Al GoreVerified account

Good read. Despite the recent changes in US policy, can we still salvage our planet?

Dear deniers, 1. It's global climate change, not global warming. 2. A single data point doesn't constitute a trend. 3. Using the dollar bills you sold your souls for as fans will not cool the planet. 4. The bible is a great, but read other books once in a while too.

It's 11° warmer in Anchorage than here in the Middle tonight. If you don't think Mother Nature's thermostat is a wee bit mucked up, welp I can't help you.

And I realize I just wrote about weather rather than climate. But changing climate = wacky weather was the point.

Climate changes are primarily due to an active & ever changing sun, variations in the earth's orbit around the sun, changes in the earth's rotational axis & even variations in the moons orbit of earth. Humans contribution to changes in climate are miniscule at best.

What you are describing are called Milankovich Cycles. Earth’s climate has also fluctuated in response to the release and sequestration of greenhouse gases. To say that Milankovich Cycles dominate over GHG concentrations really depends on the scale you choose.

You can go into a lab and measure for yourself the degree of thermal radiation that is absorbed by carbon dioxide. It’s also something that is readily quantified in the field. You can discuss Milankovich Cycles all you want but it doesn’t invalidate the anthropogenic influence.

So what caused the 5 major ice ages way before there were enough humans to emit enough thermal radiation?

Those were caused by Milankovich Cycles. Eccentricity (100kyr), tilt (40kyr), and precession (20kyr) of the earth’s orbit around the sun. Other longer-term warming events have been caused by greenhouse gas fluctuations. Also, humans don’t emit thermal radiation. They emit GHGs.

Except this real scientist, Dr. Patrick Moore, former leader of GreenPeace says CO2 is...wait for it...TOO LOW, which explains how all the dire end of the world predictions have not come true (let me guess: this is where you attack Moore's credibility): http://www.therebel.media/patrick_moore_sensible_environmentalist_truth_about_carbon_dioxide …

Wow, a whole scientist to support your view! You do realise there are literally thousands of earth scientists on the opposing side who support anthropogenic climate change, right? Or else it wouldn’t be a “scientific consensus”. Great attempt at cherry-picking, though!