[Flipside]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-18120093

Seems that recent Methane emssions can be tracked back to prehistoric Methane that was trapped under the Arctic ice. If this is true, it could be very bad indeed, since Methane is a very powerful Greenhouse gas, which would serve only to accelerate the cycle.

[Legate Damar]

I'm glad I don't live on your planet.

Then again, even if I did we Cardassians are adapted for much warmer climates than you humans anyway.

Sucks to be you 

[z64555]

All the more reason for us to bottle it and use it as cooking fuel.

[Unknown Target]

Cow farts.

[yuezhi]

I'm glad I don't live on your planet.

Then again, even if I did we Cardassians are adapted for much warmer climates than you humans anyway.

Sucks to be you 

*blows a raspberry for annoyance

adapt to this reality-show-good-for-nothin's!

[Alex Heartnet]

So, why is it that people are making such a big deal about human-caused climate change if so much of it is natural?

[newman]

I'm glad I don't live on your planet.

Then again, even if I did we Cardassians are adapted for much warmer climates than you humans anyway.

Sucks to be you 

You're obsessed with Cardassians. We-get-it.

[watsisname]

So, why is it that people are making such a big deal about human-caused climate change if so much of it is natural?

Probably because most of it is not natural.

[karajorma]

So, why is it that people are making such a big deal about human-caused climate change if so much of it is natural?

While the methane itself might be natural, what makes you think it is natural for it to be released? Hell the fact that the methane is proving to be thousands of years old seems to speak against this being a natural warming cycle, right?

[Mikes]

The natural cycle of an uppity lifeform destroying the environment that they depend on.

It propably happens on 3.134 planets every minute right now.

Nothing to see here.

[watsisname]

While the methane itself might be natural, what makes you think it is natural for it to be released? Hell the fact that the methane is proving to be thousands of years old seems to speak against this being a natural warming cycle, right?

Quite so.  It ought to be noted that atmospheric methane concentrations have been remarkably steady for at least the last thousand years.  Up until the 1800s that is, during which it rose exponentially.  (Do I detect a strong correlation with certain human activities on our planet?  Surprise!)

That we're beginning to see long-frozen methane bubble up out of the arctic now has more to due with the fact that the arctic is thawing -- and that would be due to... uhhh, wait, why is the arctic thawing again?  I can't remember.

[Unknown Target]

I'm glad I don't live on your planet.

Then again, even if I did we Cardassians are adapted for much warmer climates than you humans anyway.

Sucks to be you 

You're obsessed with Cardassians. We-get-it.

Hey, at least he's not as bad as Nuke, with his, er, nukes.

[Beskargam]

So, why is it that people are making such a big deal about human-caused climate change if so much of it is natural?

additionally, even if it is natural, we still have to live with the effects of it. methane has 25x the insulating power of CO2

[MP-Ryan]

While the methane itself might be natural, what makes you think it is natural for it to be released? Hell the fact that the methane is proving to be thousands of years old seems to speak against this being a natural warming cycle, right?

Quite so.  It ought to be noted that atmospheric methane concentrations have been remarkably steady for at least the last thousand years.  Up until the 1800s that is, during which it rose exponentially.  (Do I detect a strong correlation with certain human activities on our planet?  Surprise!)

That we're beginning to see long-frozen methane bubble up out of the arctic now has more to due with the fact that the arctic is thawing -- and that would be due to... uhhh, wait, why is the arctic thawing again?  I can't remember.

Quite.... no.  To both you and kara.

Disclaimer:  I'm not a climate-change denier.  I am confident that human activities are influencing the changing of Earth's climate.  I am not confident in the slightest (and nor are most scientists) about what proportion of climate change is directly attributable to human activity, and what is part of a natural warming trend, and anyone who claims to be confident in those proportions is lying or selling something.  That said...

The fact that the released methane is thousands of years old does not in the slightest bit dimiss the notion that part of this climate cycle is a natural warming period.  This planet has historical climate cycles that have played out over hundreds of thousands or millions of years that we are just beginning to understand.  Historical ice ages and warming cycles can last thousands of years - we have evidence for this in the history of Homo sapiens and the migration patterns our species followed across continents.  To say that just because the methane is old means that this warming period is not a natural occurrence is just bonkers and is a position derived more from hyperbole than science.  Could human activity be a factor?  Absolutely.  Could its release be part of a natural cycle?  Absolutely.

This is what drives me crazy about the ideological positions around climate change - the arguments are becoming more about ideology, with people afraid to concede simple, reasonable unknowns, than about science.  This is true even in academia, though the public is most prone to it.

