/sci/ - Science & Math

>climate change
pseudoscience belongs on >>>/x/

>>10135015
>couple of years
the time to do something about it
2030s is when the rains big time start failing in the subtropics and food security failures mold geopolitics. Evening news full of it. 1st world won't starve, but expect to pay WAY more for food.

>>10135026
fuck off back to >>>/pol/

>>10135030
>fuck off back to >>>/pol/
Do you need to swear?

>>10135028
why food supply gets hit
https://youtu.be/Mc_4Z1oiXhY?t=23m10s

>>10135032
fuck off back to >>>/lit/

The joke is a number of governments actually do take climate change seriously which is why you have wheather projection models decades and centuries in advance by U.S., seed vaults in northern Europe, architectural projects dealing with indoor ecosystems in China and alternative forms of energy usage by researchers globally.

The problem is said governments have accepted the fact that a large majority of the masses are generally self asorb idiots concerned with their lives locally. Even the Trump administration despite constantly shitting on climate change released a report admitting global temperature increases. That alone should tell you how this whole operation is going down.

>>10135041
>governments actually do take climate change seriously
and pentagon, they know shit is going to hit the fan
as do insurance companies, another sector that feels the costs already

>>10135015
kys shill

You guys need to face the facts and accept that you're all expendable. None of you are on the guest list for any of the vaults. The powers that be find a substantial population crash to be in their best interests.

They cannot be talked out of it.

Start making plans because good luck convincing the mindless hoarde to save themselves.

We just need to plan an assload of trees to sequester the carbon and stop deforestation

>>10135090
good luck
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_KmGtWi5tY

>>10135015
>Couple
>Indefinite small number
If you idiots would stop telling everyone the world is going to end tomorrow people would take this more seriously.

>>10135090
We don’t have enough people to plant that many trees in a sufficient amount of time.

Stop making this thread every day.

>>10135168
fuck you, you're going to see this stuff for the rest of your life, as long as the problem persists

>>10135168
>stop reminding me of this uregent issue, please, my NPC brain can’t handle it

>>10135146
No one is saying the world is ending tomorrow, dumbass. We’re saying anthropogenic climate change is going to fuck us over in not too many years.

>>10135030
fuck off back to >>>/co/

>>10135050
you would not want to fucking live through a big enough event to wipe out 90% of all humans.

>>10135279
>you would not want to fucking live in a future without thirdworlders
oh golly that sounds like a nightmare

It's like WWI all over again. Everyone knows it's gonna be bad and everyone wants to avoid it, but everything does not know how and thinks it is unavoidable.

>>10135015
But the polish apples...

>>10135041
Recent polls have been showing that the electorate is FAR more in favor of climate change action than the politicians themselves.

I guess a big part of the lolbertarian propaganda was directed towards the politicians rather than the electorate; convincing them of an alternate reality where we don't care about our impending doom.

>>10135015
it's literally "the boiling frog story"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boiling_frog
people fail to see the danger because it's a slow process

>>10135284
lmao @ thinking that so-called thirdworlders will be the only ones to suffe r

>>10135345
allow me correct myself
thirdworlders and poorfags like you

Climate change is only concern for third worlders, developed world will benefit immensely from it

>>10135015
>no one seems to be taking this grave threat (or even the possibility of it being a threat) seriously?
because it's too late to do anything about it
we went into overshoot back in the 80s

>>10135015
I am old, and have no kids.
I no longer care enough to do anything other than act locally.

>>10135279
No kidding. I'm not richie rich or one of his sons.

I'm just completely lost on what to do about it. Every individual has more pressing needs in their everyday lives than the looming threat of catastrophic climate change.

>>10135015
...because we don't pander to mouthbreathers who think humanity has the technology to stop global temperature changes. You know, that cyclical trend that's been happening since earth came into existence?

>we have to stop global warming!
>we have to stop climate change!
>we have to stop pollution!
>oh, I guess that 0.04% CO2 in the atmosphere really didn’t do anything after all

>>10135015

>>10136025
not true at all, basically all of Europe and America will suffer immensely especially Germany, the Midwestern and Plains parts of the US and France.

>>10135030
>anyone who doesnt share my beliefs is /pol/
Gonna be a yikes from me

>>10136025
there's more to successful growing than 'mild'.
Around 450ppm/2C (at current pace, around 2030)
rainfall in the subtropics will fail by 50%-75%,
subtropics is latitudes 23...45

>>10135015
The concept of a global warming crisis was created by and for the Chinese in order to make U.S. manufacturing non-competitive.

>>10135196
People have been hysterical about first global cooling, then runaway population explosion and global famine, then runaway ocean rising, then runaway heating, and now runaway "change" for literally multiple decades, since at least the 70's if not before. You anthro-change fucks are literally always going on about how "in the next few years anthropogenic-X is going to ruin the planet!1" for now going on at least half of a century. Planet still isn't frozen, planet still isn't Venus (it literally can't be, there isn't physically enough C02 for it to happen), populations haven't consumed every last food resource and collapsed civilization, population in a lot of places with little space is actually contracting rather than exploding out of control as hysterics predicted it would.

On top of this, China, India, and the Middle East and parts of Africa are the primary culprits for any measurable broad range Anthropogenic effects because they literally don't give a shit about how much they pollute, China's ambient atmosphere is cancer in vapor form, India releases a literal plume of liquid human shit into the ocean and the Middle East and India are constantly burning off huge volumes of poor quality oil they can't refine or sell, dumping completely unfiltered petrochemical pollution into the atmosphere. You must inevitably conclude that either they must change their behavior or nothing effective can be done to curb whatever Anthropogenic effect you believe is going to lead to damage.

Some bullshit tax on CO2 in the countries with the most efficient power generation industries on the planet isn't going to do jack fucking shit, and neither is just blindly promising to pay China and India trillions upon trillions of dollars/euros/whatever based on a nebulous promise that 100 years down the line someone will find a solution.

>>10137059
change your diapers, retard
it's overflowing here

>>10137061
nice copypasta
0.05 ruble has been deposited to your account

>>10137066
>>10137071
great arguments

>>10137071
I'm serious you fuck, let's assume for a second that the planet isn't transitioning into a warming cycle like it has done multiple times in the past, and this time it's going to be a huge fuckoff train wreck which will permanently imbalance the entire structure of the planet's climate. What
Is
Your
Solution?

>>10137077
>What
>Is
>Your
>Solution?
His solution is to hamstring the western world as much as possible so the shit polluters can take over the UN

>>10137077
polluters pay

>>10137096
>Just pay more money!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eVFd46qABi0

Disappointed but un-surprised that anthro-change fags are still giga-brainlets.

