What the climate change deniers are doing is almost the opposite of skepticism. They are refusing to accept the mountain of evidence that is before them. Sometimes they even start saying nonsense like 'where's the proof?', showing that they don't even understand the difference between science and algebra. — andrewk
The question should be, "Is this natural change?" — Harry Hindu
to say that the way one organism makes it's life is natural while another isn't is inconsistent. — Harry Hindu
Isn't that what we're talking about here, global catastrophe? — Metaphysician Undercover
By rotating crops, fallowing fields, and growing diverse plants you can actually effectively manage soil nutrition. Building naturally self-sustaining agricultural systems is messier than monoculture (see: permaculture) and you will get less calories per acre, but each year instead of needing more fertilizer to combat nutrient depletion, soil quality is naturally improved. Different plants absorb and deposit different nutrients from and into the soil, which is how ecosystems become more productive with only water and sunlight as external inputs.Have you ever tried harvesting garden crops off a piece of land for decades with out putting anything back? — Metaphysician Undercover
? — WhiskeyWhiskers
The question isn't whether or not man is causing changes to his environment. There is no doubt that he is. But the sun is also causing changes to our environment and the sun changes, and those changes have nothing to do with human activity. The question should be, "Is this natural change?" If you believe in the theory of natural selection, (if you believe in climate change, then you should believe in this too), then there is no questions that man is a part of nature and anything man does is natural - which includes capitalism, computer programming, cooking your meal, etc. Every organism fills it's natural niche differently, so to say that the way one organism makes it's life is natural while another isn't is inconsistent. — Harry Hindu
It doesn't much matter who shat on the carpet, it needs cleaning up. — unenlightened
It doesn't much matter who shat on the carpet, it needs cleaning up. — unenlightened
The evidence to which I was referring was evidence of AGW, not that it is a bad thing. If you can't see why it would be a bad thing, I suggest you ask somebody in Bangladesh or South Sudan. — andrewk
You mean the Bangladesh that achieved record rice and record total cereal production in 2015? Last year's harvest being marginally below that record. You mean the Bangladesh that has reduced malnourishment to the tune of $1billion due to increased crop yields, and still gaining land due to sedimentation? — tom
By the time we hit 3 degrees of warming, the Bangladeshis will be as rich as the present day Dutch, and quite able to afford sophisticated flood defences. — tom
This is like saying that a star burning hydrogen and helium to make other heavier elements in it's core is purely solar and we shouldn't be confusing this with the "natural" production of these elements. Stars are polluting the universe with these heavier elements. Coal is made naturally by natural forces, and because humans are natural, steel is also produced naturally. Shit and piss are produced naturally. CO2 is produced naturally by every organism that breathes oxygen.Man is certainly part of nature, and our activities are "natural" for us. But using the term "natural" here confuses factors outside of human activity (like solar radiation) and activities that are purely human, like burning coal to make steel. — Bitter Crank
Now you are making a value statement and values are man-made. Who is to say that what is right for humans is right for the rest of nature? Who is to say that humans deserve to continue to exist? I'm sure if lions had their way, there would be no competitors, like hyenas, for resources. Hyenas would be extinct. I'm sure that we'd want to eliminate every virus and dangerous bacteria from existence. Do we have that right?You are right, though, that many people wrongly locate human activity above or outside nature. But just because we "act naturally" doesn't mean what we are doing is beneficial to ourselves in the long run. — Bitter Crank
Another thing: China is one of the worst, if not THE worst polluters on Earth. If Climate Changers really want to put their money where their mouth is, why not go to China and make your claims there? After all, the U.S. has probably spent more money and energy to limit pollution than any other country yet these people still lambaste Americans more than any other country. This is what the left is known for - selective outrage. — Harry Hindu
why not go to China and make your claims there? — Harry Hindu
Actually, it makes what every other country needs to do worthless. What good is it for every other country to do something when the world's largest populations and polluters are doing nothing to very little?That's fallacious reasoning. Just because China is the worst polluter doesn't absolve every other country from doing what needs to be done. — Benkei
But yeah, you and Bitter can ignore the more interesting points about humans being natural causes to Earth's climate — Harry Hindu
Cherry-pickers — Harry Hindu
Actually, it makes what every other country needs to do worthless. What good is it for every other country to do something when the world's largest populations and polluters are doing nothing to very little? — Harry Hindu
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.