niteowl said:

Evolution has been proven, so has continental drift.
These are things that we can see happening and measure.

---

Quote:

I never said that I don't believe the earth goes through climate changes, quite the opposite actually.

Just that we do not know what the temps of the earth were prior to humans recording it. Those numbers are educated guesses, not facts.

---

Silversoul said:

niteowl said:

Evolution has been proven, so has continental drift.
These are things that we can see happening and measure.

---

Were you there?  Did you see the different species evolve into other species?  The evidence for past climates is equally indirect, yet equally certain.

---

niteowl said:

When a scientist claims that the earths temps were 4 degrees warmer/cooler 100,000 years ago he is making and educated guess. It is not a hard fact, just a guess

---

Silversoul said:

niteowl said:

When a scientist claims that the earths temps were 4 degrees warmer/cooler 100,000 years ago he is making and educated guess. It is not a hard fact, just a guess

---

The point is that science doesn't deal with fact.  It deals with theories.  The very strength of science is that it never claims final truth.  So scientifically speaking, the best explanation we have for observed changes in the Earth's climate is the anthropogenic theory, which is supported by over 97% of climate scientists actively publishing papers.

---

After a few asteroids hit the earth 100,000 years ago.. Sure it, was 4 degrees warmer/colder..

Silversoul said:

niteowl said:

When a scientist claims that the earths temps were 4 degrees warmer/cooler 100,000 years ago he is making and educated guess. It is not a hard fact, just a guess

---

The point is that science doesn't deal with "hard facts."  It deals with theories.  The very strength of science is that it never claims final truth.  So scientifically speaking, what we can say is that the best explanation we currently have for observed changes in the Earth's climate is the anthropogenic theory, which is supported by over 97% of climate scientists actively publishing papers.

---

That's what I have been saying all along man.

Every time a scientist claims that the earths temp was 'X' degrees 100,000 years ago he is making a guess.

Glad you agree with me

Silversoul said:

Tree rings, ice core samples, sedimentary layers, fossil records, etc.:  These are all fairly accurate indicators of past climate.  You don't know what you're talking about.

---

Brainiac said:

We wont have to worry about heating up, when this happens..

---

Prisoner#1 said:

Silversoul said:

Tree rings, ice core samples, sedimentary layers, fossil records, etc.:  These are all fairly accurate indicators of past climate.  You don't know what you're talking about.

---

all these things can tell us "oooooh, it was Fuckin' cold" but they are not indicative of the temperatures

---

Prisoner#1 said:

Silversoul said:

Tree rings, ice core samples, sedimentary layers, fossil records, etc.:  These are all fairly accurate indicators of past climate.  You don't know what you're talking about.

---

all these things can tell us "oooooh, it was Fuckin' cold" but they are not indicative of the temperatures

---

Silversoul said:

The point is that science doesn't deal with "hard facts."  It deals with theories.  The very strength of science is that it never claims final truth.  So scientifically speaking, what we can say is that the best explanation we currently have for observed changes in the Earth's climate is the anthropogenic theory, which is supported by over 97% of climate scientists actively publishing papers.

---

I admire this mature response.

I think we should add: science doesn't exist without scientists, who are humans and often morons who will lie, cheat and steal for a few bucks from a political or financial concern.

Silversoul said:

Prisoner#1 said:

Silversoul said:

Tree rings, ice core samples, sedimentary layers, fossil records, etc.:  These are all fairly accurate indicators of past climate.  You don't know what you're talking about.

---

all these things can tell us "oooooh, it was Fuckin' cold" but they are not indicative of the temperatures

---

They may not tell you the difference between 50 and 51 degrees Farenheit, but they can give you a pretty close range, which is more than adequate to make these kind of statements about global average temperatures.

---

Conservationist said:

I think we should add: science doesn't exist without scientists, who are humans and often morons who will lie, cheat and steal for a few bucks from a political or financial concern.

---

Prisoner#1 said:

how can that be when they dont deal in hard facts, at what temperature
does dust or pollen settle in the ice, at what temperature is a trees
growth rate affected... they deal in guesswork and estimates

---

All theories of aerodynamics are guesstimates, but airplanes still work. What to do?

Silversoul said:

niteowl said:

Evolution has been proven, so has continental drift.
These are things that we can see happening and measure.

---

Were you there?  Did you see the different species evolve into other species?  The evidence for past climates is equally indirect, yet equally certain.

Quote:

I never said that I don't believe the earth goes through climate changes, quite the opposite actually.

Just that we do not know what the temps of the earth were prior to humans recording it. Those numbers are educated guesses, not facts.

---

Tree rings, ice core samples, sedimentary layers, fossil records, etc.:  These are all fairly accurate indicators of past climate.  You don't know what you're talking about.

---

Prisoner#1 said:

how can that be when they dont deal in hard facts, at what temperature
does dust or pollen settle in the ice, at what temperature is a trees
growth rate affected... they deal in guesswork and estimates

---

Silversoul said:

Prisoner#1 said:

how can that be when they dont deal in hard facts, at what temperature
does dust or pollen settle in the ice, at what temperature is a trees
growth rate affected... they deal in guesswork and estimates

---

These are all things which we can observe today, and extrapolate from that to similar phenomena from the past.  We know how temperature affects the growth of tree rings.  We know what affect they have on soil.  We know what species thrive in which temperatures.  It's actually quite ironic that scientists can figure out more about the climate 1,000 years ago than a meteorologist can figure out about what the weather's going to be like tomorrow.

---

It's all bullshit anyway, because humanity's never going to take effective action to avert this crisis. I drive a giant SUV because I know that no matter what I do, the rest of these people will do nothing, and so we are totally fucking doomed.