Global warming is real


#1450

You’ve not shown any evidence of any objects getting anywhere near our planet that have a mass large enough to affect our orbit.

The reason these types of objects are so unlikely to exist is that they would have been ejected from our solar system by Jupiter or already collided with something else by now.

Which is a good thing.


#1451

What I have proven is that it’s a realistic possibility and as I’ve said all along we can’t know what we don’t know yet.

You didn’t know anything about the rogue planet or the 12 new moons of Jupiter that have recently been discovered much less Valetudo who’s orbit proves it is of extra solar origin or the recently discovered rogue planet that is 12x the size of Jupiter which is roaming in our vicinity.

All I ever said is that it’s a possibility and the evidence shows that to absolutely be true.


#1452

Ok all of this is way above my pay grade.


#1453

It gets pretty interesting when you start researching the possibilities.


#1454

“Realistic”? No. Not even close.

All these moons of Jupiter actually reinforces my point. Large objects flying around the solar system don’t last. They’re affected by the gas giants. Either they, get ejected, or become moons.

A rogue planet 20 light years away isn’t going to keep anyone up at night.

None of the objects you’ve referenced cross into our orbit and those that do simply aren’t massive enough to make any difference in our orbit.


#1455

You haven’t “proved” anything, except your willingness to put credence in fringe theories, while rejecting massively evidence supported science.


#1456

Everything I have shown here is supported by the known science.


#1457

They don’t last? Then tell us how there’s a massive rogue planet floating around alone 20 light years away?


#1458

It’s speculative science. It may prove out eventually. Meanwhile, you reject massively supported science, because ideology. My point is that: you’ve proved only that your adherence to evidence-based science is dependent on whether it agrees with your ideology and religious beliefs.


#1459

And you’re simply making it up as you go along.

I reject the claim that it has been proven that our current global warming is anything to be alarmed about because it is the repetition of a cycle we’ve been in for the last million years.

I reject the claim it has been proven to be caused by AGW because we are still within the norms of the last five cycles.

I reject the premise that we can know to any level of accuracy what the reconstructed, adjusted, historical data can show relative to those last five cycles.

We simply don’t have enough accurate data from which to draw any accurate conclusions about AGW, if it’s a problem at all, if so to what degree, or what we can do about it to change it.

Good science is not based on agendas or ideology, it is based on observation, experimentation, and a careful and unbiased examination of the results before drawing any conclusions at all.


#1460

A rogue planet 20 light years is not flying around our solar system.

Please read carefully.


#1461

The problem is that none of it supports your hypothesis.


#1462

And that “reply” was in reference to large objects that may only occasionally pass through it.

The fact is we don’t know what other large objects are out there that occasionally pass through our solar system and we won’t for hundreds or thousands of years.


#1463

Objects large enough to affect our gravity are few and far between. The odds that one would affect our orbit is exceedingly remote.

Space is very large. Very, very large. 20 light years is considered just outside our solar system. These are simply scales that make your hypothesis so unlikely and not realistic.


#1464

I’ve not made anything up. Everything I’ve said is backed by science.

Do you find it interesting that you aren’t concerned about global warming because it’s within the “norms” of the last 5 cycles and yet express skepticism in the global temperature record?


#1465

That reply wasn’t even addressed to you.

The accuracy of the reconstructions is far below the level of the supposed acceleraton of heating we’ve seen since industrialization so there’s certainly no reason to panic over a 1.7c “increase” over the last 140 years.

We only have accurate data from the last 40 years so that’s the only period during which we can definitively say how much warming occurred in.


#1466

And this is just flatly false. Only one of those moons, Valetudo shows any evidence of being a captured extra solar body.


#1467

There is no evidence to dismiss it either. What sort of evidence would you expect to exist from the gravity of a large object that came near but did not impact Earth? You are essentially saying that because they left no mark they must have never existed.

They also do not have to have a substantial gravitational effect to have a profound effvect on the climate over the long term. Even a slight shift in orbit, rotational velocity or axial tilt would change the climate. And if it were a particularly massive body and passed near enough, the tidal force could have been sufficient to set off the breakup of Pangea and subsequent continental drift.


#1468

Just a difference of a few miles can make a huge difference on the climate.

Look back at the article I posted where they discuss the change in temp’s just due to variations in the axial tilt over time.


#1469

Do you not think CO2 is a greenhouse gas?