You can login if you already have an account or register by clicking the button below.
Registering is free and all you need is a username and password. We never ask you for your e-mail.
[+]Phoenix_MD0 points3 points3 points
ago
(edited ago)
[–]Phoenix_MD0 points
3 points
3 points
(+3|-0)
ago
(edited ago)
I'm a physician and I do not think humans are causing climate change. I do not have an agenda or bias. I just don't think the limited data we have rules out the much more plausible cause which is natural cycling of the weather.
[+]Phoenix_MD0 points3 points3 points
ago
(edited ago)
[–]Phoenix_MD0 points
3 points
3 points
(+3|-0)
ago
(edited ago)
Not a specific theory but more a principle that weather changes.
Waves are a great example. Not only do waves represent the periodic changing of the water height, but if you watch for a long time you'll note that waves comes in waves (referred to as "sets"). If you carefully watch longer you'll see that sets come in waves, growing more powerful until they reach a peak they grow smaller.
This is the nature of weather. It changes.
Now as to whether humans are "causing climate change", you must realize that correlation does not equal causation. Just because we have millions of cars on the planet, along with factors and the like spewing CO2 in the air, and that during his period the temperatures have risen, doesn't mean the two are related. For example televisions have also grown during this time and yet it is ridiculous to think that TVs cause climate change.
Anyways, it is plausible that humans affect the climate? No doubt we do, possibly for the better and possibly for the worst. But given that humans occupy only a fraction of the earth it seems narcissistic to believe that we humans are the sole reason the changes of the weather of the entire earth. It seems more plausible that this is weather doing what weather does, change (ie periodically alter, ultimately in a cyclical fashion).
view the rest of the comments →
[–] Phoenix_MD 0 points 3 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago (edited ago)
I'm a physician and I do not think humans are causing climate change. I do not have an agenda or bias. I just don't think the limited data we have rules out the much more plausible cause which is natural cycling of the weather.
[–] [deleted] 1 point 1 point 2 points (+2|-1) ago
[–] Phoenix_MD 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago (edited ago)
Just trying to refute OP's basic claim that only idiots deny human derived climate change.
[–] joseremarque 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
Can you point to any specific theories that better explain the existing weather data?
[–] Phoenix_MD 0 points 3 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago (edited ago)
Not a specific theory but more a principle that weather changes.
Waves are a great example. Not only do waves represent the periodic changing of the water height, but if you watch for a long time you'll note that waves comes in waves (referred to as "sets"). If you carefully watch longer you'll see that sets come in waves, growing more powerful until they reach a peak they grow smaller.
This is the nature of weather. It changes.
Now as to whether humans are "causing climate change", you must realize that correlation does not equal causation. Just because we have millions of cars on the planet, along with factors and the like spewing CO2 in the air, and that during his period the temperatures have risen, doesn't mean the two are related. For example televisions have also grown during this time and yet it is ridiculous to think that TVs cause climate change.
Anyways, it is plausible that humans affect the climate? No doubt we do, possibly for the better and possibly for the worst. But given that humans occupy only a fraction of the earth it seems narcissistic to believe that we humans are the sole reason the changes of the weather of the entire earth. It seems more plausible that this is weather doing what weather does, change (ie periodically alter, ultimately in a cyclical fashion).