I've read a fair amount of the IPCC reports and looked at the studies that have the strongest conclusions in them. The IPCC seems to have taken a pretty conservative approach and chosen very sound studies to support their work. I am not a climate scientist, so many of the studies are outside my area of expertise. None the less, I spent time in a lab doing quantitative research in ecology and evolution and learning to read scientific papers is part of that training.
The body of evidence looks good. I'm sure that there are areas of uncertainty and dispute over details because there always is in science. The consensus seems pretty solid, though. I will also say that I have direct scientific insight into the effects of climate change. The lab I worked at published on of the first and most respected papers showing physiological adaptation in the wild of a species to climate change. The paper was in Science magazine, which about as respectable as you get. I did not work on this paper, but I worked with both authors on topics that would become this paper years after I left. http://www.sciencemag.org/content/312/5779/1477 Climate change is happening. There is a high level of confidence that human activity is behind quite a bit of the sudden change. Exactly how much is a matter for debate and with a complex topic like climate change , I'm sure that human activity has different effects in different areas. We need more study to better characterize the systems and understand how effects and causes are linked, which is particularly difficult when so many of the systems are non-linear. None the less, we do understand a lot of the high-level systems at sufficient detail to know that the direction we are headed is not advantageous for humans. We are not well adapted to the warmer world toward which we are headed. We can adapt, I'm sure, but it will be painful and I'd rather focus on reducing our footprint and stabilizing the climate to the extent we can so that it is a more favorable environment for my grandchildren. Cheers, Judah On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 7:47 AM, Rick Faircloth <[email protected]> wrote: > > So, GMoney... > > To paraphrase you, when did you "read the hundreds upon hundreds of studies > who's findings support this conclusion, and deem every one of the to be > scientific and credible" ? > > Rick > > > On 6/6/2014 10:33 AM, GMoney wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 8:30 AM, Sam <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> Science, logic, fact, common sense etc. > >> > >> BTW, I do not reject the possibility that humans can contribute to > >> "climate disruption". > >> What I reject is the so-called proof that it exists or it's mans > >> doing. When someone presents actual science to back up that theory I > >> will have a look. > >> > > You have read the hundreds upon hundreds of studies who's findings > support > > this conclusion, and have deemed every one of them "unscientific"??? > > > > That's impressive. > > > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:370740 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
