| go to the wiki page on Milankovitch cycles to get an idea of the gross ipunts and feedbacks that affect global climate and also the uncertainties involved.What isn't discussed is how the continent layout and ocean circulation restrictions appear to also have a role (these two factors affect how the heat is distributed around the world), as well as the effects of ice cover in solar reflection.One of the problems is that how the climate is controlled in actuality is really not all that well understood. In gross terms, there is a pretty good idea of the important factors. It is how these factors play together to produce climate variability that is the big question. Anthro warming proponents emphasize greenhouse effects as dominant over the short term. It isn't clear that that is actually the case, but it is the essence of the argument that they present.I don't think I would characterize the idea that recent global warming is mainly caused by man as either a fact or a fiction. It is one possible explanation, one possible interpretation of the available data in terms of a poorly understood and very complex system.Not mentioned in your case is whether antro global warming is necessarily a good or bad thing. That opens up a whole different set of questions. For example, it may be that in the absence of our (man's) ipunts to climate, things would have gone and would be going fairly rapidly in the other way, towards cooling, glacial expansion, and so forth (return to the ice age), and thus warming may actually be the lesser of two evils.I think it is very important to point out that the climate is not static. It does not stay the same for long. It will change to warmer or colder and tends to cycle back and forth, sometimes fairly severely. People that scream about the horrible warming tend to operate under the false premise that without man, there would have been no climate change. This is emphatically a false presumption.Not sure if that helps you or not.
|
