/sci/ - Science & Math

>>10391189
woops

>>10326153
>Wether or not the increase in global temperature originates from humans is not exactly clear, even if some scientists like to pretend this is the case.

>>10149600
woops

>>10129379
>muh predictions muh models
tell me, what's inaccurate about this graph of measurements?

>>10086130
>prove it
Here's your evidence. Proof is for deductive logic, not science. Compare the third graph on:

https://realclimatescience.com/100-of-us-warming-is-due-to-noaa-data-tampering/

to pic related. Source (not actually same image but basically identical):

http://berkeleyearth.org/nature-not-noaa-ended-the-slowdown-in-temperatures/

Past highs are exaggerated in the RCS meme graphs, or suppressed in recent data to obtain a flat trend when the trend is actually clearly upward. NOAA adjustments actually reduce the upward slope of the graph, but both data sets clearly show warming.

>>10035963
woops

>>9999096
Anthropogenic climate change is depressingly real and a dire threat in the long term.
>>9999308
There is plenty of evidence that it's occurring. Start with the instrumental record. Pic related.
>>9999575
America creates more emissions than India. China has about twice the emissions of America, with four times the population. Developed and "mostly developed" nations in general causes the vast majority of greenhouse gas pollution.

>>9983563
now combine
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_expansion
with this graph to understand the basic problem, irrespective of volcanic island formation

>>9964953
That was not the discussion, until now. You want a graph? Here. It's clear from multiple other lines of evidence that AGHG emissions have dramatically increased since the industrial revolution, which provides an explanation for the very fast 0.8C/century trend in mean surface temperatures that is not accounted for by known natural climate factors. There's never going to be a proof, only evidence and rational theoretical explanations, but all of the evidence points to an acceleration of the trend in the coming years.

>>9962116
please kys
>>9962123
>global warming is the illuminati
this is how denialtards "reason"
>>9962104
they're right, it's already very bad and almost everyone is seriously underestimating the consequences of anything less than drastic action

>>9956996
uhhh
>>9957832
Geoengineering methods will not save us, and should not be relied on to avoid cutting fossil fuel emissions drastically.
>>9957960
>rather than focusing on negligent percentage changes in co2
We can achieve ~50% reduction just by replacing our energy sources for the grid with renewables and nuclear. That's not negligible. We can do even better than that with other changes such as hydrogen fuel cells, or at least LNG, for vehicles, and substitutes for cement.
>>9959864
Pollution matters, of course. There's not that much lead actually in the air; most of the poisoning of coal comes from water supply contamination from the mine and from fly ash. Just another reason to stop using coal completely, on top of the horrific GHG emissions compared to other resources.
>>9959874
>a few degrees globally
A 5C increase is not a "few degrees." That is a large temperature change, one you will notice during high anomaly years and the broiling summers. To say nothing of all the damage this can potentially do to natural ecosystems beyond what we already do to them.
>Really though, you need to relax.
Really though, we need to hasten our action on this issue. The pace of this warming should alarm you, because it's happening over decadal timescales, and 5C warming is already in sight if total inaction occurs. We have technology available; all we need is the will. I don't see why people defend fossil fuels in the first place when reliable alternatives are available to replace so many of the power plants.
>>9960011
Foolish thinking, but once again I don't see why critics don't feel indifference towards an energy transition rather than opposition. What is it about fossil fuels that are so appealing? Just from a pollution standpoint, coal is absolutely awful. Oil also has toxic metals in it, and releases them to the environment. Gasoline emits a variety of toxic organic compounds at the tailpipe. Who doesn't want clean energy for the grid and every vehicle?

>>9953587
Why haven't you killed yourself yet? Even those "less adjusted" graphs show a positive warming trend.

>>9949919
You're a cocksucking moron that can't acknowledge the dire threats of a large population addicted to technology and paying no mind to the imminent catastrophe in the environmental balance our entire species depends on.

Here's something concrete for you.

>>9917351
Here you go. I'm just copying these from the previous thread. Do you want more?
>>9917357
>mitigating CO2 emissions won't help avoid catastrophic temperature increases
brilliant reasoning

>>9915653
Actually the total effect of NOAA's corrections to the temperature record is to reduce the warming trend. Your retarded blogs have to cherry pick the data to argue the opposite.