>>10137102
if polluters make society pay, that's just communism

>>10137119
in either case the pollution is still there

if there we really fuck up some "western" nations will vanish, others will be much smaller

>>10135015
I eill be ded by then

>>10137129
>i just want to poo in the street
>you other motherfuckers clean it up

>>10137141
well at least we're getting somewhere, how do you propose the pollution be cleaned up?

>>10137129
>pollution is still there
causing trouble, which costs money.
polluter either pays (via tax) for the shit that the pollution makes happen, year after year -
OR to break the vicious cycle, finds a less-polluting way to make money.

>>10137151
look around the world, learn from them what works and what doesn't,
is a good start

>>10137157
i prefer the status quo so I won't do that

>>10137049
they're not actually going to listen, they're shills and lunatics from /pol/ who are reposting other people's propaganda. They come here specifically to dogpile these threads and then to argue speciously until you get exhausted, the idea is to convert just one or two idiots every time and since they are sociopaths it really doesn't matter if they have to lie or get made a fool of by people who know what they're talking about. You're right, the bread baskets in Europe will suffer from longer and hotter summers, droughts and low rain fall, melted snow pack; flooding is going to increase in northern europe and sea levels will rise swallowing valuable coastline while fish abundance will spike for a short period and then plummet in the far northern lattitudes. No one in Europe cares, something like half of all Europeans just don't fucking care but acknowledge its real. Humans deserve everything coming to them.
>>10137077
Population reduction, ban on pollution, huge scaling back of industry and international travel, cessation of drilling operations, stripping down the economic machine so it can run with lower technology levels and then extreme investment in carbon sequestration and new energy research. Complete moratorium on logging and mass fishing operations in sensitive biomes, any and all measures taken to increase phytoplankton colonies and tree cover in the tropics, contingency plan for the inevitable already imminent warming and wildfire seasons that are going to buffet the West coast and central asia.
>>10137154
they should pay in blood

>>10136626
>>10137049
again, the developed world will be fine, food production will actually grow

>>10137170
>You're right, the bread baskets in Europe will suffer from longer and hotter summers, droughts and low rain fall, melted snow
kek, food production in Europe is going to increase actually

>>10137184
No the developed world will not be fine, that chart is not accurate at all. Germany, France, the Balkans and especially the Mediterranean are expected to see huge drops in crop production as is the entire United States. Europe does not even produce enough food for its population and neither does the US and China, SE Asia and South America are going to get hit extremely hard by the rising temperatures and droughts. You're lying in every sense.

http://report.ipcc.ch/sr15/pdf/sr15_chapter3.pdf

The increased crop production in the north, which is not a good place to begin trying to feed hundreds of millions of people, its too remote and too little of land to do so, are only expected to be temporary and they too will be subject to rising sea levels and longer summers. You're fucking stupid

>>10137188
>No the developed world will not be fine,
oh it will be extremely well scaremonger

>>10137170
>huge scaling back of industry
>cessation of drilling operations
>stripping down the economic machine
Are you an anarchist?

>>10137191
No, Central Europe, the Mediterranean, the Balkans and literally the entirety of the continental united states will see falling crop production, and loss of arable land. Only the boreal lattitudes will see any form of increase and its only expected to intitially increase and then drastically decrease as the temperature continues to climb. Sea level rises will affect all lattitudes, including the North where crop production will have to be relocated. All of this while summers last longer, while storms become more intense, and Northern Europe is expected to see intensifying seasonal flooding coming to resemble what China and India see annually. You have no idea what you're fucking talking about. All of this is just according to the 1.5 deg Celsius scenario, not at all considering if we fail to meet the 2040 target the Paris Accords set.

>>10137188
>Germany, France, the Balkans and especially the Mediterranean are expected to see huge drops in crop production as is the entire United States. Europe does not even produce enough food for its population
Buahahaha, you are an idiot.Both USA and Europe are self sufficient in food production and the breadbasket of Europe is Poland and Ukraine, Poland especially will increase it’s food production under global warming scenario but so does Germany as well.

>>10137198
>Central Europe, the Mediterranean, the Balkans and literally the entirety of the continental united states will see falling crop production, and loss of arable land. Only the boreal lattitudes will see any form of increase
confirmed for an idiot or a schizo, pic related

>>10137199
The US imports more food than it exports retard as does Europe and no the crop production increase in the Northern lattitudes will only last for a short time until warming wipes that out and summers will be brutal, will cause early flowering and require more frequent land alterations to maintain. Germany is in centrla Europe and is not expected to see more crop production. You don't know what you're fucking tlaking about that is not an accurate picture at all. Read the IPCC report

>>10136025
Are you retarded or something?

>>10137191
stupid fatburger can't even find his own country on the map

>>10137164
>i've fallen 10 floors i'm fine let's do nothing

I live in Florida. How fucked am I?

>>10137298
like the girl in Shape Of Water

>>10137303
Does it matter if I live further inland?

>>10137291
I am Polish, our apple and fruit harvest was 60% bigger this year.

>>10137332
wow, guess you're going to win ww3 then

>>10137343
changing the goalposts I see

>>10137344
no, it's a drop in the ocean compared to overall losses on the way.
myopic retard

>>10137199
not true, this year Germany had a warm dry summer, some kind of foretaste for real climate change. food production fell 30% below average

>>10137360
Yeah, because we grow crops that was not suited for that weather. We could change the crops and probably have rather higher than lower yields. Though it remains to be seen how permanent that weather is going to be.

>>10135015
Climate change is actually much worse than a lot of people think. While the theory behind the greenhouse effect is from the 30s, we only started actually adding carbon to the atmosphere in the 60s. Up until then, our emissions were actually mostly absorbed by mother nature and we added little if anything to the atmosphere. This is completely different now. Thanks to exponential growth, we are adding much more carbon to the atmosphere than there ever was in the history of the earth. The earths volcanoes add around 300 million tons each year to the atmosphere. We add roughly 70 times that, 21 billion tons each year. That is the equivalent of having a few hundred yellowstone-sized supervolcanoes erupting every year. That is insane. This needs to be cut down drastically ASAP or shit is going down. If we dont do anything, one can fully expect a runaway-greenhouse effect that will increase the temperature for 50-100 degrees and whipe out all advanced life on earth.

>>10137352
Noboby cares about Africa or India starving.Reduction of their population numbers could actually be considered a benefit from climate change.

