Are human activities influencing the climate?

08-09-2017 01:15PM

OP, I'd suggest you read some of the below.

General climate change questions: https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/6ertms/askscience_megathread_climate_change/

Good ELI5 on current proof of climate change: https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5h8c8e/eli5_please_explain_climate_change_proof_like_i/

How severe it is: https://www.reddit.com/r/NeutralPolitics/comments/5dd45z/how_serious_is_climate_changeglobal_warming_and/

To everyone else, maybe read this instead of just shltting on people and feeling smart: https://www.desmogblog.com/2017/04/26/what-makes-climate-science-deniers-change-their-minds-reddit-confessional-gave-us-rare-insight

Zillah · 08-09-2017 01:26PM

Potatoeman wrote: »

It's all theory.

And in three words you show you don't know anything about the most fundamental principles of science.

In science a theory is a thoroughly tested body of knowledge use to explain countless separate facts. Everything we know about gravity is The Theory of Gravity. Everything we know about bacteria is Germ Theory. Atoms are Atomic Theory. In science a theory is a higher state of knowledge than fact, because a theory accounts for many facts and explains how they all relate to each other.

In general conversation a 'theory' is a guess or a notion. People who know nothing about science think it is used in this sense. It isn't.

Beefy78 · 08-09-2017 01:38PM

Deleted User wrote: »

His poll options were Minor and Major. He didn't even leave an None option.

Wtf happened boards recently? You're like the people who never read articles, even when there's no article.

Where in my post did I suggest otherwise? Bit rich to have a pop at me for not reading his post when you clearly didn't read mine.

08-09-2017 01:50PM

Beefy78 wrote: »

Where in my post did I suggest otherwise? Bit rich to have a pop at me for not reading his post when you clearly didn't read mine.

"but you have to have your head buried very deep up your own arsehole " .... "isn't impacting the climate".

Isn't = None

Or were you not implying that it was OP with his head up his arsehole?

08-09-2017 02:00PM

Zillah wrote: »

And in three words you show you don't know anything about the most fundamental principles of science.

In science a theory is a thoroughly tested body of knowledge use to explain countless separate facts. Everything we know about gravity is The Theory of Gravity. Everything we know about bacteria is Germ Theory. Atoms are Atomic Theory. In science a theory is a higher state of knowledge than fact, because a theory accounts for many facts and explains how they all relate to each other.

In general conversation a 'theory' is a guess or a notion. People who know nothing about science think it is used in this sense. It isn't.

I think you misread his post.. It pretty much is all theory right now, isn't it? And it didn't sound like he was denying that theory.

So using whatever definition of proof that science uses, can you link to actual proof of our affect on the climate? (not ocean levels etc.)

I know that global temperature basically is climate but I'd be more interested in climate events. Like from my understanding, it's basically impossible that we can say that climate change is making hurricanes stronger because the sample size is too small.

Richard Hillman · 08-09-2017 02:05PM

Yes, I believe we are responsible but as a respecter of science, I believe both sides should be heard.

I believe that overpopulation is the biggest driver, followed by cutting down trees.

We had an opportunity with Ebola and we messed it up. The planet self regulates itself amazingly. Eventually it will find something we can't stop how its nature can thrive

08-09-2017 02:11PM

Richard Hillman wrote: »

Yes, I believe we are responsible but as a respecter of science, I believe both sides should be heard.

I believe that overpopulation is the biggest driver, followed by cutting down trees.

We had an opportunity with Ebola and we messed it up. The planet self regulates itself amazingly. Eventually it will find something we can't stop how its nature can thrive

I'm pretty sure the trees thing is a tad overrated. We lose a third of a percent of our trees per year, but trees only account for 25% of CO2 > Oxygen..

It always feels like most people don't realise algae does most of it. And I don't understand why the effect of the oceans warming and potentially threatening that isn't talked about more.

Mr. teddywinkles · 08-09-2017 02:25PM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I'm pretty sure the trees thing is a tad overrated. We lose a third of a percent of our trees per year, but trees only account for 25% of CO2 > Oxygen..

It always feels like most people don't realise algae does most of it. And I don't understand why the effect of the oceans warming and potentially threatening that isn't talked about more.

Soil erosion due to deforestation is a major one I'd say. Any mechanical venture by humans in general has a detrimental to the environment. Weather it be small or big is up for debate. Don't forget all the major wildfires this year too. Becoming so common now there hardly reported any more.

IvySlayer · 08-09-2017 02:30PM

Warmer sea temperatures and higher sea levels caused by humans have made hurricanes even more dangerous.

There's the proof.

Storms that would be a once in a lifetime event are becoming more and more regular

08-09-2017 02:40PM

IvySlayer wrote: »

Warmer sea temperatures and higher sea levels caused by humans have made hurricanes even more dangerous.

