General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsClimate Change is a Theory
Last edited Fri Feb 27, 2015, 06:22 PM - Edit history (1)
It is based on the fact of Global Warming. Measurements of temperatures are the basis of the fact of Global Warming.
The theory of Climate Change says that Global Warming will force Climate Changes.
Another Theory is that Global Warming is caused by humans and our pollution/alteration of the atmosphere. That Theory is based upon measurements of human induced pollution.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)Rex
(65,616 posts)Chairs. Somehow chairs are stealing our boogers when we sleep. Clint Eastwood knows.
frazzled
(18,402 posts)Don't try walking off the side of a tall building.
(I just don't want people to think that calling something a theory somehow means it's simply a matter of belief or conjecture.)
bhikkhu
(10,724 posts)and our habits of thinking and our use of language causes additional difficulties. Everything is a theory, with different levels of likelihood.
Gravity (as we understand it to work) is highly likely to be fact, and highly unlikely to be disproven. Its one of the better examples, because it can be experienced and tested. Every day, I wake up, gravity still works. And every experiment studying it agrees with the models. We are pretty far from that level of certainty with global climate change, but the consensus is pretty overwhelming, and its hard to imagine at this point any plausible alternative theory that would explain the evidence.
In any case, there's nothing wrong with calling something a theory.
Telcontar
(660 posts)Now hold my beer and watch this
lame54
(35,324 posts)just let it go and it will stay there till your ready to drink it again
CreekDog
(46,192 posts)this doesn't diminish scientific theories in general (compared to laws) nor climate change and global warming.
http://science.kennesaw.edu/~rmatson/3380theory.html
frazzled
(18,402 posts)The "law" of gravity is just a rule derived from observable falls, which can be used in a practical way to measure things. But there is still a "theory" of gravity; that is to say, an explanation ... and that is part of relativity theory.
rock
(13,218 posts)"Theory" has to main meanings that are used in the vernacular:
1) explanation;
2) speculation.
The GOP doesn't believe in science or explanation. Guess which meaning that always use.
So you believe in theories, that is good to know.
RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)Global warming is not a Theory. It is a fact.
Predicting future climates is to theorize. In this case the theorizing of AGW has a sound basis, just like the theory that radiation can kill you.
Spider Jerusalem
(21,786 posts)Helpful hint: it does not mean "wild-ass guess". It means "explanation for this phenomenon based on the best understanding of current data". Anthropogenic climate change is a theory the same way magnetism and gravity are theories.
RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)Predictions of the future are what?
Spider Jerusalem
(21,786 posts)I see you're as ignorant of this subject as you are the effects of nuclear radiation.
RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)Weather is what you speak of.
Spider Jerusalem
(21,786 posts)have you not noticed the droughts in much of the US Southwest and such over the past decade?
RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)Strike 3.
Spider Jerusalem
(21,786 posts)"prolonged period of abnormally low rainfall", so an area that gets ten inches of rain a year suddenly getting 2 inches of rain a year is experiencing a drought, by definition (and most of California isn't a desert).
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-31434030
RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)Predicting weather is a prediction.
Climate has to do with long term weather conditions and geography in an area. A desert climate, such as in the SW US, is a climatic condition due to long term weather events and geography.
Predicting the weather is far simpler in a climatic region and is usually correct. In the future such predictions may become harder to make if the climate changes.
Spider Jerusalem
(21,786 posts)RobertEarl
(13,685 posts).... that the Sahara was once forested.
I sure hope you have not been so angrily arguing with others about this.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)How do you feel about that "theoretical" prediction?
You are so wise I bow to your brilliance.... with a moon. Just imagine it.
hedgehog
(36,286 posts)it will fall to the ground.
What will your area's climate be like in 50 years?
hedgehog
(36,286 posts)have pretty much the same precipitation as now. We may end up with conditions similar to Seattle's.
An expectation would be a theory, yes?
LeftyMom
(49,212 posts)This new learning amazes me, Sir Bedevere. Explain again how sheep's bladders may be employed to prevent earthquakes.
XemaSab
(60,212 posts)n/t
Fozzledick
(3,860 posts)Definitely off your game...
Better get it in while you can, before you get sent back North of The Wall 
Hutzpa
(11,461 posts)
Jamastiene
(38,187 posts) 
longship
(40,416 posts)
MineralMan
(146,331 posts)That theory explains Fukushima pretty well.
I have a Thread Theory*:
The humorous outcome of a DU thread has a direct relationship to the screen name of the thread starter.
Hq = Sn*Pc
Where Hq = Relative Humor
Sn = Numeric value of thread starter's screen name
Pc = Post count of screen name
*No relationship to String Theory
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)and quantum physics. All of which have not been falsified despite countless tens of thousands of experiments.