>>10137221
>Read the IPCC report
IPCC is run by third worlders and their enablers.It’s practically a terrorist organizaton these days calling for destruction of the West in the name if Middle East and African interests

>>10137409
India contributes almost nothing to global carbon emissions, while it contributed waaaaay more to human civilization than the toilet cleaner-people that shun themselves "Poles".

it's real and the 21st century will be truly apocalyptic because of it

that being said the average shitlib that shills for carbon taxes and muh green economy and muh carbon footprint antinatalism is cringey as fuck, I can't stand them, they're totally missing the plot. we're past the point of no return just get your pleasures wherever you may find them.

>>10135015

Because there's literally nothing we can do except stop using oil.

>>10137467
Also doing stuff like eating less meat can help.

>>10137462
21st century will not be so bad yet. It will take a while until the added carbon will have its effects on global climate. We already made earth skip its next ice age. We keep pumping carbon into the atmosphere for another century on our current levels a complete death of life on earth within 100.000 years seems quite probable, sadly.

21st century though, might see more wildfires and stuff like that. The real shit is going to happen after that. This is also why we should focus on carbon filtering more than carbon prevention. We already are the biggest single environmental event on earth since 300 million years ago today's russia was basically one, gigantic super-volcanoe which kept errupting for millions of years and whiped out almost all life from earth. So just to reverse the damage we have done, we need to remove most of the carbon we already pumped there. We keep pumping until we run out of fuels to burn, we will probably kill earth off for good in the long term.

Maybe this question would be more suitable for /his/ or something, but is there an estimate of cultural damages that climate change could inflict? At least in Europe cities and their layouts themselves are sometimes considered to be a cultural piece themselves, such as Venice and Amsterdam. How does it look for that stuff?

>>10137474

And no one wants to stop eating steak and burgers.Until we invent a new efficient power source, and until lab-grown meat becomes widespread, all this talk about stopping climate change is useless.

>>10137480
Should add to this that I mostly mean damages regarding rising sealevels, and possibly the costs of holding back the sea.
>>10137482
I didn't say about not eating anymore meat. Just consuming less of it. If anything we could lessen the impact of shit until better stuff has been invented. Give us more time to do so.

>>10137417
>India
>civilization
Poo in loo detected

I blame the green party and sierra club for ruining the nuclear power industry. hypocrites, the lot of them.

>>10137298

You're already fucked since the state is riddled with sink holes.

>>10137485
Who is "us"? Stop pretending you have any part in any of that.

>>10135345
>so-called
cringe

>>10137480
Well, most of the ice already melted, so if all ice of antarctis and greenland melted the sea level would rise by 70 metres approx. While it would destroy all coastal cities, most living areas would be kept intact. Now this doesn't sound too worrisome, but the issue really is that most of ice already melted the last time there was a sharp influx of atmospheric carbon. That was around 400 million years ago in the age of devonian. Large ice caps melted and raised the sea level by 200 metres. But this way, the new water also captured most of the atmospheric carbon, preventing a further runaway-greenhouse-effect. This time, we sadly don't have that natural greenhouse-stopper.

>>10137221
>The US imports more food than it exports retard as does Europe
Kek, what kind of moron are you?
Both Europe and USA are self sufficient when it comed to food, USA could feed its own population on corn it produces alone.

>>10137495
Us as in people in general.
>>10137502
Cheers, anon.

>>10137513
People in general also don't have any part in that.

>>10137518
Do you have to be so pedantic?
In a previous post you said "Until we invent a new efficient power source." That's the kind of we and us I meant, lad.

>>10137522
I'm not being pedantic by pointing out how you try to lump yourself together with smart people who accomplish things for no other reason than being an online "activist" against climate change. You reddit brainlets are pure cringe.

>>10137526
I didn't though. Using we and us like that is a relatively normal way to speak about the greater whole. And furthermore, you did it yourself. So I guess you're trying to lump yourself together with smart people who accomplish things, eh?

>>10137535
>is a relatively normal way to speak about the greater whole
No, it's how "I fucking love science" numale brainlets talk about things they don't have anything to do with. You weren't talking about any "greater whole" in the sentences I read, but about specific challenges that specific people are working on.
>you did it yourself
No, >>10137495 was my first reply to you.

>>10136389
Please explain to me which cycle is causing faster warming than that seen in the last 600,000 years, during the part of the natural cycle where we should be slowly cooling. Moron.

>we don't have the technology
HAHAHAHAHAHA there's this amazing technology called emitting less CO2. Ever heard of it?

>>10137542
It really is though. Do you have problems with language in general, senpai? Besides, if you have such a problem with it, why don't you sperg out over >>10137482 using it? You certainly seem to care very much about it.

>>10137550
You are right, he makes the same mistake. You just happened to be the last post when I opened the thread so I replied to you. Don't excuse your cringeworthy way of speaking by saying others do it too.

>>10137554
I won't, if you promise to not sperg out over single words anymore.
Because really, what did we both accomplish in this exchange?

>>10137562
Maybe next time you will use the language appropriate for your involvement in climate change related research so the non-brainlets reading your posts will take you more seriously.

>>10137566
I do have some involvement in said research though Most recently in figuring out how climate change affects soil erosion.

>>10137562
>what did we both accomplish in this exchange?
Well for one, you both provided a nice example of how productivity in climate change discussion is diminished when ego becomes involved.

>>10135015
Guys just half ass reading this thread makes me want to kill myself. So how do you guys live with the knowledge that were fucked beyond repair

>>10137490
said by the ass-crack poolish plumber.
sad

>>10136429
>hurr this arsenic is only 0.04% of my body weight, can't do nuffin

>>10137378
Unfortunately climate change in central Europe means you switch back and forth between cold-wet and hot-dry summers. You can not really prepare for this because you don't know in advance. Fortunately EU will help farmers if there are losses.

>>10137666
you can prepare by having mixed crops,
climate predictions state that our food production will soar anyway, even under +4 Celsius

>>10137686
unfortunately reality is far worse then your super optimistic "predictions" farmers are fucked

>>10135363
You’ve got over 50 million dollars right now? Cause those are the ones that’ll probably be relatively unaffected.

If you think the uber rich give a shit about the nigger rich, you’re in for a rude awakening.

>>10135015
Its fake earth is flat

>>10137689
reality at the moment is against you, agriculture is booming

Is this the new y2k? You global warming alarmists are like the bible thumpers calling for armageddon

>>10137840
>Is this the new y2k?
I don't know, did Y2K have a mountain of research behind it?.
Inb4 Le research is fake/unreliable etc. No. Fuck off, retard.

