Warming since then can not be explained
simply by natural causes.
Not exact matches
The proof that the growing co-extension of our soul and the world, through the consciousness of our relationship with all things, is not
simply a matter of logic or idealisation, but is part of an organic process, the
natural outcome of the impulse which
caused the germination of life and the growth of the brain — the proof is that it expresses itself in a specific evolution of the moral value of our actions (that is to say,
by the modification of what is most living within us).
I can explain climate change as a result of a
natural cycle
caused by the masses and orbits of the planets, but I don't go around calling believers in humans
causing climate change idiots
simply because I know what actually
causes it.
This is because electronic screens work
by generating light, which may
cause eyestrain or discomfort while reading text for long periods of time, while books
simply reflect
natural light from the environment.
Simply, it is possible that none of the rise in atmospheric CO2 concentration and none of the change to the 13C: 12C atmospheric isotope change were
caused by anthropogenic emission but were due to the unknown,
natural (i.e. non-anthropogenic) effect that
caused most of the change to the 12C: 13C isotope ratio of atmospheric CO2.
You can't reject a null hypothesis that is
simply a restatement of reality — e.g., that ALL global warming can be explained
by natural causes.
When Gort first visited in 1951, it spent little effort on climate change issues, focusing on other aspects of our planet instead: Gort returned in 2012 to answer puny human climatologist questions about whether climate change
caused particular weather phenomena
by making an obvious point: rather than struggle with theoretical analysis, you can
simply use your Climate Changeometer to remove all the excess greenhouse gases and aerosols above
natural levels and then measure the outcome.
For instance, Vox wrote that man - made global warming did not actually
cause Harvey, but
simply exacerbated the
natural disaster
by creating heavier rainfalls.
By the way, «
Natural warming can't one on one be compared to human
caused warming» as there is
simply no way to measure / record / tell the difference.
Now, we tend to lean towards the accidental death insurance with a return of premium
simply because your beneficiary will get something when you die
by natural causes.