There's the proof.

Storms that would be a once in a lifetime event are becoming more and more regular

I'm not denying it's true, but that's not proof.

The poster above got ridiculed because of what I believe was a misunderstanding, so I'm asking for some proof, as that's exactly what he said we didn't have in his post.

Potatoeman · 08-09-2017 02:49PM

Zillah wrote: »

And in three words you show you don't know anything about the most fundamental principles of science.

In science a theory is a thoroughly tested body of knowledge use to explain countless separate facts. Everything we know about gravity is The Theory of Gravity. Everything we know about bacteria is Germ Theory. Atoms are Atomic Theory. In science a theory is a higher state of knowledge than fact, because a theory accounts for many facts and explains how they all relate to each other.

In general conversation a 'theory' is a guess or a notion. People who know nothing about science think it is used in this sense. It isn't.

This is why you have to prove your theory. Gravity is a proven and accepted theory where as evolution is an accepted but unproven theory as their is no evidence of the missing link so far. You can't expect people to make sweeping changes on an unsubstantiated theory. You need to prove your theory,

Dramatik · 08-09-2017 02:50PM

Ye can't blame me if I'm dead in ground a few hundred years, ha ha suckers!

diomed · 08-09-2017 02:53PM

Great chart above.
I learned that thermometers were invented in 20000 BC and humans moving to Argentina caused global warming.

professore · 08-09-2017 02:57PM

Potatoeman wrote: »

There is no actual proof of it at the moment. It's all theory. One thing almost all researchers would agree though, is that global warming is far better than global cooling.

Like the Theory of Gravitation is a theory. Now go jump off a 50 storey building since gravity is only a theory.

professore · 08-09-2017 02:59PM

Potatoeman wrote: »

This is why you have to prove your theory. Gravity is a proven and accepted theory where as evolution is an accepted but unproven theory as their is no evidence of the missing link so far. You can't expect people to make sweeping changes on an unsubstantiated theory. You need to prove your theory,

In a scientific sense, you can never prove a theory. You can only show countless examples of it being correct and give an estimate of how likely it is to be correct in all cases.

People online on the other hand, can disprove that smoking causes lung cancer by claiming Auntie Mary smoked 100 cigarettes a day until she was 95, and adding FACT at the end of every sentence.

IvySlayer · 08-09-2017 03:04PM

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm not denying it's true, but that's not proof.

The poster above got ridiculed because of what I believe was a misunderstanding, so I'm asking for some proof, as that's exactly what he said we didn't have in his post.

Scientists have predicted this for decades, they formed a probable conclusion based on available research and evidence and looks like they are right..

08-09-2017 03:14PM

IvySlayer wrote: »

Scientists have predicted this for decades, they formed a probable conclusion based on available research and evidence and looks like they are right..

Na, that doesn't really cut it though, like at all.

"Warmer sea temperatures and higher sea levels caused by humans have made hurricanes even more dangerous.

There's the proof.

Storms that would be a once in a lifetime event are becoming more and more regular"

There haven't been dangerous hurricanes since 2005, for the US anyway, even though the waters have been warmer. The most powerful and deadly happened long ago before all of the warming.
And once in a life-time events or 100-year floods are just based on probability. Nothing in Maths says the same lotto numbers can't come up two weeks in a row.

So at the moment, we're at a point where we can say "Irma is likely stronger because of rising sea temperatures." or "the wildfires were probably made worse because things were drier".

Again, that poster said "There's no actual proof", so now I'm asking for it. If you didn't treat me like a denier, this would go a lot smoother.

Potatoeman · 08-09-2017 03:25PM

professore wrote: »

In a scientific sense, you can never prove a theory. You can only show countless examples of it being correct and give an estimate of how likely it is to be correct in all cases.

People online on the other hand, can disprove that smoking causes lung cancer by claiming Auntie Mary smoked 100 cigarettes a day until she was 95, and adding FACT at the end of every sentence.

Most people accept that smoking causes cancer as the statistics back up the theory. The problem with global warming is that there are many other possible factors. So how do you actually prove it?

jamesbere · 08-09-2017 03:40PM

The way I'm farting today I'd say I'm having a definite impact on the climate

Zillah · 08-09-2017 04:02PM

Potatoeman wrote: »

This is why you have to prove your theory. Gravity is a proven and accepted theory where as evolution is an accepted but unproven theory as their is no evidence of the missing link so far. You can't expect people to make sweeping changes on an unsubstantiated theory. You need to prove your theory,

Evolution is one of the best supported theories in the world. You only think otherwise because you have no idea what you're talking about. Scientific theories, by definition, have been proven beyond a shadow of doubt. If your theory doesn't have overwhelming evidence in its favour then it is not a scientific theory, it is only a hypothesis.

