All right, so how many degrees per year, or per century, or decade, etc... ?? and for how long has this been happening?
I agree! The problem is how to prove things in physics. Einstein came up with the general theory of relativity. Luckily our moon and sun have the same visual size when viewed on earth so we can see how light bends during a total eclipse which supports Einstein's theory. Proving things in physics can be a lot tougher than in math. Mathematician Andrew Wiles finally proved Fermat's last theorem just recently after hundreds of years people trying. Unfortunately to understand and therefore accept this proof would take a lifetime or longer for most of us. I think the proof is 200 typed pages long. We will have to rely on experts.
I just reread all. I made some grammar and typing mistakes. I want to correct my bad typing of "God". Sorry about that!Edit: Second thought, I guess I was okay since I was using the word generically: "And when god is used generically or in reference to any but the Judeo-Christian, monotheistic god, it is not capitalized"
from ncdc.noaa.gov, statistics for 1900-1999population .6 billion to 6 billion ; carbon dioxide concentration in atmosphere 290 parts per million to 369 p.p.m. ; average temperature increase .6 degrees C per year.
And when did these measurements start?
Maybe our sins (e.g. polluting) are accumulating and gradually leading to another Great Flood. (well, at least that's a stupid way of explaining it to stupid people)
Climate change isn't science it's religion for gods sake.
The consensus that humans are causing recent global warming is shared by 90%–100% of publishing climate scientists according to six independent studies by co-authors of this paper. Those results are consistent with the 97% consensus reported by Cook et al (Environ. Res. Lett. 8 024024) based on 11 944 abstracts of research papers, of which 4014 took a position on the cause of recent global warming. A survey of authors of those papers (N = 2412 papers) also supported a 97% consensus. Tol (2016 Environ. Res. Lett. 11 048001) comes to a different conclusion using results from surveys of non-experts such as economic geologists and a self-selected group of those who reject the consensus.
cmon arent trolls supposed to recognize troll posts? There's no way Rach4ever is being serious.Is he..?
Anyways a new paper on scientific consensus for anthropogenic global warming was published today:https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/11/4/048002Paper is free, so it's a good read for those who are interested.
Are they increasing as much as our carbon emissions are increasing though? No. The graphs don't correlate. Actually the earth is warming, but not as fast as it used to be. And we are emitting more gasses and such then ever.
Waiting for him to make his point ...
Tell me, why would I? Why would I when you are all chomping at the bit like hyenas to shred my points with your brainwashed textbooks before even considering them?
It is actually also clear after some rumination that every single fact is actually a belief when occupying the mind of an idividual.
Regardless of what an "idividiual" may be, is 2+2 being 4 only a belief?