cafeamericainmag.com
There has been a lot of CW discussion on climate change. This is an article written by someone that used to strongly believe in anthropogenic global warming and then looked at all the evidence before arriving at a different conclusion. The articles goes through what they did.
I thought a top-level submission would be more interesting as climate change is such a hot button topic and it would be good to have a top-level spot to discuss it for now. I have informed the author of this submission; they said they will drop by and engage with the comments here!
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Sure, it’s an observation, rather than a prediction. That’s fine for a control group, but insufficient. At least it lets us rule other theories out.
So…what would constitute experimental demonstration? What could I do to convince you that the greenhouse effect can, in fact, trap some amount of heat?
For that matter, I don’t see you providing any experiments yourself! Why should I privilege your bench-top reasoning over the IPCC’s?
It’s a good question and is already addressed in the article:
“Although the burden of proof is on a theory’s proponents rather than its critics, we can conjecture what one such proof might look like: it would have to consist of an external energy source – such as the sun or a heat lamp – that is set to warm a surface. The energy input should be measured and the surface, in the presence of greenhouse gases, should get much hotter than that input alone can provide, emitting much more energy in response. This would definitively demonstrate the greenhouse effect itself, after which the anthropogenic influence could be gauged by introducing more carbon dioxide into the apparatus and measuring the marginal temperature response.”
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link