Sentences with phrase «if humans were»

If such a feedback system existed then one could argue that the sources of CO2 would increase (or sinks decrease) if humans were not adding CO2 to the atmosphere.

If humans were to suddenly disappear and some intelligent species 20 million years in the future were to be studying this geological layer, they would be able to identify a difference from other interglacials separate from any human artifacts they might find.

Even if we assume that an unknown source that is producing CO2 it does not follow that the CO2 levels atmosphere would increase as much as they had if humans were not pumping the excess CO2 into the air since the human produced CO2 must go somewhere.

It would be as if humans were able to look at a weather forecast, decide it was going to be hot tomorrow, and then in preparation suck up 15 or more pounds of water into our bodies

@Mike D: But if humans were setting fires for millennia, there should have been an equal number of tree ring damage before and after the MWP — and there wasn't.

It was as if humans were the only evil species on the Earth.

It's as if humans were handed the keys to the planet and started souping it up into a gas - guzzling hot rod.

A study out [Monday] in Nature Ecology & Evolution models what might happen if humans were to geoengineer the planet and then suddenly stop.

Mr. Biggs — you bring up a basic point that no one has answered for me, which is, «What would the climate / temp / weather be like outside if no humans were here?»

If humans were to similarly pump aerosols into the atmosphere, in theory we could offset some global warming.

Perhaps if humans were more like Vulcans, and operated by logic and reason instead of feeling and emotion, we'd not be in this situation, but sadly this is not the case.

Adam Lea (4) says: «Perhaps if humans were more like Vulcans, and operated by logic and reason instead of feeling and emotion»

If humans were never created, then a cat never would have even seen any of the birds found in the U.S..

Human relationships would be so much easier if we humans were straightforward about our needs and expectations with one another, like a cat.

If humans were entirely rational creatures, there would be no alcoholics.

Now if we humans were merely practical, the 2013 Mercedes - Benz G63 AMG would not exist.

What if humans were added?

Mediating institutions help give individuals meaning and connections that just wouldn't exist if humans were viewed as fully autonomous, mechanical entities.

Weisman's book uses real - world science to predict exactly what would happen to the planet if humans were to suddenly disappear entirely.

So, in short: If humans weren't able to burn fat and at some point also ketones as a by - product of fat oxidation, we probably wouldn't be here any more.

Scientists put the Silurian hypothesis to the test, to see if humans were the first major civilization on Earth.

The authors, from 13 institutes on four continents, reasoned that if humans were suffering from malaria when they left the African continent, it should be evident in the genetic makeup of parasite populations in different parts of the world; the theory predicts that parasites farther away from Africa should be less diverse, just as is the case in humans.

Eavesdropping on aliens In his comments, Snowden went on to suggest that if humans overheard aliens communicating amongst themselves — if humans were to pick up the alien version of a telephone call or television broadcast — it might be so well encrypted that it would be invisible among the radio chatter of the natural universe.

If humans were to one day live under the yellow haze of the moon's skies, exploring its rolling dunes and ragged peaks or settling by the side of gently stirring hydrocarbon lakes, they would need energy to power their lives.

The wilds of New York If humans were to vanish from New York, how soon would nature take over?

If humans were to survive a long time and spread through the galaxy, then the total number of people who will ever live might number in the trillions.

If humans were migrating out of Africa about 90,000 years ago — a time intermediate to the 120,000 - and 60,000 - years - ago hypotheses — «that shows there were probably multiple dispersals,» Groucutt says.

If humans were designed for a life of hunting and surviving harsh climates, then today's human is overly catered for.

The point near the end is interesting — if humans were removed from the earth, it would flourish.

But, how do you know that if humans were to leave the dark ages and truly except how special we are to each other (all we have in this vast cosmos) that would be better to each other?

If humans were the ultimate source wouldn't it make sense to humans.

So, if humans were truly designed, as an engineer, I can tell you, we are the result of a very poor designer.

If humans were not designed by a higher authority, how can each individual's DNA be uniquely different among the human species, especially different than the other animals; how can the life sustaining elements be constantly available and exist in exact formulations: O, H, C etc. water is always 2 atoms of Hydrogen and one atom of Oxygen; sugar, fats, grains, and any bio-chemical products can be broken down to their simplest forms of elements, but can be re-constructed with specific (not by chance) formula.

If humans were able to save themselves, Jesus Christ would have not needed to die for our sins!

The only thing that I can think of is if humans being there is inherently part of the economy — and the only way that happens is tourism.

If humans are presented with too many options, their decision - making abilities kind of shut down, Schwartz's research has found.

Governments in the U.S. and Israel are already trying to sidestep responsibility for the damage existing drone strikes are doing, so there needs to be clear rules for who is ultimately responsible for anyone's death if humans are indeed going to be pulled out of the loop, which seems inevitable.

«If human beings are perceived as potentials rather than problems, as possessing strengths instead of weaknesses, as unlimited rather that dull and unresponsive, then they thrive and grow to their capabilities.»

If it can't — if we humans are hardwired to engage emotionally only with other humans — then all those financial advisers, lawyers, and other relationship workers are safe.

This part of the optimist's theory argues that if humans aren't bogged down by routine tasks, they will find something better to do.

If humans are the result of so - called «intelligent design» then why do we have too little room on our jawbones to accommodate wisdom teeth (unless this alleged «god» intended our teeth to rot out since we're not supposed to have learned science, and therefore that the presence of bacteria plus acids are a bad environment for tooth enamel), and that so many of us are near - sighted, and that women can have FACIAL HAIR (is that a cruel joke?)

I think what you and I both know, is that, if humans are still around, they will naturally replace the current God and holy books with new ones.

So if those human beings feel that flying airplanes in to buildings, or torturing other humans, or killing their unborn children is right, they can.

If a human being has the gender of «male» AND that same human being is not the property of a man / woman / master, then the Bible, in both the OT and the NT, under Law and under Grace, does endorse sexual intercourse outside of marriage.

If humans are more powerful than God, why make him the subject of our praise, worship, and devotion?

If a human being has the gender of «female» AND that same human being is the property of a man / woman / master, then the Bible, in both the OT and the NT, under Law and under Grace, endorses / mandates abstaining from sexual intercourse.

This is an essential element if humans are to deal effectively with the problems of suffering.

If human beings grew up individually among wolves, they would not know what to do as human beings.

But if human beings are a product of the evolutionary process, why do we suppose that the earlier participants in this process were wholly unlike us?

If a human being devised a mechanism that tricks people, tortures them en mass for being tricked, and then implemented that method, would they not be evil?