View Single Post
Old 03-03-2014, 07:58 PM   #39
vtflyfish
Brookie Addict
 
vtflyfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: West coast of New England
Posts: 2,539
Quote:
Originally Posted by l'oiseau View Post
I agree that we shouldn't take risks with our environment, that is the only thing I agree on, although I think I'm the only one who eluded to that, so I guess I'm agreeing with myself. And I agree that science has always thrived on uncertainty, always will. Critics will always say scientists don't know jack because they have different views, but by evolving these views are discussed and put the test, and eventually we weed out the crud and come with something useful, but that by no means confirms absolute truth. All science is subject to revision when new findings are brought to the table (usually trying to answer one of those many questions that were generated when searching for the answer). That is the beauty of it. It always gets better.
l'oiseau, the history of science has always been one of powerful, ground-breaking hypotheses followed by long periods of refinement. There is some oscillation to that process but it always manages to converge. That, to me, is the beauty of the scientific method.

See this for a layman's review of the history of climate change science, with links to all the important pieces along the way:
http://www.aip.org/history/climate/co2.htm

So here we are in the midst of a great experiment of our own making. The earth is undergoing its first step input of CO2 in the atmosphere. We don't know its impulse response. If climate is under-damped we're in big trouble.

As I said in the OP, climate change is only one of three afoot influencing the mix of species on this planet. The question is, through climate change, spreading invasives and killing off other species have we created a situation that leads to our own destruction?
__________________
Oscar Wilde:Work is the curse of the drinking class
vtflyfish is offline