.
I have an answer to that......I have ALWAYS said no such thing!!! we MAY influence the weather in some ways, but not as much as you seem to think.
The ONE THING that convinced me? MARS!!! astronomers have noted over the years that the polar ice caps on Mars, their 'north and south poles' so to speak, MELT AND THEN RETURN FROM TIME TO TIME!!!!!
.......now the last time I heard, there's no life as we know it on Mars, and certainly no 'polluting' industries, etc,...
and that's what convinced me.....................
I have never met a climate change hoax believer who did not believe that human activity has some effect on climate change.. Indeed i have not met many who do not acknowledge that climate changes.. The debatable area in the subject is what is the main cause of climate change.. Is it man made rise in CO2 levels or is the main cause something else..
I have never heard anyone insist any such thing. Nor do I know of anyone that denies that the climate changes or that man has an impact on that. The point of contention is, and always has been, just how great man's impact is regarding climate change.
Why are we here? Ambiguous. Did some reasoning put us here? By what cause did we come into existence? Do we have a purpose? If so, who or what determines it?
I believe we evolved through the forces of physics and biochemistry, and that it was inevitable that the right conditions for life would develop in many places amid the billions of worlds. Even though there are other suitable planets, the practicalities of transport and other problems means that for Earthlings there is no Planet B. I don't believe that humanity has any special right to exploit the Earth's resources to the point of risking the health of all life.
As a species, we have always influenced our environment, starting from when we first learned the use of fire. Despite our abilities to invent and adapt, we are ultimately dependent on the healthy balance of nature's ecosystems.
Our greed outweighs our knowledge.
Ineffective ciphers? I don't understand.
And that's it.
That "convinced" you because you WANTED to be convinced, not because you paid attention to the actual science.
https://www.skepticalscience.com/link_to_us.php?Argument0=39
No, because deniers cannot point to anything else. Whatever else Deniers point to either is entirely speculative or the data do not support the claim.
In short, deniers insist the main cause MUST be something else, because otherwise TEH EBIL SOCIALISM! BE AFRAID! and then go looking for something -- anything -- that might be a plausible alternative.
Thank you for your reply hartfire and Happy 4th of July Monday. What don't you understand? Cipher?/"Something o no value or importance. A person of no influence. A nonentity".
Are carbon emission naturally occurring or caused by man OS? Mahalo for your reply and Happy 4th of July Monday! :)
Carbon emissions are both man made and natural.. The problem with the theory is that in history carbon rising has been in response to raised temperatures NOT the cause.. The rises in carbon in the middle age warm period followed the rise in temperature not preceded them.. When temperature drops carbon is absorbed more readily by the cooler oceans. Note if you look at this Wiki doc on the event you will see the rise in temperatures in the middle ages from about 950 AD to 1250 AD this was not caused by motor car or aircraft carbon monoxide exhaust..
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieval_Warm_Period
The basic foundation mistake of the scientists is to place the rise of carbon before the rise in temperatures when in fact it is the temperatures that cause a rise in carbon in the historical record.. Carbon levels have historically followed the amount of life on earth.. The more living mass both plant and animal the more carbon in the system.. Warmer climate mean in general more Bio Mass and thus more carbon.. Colder climate means less Bio Mass and thus less carbon in the system..
@AAPAD -- You know, I guess other people haven't followed the climate science like I have over the past 20-25 years, so Denier tropes like Midieval Warming Period and CO2 lag may seem like "Aha! Gotcha!" arguments. But, no, they're not.
@pom50 -- Thank you for verifying my hypothesis. Your "counterargument" clearly boils down to "I don't care what the science tells us because....TEH EBIL SOCIALISM! BE AFRAID!"
Most Deniers are not quite so open about subsituting their political ideology for judicious study for discernible reality. But you have no such qualms...;-D...
You're cherry picking. A fundamental mistake in any argument.
If you really care to know the truth, read the whole of the summarised data on climate change before making up your mind.
I agree that science does not stop at one point and say "now we know." It continues to research, to prove or disprove theories and to discover new information.
I also agree that the Earth's ecosystems are highly adaptable, but that adaptation only works over geological time frames that are hundreds of thousands of years longer our human lifespans.
Earth will inevitably recover, but not in our lifetimes.
There is no "cult" of climate change. Cult has a specific definition. It is religious, organised, dependent on the voice of one authority, and based solely on faith. If you can find a cult of climate change, please send me the evidence.