>>10137847
>did Y2K have a mountain of research behind it
ya and they spent a trillion dollars to fix it so nothing happened, don't see how this is any different

>>10137856
Well, I don't see anyone fixing it

>>10137840
It's not Armageddon, this would be WWIII.
Global Warming is The Great Flood and biblical plagues combined.
This is no drill. It's real. It's backed up by observation and science and Bible and Quran and every religion you might believe in.

>>10137882
>The Great Flood and biblical plagues
lul

>>10137061
>People have been hysterical about first global cooling, then runaway population explosion and global famine, then runaway ocean rising, then runaway heating, and now runaway "change" for literally multiple decades, since at least the 70's if not before.
These are all strawmen. Climatologists have never said runaway warming is going to occur.

>Some bullshit tax on CO2 in the countries with the most efficient power generation industries on the planet isn't going to do jack fucking shit,
Who exactly is saying mitigation should only occur in certain countries?

Deniers have no valid arguments so they have to constantly make shit up, case in point.

>>10137187
P
O
L
I
S
H

A
P
P
L
E
S

>>10137952
He never denied it you mong, he literally says the third world is the primary culprit of anthropogenic effect. The thing he contested is your point of no return scare mongering.

>>10137392
Nothing you said implies that global warming is underestimated. And your 50-100 degrees claim is physically impossible.

>>10137962
>He never denied it
Oh great so he admits global warming is occurring and extremely harmful.

>he literally says the third world is the primary culprit of anthropogenic effect
Absolutely. You know what else? The third world has too much food. All the food should be divided among countries equally, right? Population should not be considered. A citizen of Monaco should have 3000 times more food than a Chinese citizen. Makes perfect sense.

>The thing he contested is your point of no return scare mongering.
How exactly did he contest the scientific fact that warming is already in the pipeline? By making a bunch of idiotic strawmen?

>>10137956
Implying only Poland will benefit from climate change

http://rstb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/365/1554/2973#ref-62

In mid and high latitudes, the suitability and productivity of crops are projected to increase and extend northwards, especially for cereals and cool season seed crops (Maracchi et al. 2005; Tuck et al. 2006; Olesen et al. 2007). Crops prevalent in southern Europe such as maize, sunflower and soya beans could also become viable further north and at higher altitudes (Hildén et al. 2005; Audsley et al. 2006; Olesen et al. 2007). Here, yields could increase by as much as 30 per cent by the 2050s, dependent on crop (Alexandrov et al. 2002; Ewert et al. 2005; Richter & Semenov 2005; Audsley et al. 2006; Olesen et al. 2007). For the coming century, Fisher et al. (2005) simulated large gains in potential agricultural land for the regions such as the Russian Federation, owing to longer planting windows and generally more favourable growing conditions under warming, amounting to a 64 per cent increase over 245 million hectares by the 2080s. However, technological development could outweigh these effects, resulting in combined wheat yield increases of 37–101% by the 2050s (Ewert et al. 2005)

>>10137963
It absoluetely isnt exaggerated at all. The oceans keep heating and will release way more carbon than you can imagine. Its not like in hollywood movies where things will change over night, more like over millenias. But it certainly is possible to trigger a runaway greenhouse effect that can heat earth up almost indefinetely.

>>10138105
>dude monaco has 10x per capita smog!
wow we better shut them down then, glad the chinese are such clean people

>>10137662
>comparing poison to a molecule essential for life on earth

>>10137170
>Complete moratorium on logging

>>10136429

Are you retarded or something? You have to look at those atmosphere gases that actually have a greenhouse effect and can cause a warming. CO2 is responsible for >90% of the greenhouse effect on earth.

>they didn't listen

>>10137197
No, opposite.
>>10137412
Not even worth typing.
>>10137378
Wheat production is expected to drop dramatically in Europe along with maize production. climate change with carbon enrichment of the soil favors rice and onions but not staples like maize and wheat. Germany is expected to see horrible flooding and awful droughts in different regions with some regions experiencing bigger harvests, but with shorter growing seasons and earlier flowering (which is really bad). Russia saw severe reduction in wheat harvest in the last few years and its expected to get worse. Scandinavia cannot feed all of Europe, and America according to our own internal reporting agencies is expected to see severe drought exacerbation, shorter growing seasons, and reduced soil moisture with flooding and water shortages being complemented by extreme weather events in the interior. Pacific cyclones are on the decline but the intensity and damage of the storm systems is increasing; however, in the midwest and plains states extreme weather events like wind storms and tornados are becoming more frequent and worse, as are flash floods. america is expected to see severe loss of snowfall and snowpack, which is what has caused the droughts in the Cascade, Columbia-Snake river regions in Washington state and Oregon. California is in the midst of a 7 year long drought which combined with extremely stupid urban water management (which libs and cons are responsible for, overgrowth is not partisan) is causing annual wild fire seasons to lengthen. Alaska, one of the least wildfite prone boreal biomes on Earth is seeing extreme wildfire seasons which are getting longer and more intense. Victoria and British Columbia are as well, you can expect the same to spread to Central Asia and Brazil as well, and this is already happening there. America has seen universal temp increases except in the SE which is due to, you guessed it, climate change confounding normal weather systems there.

>>10138123
There are a few things here: Wheat production will probably not increase and neither will maize, these crops feed most of the West. The increase in population density and carbon output will also mitigate the gains made in cereals, rice and s o y crops however, you are right that parts of the Baltics and Eastern Europe along with the Nordic states will benefit. Northern Canada will also become the likey bread basket for all of North America in due time, of course this means converting forest to farmland which is really dangerous considering habitat loss, and carbon emissions but leaving that aside; central europe, especially france, and northern italy will not benefit at all, parts of Germany in the North likely will at the very least get better harvests but with worse flooding, all of Northern europe is expected to see worse flooding; however southern Germany will almost certainly get hit with longer, drier summers and springs with reduced crop harvests. the issue is that not only will this encourage more farm expansion in places which are heavily forested but it encourages retarded views from nationalist leaders looking to farm assent from their increasingly nervous voter base. Some Polish leader mentions potatoes or apples being more abundant and so they then believe that further investment in farm land and carbon producing industries is viable long term. Its going to reach a point where the entire mediterranean, parts of central europe, all of central and south asia, along with China, South America and the Continental US cannot support their populations anymore. You absolutely cannot keep the same farmland area in Northern and Eastern Europe and feed that many people. Even if you sacrificed all of africa, china and south asia (good luck with that without waging a nuclear war on them, they will begin agitating for aid and asylum) then you’d still have to feed the rest of Europe and America. America will not be capable of feeding itself quite soon

>>10138224
Go breath in some pure "molecule essential for life on earth" and see how that works out for you

>>10138376
How many years until my life won't be comfy and relaxing anymore?

