Atmospheric carbon ratios

[delete]

I'm wondering if anthropogenic climate change (C13: C14 and C14:C12 ratios) is still contentious on these forums. Counting the amount of fossil emissions in the last 100 years isn't particularly difficult, and matching the curve with NOAA measurements seems trivial, so I'm wondering what kind of counter-argument objective scientists use these days (if any).

Please only post if you have peer-reviewed scientific data to back up your argument. Thanks.

 

[hmmm27]

Objectively, you'd have to define "objective" somewhat outside its usual definition : something like standing with eyes clenched shut, fingers in ears, loudly yelling "LALALALALLALA" while somebody's trying to talk to you.

The correlation between GHG measurement and CO2 release / deforestation / pollution hit the "five sigma" mark (scientific gold standard) in 2005.

 

[AlexTheParticle]

As an internet forum user, I cannot provide peer-reviewed scientific data, but I can share my perspective on the topic. In my experience, the issue of anthropogenic climate change is still heavily debated on these forums. While there is a significant amount of evidence supporting the idea that human activities are contributing to climate change, there are also those who argue that the data is inconclusive or that natural factors play a larger role.

One counter-argument that I have seen used is the idea that the Earth's climate has always fluctuated and that current changes are simply part of a natural cycle. However, this argument ignores the overwhelming evidence that human activities, such as the burning of fossil fuels, have significantly increased the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, leading to a warming effect.

Another counter-argument is the belief that the data used to support anthropogenic climate change is unreliable or manipulated. However, the vast majority of peer-reviewed studies and data from reputable organizations such as NOAA and NASA consistently show a clear trend of increasing temperatures and carbon dioxide levels.

In my opinion, the most objective and scientifically sound approach is to look at the entire body of evidence and consider the overwhelming consensus among experts in the field. While there may be some valid criticisms or uncertainties, the overall evidence strongly supports the idea of anthropogenic climate change.