/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>17388371
how do I short this?

Wrong

>>17388371
It is real and it is a good thing

>>17388371
retarded climate changers can never fathom the earth being in an ice age...with no humans. how did that happen? woah! the earth has cycles like nature! wtf!

>>17388406
invest in coal powerplants, factory farms, and bet on climate change not altering crop patterns...

Everyone knows it's real. However, the notion that it's mostly our fault and that we need to do something about it is a mechanism to control us. Most scientists do not agree that it is manmade.

http://www.populartechnology.net/2013/05/97-study-falsely-classifies-scientists.html

>>17388465
https://climate.nasa.gov/causes/
https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

Statement on Climate Change from 18 Scientific Associations
"Observations throughout the world make it clear that climate change is occurring, and rigorous scientific research demonstrates that the greenhouse gases emitted by human activities are the primary driver."

>>17388371

>nasa
>which doctored the data in the first place to get trillions in subsidies
>for which they retroactively edited historical data and got caught by real climatologists

Wow bud, you sure have done your research huh. We should get rid of all that CO2 right now, just banish the C from our entire planet huh.

>>17388485
that is not what that article states. and I did not use the article that you are criticizing as evidence.

You know that statistic they throw around. 97% of scientists agree. YOUre an asshole. And you should feel bad. Well let me educate your ass on where this number comes from.

The data comes from cook et al 2013. Here is the data under 7 categories.

>1,Explicitly endorses and quantifies AGW as 50+% : 64 studys Explicitly state that humans are the primary cause
of recent global warming
>2,Explicitly endorses but does not quantify or minimize: 922 Explicitly state humans are a cause of global warming( but not primary cause)
>3,Implicitly endorses AGW without minimizing it: 2910 Implies humans are causing global warming. E.g., research assumes greenhouse gas emissions cause
warming without explicitly stating humans are the cause
>4,No Position: 7970
>5,Implicitly minimizes/rejects AGW: 54
>6,Explicitly minimizes/rejects AGW but does not quantify: 15
>7,Explicitly minimizes/rejects AGW as less than 50%: 9
>Total number of studies 11954
>Total number that explicitly state humans are the primary cause 64
Percentage that indicates humans are the primary cause .53%

Note: to arrive at 97% the retard who conducted this study takes the totals of category 1,2,3 and divides it by the total of 1,2,3,(ignores 4),5,6,7. Most notably said retard indicates that category 4 has two sections. 4a(no mention of cause) and 4b(states human role is uncertain). Then proceeds to not give numbers for each category as 4b should be included in the total.

>>17388371
Go home greta and bring Gore with you

>>17388371
Saying climate change is real and only using a million years of history.

>>17388564
again you are arguing against evidence that i have not used.

Going to build an off the grid stone house in Alaska with cisterns and everything. In the meantime, making money as a civil engineering consultant doing flood mitigation design and hydrology analysis.

>>17388559
What does the article state, then? Let's see those mental gymnastics in action.

>>17388590
>https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/
>"Based on well-established evidence, about 97% of climate scientists have concluded that human-caused climate change is happening." (2014)
From your second link. They are referencing a fraudulent study.

>>17388602
it makes that argument that multiple scientist believe that their work was misrepresented. This does not mean most scientist do not agree that it is man made. again i didn't use that article as evidence

>>17388636
Why are you telling us? Go tell the chinks and pajeets to stop shitting up the atmosphere.

>>17388636
along with many more studies and scientific papers. also that is from the aaas not the cook 2013 paper

>>17388371
the climate horeshit was created due to using a Greenhouse model, but in real life a greenhouse doesn't work for the atmosphere.

Co2 provides more green growth, and in return we get more oxygen.

What these climate faggots don't tell you about is that our Oxygen supply is reducing.

>>17388371
>believe scientists

>>17388371
why does it starts at -800 000?
show it -50 000 000

>>17388893
Just more scientific fraud
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2012/11/fourteen_is_the_new_fifteen.html

>>17388564
There are plenty of studies other than that one showing 85%+ consensus. Google them yourself im phoneposting.

>>17388965
Naw, im good. this is the study most people reference and its dog shit. I cant imagine how bad the rest are.

holy shit where can I fomo in on this shitcoin?

>>17388893

To be fair the graph would be too big to see anything recent.

>>17388371

>It has never rained for days!

>>17388965
Wrong. Climate Change can't be manmade because it's mostly caused by subhumans.

