Ummm. That’s suck a weird question.

Both. Same amount.

Both. Same amount.

lmao, do you have any evidence for that?

Actually, when you finally corner the climate scientists, they all admit that they have no idea to what extent humans are the cause of climate change. Many scientists also agree with you that the sun has a much greater impact.

Blasphemy! The science is settled! Anyone who says otherwise kills baby seals in their spare time.

Seriously you are correct. The ice core data that shows climate change statistics over thousands of years shows the real story.

We have gone through ice ages and much hotter periods than now and that is without carbon emissions from industrialization.

It's an industry the climate warming folk have created. $$$

Relevant.

Bullshit

How do you know that the earth's climate is changing?

Earth's climate constantly changes...

According to who?

According to history? Believe it or not, Egypt used to be green and fertile, hence the ancient name "Kemet", which means "Black Soil". Furthermore, the little ice age, in "modern history". The climate is always changing. I don't think humans are actually responsible, for it, though, unless you consider HAARP and Geo-Engineering.

According to history

Whose 'history'? Have you taken the time to check their sources?

Thank you, friend. Some people get upset at me for asking for sources, but only because they are insecure about their beliefs.

To be fair you get triggered as fuck when someone emasculates your flat earf stuff

What 'flat earf stuff'? I have repeatedly debunked Flat Earth.

He gets triggered anytime anyone challenges him on any of his claims. He isn't pushing any envelopes, he is repeating "evidence" like a 3 year old playing the Y game.

Ask him if he doesn't believe in flat earth and he doesn't believe in a round earth orbiting the sun then what does he believe in?

He things gravity does not exist, nor do planets, the sun, space, atoms, dinosaurs, missiles, nukes, a round earth, evolution, all of history etc.

Most of it is because he does not understand basic science or history. His argument for why gravity is fake is that cavendish's first experimental measurement of G was done with a simple experiment in a shed... therefore the entire theory of gravity must be wrong... that is like saying early surgery was done with a bottle of alcohol, a mouth gag and some dirty instruments and many people died... so modern surgery is fake... his argument is inane.

Or why missiles do not fly? He just cannot understand a basic force diagram or understand how flight control surfaces and vectored thrust works... does he admit being wrong? No he gets triggered and doubles down.

He won't tell you anything he actually believes in... probably because he wants to sell you a subscription to his $20+/mo website or send you to his youtube videos.

The man has proclaimed himself to be the world's leading skeptic but I would posit he is the world's leading ignoramus or best example of the Dunning Kruger effect...

👏 well said

The person who replied to you, step2thejep is here posting his own links shilling his paid website.

He is here to shill his paid website as he is john le bon who made the video below. He has already been banned from the cryptocurrency sites. He was told to stop doing this by the mods. He is not acting in good faith.

He claims to be the world's leading skeptic. Most of his claims are rooted in that he does not understand basic scientific concepts and his standard of proof is he has to see something with his own eyes.

He moves goal posts, attacks people on this sub, all the while never actually elucidating what he believes because that would be giving away for free the genius he offers on his website for $20+ month.

He simply is not acting in good faith.

Whose 'history'?

Our collective history (actual history, not the propaganda they teach in "schools")? I mean, the geological evidence of erosion on the Great Pyramids and the Sphinx shows that, it must have been built prior to the desert climate that it is now, hence the name Kemet - Black soil. There had to been a time when Egypt was fertile, wet, and green - which explains the water erosion (ie. amount of rain fall).

Have you taken the time to check their sources?

I have looked at the MS academia sources, and alternative academia sources, yes... There is far more evidence in the latter, than the former. For more, check out: /r/AlternativeHistory.

the geological evidence of erosion on the Great Pyramids and mainly the Sphinx

What 'geological evidence'?

https://www.ancient-code.com/scientists-geological-evidence-shows-the-great-sphinx-is-800000-years-old/

That is some obscure website, not evidence.

https://www.encyclopedia.com/science/science-magazines/great-sphinx-twice-old-egyptologists-and-archaeologists-think-based-recent-geological-evidence

1) What is the evidence in that link? Or is the link itself your idea of 'evidence'?

2) It is clear that you are just post hoc google-searching now in order to cherrypick headlines which suit your preconceived notions.

How many sources do I have to give you?

What evidence is there that earth’s climate has stayed the same?

Over what time period?

The last 20,000 Years

How far back to you believe reliable history goes?

What kind of history?

Any.

Millions of years

The person who replied to you, step2thejep is here posting his own links shilling his paid website.

He is here to shill his paid website as he is john le bon who made the video below. He has already been banned from the cryptocurrency sites. He was told to stop doing this by the mods. He is not acting in good faith.

He claims to be the world's leading skeptic. Most of his claims are rooted in that he does not understand basic scientific concepts and his standard of proof is he has to see something with his own eyes.

He moves goal posts, attacks people on this sub, all the while never actually elucidating what he believes because that would be giving away for free the genius he offers on his website for $20+ month.