Climate change was only a theory of possibility at the beginning of the twentieth century. By 1979, specialists in meteorology had proof that the atmosphere was warming faster than the normal rate for this interglacial period. It was speculated whether the causes were man-made or natural. The only possible natural causes were the activity of the sun or of volcanoes.Testing proved that the sun's occasional flares were too sporadic and too small to have any effect. Statistical analysis of volcanic eruptions since 1900 showed that the increase of reportings depended only on the technology available and did not reveal an actual increase in vulcanism. Measurement of the CO2 output from volcanoes accounted for only half the amount of increase present in the atmosphere when compared with atmospheric CO2 levels measured from ice-cores from geological records spanning 800,000 years. The last ice age ended 10,000 yearsago. Measurement of the output from burning fossil fuels showed that the increase in CO2 levels does come from human activity. Experiments prove that when sunlight passes through CO2, CH4, and N2O, it changes in the same way as when it passes through glass: the ultraviolet wavelengths convert to heat and become trapped below the layer. This is why the phenomenon is called the Greenhouse Effect. This is no longer a theory. It is a proven fact.
The only thing climate scientists can't quite be sure of is the actual rate of acceleration of global warming. At the lowest end of the spectrum, some think we might get to 2-degrees warming by 2050. This is enough tohave disastrous effects onfood security world wide. Some think there is a serious riskofglobalcatastrophic extinction at any time within the next 20 years if a large bubble of methan is released from the melting permafrost in the tundra. Such as extinction would not end life on Earth, but is would take as long to recover as it did from the Age of the Dinosuars, billions of years. Humans would not survive. Intelligent life might or might not re-evolve.
I can assure you that there is no conspiracy to destroy economies. To conspire, powerful groups and people must plan in secret. No amount of planning, public or private, can prevent what is now happening to the Earth's atmosphere, oceans and ecosystems. What is already occuring is only the very beginning.
Truely, it doesn't matter which of us is right because we willall be feeling the effects increasingly over the next ten to twenty years
This is a very fine rebuttal to the typical ordinary average standard mediocre so-called" thinking" by 
every climate change denier. Thank you for taking the time to provide this very helpful information hartfire. I appreciate it a lot. Happy Tuesday to you m'dear! :)
Humans have a lot to do with climate change, but there are more changes happening the last 15 years. These are all Biblical prophesies coming true now, which are signs we are in the last days before Jesus comes back.
How long will these "last" days last Carazaa? Any idea? Thank you for your reply and the chart and Happy Tuesday! :)
I believe until Jesus comes back and takes us home, very soon. I am not sure, but I think we need to be ready any time.
no, I didn't want to 'be convinced' but seeing the evidence of Mars' poles coming and going, so to speak, was good enough for me!!!!!!!!
Believing in a Hebrew prophet won't actually help anyone apart perhaps from bringing you some personal comfort, but more seriously, the debate is about climate change and humanity's effect or otherwise on it, NOT on earthquakes. The majority of those are caused by the planet's internal workings and Mankind has no influence whatsoever on them: we can do no more than simply measure them and assess the risks to us from the hazards they pose.
That graph may look alarming, but look at the time axis. 100 years. That's nothing, geologically, rendering the diagram really rather meaningless except in human terms! I wonder what the graph's purpose was: it would take several more centuries yet to begin to make it at all sensible even if it then reveals there is no pattern to it.
That is not what "climate change hoax believers" contend. What they do point out, quite factually, is that Al Gore's ice-free Arctic by 2013 did not happen. Nor did the UN IPCC's 50 million climate refugees by 2010. Katrina and Wilma in 2005 were NOT the doom-sealing beginning of frequent destructive hurricanes - there have been none since, and it has been nearly 4000 days. In 2000, Dr. David Viner of the Climatic Research Unit of the University of East Anglia declared that snow in Britain was a thing of the past, with Heathrow having been shut down by snow repeatedly since.
Global warming climate change was and is just another two-bit doomsday cult. Like any other doomsday cult, when the prophesies of its high priests fail to materialize, they just change their story and their sheeple believers eat it up.
Oh yeah, Rosie. They think this is a big playground where 8 plus billion people on the planet can just trample and plummet the whole place to death
Ted Nugent bragged that he slaughtered 500 pigs with a machine gun for fun.
There is a special place in Hell for people like this. And they are trying to make it right here on earth.
