Quote:
Originally Posted by Lune
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
1. They are using thousands of years of climate data to compare the last 150 years to the last few thousand, which tells us what is happening now is very rare and corresponds to what we should be expecting given models and the concentration of greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere.
2. We know the mechanics of the Greenhouse Effect-- we know that increasing concentrations of certain gasses in the atmosphere trap heat and result in a Ruth Bader Ginsberg machine of side effects and feedback loops that ultimately result in higher temperatures and/or warmer oceans. We see this play out on Venus, which has a runaway greenhouse effect, and Mars, which has none at all. We see it in Earth's history through fossil records and chemical analysis of ancient samples. Obviously there are all kinds of different properties on those planets but it's just a simple example. (90% confidence interval here)
3. We know that the dramatically increasing concentration of greenhouse gasses are due to human-related emissions.
150 years is particularly significant because the changes we've observed rarely happen so rapidly.
|
In that boldes piece are you suggesting that we atully have a model that
accurately predicts temperature changes? ^^ Just 2 years ago, UW published a study was published, concluding the climate has been warming throughout the Holocene, the exact opposite of a study from the year before. This of course while observations show cooling and models indicate warming.
That's just one example. Of course it is science at work, but it is far from conclusive. Climate science is also the only branch of science that is heavily politicized. There are heavily vested interests on both sides.