Originally Posted by
MaxQ
At what point is presentation of physical laws (thermodynamics), experimental demonstration of phenomena (energy in certain wavelengths being trapped by specified molecules such as CO2, H2O, etc) and measurements of change in heat energy capture of the planet while also calculating how much these atmospheric molecules have increased directly due to human activity, considered to be approaching proof?
The models are unreliable and there is no consensus among the scientific community. That in and of itself is clear as day.
Originally Posted by
MaxQ
I personally have zero expectation of mankind taking any steps significant enough to reduce the annual addition of greenhouse gases. The temp of both the atmosphere and oceans will increase accordingly. The acidity of the oceans will continue to increase.
It couldn't have anything to do with the fluctuation of the sun's energy output? Or maybe a tiny shift in orbit/proximity to the sun? Or the volcanos that spew out junk into the atmosphere? No of course not, none of that stuff matters. Only me eating steaks and driving my car to work is what causes climate change
Ask yourself this.... why has the climate changed on Mars and other planets? Is it because of the emissions of the probes we have sent there?