Science is used to explain everything nowadays, however the same theory can be analysed from many points of view, it can be manipulated. We have to be clear, objective, take science as what it really is and not what some people want it to be. So lets talk facts.
Imagine a car, imagine you are going too fast you press the brakes to slow down, then you are going too slow so you press the accelerator. This is known as a negative feedback.
Now imagine someone comes and changes your pedals so that the accelerator pedal is on the brakes place and vice versa. Then when you are going too fast you will accelerate even more and when you are going too slow you will decelerate due to the brakes. This is known as a positive feedback.
Nature is intelligent; when tectonic plates move apart somewhere else they move towards each other, this way the Earths surface is always the same size. Then logically nature will react with a negative feedback, yet the computer models used to predict the future temperatures and climatic changes are based on a large positive feedback. That doesn’t seem right does it?
It seems even worse when satellites records, which are thought to be a reliable piece of evidence, prove that climate is dominated by a negative feedback and that the response to doubled, even quadrupled carbon dioxide emissions is minimal.
Keep this in mind when you listen to those fools who present a computer prediction as a certainty, forgetting that computers are man-made and therefore not perfect. Computers can predict upon the input of certain statistics and upon a expected scale however no computer model could have predicted in 1991 that the explosion of Volcano Pinatubo would cause the entire earth to cool by 1/2 degree for over one year, computer predictions can estimate but there are so many variables it would be impossible for a computer to take them all into account.