>>10137409
That doubly goes for Poles, really

>>10138132
A runaway warming would require the oceans to boil away. We are simply too far away from the sun for the greenhouse effect to be that strong.

https://www.skepticalscience.com/Venus-runaway-greenhouse-effect.htm

>>10138185
>CHOMP The Chinese BUUUUURP are the GLOBGLOBGLOB problem GLUMP

>>10138224
>failing to respond to the argument

well, since the thread about cell tower saturation having an impact on global warming was moved/deleted

I guess we'll just say it here in amongst all the noise about global warming

even though the topic was about the cell towers, specifically

but u go on, chugging through the airwaves, through lithium batteries

superheat the world if u want

as long u get to exercise infantile control over others

u'll get off, i'm sure.

>>10135015
Fake news.

>>10138676
>no punctuation or capitalization
>every sentence is its own paragraph
>babbling on about nothing

>>10138684
>cell tower saturation

I take it you cannot read and are here for the jabs and the jibes because your girlfriend doesn't blow u right

>>10136025
>I'm sure those hordes of Africans, South Americans and Middle Easterners will stay right where they are and not bother us!

>>10138690
>cell tower saturation aka nothing
I take it you're mentally ill and this prevents you from understanding simple concepts

>>10138702
>>cell tower saturation

do u even science - apparently not - but what a fabulous little dick rider you are

jumped on my big one straight up you go for it whore.

>>10135015

because they don't want their toys taken from them waa waaa - power stations - power poles - communications grids - smartphones - cell towers - EMF madness superheating through lithium batteries waa waa

they tantrum like babies at the mere mention their pathetic technology empire is the cause...

and the ones who don't care are so buttcuked by social media they only live for likes

>>10138708
>>10138714
Are you having an episode?

>>10138717

case in point, the first response is usually one of those low brow oh hey i'm a forum tool so low in basic intellect I cant fathom the simple concept presented and must resort to ad hominem attacks as the only argument in lieu of not having one..

>>10138694
>>I'm sure those hordes of Africans, South Americans and Middle Easterners will stay right where they are and not bother us!
>borders and machine guns don’t exist

>>10138725
>Africans, South Americans and Middle Easterners

big tek junkies these days - heavy saturation of communication grids including towers - and power lines.

it's what u get for not going solar sooner and fucking urselves over with technology

happy 'download the app' day and don't forget to blast the net through lithium

always a good start to blowing up the whole world.

>>10138724
>>10138733
>>10138736
Take your medication, please.

>>10138724
Can you paraphrase this for me?

>>10138376
>Wheat production will probably not increase and neither will maize, these crops feed most of the West. The increase in population density and carbon output will also mitigate the gains

Both maize and wheat are going to increase.Also Europe has declining population.

Anything short of literally making driving your car and using any form of fossil fuel illegal than nah. Green tech isnt up to snuff and you can blame the oil people all day thats just the way it is.

>>10138737

again, the same response, no other argument to present and lives in the dark ages of medicine when drugs were used to silence dissent and the truth

probably comes from someone with a smartphone and no original thought process to take in information and process it.

>>10138739

will that help you understand the basic idea that cell tower and power line saturation kick up a shit ton of radiation and u guys hit the net through lithium batteries 24-7 and say "oh that's nothing"

in the face of 'global warming'?

>>10138746
It's already decreased wheat yields.

http://www.pnas.org/content/112/9/2670.long?utm_source=TrendMD&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=Proc_Natl_Acad_Sci_U_S_A_TrendMD_0

>>10138753
Incorrect.

>>10138755
>>10138759
No one is going to take a mentally ill individual seriously. You don't deserve a response. Now go back to your containment board >>>/x/.

>>10138773

u there, making mental health assessments online like king fucklord of nothing - fuck you

that's your best response because you are the mentally sick person here.

>>10138773
>Now go back to your containment board >>>/x/.

suck my scientific dick u pathetic obnoxious baiter

'mommy I want my phone' < pathetic. deal with the science of it if u even can.

kings of lithium.

>>10138789
>>10138791
you've taken a stance and your position is strong, im starting to really wonder about wifi now. thanks anon. you're doing gods work. keep at it.

>>10138746
No, they will not increase. The EEA, US Global Change program and IPCC disagree with you. Im not even going to keep reading your retarded PNG’s
>>10138385
No one knows, I would encourage anyone here who is interested or worried in this topic to review the sources I’ve cited in the response line above this one. it seems like 2040 is a big turning point and then 2080. So we have probably 20 years before extreme weather will become more than just a nuisance as it is now, and then 40-60 before its a crisis for most developed nations. if you live in the subtropical lattitudes I would leave now, also the American SW. But, to be clear its just not possible to tell because there is no way of knowing how much carbon the forests can absorb, or how much will be emitted from the oceans and methane from permafrost, ocean acidification. all of it is quite uncertain. The US Global Change Research Program has comprehensive reports, peer review link and a response to their peer review available online. The European Environmental Association has published semi-regular comprehensive reports as well. The Medittereanean and parts of Southern France, all of Turkey and the Balkans are going to get fucked really hard. The shills in this thread are sort of correct, the Northern Lattitudes will be “comfy” for a while but they are also unfortunately either dense forest land like in Northern Canada or situated very close to the coast line, like the Nordic states which as you can imagine is a problem.
>>10138633
Again, no one actually knows if the oceans will emit CO2 or if the permafrost will release massive amounts of methane. We actually have to wait and see. The arctic will be ice free by the middle to end of this coming decade in the summer so it will become more clear quite soon.
>>10138768
He hasn’t read the studies nor is he interested in them. Its just a political motivation, and spite motivating his behavior.

>>10138884
>>10138884
>Southern France, all of Turkey and the Balkans are going to get fucked really hard
>The shills in this thread are sort of correct, the Northern Lattitudes will be “comfy” for a while
I think we can conclude this thread now, thank you for admitting defeat

>>10138381
Nothing will happen retard. You realize your lungs literally produce CO2 with every breath right?

>>10138900
Based and redpilled

>>10138670
Lol what fucking argument?