The best response to Alex's post came from Beskargam.  It doesn't actually matter if its part of a natural cycle or has been influenced by human activity, it's happening.  If we as a species want to keep this planet relatively comfy, we should probably be concerned and be figuring out what we can do about it.

[watsisname]

The fact that the released methane is thousands of years old does not in the slightest bit dimiss the notion that part of this climate cycle is a natural warming period.  This planet has historical climate cycles that have played out over hundreds of thousands or millions of years that we are just beginning to understand.

Um.  Wow.

The differences between the current warming trend and prior cycles are understood pretty darn well, and there is no reasonable uncertainty that we are responsible for the current temperature rise.  If you would like to understand how we know this then I'll be happy to provide the data for you.  But if you think it's all based on scientists lying, then there's no point in discussing it.

[Dragon]

I wouldn't call it lying, but a case of bias stemming from the fact the results are not entirely conclusive and can be interpreted either way, so everybody interprets them to be like they expected. Politics that are revolving around it don't help the matter the slightest.
Also, even if taking the "worst case" measurements, it can't be said we're responsible for the current growth, but, at most, that we've influenced it. The question is how much. Opinions here vary from "detectable" to "catastrophic".
If you have evidence to the contrary, I'd like to see it.

[MP-Ryan]

The fact that the released methane is thousands of years old does not in the slightest bit dimiss the notion that part of this climate cycle is a natural warming period.  This planet has historical climate cycles that have played out over hundreds of thousands or millions of years that we are just beginning to understand.

Um.  Wow.

The differences between the current warming trend and prior cycles are understood pretty darn well, and there is no reasonable uncertainty that we are responsible for the current temperature rise.  If you would like to understand how we know this then I'll be happy to provide the data for you.  But if you think it's all based on scientists lying, then there's no point in discussing it.

If you'd like to go back and actually read my post, you'll note a distinct argument against simplistic reductions which you seem to be happily repeating.

Once again:

The fact that the released methane is thousands of years old does not in the slightest bit dimiss the notion that part of this climate cycle is a natural warming period.  This planet has historical climate cycles that have played out over hundreds of thousands or millions of years that we are just beginning to understand.  Historical ice ages and warming cycles can last thousands of years - we have evidence for this in the history of Homo sapiens and the migration patterns our species followed across continents.  To say that just because the methane is old means that this warming period is not a natural occurrence is just bonkers and is a position derived more from hyperbole than science.  Could human activity be a factor?  Absolutely.  Could its release be part of a natural cycle?  Absolutely.

Don't take the beginning of an argument out of the complete argument, then reduce that to simple terms and argue against your construction.  That's called a strawman.

You and kara both agreed that the release of methane that is thousands of years old speaks against the idea of a natural warming cycle.  That is, if not false, then at least an exaggeration.  From a perspective rooted in science (as opposed to ideology), the fact that methane thousands of years old is only being released now suggests that this is the first point in time since it was trapped that climate conditions have begun to approach similar levels.  It does not speak to causation.

Notwithstanding the fact that we cannot conclusively know that the release of methane as is now ongoing is not a natural process, we can demonstrate that human activity is having a measurable effect on the changing of this planet's climate.  To what extent (and not the "is it?") is the matter really up for debate in most scientific circles.

You're kind of proving my point about ideology vs. scientific fact here.

[Mika]

Great news! If Science has it right, this just means more warmth for us!

If you guys down there in the south want to prevent this, chop chop, you'd better get to it!

Human psychology is weird; if generally things are heading towards the gutter and you make a bet where going further in the gutter nets you something it doesn't feel half as bad any more! Actually, I'm sort of grinning now. Also that I'm torn between if I should do some unnecessary driving in order to speed up the process or not?

[Dragon]

You're right about this one. I'm also a heat lover, so if there's global warming, I'd welcome it. I live far from the sea, so it's not like I have to fear flooding.
I only hope the warming doesn't destabilize the gulfstream, since with it gone, Poland would have a climate similar to Canada (only without the mounties, oil and French-speaking Quebecois, eh? ).

[Mika]

Hah! You're right on that one! Besides, doesn't the possibility of Gulfstream reversing or altering direction mean that we should push even more of that stuff in air to negate the consequences?

I'm sort of proposing collecting the methane and then burning it as a source of energy. That would convert methane to carbon dioxide, which, from what I have heard of, is ten times less potent gas. And the worst thing here is that I could probably sell this to a quite a fraction of people too!

Science meets Realpolitik, Round 2.