Everything physical is affected by its environment. Temperature [alone] has a tremendous effect on all substances.
And conversely, substances have a tremendous effect on temperature. Hence, why almost every time I discuss the warming of the planet I bring up the albedo effect. That one of the reasons for an ice age lasting as long as it does is that the amount of the surface covered by ice reflects a lot of solar radiation back, enhancing the effect of the cooling. And that as that ice melts, even less solar radiation is reflected, therefore enhancing the warming. Something I was aware of over 40 years ago, but almost nobody ever discusses. Want to cool the planet down again? Simply cover most of Canada in mylar so that it replicates the albedo effect by reflecting a significant portion of the solar radiation back into space.. It really is that simple. And I honestly laugh whenever people talk about an almost insignificant increase of a trace gas in the atmosphere. Meanwhile ignoring that at the height of the last ice age, the albedo was just under 1% of solar radiation reflected back into space. And today, it is around .1%. That is a huge freaking difference, if one even understands the difference between 1.0% and 0.1%. Especially when looking at the surface area of the planet. We take in about 173k terawatts of solar energy constantly. That is over 10k times the use of all energy on the planet. Now just imagine 1% of that reflected back and removed, and 0.1% deducted and removed. That is actually a huge difference, but also insignificant at the same time.
I guess when you're a hammer, everything looks like a nail. I can understand that people are afraid of EVERY damn thing, but do you really believe you can understand the dynamics of an ecosystem as large as a planet? The secret of life is just doing the simple every day things well. Leave the really complicated things up to the gods.
No, and here is the difference. I claim it is impossible to know and understand it. Which is why I laugh at those that claim they know in minute detail exactly what the future will bring. That is the difference, I admit that such is impossible. It is those that scream the opposite that I mostly laugh at.
Scientists from around the world show that it is NOT impossible to know and understand it, at least to the extent of knowing Earth is warming and that human activity is the primary cause.
Then why7 have you never been able to actually show us a claim from 30 years ago, and prove that exactly what was said was true without gross "adjustments"? Meanwhile, one of the Prophets of Global Warming back in 2009 who was backed by a great many of the "scientists" you seem to believe without question stated that the North Pole would be without ice within 5-7 years. Well, it is now 13 years since that prediction. And guess what? We still have a Polar Ice Cap. Oceans rising to inundate coastal cities by 2020. Also, nowhere to be seen. Global famines and drought, also nowhere to be seen. You see, these are actual facts, and predicted by those Prophets of Doom. None of which has ever happened. But you still believe them with the fanaticism of a religious nut. And are completely incapable of understanding anybody that has not "drunk the kool-aid". And yes, another religious nutcase reference. But unlike you, I refuse to drink the kool-aid and remain a skeptic.
Look throughout history at what the best and brightest thought to be true. Accepting that things are what they are regardless of our interpretation is liberation worth pursuing.
Obviously, there have been predictions that have not come true as of today. However, you aren't citing those predictions. So, there is no way to know what time frame those predictions referenced or the degree that science backed those predictions. You continue to fabricate claims concerning what I believe. AGAIN, you need to stop that.
I really don't know what you mean by that second sentence. But, there is no doubt that humans will continue to develop greater understanding of pretty much everything - as has been the case with humans so far.
Once you "understand" that you cannot understand, it's incredibly liberating. What people fail to grasp is that understanding is the illusion, as seeing what's really going on is the goal. Of course, human being will gain a "better understanding" of what's going on but this better understanding is relative to condition that are constantly changing. This is the key. That is, what's true one moment is not the next [as the conditions which gave rise to that truth have morphed]. A new truth every moment...think about it!
And the Denier escapes by denying everything! It's at moments like this when I want ever so badly to be able to cough up an honest reply...
I destroyed your schtick. I can get specific, but that involves getting beyond notions such as truth. Knowledge is conditional, but that doesn't upend it's utility. Or to be blunt, that's not philosophy, it's crap.
I agree with some of this. Humans don't know it all. Science is progressing toward that dream. But, what is being learned is not an illusion. Plus, physics is not changing as you seem to want to think.
Please get specific. Who suggested that knowledge was not important? This isn't philosophy. Using knowledge, it's quite easy to demonstrate.
Sure, you can point to anything humans know and say that is not "truly understanding" due to some idea of absolute understanding. But, that's totally useless, and in most cases meaningless. The decisions we make today have NOTHING to do with your arbitrary measurement of depth of understanding.
It is anything but useless. Being able to go with the flow [of all things] IS what it is. Wisdom is understanding the flow.
Knowledge is understanding why a tomato is actually a fruit not a vegetable Wisdom lies in not adding a tomato as an ingredient into a fruit salad