Still blows my mind that people who don't understand science feel they're in any position to argue with people. You literally don't know what you're talking about. Have you read any actual books on evolution? Can you tell me what the best evidence for it is? Do you know anything substantial about fossils, genetics, and the tree of life? You don't, so why do you think you're in any position to form an opinion on evolution?

B0jangles · 08-09-2017 04:16PM

I have a new hypothesis to propose:

There is inverse relationship between the knowledge an internet poster has about any given topic and how loudly and aggressively they will defend their opinion (and their right to have that opinion) of that topic.

Sam Quentin · 08-09-2017 04:23PM

YES...And that's why we(the general public)shouldn't have to bare the cost of trying to save/protect the environment for future generations blah blah blah!? When we have governments and scientists in certain parts of the World doing the opposite.... So enough with your electric cars etc etc.. Keep 'cheap' diesel and petrol and bring back BIG smoky industry ok... ðŸ˜ ohhhh yeah and bring back coal and get all those coal mines up and running yeah......

Potatoeman · 08-09-2017 04:50PM

Zillah wrote: »

Evolution is one of the best supported theories in the world. You only think otherwise because you have no idea what you're talking about. Scientific theories, by definition, have been proven beyond a shadow of doubt. If your theory doesn't have overwhelming evidence in its favour then it is not a scientific theory, it is only a hypothesis.

Still blows my mind that people who don't understand science feel they're in any position to argue with people. You literally don't know what you're talking about. Have you read any actual books on evolution? Can you tell me what the best evidence for it is? Do you know anything substantial about fossils, genetics, and the tree of life? You don't, so why do you think you're in any position to form an opinion on evolution?

I never said I didn't believe evolution just said it needs to be proven with the missing link. Don't let that stop you having a little rant though.

seamus · 08-09-2017 04:55PM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MnX0-TayVjk

B0jangles · 08-09-2017 04:56PM

Potatoeman wrote: »

I never said I didn't believe evolution just said it needs to be proven with the missing link. Don't let that stop you having a little rant though.

Do you understand what you are asking for when you ask for 'the missing link'?

seamus · 08-09-2017 04:56PM

Potatoeman wrote: »

I never said I didn't believe evolution just said it needs to be proven with the missing link.

No, it doesn't. Even using the term "missing link" illustrates that you don't understand the theory, never mind understand how to prove it.

Zillah · 08-09-2017 04:57PM

Potatoeman wrote: »

I never said I didn't believe evolution just said it needs to be proven with the missing link. Don't let that stop you having a little rant though.

There is no missing link, that's why I'm 'ranting': you've no idea what you're talking about, the idea of a missing link is nonsense perpetuated by religious conservatives with an agenda. There is an extremely impressive series of fossils showing a vast amount of the natural history on this planet. Genetics alone proves evolution ten times over.

Again, evolution is proven beyond a shadow of a doubt; that is obvious to anyone who actually understands it.

Why do I need to explain to you that you don't know what you're talking about? You know better than I do how little you actually know about the topic. You know you don't understand it, you know you haven't read any books on it.

You don't know anything about science, why do you have strong opinions on something you don't know anything about?

RobertKK · 08-09-2017 05:05PM

Humans no doubt are affecting the climate, but it is a minor influence compared to the major influence which is sun activity.

LordSutch · 08-09-2017 08:27PM

I voted minor influence, which I guess makes me a climate change denier.

My opinion is that climate change is a naturally occurring phenomenon, hence the climate of planet earth changes naturally, and always has done since the beginning of time! And now surprise-surprise, its changing again :eek:

Admittedly with a little help from ourselves, but I would never say that "we alone are responsible" for climate change > as that would be untrue in my opinion .....

The climate is changing again and we have contributed (percentage unknown).

buried · 08-09-2017 08:52PM

Not a great look to see whales dying on the shorelines due to the fact their stomachs are filled with plastic, is it?. We are due the end times. We treat this place like a absolute toilet kip. The universe might be coming to clean it up. End of October meteor shower maybe, some nice bit of stoney Karma from the Taurid meteor stream. Why not? It happened before. Nice 8 mile long meteor go to smack bang straight into this planet. That'll sort everything out real nice. Can't treat this place like a dirty toilet forever. Existence for everything seems to include its awareness for RESPONSIBILITY. But apex humanity doesn't give a monkiestwat about it's responsibility for the planet we can only exist on. If your not being responsible for yourself in your own micro environment - You are totally f**ked. Why should it be any different for us as a species, collectively? It isn't IMO. Somethings got to give. We could we be real f**ked, real soon.

Are human activities influencing the climate?

Comments