-
Scientists are not arguing that warming is unprecedented. I’ve never read any paper that said “the climate has never had a warming period before”. To say that scientists are making that claim is to build a straw man, which this thread has dutifully beat the s4!t out of.
The science community is arguing that warming secondary to human action is unprecedented. Just like the magnitude of cooling following Krakatoa’s eruption in the 19th century was relatively unprecedented (at least in recent history). Citing examples of previous warming when human action was not present do not prove or disprove the anthropogenic argument. It just states another example of what we already knew: the climate is pretty volatile over geologic time. Lots of things affect the climate, everyone agrees with that point. That doesn’t mean man’s impact isn’t significantly contributing to THIS warming trend.
To use examples of previous non-anthropogenic warming periods as proof that man’s actions are not currently responsible shows a fundamental lack of understanding of the science. Therefore, citing a warm period in the dark ages as proof against manmade climate change now is embarassing to read.
I agree, we do need more data points. More importantly though, we need to understand the data points we have, and not misinterpret them 2/2 bias.
Reading the article helps.
