Really? Let’s go back to the fact that we know the sun is burning brighter and hotter than it was 200 years ago.
Could that have any effect on the average global temps?
How about the amount of Water Vapor suspended in the atmosphere? Any effect?
That’s my point. When an orbit gets changed by an external force it remains in that changed orbit until the next external force changes it again. It does not return to its “correct” orbit.
By the way, “correct” was your word, I simply parroted it.
Not to mention the fact we can barely produce enough food for the world’s population as it is.
Try shortening the growing season world wide by a few weeks and see how that equation works out.
Yep. If these catastrophic climate change nuts want a real disaster to worry about, they should consider what the next ice age will be like.
The equilibrium of the system is determined by the constant forces within it, not a temporary effect that occurs just once over a long time period unless of course that temporary effect was enough to change the entire system.
Again for the simple analogy of plucking a guitar string. It only vibrates measurably until equilibrium is returned due to the stable forces stretching the string.
1 Like
As I keep repeating, the next ice age will kill billions, and the fight over the remaining habitable and arable lands will kill far more.
I like to tell the ‘CO2 is to blame’ ilk that I certainly hope they are right … it may be the only thing that is holding off the onset of the next ice age. 
You keep brining it up, not me.
You never provided any evidence or explanation for your version of the “hide the decline” controversy, just declared that the rational explanation was a cover story and then bailed.
I’m still waiting for you to respond to the question.
Someday, maybe you’ll get around to the topic.
Maybe if we survive as a species to reach the next ice age we can worry about that.
Still incorrect. Every orbit is a sort of its own equilibrium (although I don’t think you’d ever hear anyone describe it that way) determined by velocity and position of an object and the mass of the object it’s orbiting. If an orbit is disturbed by an interaction aren’t forces pulling it “back” to the original configuration.
There is air resistance in space?
It’s not air resistance, but the force from the stretched string that returns it to the middle. The same cannot be said about an orbiting body.
Air resistance accelerates the process of returning the string to a non-vibrating condition.
No orbit is constant, there are variations in all of them as they are affected by other objects.
Equilibrium is returned to the system when the temporary objects move away from one another.
Again, basic physics, the sum of all forces.
Quit pretending otherwise, you’re just showing you lack anything resembling intellectual honesty.
Seriously? Which is the greater force, air resistance or the tension on the strings?
Air resistance is an extremely minor factor. Even in a vacuum the string returns to it’s original prior to being plucked.
That is completely false, the same sum of all forces applies to a body in orbit.
That you can even pretend to have an education in the sciences with a straight face speaks volumes.
You keep saying that like it means something. What forces?
Every body that originally acted on it that remains in the system continues exerting the same forces that originally locked it into it’s orbit.
Unless a passing object exerts enough force to permanently move it far enough out of it’s path to allow those forces to act, it will have to return to equilibrium.
The same forces we’ve been discussing, primarily gravity.