>>10138919
The argument I made, retard

>>10138929
You didn’t make an argument, you compared apples to oranges

>>10138936
Not an argument

>>10138900
Well that’s not really what you were implying, Nordic states and parts of eastern europe, which do not have enough arable land to feed Europe or America, will see temporary boosts in crop productivity. But wheat production is going down in Germany and Russia and Germany itself will see heterogenous effects from warmer temps, some good, in the North, but mitigated by ever increasing flooding, and some really bad in the South, with brutal spring and summers with shorter growing seasons and earlier flowering. France will probably get fucked pretty hard over half the country is expected to see crop production decreases. The Mediterranean will get fucked, sea levels are going to rise in the Nordic states and Northwestern europe which will damage their economic efficiency and then European Maize and Wheat production are expected to decrease every decade. Only s o y and cereal crops, lettuce and other shit like that will likely see any benefit from warming. Its really fucking dangerous to wipe out the med, france, half of germany and then raise sea levels dramatically while sentencing 60-70% of the planet’s landmass to aridity that is not feasible for crop production. America itself will get completely fucked, the midwest and west coast will just not be capable of the crop production we expect from them today, wildfire seasons will become more intense and longer which has a cumulative effect, and then of course temp control will overpower precipitation control in drought prone regions. Canada is mostly thick forest land, the expandion of farm land is extremely likely to increase carbon production dramatically, offsetting whatever gains we make from technological mitigation. On top of that you now have to feed America and Europe with significantly less farm land and a weaker economy. Its a catastrophe by any measure. I don’t see how you won anything. No one disputed that SHORT TERM gains for the Nordic states and Eastern Europe were imminent

>>10138900
Adding on, its just stupid to think those gains are permanent. Temperate is expected, by all monitoring agencies and scientific models made, to continue increasing with higher sea levels as an effect, well into the 2100’s. That’s going to eventually wipe out the gains made in the Northern Lattitudes. As in, by 2150 you should expect crop production to decrease up there. All the same ocean acidification and the political tumult caused by all this is not good for tiny states that have never had to become responsible for whole continents food security. Its fucking asinine, the whole drive of your logic is nihilistic and small minded. Idk why we would want Canada’s north to become a gigantic industrialized farm or to rely on tiny peninsulas in the Arctic to supply us with all our food. I mean do you want most Europe and most of North America to see population collapse, the loss of sustainability for human life and near universal ecocide in these biomes? how is that a victory? Its fucking stupid.

>>10138900
Just think about the logic of this. You turn the north into breadbaskets, which means the world’s greatest sources of timber become converted into farms. You lose all that carbon absorption from the taiga forests, boreal forests, and you start emitting massive amounts of CO2 speeding up warming. Then you now have a migrant crisis, not of shitskin subhumans but of white europeans and americans who desperately want to leave their baking homelands. That’s terrible, its a bad plan.

>>10135196
>No one is saying the world is ending tomorrow, dumbass.
>"climate change is going to fuck us all over big time within a couple of years"

>>10138936
>You didn’t make an argument, you compared apples to oranges
How exactly does the comparison fail? Why is the small percentage relevant for CO2 but not relevant for arsenic? Before demanding an argument make one yourself.

>Because CO2 is plant food durr hurr
Irrelevant.

>>10135050
Only true goyim need to worry about your problem. Spend your time and money on the biggest hoax of our generation. Climate change is real but not a fraction of what you believe and not a fraction of why you believe.

>>10139313
all gentiles are by definition goyim, it just means nations, as in other races. Aryans had the exact same words for other tribes as did the Greeks and the Egyptians, brainlet.

>>10138941
>and parts of eastern europe, which do not have enough arable land to feed Europe or America, will see temporary boosts in crop productivity. But wheat production is going down in Germany and Russia
Poland and Ukraine are breadbaskets of Europe and both Russia and Germany are going to see increased food production

>>10138884
>IPCC disagree with you
IPCC ? Despite being a propaganda program it actually was forced to admit food production will increase

>>10135015
I think you and Matt Stone need to end your shitty cartoon already.

>>10139317
What were those words, genius?

>>10138955
based and redpilled

>>10139558
The Greeks and the Romans used "Barbarian" for outsiders

>>10139284
Because they’re two completely different molecules you fucking imbecile and actually one’s an element
>x amount of y is bad for you so x amount of z is also bad for you

>>10138915
>being this retarded
Just when I thought /pol/tards couldn't get dumber
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16499405
>[...] although it also exerts toxic effects at cellular level.
>At higher concentrations it leads to an increased respiratory rate, tachycardia, cardiac arrhythmias and impaired consciousness. Concentrations >10% may cause convulsions, coma and death.

>>10139619
Is CO similar to CO2?

>>10135033
this was a good watch thanks for posting

>>10135015
I don't care

>>10135033
>hurr durr this drought in australia isn't just a drought IT'S THE NEW NORMAL I TELL YOU BE AFRAID
>meanwhile australian wheat production grew to the highest it's ever been

>>10135034
>>>>>>>>>

We will not stop burning fossil fuels. Don't be deluded. However, there is only so much fossil fuel left. We will probably hit 2000 ppm at least before we run out of coal and oil to burn. We will counteract the effects of that by spraying aerosols into the atmosphere. The aerosols don't stay there for long so that risk of doing lasting damage is limited, plus we can better steer the climate. As the centuries go by, more and more carbon dioxide leaves the atmosphere again, and we will decrease the aerosol spraying gradually.

>>10139619
This is like saying that dogs and cats don't both have four legs because they are different animals. Saying they are different doesn't mean they differ in all properties.

Your argument was that CO2 is insignificant because it's only 0.04% of the atmosphere. This "logic" is not specific to CO2. Thus I see no reason why it can't be applied to anything else. Otherwise it's just a baseless claim about CO2 and not an argument.

>>10135050
lol speak for yourself, poorfag

If it’s happening within a couple of years we’re already fucked and it’s a waste if my limited time to worry about it

>>10135314
this is a good analogy. We are not evolutionarily equipped to grasp changes in the climate that span several generations.
We can reason about it abstractly and scientifically, but the fossil fuel industry can just keep throwing billions of billions of dollars funding denialism so they don't get shut down.

That is also why I generally don't respond to these threads, since the reddit MAGA trumptards scream the loudest and it's just depressing arguing with these people. Everytime I do I feel like I have aged 5 years. It is all so tiring.

>>10140780
People have been saying this for hundreds of years bro. It’s just a hoax to scare people and get them all worked up

>>10135015
Anyone care to make their year by year predictions for the next 20-30 years?

