/sci/ - Science & Math

>>8757034
I can't even imagine what kind of poor education you're receiving that you've come to that conclusion. Is this supposed to be some kind of shitty argument from your own authority?

All of the evidence shows that humans have far more than a "negligible" impact on the Earth's climate system, you would know that if you even bothered to read any published studies on the subject.

>if there is anthropogenic climate change, than it is nearly 0
Hilarious for someone so ignorant on the topic to make such an absolutist statement. Sorry to tell you, but again, you're so wrong it's comical. You clearly have such little knowledge of the subject, it's honestly embarassing to claim you're working towards a masters and have come to this conclusion. Perhaps you should go and read the IPCC report, or some literature focused on climate forcings and atmospheric physics?

Here, I'll help you out:
https://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/wg1/WG1AR5_Chapter08_FINAL.pdf
First, read AR5 chapter 8 on climate forcings, it's a long read, but if you're an academic with training you should be able to breeze right through it, no?
FAW from ACS on what climate sensitivity is:
https://www.acs.org/content/acs/en/climatescience/atmosphericwarming/climatsensitivity.html

Second, you should read a few studies, as the IPCC is merely a compilation of the knowledge at the time the study is published, the IPCC did not conduct their own research, but many climate scientists, physicists and other earth science professionals contribute to the reports.

>but some people have diverted the minds of sheeple towards global warming and climate change.
Sounds like you're one of them, considering how ignorant you've already proven yourself to be on the subject, especially considering you state you're training for a Ms in environmental science. Truly embarrassing.

Science advances by evidence, you should know this, the body of evidence for anthropogenic climate change is astoundingly large.