Quote:
Originally Posted by ArgoNavis
So a scientific hypothesis should predict an observation, and also be falsifiable.
Darwins theory of organic evolution predicts speciation = speciation observed = theory validated.
AGW hypothesis predicts increasing CO2 will increase temperatures = temperatures fail to increase = hypothesis fails.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/...NTARY/10575140
shouldn't the increases in CO2 have done something significant?
maybe I am too simple to understand, or is AGW more scripture than science?
can you tell me what tests would falsify AGW?
or maybe there aren't any? |
It helps to have an understanding of estimated temperature records from ice core samples going back a million years or so.
Basically what those records indicate, is that the Earths Temperature was not stabilized like it is now. It had wild fluctuations between hot and cold and these were not geographically set as to where.
About 10,000-20,000 years ago near the end of the ice age, the oceanic conveyor started up, which is what gives us the rather stabilized climate that we've been enjoying since then.
What global warming is doing, is speeding up the loss of the ice caps at the poles, which is already having effects on the oceanic conveyor.
Once the conveyor is gone, the GWT indicates that areas will have more extreme temperatures, both on hot and cold side of the scales.
The data gathered so far from modern/pre modern temperature records seems to be supporting this prediction of the GWT's, and thats not something even the deniers can hide from. Its happening now.
However it's not as bad as it sounds, as our prehistoric hunter-gatherer ancestors live through both the kind of climate variable situation we are moving to-wards, and through an ice age.
We are a hardy species!