How can global climate change be scientifically disproven?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Brendan
  • Start date Start date
B

Brendan

Guest
With this question I am challenging you to explain to me in full scientific detail, how climate change cannot exist as a result of human actions on Earth.

I am very disgusted with the close minded, highly unscientific mode of thought followed by many doubters. On my own I have been unable to find any reliable evidence that refutes the chemistry of climate change, or provides another explanation for the gradual rise in average global temperature.
I myself have a very good understanding of the scientific principles of infrared radiation, the greenhouse effect, and the carbon cycle.

Do not waste your time shouting 'conspiracy!', I want scientific explanation from someone who shares a deep understanding of the topic from both sides of the argument.
Just as any scientific discussion should be held, I will receive your claims with an open mind, yet do my best to refute them respectfully and with empirical evidence. I appreciate any insight you can offer me!

The uneducated, biased, and closed minded dare not reply.
Alright guys, I appreciate the interest, but we are four for none. I don't want a "he said she said" competition. Your opinions mean nothing without evidence to support them.
TO PETER; interesting website, but sunspots are *cold* spots on the sun.. I would really like to see some evidence suggesting that increased solar output coincides with the visible rise in global temperature...

Please guys, re-read what I am asking for in my question and respond accordingly.
 
Look at the sun. Watch the global temperature vary with the sunspot activity.

Sunspots now still zero... it's been cooling and the forecast is cold.

http://www.spaceweather.com

And as you're standing with a bunch of people who claims that AGW exists... prove that human beings do have an effect on the climate. Proofs are of something positive, not of something negative.
 
no one denies the climate changes it has been for the past 12,000 years since the end of the last Ice Age, eventually all the ice will melt and somehow that will trigger another ice age

my theory is that ocean plankton will thrive in the flooded liquid planet, but as these organisms die they take the carbon with them and it creates another ice age, they must reproduce extra fast and world wide life prospsers for a thousand years then the Ice age hits when enough carbon is taken out of the atmosphere
 
This can be argued forever. There is a lot of scientific data out there that proves global warming is not a danger to earth. What is proven however is that there is another ice age coming. El nino comes every four years and changes the climate. Go to your local university and talk to as many science majors as you can. They would love to sit down a debate this issue with you and hsow you facts that go both ways, but here is one point to think about.
A lot of the "research" is funded by private organizations so really what is published is what the boss believes wants to believe.
 
If we keep increasing the atmospheric concentration of CO2, the agent which is supposed to cause warming and was projected by AGW theory proponents to cause warming, and it doesn't get any warmer, then that would appear to disprove the theory - - or at least to prove that we don't know enough about how the climate works to conclude one way or the other, which would mean that in a free society there is no basis to override individual liberty.

Somehow magically it's been cooling since 2005 but each year somehow finds its way to barely make the "top 10 warmest year" - - I'm sure the numerical gyrations used are akin to those used by stock analysts to maintain their target price no matter what bad news comes out about the company - - but they can't do that forever.
 
thank you.
even if "global warming" isnt exactly what theyve said it is, shouldnt we be conserving and taking up better living habits so that we do not run out of clean air and water and other resources?
 
You must be new here.

Anyway, you can't prove a negative.

But the positive has been proven and no viable alternative has been presented (they've all been debunked).

But you won't find that information here from the deniers.

But go ahead and debunk all the previously debunked ideas.

Just be careful about getting too uppity in your smackdowns or they'll report you for chatting.
 
Back
Top