Convention held in New York for Global Warming science..... the truth

[kenzomatic]

Rath said:

Slimebeast said:

 

You and others who support actions against global warming, have to understand that when people say

"Global warming is a myth!" ,

they shouldn't be taken literally, because what they're trying to express is that there is an agenda exaggerating the size and the risks with man-made global warming.

So, let's agree that there is a strong concensus that man-made global warming is a fact.

But then what? How big of a factor is the man-made part of the green house gas effect compared to natural reasons? Is there concensus on that? No.

And if and when there is concensus on how much man is contributing to the global warming trend we have, then what?

What are the consequences of the warming on the planet and on us? How many degrees will the global average temperature rise in 10, 30 and 50 years? How many meters will the ocean level rise, and in what time, and what will the consequences of that be on the US, the EU, the rest of the rich world, and the developing countries?

You don't have an idea, do you? No one has, and there are no facts about that, and certainly no concensus. But you have tons of all sorts of people almost hysterically crying "Global warming is a threat to mankind! We must act now! We aren't doing enough!" as if they had facts.

Stop this madness.

There are no 'facts' but there is general concensus that 1. The climate is changing, 2. That mankind is significantly adding to this climate change, 3. That said climate change is going to cause an increase in natural disasters and significant economic damage.

 

With those three things in mind, shouldn't we be doing what we can to stop it? I'm not claiming that climate change is going to cause a mass extinction (though it seems humans are keen on doing that through other means) but rather that its easier to spend billions of dollars on greenhouse gas reduction now than the trillions of dollars in the future, not to mention the cost in human lives. 

 

So your argument is theres a "general concensus" and there are no "facts?"