How can an educated, rational person subscribe a theory of human induced global warming?

B

Baccheus

New member
Stop talking generalities and give specifics. In exactly what other 100 year period did temperatures rise so quickly. Clearly an educated, rational person would not compare warming that happened in a 100 year period to other periods that took tens of thousands of years to warm the same amount and think they must be the same cause.

So please name those other 100 year periods you are talking about -- the one's that no one else knows about. This is important for your credibility -- because if you cannot provide an example of a single warming century, you'll appear not as educated and rational, but as just another thoughtless uneducated ranter.

I think you will find you need more education in the subject, and that rational people do not rant on subjects they know nothing about.
 
In the past 500,000 years the earth has undergone several warming cycles. Humans were not present when these cycles occurred. Human production of greenhouse gasses was not present for the first 90% of the current warming cycle. This is clearly an involuntary process which has no regard for human activity.
 
An unbiased look at the raw data.

An educated, rational person should know that if one doesn't like the outcome, manipulate the data. With this issue being very complicated, the ability to manipulate the data to give a different result is very high.

Because something has happened in the past, no matter what is happening now can have no influence on GW??? That sounds pretty silly to me, definitely not rational.
 
Right. However, there is profit involved. People have been known to do some really dumb things if they think they can make some money in the process.
 
There were forest fires before humans walked the earth. Therefore human beings cannot be responsible for forest fires today.

The same educated, rational logic. Right?
 
Back
Top