>>10135295
v. tasty, heavily recommended

>>10137131
looks cool to me

>>10135015
>>10135295
>agricultural production the greatest it's ever been
>food never been this abundant
>give it a couple more years guys i swear we bout to starve

>>10139555
those are combined plus/minus’s for multiple crops, wheat and maize are not expected to see crop production growth at all.
>>10139547
They aren’t really Germany and France produce huge amounts of food, and Russia has seen lower wheat yields the last few years which is expected.

https://www.agriculture.com/markets/newswire/update-2-crop-monitor-cuts-eu-winter-grain-outlook-again-on-dry-weather
>>10139569
>>10139558
Barbarian, or any other word that signified “not us”, the word aryan literally means noble and was used to designate their ingroup as holy and upright and others as lowly and wicked. This is totally normal for most warlike ethnic groups. The word “Mleccha” is the equivalent of barbarian that the Vedics used.

>>10137061
>On top of this, China, India, and the Middle East and parts of Africa are the primary culprits for any measurable broad range Anthropogenic effects because they literally don't give a shit about how much they pollute, China's ambient atmosphere is cancer in vapor form, India releases a literal plume of liquid human shit into the ocean and the Middle East and India are constantly burning off huge volumes of poor quality oil they can't refine or sell, dumping completely unfiltered petrochemical pollution into the atmosphere
>>10135015

You forget that india and china produce so much waste to produce cheap products for cumskins? How about we eliminate the market? An average American uses 7x more resources than a single indian or Chinese, lets eliminate the American I say.

>>10137490
>>10135015

Higher GDP than UK lol, even after UK looted everything

>>10138725
>>borders and machine guns don’t exist
>>10135015

Can't do shit after some time

>>10141074
>China's pollution is America's fault!
Can't just blame all of your problems on the boogieman.

>>10141221
>>10135015

Well, to develop every country pollutes, the west did early on, and gained significant advantages.

i'm vegan, i bike instead of drive, i won't be having children, but what more can i do?

>>10142628
Not a vegan but same here. Reality humanity is fucked, their whole society and economy was meant for infinity growth on finite planet, little did they know releasing sealed energy underground meant extinction and not only that, but most don't take it seriously. Imagine some people really think humanity doesn't do any effect.. Most of them are religious and think it's political.

>>10142628
use less water you scum

>>10141005

>More extreme devastated weather than these 10-15 years we had.
>summer will be hotter in EU and last longer
>Food supply will be a problem
>Immigration

When we hit 500ppm CO2 nothing will save us, it will be the trigger effect of melting all the ice in Greenland, just matter of time, more methane release from Antarctica and will trigger a new domino effect.

It's going to be a shit storm

>>10142745
This will be the new norm in Switzerland https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=791o4LPqJWc

>>10142769
>mudslides never happened before

>>10142783
They'll happen more often

>>10139885
https://www.spglobal.com/platts/en/market-insights/latest-news/agriculture/071118-australian-201819-wheat-production-revised-down-to-21-mil-mt-usda

>>10142798
21M tons is about average for australia you dumb fuck

>>10142783
You can't be this seriously retarded..... This mudslide came from permafrost glaciers melting and not from rain.

>>10142819
big deal

>>10142817
from 24 million average to 21 million average... it's laterally going down faggot

>>10142826
24M was just the forecast for the year you illiterate baboon
the average for the past 20 years or so is about 21M

>>10135015
Industrial civilisation won't collapse until the latter half of this century. It's the generation after yours that's fucked.

>>10135015
I take comfort in counting how many years it has been going to fuck us over "in a few years."

>>10142628
cringe

>>10135015
I am a man of means living in a non-coastal city in the first world. I have nothing to fear

>>10140874
point proven. My only solace is that you will die along with me

>>10142823
Satan has made a nice little home inside you I see. When you rise up to be judged, do you really think God will forgive you for destroying his greatest masterpiece, all for a sliver of wealth? Hell will embrace you with open arms, and your screams will echo through eternity.

>>10144365
in about 10-30 years you might be fucked unless you live farther north

>>10144365
>still regurgitating the flood meme
The first thing to hit you at around 450ppm/2C (2030s) will be failing (50%-75%) rains , and then failing crops. 1st world won't starve, but food prices will rocket.

>>10142823
>i'm stupid and proud of it

>>10144365
is there a river nearby? it's not just sea level rise, floods can also be caused by heavy rainfall, read the Bible if you don't trust science

>>10144505
no one can know that, its just that by the end of the century first world crop production will be significantly lower and food scarcity will become an issue for those populations like it is now in Africa. Most importantly droughts and water insecurity, and demographics problems from migrations will be the bane of existence for those populations well before food becomes an issue. The entire talking point of relying on crops as the means to motivate apathy towards climate change is silly, the sea level rise, freakish weather, loss of rivers and lakes and extreme political turmoil, along with just hell on earth from ecosystem collapse in all biomes will be more than enough to make people extremely uncomfortable and to begin panicking. This all may very well take the entire century to fully materialize. No one will notice how bad things get until mid century when its far too late to stop the first wave of cataclysms.

Aren't there any technologies to capture CO2 directly out of the upper parts of the atmosphere? I mean, just seend helium balloons up that span gigantic filtres between them and get the shit out. Sure it would be expensive, but distributed over 50 years or so the cost should be bearable, right?

>>10135292
Everybody went along with WWI. They all thought they will just end it by the time Christmas come (everybody except communists) .

>>10144619
>>10135033

>>10144642
too much crap going on
https://youtu.be/6VUPIX7yEOM?t=2m40s

>>10144488
i'm the juggernaut bitch

>>10144510
no one cares about your little ice faggot

>>10144867
>cucksure dumb
k

>>10145009
>posting pseudo science

So many retarded fucks ITT

It's kind of creepy that no one is talking about it anymore.

>Ice caps melt
>Earth is flooded
>Global beach front property

The goyim are going to eat it up

Even if there was some silver bullet "solution" like a new energy technology 100x more efficient than coal, do you seriously think humans would use it at the scales necessary to prevent warming? Unless they (humans, ie. you or me) perceive a change to be in their direct short term interest, the switching costs (psychological, financial, whatever they may be) will prevent them from carrying out impactful change. What I'm saying is, any new solution would not only have to solve the energy problem but also the financial problem of making people very rich (ie. must make disruptive economic and market charges to displace current energy leaders). Because of that, and given that there actually is no such technology that exists to satisfy that hypothetical scenario, you can practically assume that humanity's growing energy requirements will cause the next population and societal bust in the very near future. Talk of living on another planet or moon is so far fetched that I find it hard to take people who believe that seriously, any plan to live off-world that does not include preserving the Earth should be considered a reboot of humanity as a species, because of the changes and uncertainties associated with the evolution of that plan.

