Where's an Environmentalist when you need one

[Otern]

That was pretty simple. I really don't have any trouble with those statements. It tells me AGW in a Theory, not a Law, more information has to be collected, more experimentation has to be done in order to come up with predictive results.

Now, why couldn't the guest answer as simply as you did ? Congrats Otern, you are officially smarter than Bill Nye, the Science Guy.

A super complex system like the climate will never be 100% predictive, no matter how much science we do. Also, experimentation on such a complex system is impossible too.

But there are things we do know. While we may not know for sure the exact degree, we know it will get hotter. And while we do not know the exact ppm CO2 caused by humans, we know there's a lot more in the last 200 years than before.

Bill Nye never really got a chance to explain anything about climate change in this interview, since he got interrupted by Carlson every time he opened his mouth. Carlson is a good debater, but that doesn't make him right, it just makes him more able to corner someone with rhetoric, even if that other guy has his facts straight.

[Alexander PhiAlipson]

While we may not know for sure the exact degree, we know it will get hotter.

How do we know?

[C-Mag]

That was pretty simple. I really don't have any trouble with those statements. It tells me AGW in a Theory, not a Law, more information has to be collected, more experimentation has to be done in order to come up with predictive results.

Now, why couldn't the guest answer as simply as you did ? Congrats Otern, you are officially smarter than Bill Nye, the Science Guy.

A super complex system like the climate will never be 100% predictive, no matter how much science we do. Also, experimentation on such a complex system is impossible too.

But there are things we do know. While we may not know for sure the exact degree, we know it will get hotter. And while we do not know the exact ppm CO2 caused by humans, we know there's a lot more in the last 200 years than before.

Bill Nye never really got a chance to explain anything about climate change in this interview, since he got interrupted by Carlson every time he opened his mouth. Carlson is a good debater, but that doesn't make him right, it just makes him more able to corner someone with rhetoric, even if that other guy has his facts straight.

Well, based on this, I have to back you up on the scientific method from Theory, to AGW Hypothesis.

[Otern]

While we may not know for sure the exact degree, we know it will get hotter.

How do we know?

Comparing average temperature in the past with their respective CO2 levels. Maybe "know" is the wrong word, but we can do a pretty accurate assumption.

There's at least correlation between higher level of CO2, and a higher temperature, and lower levels of CO2 and lower temperature.

And we do "know" about the global temperature millions of years ago thanks to measuring oxygen isotopes on calcium carbonate: https://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/briefs/schmidt_01/

and we "know" the CO2 levels for a pretty long time back due to antarctic ice samples.

[ssu]

Here's a question I have for the science community on this.

Where are we in the process of the Scientific Method ?

The scientific method is a method. Not some "stage" of a process that were are in.

How do we know?

Where to start? I think the greenhouse effect is pretty undisputed science. Venus has a greenhouse effect, you know.

Naturally we cannot know what exactly will happen. Of course we could have the Yellowstone Caldera,
the super-volcano erupt and enjoy colder winters here Europe and not worry for some years or a decade about
global warming.

[PartyOf5]

While we may not know for sure the exact degree, we know it will get hotter.

How do we know?

Comparing average temperature in the past with their respective CO2 levels. Maybe "know" is the wrong word, but we can do a pretty accurate assumption.

There's at least correlation between higher level of CO2, and a higher temperature, and lower levels of CO2 and lower temperature.

And we do "know" about the global temperature millions of years ago thanks to measuring oxygen isotopes on calcium carbonate: https://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/briefs/schmidt_01/

and we "know" the CO2 levels for a pretty long time back due to antarctic ice samples.

So what is the ideal temperature for the planet? Maybe making things a bit warmer would be a good thing.

[Alexander PhiAlipson]

Are temperatures warmer when there's more CO2 in the environment, or is there more CO2 in the environment because temperatures are warmer?

[C-Mag]

Where are we in the process of the Scientific Method ?

The scientific method is a method. Not some "stage" of a process that were are in.

My understanding is good science follows the steps. But OK it's a method.

Based on Science, would you categorize AGW as a
A. Speculation
B. Observation
C. Hypothesis
D. Theory
E. Scientific Law

Please pick the best answer.
(you will not be given credit if pencil marks stray outside the lines)

[Otern]

Are temperatures warmer when there's more CO2 in the environment, or is there more CO2 in the environment because temperatures are warmer?

Are you saying human fossil fuel management haven't increased atmospheric CO2 in the last 200 years?

[Alexander PhiAlipson]

Are temperatures warmer when there's more CO2 in the environment, or is there more CO2 in the environment because temperatures are warmer?

Are you saying human fossil fuel management haven't increased atmospheric CO2 in the last 200 years?

No, I only asked a question.