Which is the scarier scenario - if the recent warming is human caused, or natural?

Question

Nobody has been able to come up with a plausible alternative physical explanation for the recent global warming. All evidence points to humans being responsible.

But what if the contrarians are right and the recent warming has been natural? In that case, we really don't understand the science at all. Thus we have no idea what the climate will do next. It could continue rapidly warming, or it could rapidly cool, and we have no idea.

In comparison, if the man-made global warming theory is right, we're headed toward catastrophic climate change, but we know exactly what we have to do to avoid it.

Which scenario do you find more worrying?

Answer 1

Well, as others have said, this is a tough one.



If it is natural, there would be some comfort in the knowledge that humans have survived everything that nature could throw at them for around 200 000 years.



Having said that, if it is natural, recent warming is also unprecedented so we would not be able to look to the past as a guide. We really would have no idea where it was going. Things could still be pretty grim for many millions of people, maybe for all of us!



On the other hand, in the AGW scenario, we would have the ability to change what we are doing and limit the damage we have done. We would be in control!



So which scenario is the most worrying?



If it is natural, we are powerless to intervene, for better or worse, we just have to sit back, watch, then try to adapt as necessary. If it is us, as I believe it is, then we have the ability to put it right!



Whilst I wouldn't say I was particularly worried at the moment, I would go with the natural warming as being the most worrying since I am optimistic that, in the AGW scenario, we WILL do what is necessary to get things under control.



After all, as a species, we would be pretty stupid not to, wouldn't we!



...and we're not that stupid, are we!



(Note to self; worry level anomaly detected!)



=============



Probably best to act sooner rather than later though. The longer we leave it the more fixing it will require. It may become unfixable if we leave it too long...

Answer 2

If scientists found out what was causing an unusually high number of people to develop a certain cancer, I'd view that as a positive step in preventing/curing the disease.

If scientists knew nothing and the cancer was just something "natural", to me this is the much scarier scenario.



Of course, people might say the first scenario is scarier in political/economic terms, because the cancer's cause was determined to be related to the processing of a major food source and now the government wants to tax/ban this particular manufacturing process, which would of course hurt profits for this particular business. This is then linked to socialism/communism/fascism, which is in turn deemed scarier than anything imaginable.

Answer 3

The fact that scientists can't prove an affirmative case against some other cause or causes for the post-1980 warming isn't a substitute for an affirmative case against mankind. There have been other warm periods, and other cool periods, and many of them are not fully explained. Also note that this is a branch of science that has evolved during the era of global warming - - i.e., the purpose of almost all climate research is to prove the case against mankind. You have a tough time trying to find evidence of another cause if you're not looking for it.

Answer 4

To me, the most worrying scenario of all time, is to think that we'll get to the end of our lives and realize how many hours we spent worrying and arguing about tests we did not run ourselves, reports we had no idea where the heck they came from, data we did not personally collect from an ice core in Antarctica so how the heck can we possibly vouch for it's validity, and so on. Have you ever heard of a Red Herring? Something to draw you so off track from what is actually important that you completely forget to, like say, observe the world around you for your own self? Go outside tommorow, and if it's burning hot and you can't breathe and the birds are dropping out of the sky, welp, you were right. And if your block is covered by a creeping glacier and the polar bears have become the dominant world species by some ironic twist of fate, welp, you were right! But if you go outside tomorrow and it seems downright normal and decent, maybe consider smiling.

Answer 5

Good point. Given the rapid warming the planet has observed over the last century and particularly the last few decades, if none of it was human-caused, it would imply there isn't much we can do to stop it the unusual warming. That's isn't good. I'm glad scientists have concluded that we have the ability to mitigate some of the problems.

Answer 6

to be honest. neither.



Main reason for that line of thinking is because I can't see any warming (if it does happen) being catastrophic. We humans would evolve to deal with any climate change and so not face any serious problems.



Warming would be preferable to large scale cooling.

Answer 7

Neither should be scary, species adapt or become extinct, if you think humans are too stupid to adapt, then be scared. I give the human race much more credit. By the way labeling people "contrarians" or "deniers" because they don't subscribe to the same dogma is slightly irritating, arrogant and rude. Try "skeptics" as a more civil and accurate term.

Answer 8

Yes, that's a tough one.



If climate change was naturally caused, there would be nothing we humans could do to stop it. In a worst case scenario... runaway global warming.... I guess we'd all have to run for the hills and hope for the best.



If it was man made, well that's worrying as well. But at least we can do something about it and work to reduce emissions etc. Unfortunately, given the slow reactions of the worlds governments to climate change so far, the potential for runaway climate change is rather high.

Answer 9

Neither is even slightly scary. It would only be something that the political movement could use for propaganda if they can convince people that it is human caused. That is why they ignore science and logic and try to assign far more than can be supported by the evidence.

Answer 10

There is no scary scenario! it's the weather son, been happening a long time and we have next to no impact on it!

Answer 11

Neither, global warming is just a natural cycle of this earth; that is has gone through before. Do some real research and you will see that the earth's warming cycles does not follow human caused carbon emissions. This is only a natural phenomenon that is being exploited by the Government/ big business to scare us into giving up freedoms and paying more taxes.

Answer 12

Uh, you are wrong in your assumption. It is natural and has been proved as such. If it wasn't then Mars wouldn't be warming up right along with earth. It is called a natural cycle and people like you are only trying to make money off of something that has nothing to do with humans and are doing nothing more than what amounts to selling snake oil to cure cancers and make it rain.

Answer 13

The evidence points to CO2 not suddenly driving the climate. Your pretense that the climate is stable is flawed. It is not. There was a cold time 400 years ago called the Little Ice Age. They didn't call it that because there was a little ice in that age. There was a lot of ice and it was a time of famine and disease. We live in warm times now. WARM is GOOD!!!!! Say it after me. WARM is SOOOO GOOOOOOD. OK now give me 3 hail Marys and 50 WARM is GOOOD, and I guarantee you will feel better in the morning

Answer 14

What "recent warming" I see no warming. Spring isn't even here yet.



1998 isn't "recent".

Answer 15

Of course a change in which we know the cause is less frightening than one in which we have absolutely no idea what is causing it.



I really don't see how anyone can argue with this--and yet, on a fundamental level so many do...