Climate Change Thread

[Seamus Fermanagh]

@Seamus Fermanagh, I hope you don't mind me asking. If I remember correctly, you were never a fan of the anthropomorphic argument. This last reply suggests that this opinion may have shifted. I am curious to what may have contributed to this.

There was always a good prima facia case for anthropomorphic climate change. The earlier efforts to computer model to "prove" it were chancy, since the models themselves could not replicate known results when preceding data were fed in. The modeling has gotten better. Moreover, ice cores and tree rings and the like are providing a better "fossil" picture of the temperature shift. I have yet to see an absolute proof of causation, but the correlation is so strong as to make it hard to believe that human agency isn't at least partially responsible. Facts are stubborn things.


Just because the anti-capitalist/'corporations are always evil crowd' are bandwagon-ing an idea to further their own agendas does NOT mean that the concept being used is necessarily false -- though I doubt you could get the current US administration to agree to that.



And, Pannonian, I have nothing against reasonable measures to conserve. I do go around my house shutting lights off, setting the thermostat at a level where it does not run 24 hours a day in a vain effort to keep my Florida home at 70 farenheit etc. I am of the belief, however, that draconian conservation is more about anti-capitalism than eco-protectionism. We DO need to shift our power generation and build for a less carbonized future, but I think incentivized R&D is the stronger route choice.