OMG this thread is still going?

This.

condemn it to R&P already ffs

This is actually not true. As I have said before, we are currently experiencing the highest carbon ppm in history.
Spoiler!

But theyhavebeen at high levels before--this is just the highest point they have ever been. We are seated between 410-420 ppm currently.



Okay, so let's just delve into something for a moment; temperature is a part of the equation, but it goes a little deeper.

Somewhere around 2005, the first category 5 hurricane to make landfall in the US occurred. In the 10 years preceeding this, atlantic hurricanes actually occurred more frequently than average. And in 2017, Hurricane Irma was the next category 5 to make landfall.

If you want any evidence of an increased rate of hurricane occurances, take a look at this:

https://www.wunderground.com/hurricane/hurrarchive.asp

In the late 1800's we see a numbers in the low single digits. In the early 2000's until more recently, we begin to see numbers in the high single digits and low doubles. That's just on the North Atlantic side. We can look at the Eastern Pacific and see a similar upward trend (though reaching the high 30's from single digits in recent times), as well as in the Western Pacific and Indian Ocean. There is a distinct upward trend. This coincides with our industrial revolution and modern outputs.

I think that you are much more politically biased on this than I am, and while you attempt to assert that you are not... You are also the only person who has brought up a political ideology to the forefront of this conversation.

It's because of this, that we need to address your bias. You can't have a discussion about fact, and then bring political ideology into it. Political ideology is opinion, and preference. It is not fact. The amount of hurricanes that occur, the changes in climate, etc, these are all facts. These are all things that must be evaluated on merit.

If I present data to you, you must evaluate the data on quality and if bias must be addressed, it must be done in an objective matter. But your stance is not objective, and it is heavily biased.

I'm not asking you to change your ideology, or political stance. But we have to address that bias which permeates your reasoning.

I cannot state that I did not initially let my bias steer the conversation, because my stance is such that I do believe in climate change. And so we will address that now; currently the majority consensus in the scinetific community is such that climate change is an important and relevant issue. If one is to deny this, and assert that claim, the burden of proof would have to fall to them. Because of this, certain things that have been said in this thread are very "against the grain" and must be evidenced or considered erroneous.

There are several claims, and statements you have made that I've evidenced as false, including the one outlined about. I have no doubt that you are well written. I have less doubt that you are well intentioned.

I think most people are well intentioned. But the question then becomes; does your political bias interfere with your pragmatic ability?

I'm truly disturbed at how you guys can see climate change as a marxist hoax. Is everything about politics?

Let me make an argument that sides with conservatives then. CONSERVatives. If you want to keep values of old saying that we should be slow to change, should that not also apply to the environment. You going to tell us that the CO2 levels rapidly rising in 200 years (just magically coinciding with us using fossil fuels en masse) is just random? The fact that forests are receding, the ice caps are melting. You know the sad thing. I WISH it wasn't happening. It would be ****ing ace if we didn't have to worry about it. But we do.

Also this isn't the first time we've discovered mass man made issues.... need I remind you, petrol used to have LEAD inside it, and we used to use CFC's which made a big ass ****ing hole in the ozone.

Yeah - I agree.

But who's fault is it, this mass consumerism? It's been pushed onto the lemmings who simply do what they're mostly told.

Why are pregnancy test kits (to be used once) sold with an LCD digital display???

I was happy keeping hold of TV's and getting them fixed when they broke. Do TV repair men even exist any more?