- Oct 16, 2023
- 1,019
- 185
- 67
- Country
- Canada
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- In Relationship
The quote you cite seems to say gasses contribute to it. The link I gave said that in the US, the majority do not support man made causes. Connect the dots. The point you missed or avoided was that there is distention in the ranks. Different claims and opinions from science. A house dividedYour link to the very organization you touted as representing the scientific community shows less than four-tenths of one percent of them disagree with position statement they posted:
"Research has found a human influence on the climate of the past several decades. Its manifestation includes the warming of the atmosphere and oceans, intensification of the heaviest precipitation over continental areas, increasing upper-ocean acidity, increasing frequency and intensity of daily temperature extremes, reductions in Northern Hemisphere snow and ice, and rising global sea level. The latitudinal and seasonal observations of the surface warming and the observed warming of the troposphere and cooling of the stratosphere are consistent with theoretical expectations from increased concentrations of greenhouse gases.
The increase in global average surface temperature over the past half-century cannot be fully explained by natural climate variability, e.g., responses to Earth’s orbital changes over thousands of years, or natural climate forcing such as from solar or volcanic variability."
You seem to be making my points for me. Or are you now telling me you no longer want to use them as representative of scientist opinion?
Seemed. Seemed to him...etc. To others it seems another way.He took a look at factors that would increase atmospheric warming. Only one of them seemed to fit the existing data.
Since that gas was rising, it was bound to be right if a warming trend happened. Just as if some claimed gases were to blame for cooling and a cooling weather trend happened, they would claim bragging rights.So he predicted what the future would be, using only carbon dioxide content of the atmosphere.
Yet the link said otherwise. Guess we better check the links as well as the prophesies here!The organization you touted has 13,000 members in the U.S. Only 50 of them dissented from the conclusion of that organization, supporting anthropogenic carbon dioxide as the cause of warming.
Either you or the link is wrong.
You seem to be seeking a popularity argument. As if the most votes win. Sorry, the point is dissension and that many were wrong. That is all that matters in a false prophesy thread! You cannot deny there was differences in prophesies or opinions. So just pick who you choose to believe! Who you pick merely tells us your beliefs!Also in 2021, a team led by Mark Lynas had found 80,000 climate-related studies
All sorts of prophets had it wrong and all used science in their arguments. Best to believe God and toss out all the opinions of men, who lie for profit, and are easily influenced by Satan and his vile little anti human agenda. Good thing God already told us the future and overrules them all.Your prophets just had it wrong. And by this century, there was no longer any debate. The vast majority of climatologists knew that warming is primarily the function of anthropogenic carbon dioxide.
Upvote
0