Reddit reviews Climate Change: The Facts

I'd recommend this book as well.

It can help to understand the climate change sceptic side too. Try Climate Change:the facts

I'm not making an "evidence-based argument", retard. I'm telling you that I'm speculating.

Why do you care so deeply about this non-issue?

Read a book:

Climate Change: The Facts

>Ian Plimer draws on the geological record to dismiss the possibility that human emissions of carbon dioxide will lead to catastrophic consequences for the planet. Patrick Michaels demonstrates the growing chasm between the predictions of the IPCC and the real world temperature results. Richard Lindzen shows the climate is less sensitive to increases in greenhouse gases than previously thought and argues that a warmer world would have a similar weather variability to today. Willie Soon discusses the often unremarked role of the sun in climate variability. Robert Carter explains why the natural variability of the climate is far greater than any human component. John Abbot and Jennifer Marohasy demonstrate how little success climate models have in predicting important information such as rainfall.

It's not strictly about scientific consensus. There's a complex line of reasoning you have to agree with to get from the premise of rising CO2 levels to justifying policy targeted at reducing CO2 emissions.

The questions of what we can and should do in terms of government policy, determining a social cost of carbon, the trade-offs between emissions reduction and adaptation, etc. are not strictly scientific questions. The massive uncertainty makes it difficult to establish confidence that any reasonable proposed policies are going to have enough effects to justify the costs.

What you have presented as 'facts' are largely either of no relevance to the points I'm making, or broad summaries or news articles. I don't expect you to prove the case for emissions reductions in a few citations and you shouldn't expect me to refute them with more. There's a tsunami of information on climate change related topics out there and it has taken years for me to understand it as I do. There's obviously lots of information on the risks of climate change because nothing sells news like fear and it is an actual realistic doomsday scenario -- so we shouldn't be surprised to see dozens of articles on every study that remotely hints at some of the more catastrophic climate risks (and lots of funding for such studies). The scientists that think maybe it won't be so bad, or maybe natural variation plays more of a role in current warming than we think, don't make headlines ("everything might be OK" is not a good headline for selling news) and can even be marginalized by their peers for not trying to draw more attention to the issue. If you are genuinely interested in the skeptic argument, I can suggest reading some of the content on the Climate Etc. blog and the book Climate Change: The Facts. If you're a converted alarmist, you can easily dismiss them with a series of ad hominems on the authors, but if you accept the arguments in good faith, you might be a little more optimistic on the future of the climate.