What's your stance on Climate Change?

[netgamer]

Satellite observations show that Arctic sea ice is now declining at a rate of 11.5 percent per decade, relative to the 1979 to 2000 average.

[Northy]

Facts are true whether you believe in them or not. Beliefs are false even if you know they are true.

[Sierra85]

why does the every man have to have a stance on something? if you are uninformed you cannot take a valid stance.

scientists have said climate change is a real issue, just because talking heads on fox news have filled you with bullshit doesnt mean you should regurgitate it

[lockedout]

The climate is always going to change, why is this suddenly a bad thing. Nothing we can do to change it.

[Wells]

The climate is always going to change, why is this suddenly a bad thing. Nothing we can do to change it.

The environment does change. And the change we're causing will negatively impact human civilization. We can absolutely change it. We pretty much solved the issue with the eroding ozone layer.

[lockedout]

The environment does change. And the change we're causing will negatively impact human civilization. We can absolutely change it. We pretty much solved the issue with the eroding ozone layer.

How do you know how much of an effect we are causing?

[Wells]

How do you know how much of an effect we are causing?

You either already know because you're informed on the subject and you're just being dishonest or you don't know and I have no interest in explaining what you should already know to you.

In otherwords, your question is a bad one.

[lockedout]

You either already know because you're informed on the subject and you're just being dishonest or you don't know and I have no interest in explaining what you should already know to you.

In otherwords, your question is a bad one.

So basically there is no exact number and no one actually knows what if any effect we are having on climate change.

[Wells]

So basically there is no exact number and no one actually knows what if any effect we are having on climate change.

Oh so its the first one.

Thanks.

[Selah]

Last time I checked, the climate has changed since the dawn of the planet earth. It changed before us, it is changing, and it will change until our sun supernovas.

[Garnier Fructis]

Last time I checked, the climate has changed since the dawn of the planet earth. It changed before us, it is changing, and it will change until our sun supernovas.

The thing that matters is how we're accelerating the change, and the negative effects that it will have on damn near everything.

[Elegiac]

Last time I checked, the climate has changed since the dawn of the planet earth. It changed before us, it is changing, and it will change until our sun supernovas.

The fact that you say the sun will go supernova points to a very poor understanding of science.

[Cthulhu 2020]

The fact that you say the sun will go supernova points to a very poor understanding of science.

I find people in general, especially those who constantly parrot "Climate has changed before" in general have a very poor understanding of science. I mean, they are pointing to a popular right wing line/lie that while technically true, does not discredit human accelerated climate change.

[unwirklich]

I don't doubt we could achieve cost parity for say, electric vehicles, in Europe, or even in the U.S., if/when gas prices are spiking over $4 a gallon.

Some countries already have reached grid parity for photovoltaics thanks to the module price plummeting over the last few years. The real challenge with the renewables is the re-design of the grid they require. Experiments showed that a grid operating fully on renewables is theoretically possible (http://www.kombikraftwerk.de/fileadm...080417_CPP.pdf).

[Masark]

I don't doubt we could achieve cost parity for say, electric vehicles, in Europe, or even in the U.S., if/when gas prices are spiking over $4 a gallon.

If? Gas has been consistently above $4/gallon up here for years.

[XangXu]

Even if people don't believe in climate change, the enviromental situation is getting out of hand.

[Endus]

The whole business of asking for "direct cause data" is a red herring because you can't interpret data without theory. It's just a not so subtle setup so that they can go "AHA, correlation does not imply causation!" when you present them with measurements of CO2 along side temperature or heat energy.

They want to dismiss the models and the theory and act like data is the only worthy judge, because they know that data without theory and models is insufficient.

And, specifically, the way science works is by developing theory that explains the data you generate. As you introduce new data, it either matches the theory and confirms it, or it doesn't and requires that you refine and update that theory.

Correlation isn't causation, but that's where science comes in; you test for causation, by controlling other variables and seeing which one actually affects the change. And we've done that, with CO2 levels. Extensively. Along with other factors in climate research.

How do you know how much of an effect we are causing?

http://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/index.shtml

It's all in there. That's what, the fourth or fifth time I've linked the 5AR? Seriously, read it. It'll answer these silly questions.

[Deleted]

I haven't read enought to have a stance.
I do believe that whatever is happening will keep happening, because there isn't any iniciative on most goverments to change. Like everything, when they decide to change it will be too late.