"Multiple studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals show that 97 percent or more of actively publishing climate scientists agree*: Climate-warming trends over the past century are extremely likely due to human activities."

https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

My question for all you deniers is, if this was a different topic would you disagree with a 97% consensus of educated specialists?

If 97 out of 100 doctor's agreed on medical treatment would you argue that 3 of them said that oatmeal would cure your cancer?

He's referring to the abiotic theory, however, it is false, there is no such thing as a renewable resource, it violates the laws of thermodynamics.

From Sonic flyer

Answer these questions:

- why is the climate changing on Mars?
Mars is warming because of a change in albedo or a change in the reflectivity of the surface. You also can't compare a planet with 1% the Earth's atmospheric volume to Earth.
https://www.nasa.gov/centers/ames/research/2007/marswarming.html


- why did the climate change on Earth millions of years before the Industrial Revolution?

Climate does change through small changes in the Earth's orbit. These are actually accounted for and shown by the same scientists you are saying don't know what they are talking about. The difference you need to look at is the warming trend over the past 100 years vs the most aggressive warming trend on the Earth before the industrial revolution
https://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/

- does the sun maintain a constant intensity/output? The sun's activity is on an approximate 11 year cycle. Much to short of a time period to effect climate

- is the orbit of the Earth around the sun a constant distance, or does it ever change? Already spoken to above


When you think about the answers to those questions then get back to us

A "renewable" resource was never meant to mean infinite. All energy sources are replenished, some at a much slower rate than they are consumed. Oil, coal, natural gas, uranium take millions to hundreds of millions of years to replenish. Renewable sources are replenished at a rate that greatly exceeds consumption or are so plentiful that we couldn't even dream of consuming them. Solar, wind, hydro, etc cannot be "exhausted" but our ability to harness/efficiency of capture and storage is limited.

I'll bet quite a few don't take kindly to the theory of evolution, either. Just a hunch.

If I give you the definition of a unicorn, will they suddenly exist?

Yes. Many wells have filled back up after being pumped dry. Also petroleum can be made synthetically:

https://www.discovermagazine.com/tec...ng-into-oil-03


Research the abiotic petroleum origin and you'll discover there are a lot of geologists and scientists that hypothesize that petroleum is in fact a natural process in the earth, and not dead dino guts. In other words the earth keeps generating more of it over time.


Also, peak oil, is a myth.

Stats are like bikinis... what they reveal is interesting but they hide the most important parts. Also, lies, damn lies, and statistics.

Statistics is not science....so, you know.

:confused: