/sci/ - Science & Math

>>10242029
>You have no valid reasons to rule out the possibility that climate change is caused by natural factors
Do we have any valid reasons to rule out the possibility it's caused by leprechauns? We are able to accurately model the climate based on our current understanding, and that model shows that it's not natural. If you have a better model that says otherwise then present it, otherwise you're just spouting bullshit. You would also need to explain how human emissions are not causing the warming we directly observe them to via radiative spectroscopy, or explain how humans are causing cooling that cancels out that warming. Good luck. Until then, I'll stick with the actual successful models rather than your wishful thinking.

>Paleoclimate data calls bullshit >>10240891 #
Please explain how tyre paleoclimate data contradicts our observations of current radiative forcing. Or just admit you have no idea what you're talking about. This is childish.

>>9915766
>Viking age (Medieval Warm period) was warmer than today.
Your graph only shows the temperature in one place in Greenland, not global temperatures. The medieval warm period does not even show up in the global reconstructions.

>The World is warming up again due to natural cycle of activity of sun.
There's just a few problems with that:

1. The sun does not have a cycle in the same time frame as global warming.

2. Solar irradiance had been decreasing for decades while the temperature has been increasing

3. Radiative forcing from the sun since global warming began is much lower than the observed radiative forcing.

>It's unrelated to Carbon Dioxide.
So the greenhouse effect does not exist?

>>4528232
I'd believe that if the science supported it. Everyone with a cursory understanding of the climate for the last 100 years can recognize a warming trend, but these so-called greenhouse models can't explain the actual, observed patterns of warming. Maybe ask an real climatologist and not Al Gore.

>>4528237
>Permian
>Permian
>Permian
>Permian

>>4528241
Agreed, Geology is hardly even recognized as a science anyway. I shouldn't even be posting here. I'll go burn my MSc now.

>>4528232
I'd believe that if the science supported it. Everyone with a cursory understanding of the climate for the last 100 years can recognize a warming trend, but these so-called greenhouse models can't explain the actual, observed patterns of warming. Maybe ask an real climatologist and not Al Gore.

>>4528237
>Permian
>Permian
>Permian
>Permian

>>4528241
Agreed, Geology is hardly even recognized as a science anyway. I shouldn't even be posting here. I'll go burn my MSc now.