To counteract global warming, we need to block the sun’s warmth from reaching earth?
We’re already doing it with the very particulate pollution that comes with the CO2.
[QUOTE=Half Man Half Wit]
But wouldn’t such a line of reasoning still need an argument as to why the increase in CO2 doesn’t contribute to the warming, or alternatively why the CO2-increase isn’t man-made?
Or is the acknowledgement that the earth is warming in part due to greenhouse effects, but that the dominant cause is something else (presumably of natural origin)? Wouldn’t that just add the convenience of not being the ones to blame to the issue, since we’d still have to try and come up with solutions for the same problem (or a way to live with its effects), because the contribution by the greenhouse effect would be the only thing we could at least hope to affect, if the underlying cause is natural?
[/QUOTE]
The classic dissenting argument here is that increased CO2 concentration creates feedbacks that outweigh the greenhouse effect of the CO2. One such feedback is clouds, which might cool the earth by reflecting sunlight back into space before it warms the earth (this is referred to as increasing the albedo of the earth.)
The idea that the feedbacks outweigh the greenhouse effect isn’t accepted by the scientific community in general, but their existence, and the fact that the complexity they create means that climate science is imprecise, gives those who have an interest in disputing climate-change a bit of an intellectual shield to hide behind.