This is what was pushed before Global Warming and before Climate Change. It was totally the 'consensus' that all the professors believed.

SOME impact? you have no idea what you are saying.

 

Let me just say I completely agree with you. The evidence however seems to point to the fact that we are indeed the chief culprits of this change. As for the extent of the change, how much of an effect it will have in our lifetime, and to what degree we can reverse the effects, these variables are always changing in the scientific community, and yes I agree that there is not a consensus on those factors.

 

Just stop. Someone posted a Time magazine cover from 19muther****ing77 so this debate is obviously over.

 

try reading........

 

Sorry, just one glance at your posts makes me lose brain cells, so I just give them a once-over with my eyes squinted just in case the dumb is contagious.

 

If you aren't mature enough to be apart of a debate or discussion then why come in here?