QUOTE(anthony @ Sat 24th July 2010, 7:13am)
So, you agree that the *only* way to establish causation with regards to global warming "would be to take a few identical planets, alter their CO² levels and then measure the effects"?
Pretty much, the only other way would involve technologies beyond what we currently have and data that we almost certainly won't have short of Von Neuman sensor network.
Basically, my opinion is similar to Freeman Dyson's - the climate is so incredibly complex, with so many interacting variables that causation is extremely difficult to prove (impossible with current technologies) - and causation is already hard to prove. But really, to be fair, I don't think causation needs to be proven to an absolute certainty -
but people act like it has been, which really irks me.
QUOTE
I'll pose this question to anyone who wants to defend that statement. How do you show that evolution caused humans to arrive on earth? Build a bunch of planets, throw in a bunch of bacteria, wait a few billion years, and watch humans spring up?
Discover FTL travel and then build a REALLY good telescope - or make reasonable assumptions based on the fossil record.
QUOTE
But from what I have read, anthropogenic global warming is the most plausible theory for what is happening (and whether or not anything is happening). I certainly wouldn't take the position that the Good Locust is taking, that I absolutely won't be convinced no matter *what* evidence is presented to me (that's essentially what he's saying).
No, that isn't my position at all, I believe CO2 may be warming the planet, but that it isn't as bad as some are making it out to be and that the hypothetical positive feedbacks they are feeding into computer models to come up with scary scenarios are ridiculous - if the climate was really that sensitive then it would've fucked over the planet a million times over by now.
My basic belief is that most of the warming is due to natural cycles (oceanic and solar) - if I'm wrong (or right) then I'll know in 5-10 years (probably less).
QUOTE
Furthermore, I don't think it particularly matters whether or not global warming is caused by humans, because all the evidence I've seen is that it would be far too costly to stop it and much more reasonable to deal with it. I'd rather my grandchildren live close to the beach in air conditioning, than in the stone ages. (Which, I hope needless to say, means I don't buy into the "runaway global warming" scare mongering and
Environmental Pascal's Wager.)
Not only that but millions are starving due to our conversion of food crops into biofuel due to the global warming scare - and the increased CO2 levels have been helping to feed the expanding human population.
QUOTE(Herschelkrustofsky @ Sun 25th July 2010, 5:41pm)
Except that you're way to pessimistic about fusion.
My hope is actually for thorium powered reactors - the fuel is more readily available, the reactors are perfectly safe and the byproducts can't be used to make nuclear weapons (so we shouldn't have any problems with other countries having them).
Get a nice modular design so we can make them fast and we could solve the world's energy problems fairly quickly - too bad we are flushing the money down the solar/wind toilet.