Climate skeptic's thinking isn't linear single variable causal determinism. Alarmists tend to think

Author: Eli (3973 Posts - Original UHND Member)
Posted at 2:08 pm on Feb 10, 2019

that way. I just used one discovery from ice core to challenge your hidden assumption: CO2-> temperature, which seems to be such a strong belief that you don't have to speak it out.

I think it is because you fell into alarmists' very deceiving trap: using 19th century physics to hide complex climate issues. Yes, CO2 is greenhouse. but its warming effect is very limited. If double CO2 emission from begining of industry revolution to the end of this century (300 years period), as stated in 3th IPCC report, it will only increase temperature 1.1 C by the end of 21th century. This is just 19th century physics that treat earth as a simple object, not as a complex system. There is no controversy here, everybody agree. So, if you argue based on this part of non-controversy science, then alarmist already lost. 1.1C increased temperature is not a big deal to earth.

What skeptic and alarmist disagree is feedbacks caused by this 1.1 C. The feedback issue is beyond of 19th century physics that your statements are about. That's why I said your statements actually have nothing to do with actual issues of global warming.


Replies to: "Climate skeptic's thinking isn't linear single variable causal determinism. Alarmists tend to think"