He simply is not acting in good faith.

Non-Mobile link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_emissions_scandal

^{HelperBot v1.1 /r/HelperBot_ I am a bot. Please message /u/swim1929 with any feedback and/or hate. Counter: 149318}

Fuck it dude, let's burn it all. Pollution has zero consequences. Our actions have zero consequences. Let the smoke stacks roar.

why is there so many people who seem to be literally incapable of thinking outside of The Dialectic?

(I have some ideas why)

Pollution is bad. Smoke stacks are bad. I don't need climate scientists to tell me that. If you don't believe me suck on a muffler.

Thanks for the information. Still tho, if it's not bad suck on that muffler.

you've got the mind virus so bad you don't even know or want to know what I'm saying

know how I can tell? Nowhere here or anywhere else did I say anything remotely like "pollution is good"

A better question is:

What is a more desirable outcome? Doing nothing about fossil fuel consumption because you think man-made climate change is false and potentially causing a global extinction event, or moving to stop consuming fossil fuels because you think man-made climate change might be true and cleaning up the environment in the process?

Seems like only a greedy jerk would support the first idea when you frame the issue around the consequences. I'm not saying people denying climate change are greedy jerks, I just think if you are against cleaning up the environment for any reason, you probably are one.

Less than 1% of the earths atmosphere is co2 or methane. Truly insignificant.

Yet if I changed the composition of your blood by 1% you would get really sick.

Is that insignificant?

Im just saying that a 1% change doesnt have to be "insignificant"

Im of the mind it doesnt matter whats causing it there is zero reason not to pollute our environment.

You should watch some of John Colemans videos. He was the founder of the weather channel and always says the sun is the largest contributing factor.

I believe the theory with the most evidence, that comes from the people in the best position to collect that evidence.

I can't feasibly go out and collect thousands of data readings from all over the globe to even tell whether or not the Earth is warming, or cooling, or if Japan even still exists, as I've never been there. I have to assess the facts I have available based on their source.

So from that perspective, I think it's most likely that humans are making large, drastic changes to the environment that could cause some discomfort for us in the near and far future, such as making the climate generally more unpredictable. This is being done via the burning of petroleum based fuels, unsustainable farming techniques and other human-related activities.

But you're welcome to believe whatever you want, so long as you don't get in the way of evidence-based, scientific observations and reasonable laws that minimize the damage that human activity can cause.

You asked what I believe, and I told you where I get my beliefs. I am not an authority on the weather, I leave that to those I mentioned that are in a position to be authorities. I don't know what affects the temperature more, but I do know it's dangerous to come to your own conclusions without an appropriate amount of evidence.

the sun. we are less than ants compared to the sun

First, humans build tools and machines which both outlive us and never sleep.

For example, humans have built oil pumps which need an energy supply and maintenance, but otherwise pump much more oil than humans or horses. When the mechanic who built the pump dies, the pump keeps running. A mechanic can maintain hundreds of oil wells.

Humans alone have limited power, but our machines multiply our force.

An extreme example of this is the global nuclear bomb arsenal. If unleashed, even the people with the dumbest belief system agree that the climate would be changed for a long time. This is an example of how easily humans can quickly change the climate by using machines we have made.

Human activity has pumped a known amount of oil, and burned 60% of it. This directly matches the increase of CO2 from 280ppm to 400ppm. Humans have increased the CO2 in the troposphere. In turn, the CO2 is reradiating a measurable amount of infrared that previously radiated away into space. This is adding energy to the weather, causing more extreme winds, storms, currents, and temperatures.

Humans have greatly changed the climate, and done so in a way that has a positive feedback, or runaway, tendency.

Meanwhile, the Sun hasn't changed very much. The tiny variation due to the more extreme solar minimum is nothing compared to what humans have done to the atmosphere. Also, the variation in the Sun is cyclic over relatively short (20 yearsish) time periods.

Obviously if the Sun changed in an extreme way, that would affect the climate more than human emissions. For example, if the Sun actually went out, we would freeze to death.

But the Sun isn't doing anything extreme at all. Meanwhile, humans have done something very extreme to the atmosphere.

So that explains the flaw in the bogus question comparing the relative influence of human industry vs. The Sun on climate.

"Are humans more powerful than the sun?" is a dumb question that is nevertheless very popular among certain belief systems, which in turn are full of stupid ideas. If your thoughts are troubled by this kind of question, your best bet is to start completely over with new parents and kindergarten. If it's too late for you to start over, try reading and understanding, "Metaphors We Live By," and "On the Structure of Scientific Recolutions."

Also, it is ridiculously lame that you reposted this question a second time in under 24 hours. It reeks of polemic intent.

https://www.encyclopedia.com/science/science-magazines/great-sphinx-twice-old-egyptologists-and-archaeologists-think-based-recent-geological-evidence

What evidence is there that earth’s climate has stayed the same?

Over what time period?