Timeline for Does CO₂ cause Global Warming?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
30 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 30, 2020 at 5:42 | review | Close votes | |||
| May 5, 2020 at 3:04 | |||||
| Apr 30, 2020 at 5:22 | comment | added | coagmano | Does this answer your question? Do human activities contribute to climate change? | |
| Feb 6, 2019 at 22:36 | answer | added | PoloHoleSet | timeline score: 4 | |
| S Feb 5, 2019 at 22:28 | history | suggested | elliot svensson | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Title broadened to be more accurate.
|
| Feb 5, 2019 at 20:54 | comment | added | JoseOrtiz3 | You need to cite your sources when you invoke things like "I read somewhere...". I clicked your link to some website called warmingscaretactics.com, and the link resulted in an IP-Address-not-found error message, meaning the server hosting your URL is no longer running. In particular, given that you are posting on skeptics, your sources should be considerably strong, in other words referencing actual publications, especially peer-reviewed and scientific ones, and minimally sources that actually exist. Consider improving your literature standards. | |
| Feb 5, 2019 at 17:55 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Feb 5, 2019 at 22:28 | |||||
| Feb 5, 2019 at 17:43 | answer | added | elliot svensson | timeline score: -3 | |
| Dec 25, 2018 at 20:23 | history | protected | CommunityBot | ||
| Feb 8, 2015 at 4:35 | comment | added | vartec | @AndrewGrimm: Asking if CO2 is the cause and asking if GW is anthropogenic are completely different questions. There are other gases that are beyond doubt man-made and per same amount of gas, have tens of thousands times more greenhouse potential. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global-warming_potential#Values So this question is basically about demonstrating that there is so little of them, that they don't have significant effect on GW. | |
| Jun 24, 2014 at 7:21 | history | edited | Sklivvz | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
edited body; edited title
|
| Nov 23, 2013 at 21:35 | history | edited | ChrisW | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
edited title
|
| Nov 23, 2013 at 21:34 | history | edited | Larian LeQuella | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 22 characters in body; edited title
|
| S Nov 23, 2013 at 21:14 | history | suggested | Brad | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
fixed CO<sub>2</sub> references
|
| Nov 23, 2013 at 13:30 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Nov 23, 2013 at 21:14 | |||||
| Sep 12, 2013 at 9:53 | comment | added | Mark | Are you seriously saying that no positive feedback has ever been established outside climate science budgeting? Or just a humorous note? | |
| Sep 12, 2013 at 8:39 | comment | added | jwenting | @Mark actually, no positive feedback has ever been established except in climate science except the one between alarmism and budgets. | |
| Sep 12, 2013 at 7:38 | answer | added | user18604 | timeline score: 18 | |
| Jun 5, 2013 at 2:15 | comment | added | Mark | True jwenting, though, of course, the net positive feedbacks have actually been measured through paleoclimate data, whereas the net negative feedback is based on wishful thinking. | |
| Jun 4, 2013 at 5:58 | comment | added | jwenting | OR it's possible that there is no positive feedback at all, and that an increase in one causes through some means a decline in the other, or at least creates a condition that's conducive to the other declining. Think increasing temperatures (caused by increasing CO2 or not) causing conditions in which forests and algae banks grow better, absorbing more CO2, which causes CO2 levels to decline, which results (IF the "CO2 causes global warming" adherents are correct) a decline in temperatures, flattening out the curve. | |
| Jun 3, 2013 at 12:24 | comment | added | Kaz Dragon | Do note that you have a false dilemma. It's also possible that carbon dioxide in the atmosphere increases the global temperatures, AND an increase in global temperatures increases the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. What a nasty feedback loop that would be... | |
| Jul 17, 2012 at 10:47 | comment | added | matt_black | It depends what you mean by cause and how far you want to trace the effects (even if you accept the consensus on warming). Higher CO2 doesn't directly account for the majority of projected warming in models: most warming comes from other forcing effects such as higher water concentrations and other feedbacks. So even in standard climate models it isn't the CO2 that directly causes the warming. | |
| Jun 2, 2011 at 9:05 | vote | accept | Thursagen | ||
| May 21, 2011 at 9:12 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/#!/StackSkeptic/status/71865938869366785 | ||
| May 21, 2011 at 3:00 | comment | added | Thursagen | Humans can cause Global Warming through other means. | |
| May 20, 2011 at 15:39 | comment | added | Golden Cuy | Is this essentially a duplicate of skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/41/… | |
| May 20, 2011 at 14:08 | answer | added | Oliver_C | timeline score: 32 | |
| May 20, 2011 at 14:04 | answer | added | RMorrisey | timeline score: 25 | |
| May 20, 2011 at 12:45 | comment | added | Golden Cuy | How do you know that humans have caused global warming if you doubt that CO2 is behind it? | |
| May 20, 2011 at 11:26 | history | edited | Kit Sunde | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
- really
|
| May 20, 2011 at 11:14 | history | asked | Thursagen | CC BY-SA 3.0 |