no, if you actually pay attention CO2 is the least of the harmful pollutants

the most harmful is methane

I don't know about that

yeah

increasing C02

actually increases the production of Oxygen in plants

Imma have to trust the scientific community on this one. Maybe in the short term more CO2 is good for plants but, like many things, too much is a bad thing. I'm sure that other gasses are contributing but either way the CO2 levels we have are bad

I think you have too much `FAITH` on the scientific community

taking into consideration that many of their predictions haven't come true in regards to climate change

Well if they're all saying the same thing and have dedicated their lives to studying this stuff while publishing their studies in peer-reviewed journals why shouldn't I trust them?

All previous heat records have been topped in the last 10 years. Weather is notoriously difficult to precisely map, but the climate trends corroborate the climate change emergency. Corporations are already charting their futures to accommodate it.

they have?

If they haven't then they should

https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2841/2018-fourth-warmest-year-in-continued-warming-trend-according-to-nasa-noaa/

Nasa is part of the conspiracy though so they don't count

no no

the earth is warming alright

but were their predictions correct and what would happen when those temperatures hit correct?

wasn't bangladesh supposed to be underwater by now and the ice volume be lower?

I'm not saying that the pollutants are harmful to human health

what I'm saying is that the impact that we have in the ecosystem is not as big as it is being portrayed

You would have to find a specific prediction I guess and we can check it

with all of the scientific data on global warming I've read I tend more to believe that the temperature variation is more connected to sun activity

Sun spot activity is there, but the CO2 situation seems for real to me, and we understand how that cycle works pretty well

They compound as well for the greenhouse effect

I think it's real, but it's a detriment to human health more than the earth

e.g.

I'd be in favour of changing our main source of power to clean energy

I am human so the viability of human life on the planet matters to me

due to the respiratory impacts it has on us

but when you compare the sun activity to the temperature increase

you will see that it follows a pattern

```Figure 1: Annual global temperature change (thin light red) with 11 year moving average of temperature (thick dark red). Temperature from NASA GISS. Annual Total Solar Irradiance (thin light blue) with 11 year moving average of TSI (thick dark blue). TSI from 1880 to 1978 from Krivova et al 2007. TSI from 1979 to 2015 from the World Radiation Center (see their PMOD index page for data updates). Plots of the most recent solar irradiance can be found at the Laboratory for Atmospheric and Space Physics LISIRD site.

```

Do you think that is an accurate representation?

that uses the solar averages, the average of irradiance doesn't change that much which does't display a big correlation

but when it comes to activity in terms of solar flairs

hmm

I cant seem to be able to post images

upload

You might not be high enough level yet as an anti-spam, the link worked but you deleted it