>>17388469
It already is on both sides of the atlantic. I hope every satan worshipping basedbean farmer enjoys knowing their entire bloodline will spend eternity in hell.

I'm not even going to argue with morons over the statistics because anyone that still wants to say that global warming isn't happening or it isn't caused by humans is too far gone.

Even anecdotally do you retards not feel the weather has changed since your childhood? Where I live (Northern Europe) the summers keep getting hotter and the actual winter period gets shorter. It hardly ever fucking snows anymore too.

>>17389042
read the 14 is the new 15 article. global warming isnt even happening. They had to go back and alter the data to make it look like it was kekekekekekekekekekekekek

anyone who is a denier is literally in the same category as flat earth believer (Round Earth Denier)

>But for the love of Allah he must have loved idiots, He made so many of them...

>>17389067
global warming has not been proven when you use the old data of 15C as a baseline.

>>17389042

Anybody who still thinks the Earth is round is too far gone.

Even anecdotally, don't you retards see a flat horizon? Look outside your window for fuck's sake!

>>17389060
>14 is the new 15
Is that what you told the judge?

Realistically nothing sufficient is going to be done to stop it. Better to just adapt to any consequences.

>>17389085

>>17388833
this is answered by nasa. i think on the first link

>>17389094
Are you really trying to equivocate believing in climate change with being a flat earther? I was using the anecdotes because climate change deniers won't believe the overwhelming scientific consensus anyway.

>>17389114
god i want to kiss her

>>17389111
You still havent proved IT is happening. The baseline data was tampered with. The cherry on top is they put the temperature sensors at airports and shit so everytime they add a new runway it increases the thermal load and temperature of the area. The sensors are just measuring local human activity. This was acknowledge by NOAA.

>>17388499
>people who's livelihoods depend on grants find that you should give them more money

shocking stuff OP

>>17389152
Also pic related. Do you have any idea how hard it is to measure outside air temp without getting human activity? Clearly they dont either.

>>17389165

>>17389185

>>17389152
how many studies do you want?

>>17388647
Their work was misrepresented as saying humans cause it, when in reality they are undecided at best. You're only following the logic halfway through in order to have your own point feel correct.

>>17389200

>>17388371
blatantly artificial chart. wouldn't trust that "price" at all. might want to check if the exchange is manipulating the figures so it can scam you for trillions of dollars

>>17389206
and yeah that doesn't show the temperature but increasing atmospheric CO2 will be correlated to increasing temperature due to the greenhouse effect

>>17389206
>Co2 is rising
ok anon. Do you have a peer reviewed study indicating that this is problem

>>17389222
facts not in evidence. if CO2 caused warming there would be a hot spot in the troposphere WHICH THERE ISNT

If you deny climate change, the rope is for you.
sage

>>17389143

>The anti-tank gun won't work so I'll use an air-rifle.

And who cares if they don't believe the overwhelming scientific consensus? It's not like policies are determined by what people want. Nobody votes for war, nobody votes to destroy our manufacturing sector and nobody votes for financial bailouts.

>>17389280
What consensus?

>>17389228
https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2017/09/WG1AR5_Chapter01_FINAL.pdf

pg 131-132

im not doing anymore of your homework

>>17388965
I thought it was a 97% consensus? Will it be a 70% consensus in a few year when the number and studies need to be revised?

We are the CLIMATE DENIERS and we are NEVER BUYING IT

>>17389296
you are fixated on a single article. why not answer the actual arguments.

You're not stopping me from eating meat you climate faggot.

>>17389343
that would be a good idea. we should stop eating meat or at least reduce the amount we eat by a lot. it's not impossible.

>>17388371

>>17388551
>for which they retroactively edited historical data and got caught by real climatologists
Got any breadcrumbs on this? Not finding it

>>17389295
>Uses 14 as a baseline which has already been debunked.
>References surface temperatures which has already been debunked
>Assumes correlaton=causation
Its like youre not even trying anon. I believe in you

>>17388371
I'm not a climate change denier, but let's be fair. The chart you posted isn't showing that climate change is real. It's just showing that CO2 levels are up.

>>17389375
Its explained here https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2012/11/fourteen_is_the_new_fifteen.html

>>17389343
and faggot? you are the one someone is going to take their meat out of your mouth.

>>17389367
https://news.trust.org/item/20200219145345-e89fd

If you think denying climate change means eating bugs its literally true

>>17388485
If we could capture that CO2 in the atmosphere, why wouldn't we? We created the problem, we might as well fix it.