| General > General Technical Chat |
| heartbroken that John Clauser seems to have joined climate change denial. |
| << < (49/67) > >> |
| snarkysparky:
--- Quote from: MarginallyStable on August 08, 2023, 04:53:44 pm --- --- Quote ---There are probably plenty of similar mechanisms that we don't know about yet that could cause even more warming and more detrimental change. --- End quote --- Fear mongering about "mechanisms that we don't know". Let me rephrase this in another way There are probably plenty of opposite mechanisms that we don't know about yet that could cause less warming/possible cooling and slow down/reverse change. We then would fear the demise of the human race via cooling instead of warming. --- End quote --- What does this mean ? What is the relevance ? It's like saying that if my house is on fire i might as well just stand by cause some unknown effect could put out the fire. |
| vad:
--- Quote from: tom66 on August 08, 2023, 05:58:55 pm ---Could you indicate what those opposite mechanisms are? --- End quote --- 1) Photosynthesis 2) Reflection |
| PlainName:
--- Quote ---We then would fear the demise of the human race via cooling instead of warming. --- End quote --- To change the subject slightly, which would be, ah, least worst? I think we could keep warm in the cold, but it would be more difficult to get cool if it got hot. Though personally I prefer a nice summers day to winter... |
| Bud:
Depending on definition of 'cold' - vehicles would have difficulties to start, or not start at all, batteries would underperform and we will need to spend more energy, to keep them warm. And we'd need to go back to using animal fur for top clothing. |
| vad:
I was always wondering why there is the consensus in climate science, especially when other scientific fields often leave ample room for debate. In physics, for example, there is no consensus on topics such as dark matter. The Modified Newtonian Dynamics (MOND) theory, which is one of the alternatives to the Lambda Cold Dark Matter (LCDM) model, is still very much alive. Popular theoretical physicist Sabine Hossenfelder is one of the vocal proponents of MOND. If you read scientific journals, you will find that in modern cosmology there is no consensus on topics such as the age of the Universe (some recent paper claims the age is twice as long), and that in physics of condensed matter there is no consensus on whether LK99 is really a superconductor. However, in climate science, somehow there is consensus. I wonder why? This short video explains how the consensus is manufactured: |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Next page |
| Previous page |