Oil. Oil is a liquid. It is vast. Much volume. Ever present in the ground. Without being a scientist " however" used to work as a mechanic, can tell you what happens when you have heat, and have no water to cool it. Oil cools. Different volume cools differently. Water Cools. Different volume cools differently. I have a theory: That is: Extracting Oil from the earth over a long period of time as has been done, is the equivalent small scale as loosing water from a radiator or a water boiler. Where fire of a boiler or heat of an engine is the "on the large scale" From both the sun and from the heat from the center of the planet. We are removing the coolant and also moving the coolant at to high a rate in some areas and not enough in others in effect triggering bizarre weather, sink holes, and possibly changing pressure of the atmosphere setting off volcanoes titanic plates and earthquakes that otherwise may not be changed. And that not the burning of fossil fuel the issue.
They are all stupid and a waste of time the main theory is the only plausible theory. F f f f f f f f f f f f ff f f ff f f f f f f f f f f f fff f ff f f f f f
There is plenty of research happening in the last few decades if you look for it. All facts backed up by observations rather than predictive models. Find details of climate records rather than the graphs they show you and you soon see how incorrect the graphs they like to show you are. The first nasa satellite for weather went up in 1979, the last year of a global cooling, even nasa released a statement in early 2015 asking people to stop using the data and images from 1979 satellite data to compare todays climate with. As well as that, the polar ice melts in summer which are being compared to the peak of the cooling faze don't tell the true story. In 2014 nasa released a statement that for years now the winter sea ice coverage is exuding the 1979 levels, but they don't want to advertise that as it dose not agree with the crap they dish out about climate change. The intergovernmental climate change board has no scientists on it, only people who are enthusiastic about the topic where elected, aka, climate change advocates. It even has government in its name. And their mission statement is "to advise on the negative effects of human induced climate change". They do not even look for other climate forces or science that is taking place. Also, in 2012 over 39 000 scientists in the USA signed a partition to reject the current human induced climate change theories. Thats over 80% of the American scientific community. You can find the partition and all the signatures on petitionforchange.Com. Its all their if you look, real science based of facts and observations. Solar studies predicted the warming from 1983 to 1997 way back in the 1800's. Its all their if you look past the bull dust. Studies on the increased carbon absorption of trees in high temperature high carbon environments. The increased sulphur emissions ( a cooling gas) from soils in high carbon environments. The stuttering of the deep ocean currents that cause sea surface temps to rise, which in turn cause the currents to kick start again bringing cooler waters to the surface ( el,nino, la'nina) and how they all combine to cause cooling, and how the cooling feedback is greater the hotter it was to start the cooling feed back in the first place. Its all fact, based on observations, and available. They predicted long term weather based on solar cycles accurately from back in the 1600, how convenient that the governments and media class have forgotten it all.
There are plenty of alternative climate change theories for global warming and cooling. These range from a natural change in the environment to alien terraforming. The most common one, of course, is that man is not responsible for climate change, it is just a natural environmental stage. This could be partially true, but man is mostly responsible.
Of course, various alternative theories to climate change are available today. People often try to discredit global warming and cooling as a natural progression of the Earth. The scientific facts point toward these alternative views being highly out of touch with what is actually happening on the planet right now.
I believe there is an alternative climate change theory to global warming and global cooling. That theory states that what is happening now, is quite normal. Since we have limited data and knowledge about the planet and we know it cycles in and out of cold and warm periods, it may be possible that we are just noticing these differences.
I believe there is only one alternative to the global warming and global cooling theories. If the theory of global warming/global cool is not true, then in effect the changes that we are experiencing are simply fluctuations that are common for Earth. Given that we really don't have data for an extended period of time, I would find it difficult to tell the difference.
The Greenhouse gas theory is just one of many and is highly questionable. All other theories should be given a wide platform for discussion and anybody who questions the theory should cease to be gagged and treated as a pariah. There's too much of that going on at the moment.
Climate change is clearly caused by the emission of greenhouse gases. Although organizations have provided alternative explanations, they are incorrect. Energy companies have a lot invested in their infrastructure, and they do not want to lost their investments if alternative energies take over. They have a vested interest in deceiving the public.