/sci/ - Science & Math

>>8934653
this tbqh.
does a great job getting kids inspired, but dude needs to stop shitposting about biology.

>>8760718

Here you go op.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confounding

Doesn't mean he couldn't be right but he would have to actively PROVE his premise is correct rather than simply be an action that runs parallel and appears to be the source of autism.

>>8457901
>I've done the math estimates
well there, PROBLEM FUCKING SOLVED!
if some guy estimated how things are going to be in the future using a little simple arithmetic, SURELY that means we're okay. never mind those complex models with all their actual evidence and everything!

>>8457957
>in the 70s, they said we would be dead by now. Fewer years ago they said it again.
"they" being scientific publications? or MAGAZINES?
>I believe that the natural carbon and nitrogen cycle will fix it eventually.
do you have any idea what timescales those cycles operate on? by the time they "fix it", our civilization could have gone to shit. it's like appealing to the Invisible Hand
>I am not a geologist
lucky for you, I am.

>>8458182
>our planet needs a nice big die off.
you weren't there for the P-Tr extinction. neither was I, but some rocks were...and it ain't pretty.

>>8458448
>the dying of the race that has built every aspect of western civilization
you have to go back >>>/pol/

>>8458505
I'm with you there. another possibility is spreading powdered mafic rocks around to increase the rate of chemical weathering, speed up that long-term carbon cycle control.

>>8459209
ah yes, the ADJUSTED data.
whenever a trend is inferred from adjusted data, you lot whine that it's ALTERED AND TAMPERED WITH AND TOTALLY FAKE! and whenever a trend is inferred from raw data you whine that it's TAINTED BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T ADJUST FOR THE UHI EFFECT!
you don't get to have it both ways.

>>7970863
Define "sun"

>>7501554
>most revered