I realize you're just trolling, but science is quite settled that anthropogenic climate change is a real ting.
Minutae about whether methane is 28x as bad as co2 or merely 20x as bad remains to be settled. Please don't exploit people's good faith interest in getting the exact truth to advance bad faith claims.
I am being pedantic, but there is no such thing as settled science. No matter how solid a theory is, no matter how well-proven, it will remain unsettled in perpetuity.
What utter tripe. Water is made of hydrogen and oxygen and we know their chemical properties exceedingly well. Endlessly splitting hairs that it's not "settled" when someone puts another digit of accuracy at the end of the accepted mass of a proton isn't being pedantic, it's just being pompous.
And yet comparing a simple chemical composition of water and the effects of a particular gas on a large and very poorly understood system is somehow less tripe?
The greenhouse effect is not "poorly understood" and the link between CO2 and climate is clearly established over millions of years of geologic time. If you have trouble understanding how this is done, I recommend you read more instead of posting on hackernews. You could start here:
I never said the greenhouse effect was poorly understood, however I will for a fact state that the overall climate system of earth is relatively poorly understood. If you must insist on making wild strawman arguments, I recommend you read and understand what you read more before you start posting anywhere.
30% change sounds large, until you multiply it by the fraction of the problem that methane forms. It's still a welcome impact reduction, if true, but yeah you're quite right.
