/sci/ - Science & Math

>>8735797
>who buys into the totality of climate-change-as-presented-in-popular-media
I don't "buy into" any narrative you dumb fuck. I study the scientific EVIDENCE, yes meaning I read peer reviewed literature, primary sources of scientific information. I read blogs run by actual climate scientists and hear what they have to say about their research and their papers and current news in their field of specialization. That's where I get my information and understanding of climate science from, because I'm an Earth science graduate myself and am interested in the field. Failing that, I MSM reporting on issues of climate science is abysmal as is, there are many science oriented websites like Ars, Science, Nature, Nat Geo, New Scientist, etc. that do good reporting on scientific issues that are worth reading that I read a lot as well.

There is no real "alternative viewpoint," scientific facts don't have alternative viewpoints you fucking moron, they are scientific FACTS based on EVIDENCE. Do you even know the first fucking thing about science or the scientific process itself? Stupid fucking moron, yes I'm "triggered" by your nonsense. I'm guessing if you're looking for "alternative facts" you voted for the right administration though, too bad there is no alternate reality for those facts though, only the one we live in.

There's a reason I'm pissed off and angry about this bullshit, fucking DECADES of this denialist crap purported by special interest groups, "think tanks," and other associated energy industry fronts, spending hundreds of millions of dollars to spread misinformation and lies, and cast doubt about the reality of climate change.

>>8619314
>The greatest threat to our oceans would be depleting fisheries
Which is directly related to ocean acidification and coral bleaching. Do you not understand that Coral reefs are the basis of most ocean fisheries? You kill the reef systems, you negatively effect fisheries globally. The issues are both related. Ocean acidification is most certainly not understated, it's basic ocean chemistry you dumb fuck. More CO2 means more carbonic acid in ocean water.

>Americanthinker
>Heartland as a source
Oh boy, and here it is, you show your true colors finally.
Do we seriously need to go over this bullshit again?
https://www.desmogblog.com/heartland-institute

The same organization that lobbied for Philip Morris in the 1980s to fight claims that cigarette smoking leads to heart disease, lung cancer, etc.

The same organization that is using the exact same tactics that they used in the 1980s to spread propaganda about climate science.

The same organization that has accepted millions of dollars in donations (before they stopped disclosing) from entities like the Southern Company, Exxonmobil, the Koch Brothers, etc.
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Heartland_Institute


>>8619347
There were eight seperate committees that investigated your so called "climategate" and found no wrongdoing. Stop beileiving whatever propaganda you read on your shill websites like WUWT, Heartland or Americanthinker.
http://www.deccanherald.com/content/61233/uk-climategate-inquiry-largely-clears.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/08/science/earth/08climate.html
http://web.archive.org/web/20100802130220/http://views.washingtonpost.com/climate-change/post-carbon/2010/07/by_juliet_eilperin_a_pennsylvania.html
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-essex-10899538
http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/u-s-scientists-cleared-in-climategate-1.1031242
https://www.thefreelibrary.com/Data+without+the+doubts%3A+the+climategate+furore+has+galvanised+the...-a0257556897

Educate yourself dense fuck.

>>8585790
>http://climatechangereconsidered.org/
>Fred Singer's NIPCC
>HEARTLAND (toppest of keks)
>CO2 Science (Wow look at all these legitimate sounding names!)

T O P K E K

Let me "redpill" you on Heartland you dumb fuck, aka the organization that like other conservative "think tanks" is nothing more than a front for the petroleum industry to spread propaganda. This is not a "conspiracy" either, there is a large trail of evidence starting with numerous disclosed donations by Exxonmoil and Koch, the Southern Company, Shell, BP, etc. just to name a FEW of the fossil fuel interests that pump money into these think tanks to spread denial.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Heartland_Institute

Keep in mind that Heartland is literally just one of hundreds of organizations that money from the fossil fuel industry has been funneled into during the past, currently through third-party organizations like Donor's Trust, but in the past they donated directly, records of which can be found here:
http://www.exxonsecrets.org/html/orgfactsheet.php?id=41

Go ahead and read through the Scientific American article I posted earlier, alternatively, you can read the actual scientific paper that the article is about here:
http://drexel.edu/~/media/Files/now/pdfs/Institutionalizing%20Delay%20-%20Climatic%20Change.ashx

See
>>8585141
>>8585117
Notice how no one responded to my posts here anyways, because all """skeptics""" completely have their heads in the sand when it comes to the corruption of the fossil fuel industry in funding """skeptic""" efforts.