The thing that irks me is that everyone, literally everyone, talks about mitigating climate change, like it's an inevitability. There's one simple solution, nobody may like it, but itll save our hides, just stop consuming. That's it, stop using your computer and read, stop using your car and invest in a bike, get off your damn phone. It's like the world is literally being destroyed and humans are acting like meth addicts to technology. Look at the atmosphere and think about how much carbon was put there by internet porn, pointless tweets, diabetic fat fucks who drive literally everywhere, NEETs who use the computer all day for 4chan. We could eliminate so much if we just restrained ourselves.

>>10145044
fuck off back to /xenu/

>>10142745
there could be more factors for that infographic though, like the technology measuring those events and more world involvement like now we care about other countries etc

>>10145380
Wtf kind of sophisticated technology do you need to measure flooding and droughts? And reread the infograph, the world, I highly doubt they would put that if all the events accross the globe weren't recorded.

>>10135015

It doesn't seem like it's going to be that bad, and that's /something/ when you're talking about x-risks. There's no hard cutoff beyond which everyone instantly dies like some doomsayers seem to be saying, and no fixed thing that we need to do to go from no problems to instant universal death.

It's just a smooth curve of damages, quadratic in temperature rise.

>>10145200
Fucking luddites

>>10145483
>restraint = bad
burgers.

The main problem is we don't know how far we can go before we really get a chain reaction and runaway warming. That's why there is this two degree goal. We know this should be safe because geological records say so. But going beyond is a risk.

>>10137061
It doesnt matter how much you try to use postmodernistic scientific arguments.

We are killing the biosphere. And when it goes. So will humans because we cannot live without the vast complexity of microbial and animal system that we live in.

>>10137191
Yes. 2100 Poland will have increased only 88% as of climate change. And vould be vastly higher.

to this day i have yet to meet a person who can successfully refute the very simple argument that co2 is plant food

>>10147952
>we cannot live without the vast complexity of microbial and animal system that we live in
Not with that attitude.

>>10148195
drought + heat

the real world doesn't work like the little lab experiment where watering and temperature are kept perfect

>>10148195
so you grow plants in your chimney?

>>10135026
/thread

>>10148195
It doesn't work like that its not a linear system with only a few variables.

>>10135050
>None of you are on the guest list for any of the vaults
Joke's on you, I'm in the /k/ave discord for just such an occasion
If I die, it's gonna be the fun way - some drunk guy in a ghillie suit ND'ing me in the head with a mosin nagant while we're picking potatoes

>>10137199
we'll have so many Polish apples we won't know what to do with all of them

>>10141060
>You guys are idiots, the Titanic isn't sinking. It's 200 feet in the air on my end.

>>10149449
elaborate
how is this relevant to food production increasing?
make an argument

>>10149459
The food production increases will be temporary. Sure, higher temps means longer growing seasons in the high latitudes, but eventually it will be too warm there as well. Combine it with rising sea levels, plummeting fish populations, and a migrant crisis 1000x times worse than the one we have now.

>>10149469
>the growth in food production in the last 20 is due to higher temps

>>10149479
The warming is creating better crop growth, sure but there's no stopping to that warming. Eventually, all the worlds breadbaskets are gonna turn into deserts.

>>10141060
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/u-s-bread-basket-shifts-thanks-to-climate-change/

>>10149420
dissertations on the apple conflicts by future underground races once poland becomes the last piece of arable land on earth and is the catalyst for a near extinction event driven by biological warfare and anti-apple tree gene drives.
>>10149479
you mean like the reduced wheat harvests in: France, Germany and Russia as well the as the shortening growing seasons in America? Wow really great trade off. I love being forced up into the Northern lattitudes while endless swarms of subhumans are battering at the gates because their entire native continents are on fire 6 months of the year. Pacific coast, southwest, central and southern euope? Who needs em! We have Poland and Nordicuckland and Canuckistan to play refuge for 700 million whites.

lmao @ this retard thread
A couple of things to note:
1: Edward Bernays was hired by various companies in the mid 90s to help promote a new style of "green" marketing
2: Evidence was quickly fabricated to support "global warming"
3: "scientists" all funded by coroporations
Need I honestly go on...this hoax has been BTFO more extensively on /pol/ but this is all you should know

>>10149597
>Evidence was quickly fabricated to support "global warming"
you mean like this direct measurement evidence, or direct measurement evidence of C-14 fraction of atmospheric carbon decreasing from fossil fuel use?
>3: "scientists" all funded by coroporations
like the fossil fuel funded denialists?
>Need I honestly go on...this hoax has been BTFO more extensively on /pol/ but this is all you should know
aha, HAHAHAHAHAHA

>>10149600
woops

>>10149600
LMAO
Contiunu with this pseud existence all you want, you're just pic related
>m-muh "science" disproves you're /pol/paganda
science is purely subjective, lmao.

>>10149604
forgot pic

>>10149604
>evidence I don't like isn't real
you're on the wrong fucking board kiddo

>people are allowing the co2 debate to be entirely about climate change when it's literally pollution that harms the environment in other, less debated ways

>>10149610
>KIDDO
lmao, the state of "scientists"

>>10149613
>I have no argument

>>10149626
Nor do you, as your last posts definitively proves
stay brainlet

>>10149631
>if you present evidence I don't like and refute my claims it's not an argument

>>10149639
>refute
you made ad hominid attacks, tardlord

>>10149645
actually I gave you direct measurement evidence that refuted your claim that it's a hoax

>>10149659
Which was, in turn. funded by the military industrial complex. Bait harder

>>10149670
now you're introducing new, irrelevant claims, again with no evidence

are you sure you don't just fucking suck at arguing? of course not

>>10149670
dogs do the exact same shit they’re just worse at hunting. also the entire “global warming hoax” propaganda is funded by mil-industrial connected think tanks and rw oil companies

>>10149675
>evidence
>implying they're not too good to leave no trace

>>10149685
>they destroyed all the evidence
very convenient for your evidence-free narrative

>>10136025
>what is mass migration

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hmurYdp1kp4

I honestly feel like even if climate change was 100% spot on what they were predicting, that it would be entirely reversible.

If things got to the point people were starving from crop shortages (even though climate change has been shown to increase growing seasons) or whatever, a few trillion dollar government projects out of the USA and China could fix things pretty quickly.

>>10149504
>>10149592
lmao you're a retard, let me tell you why.
there hasn't been any significant warming in the last 20 years yet food production has grown SIGNIFICANTLY across the board for instance this moron >>10149595 brings up wheat production, a favorite of climate shills, he doesn't even know the numbers but he assumes wheat production is decreasing because it has too.... WRONG YOU FUCKING RETARD
france: wheat production in 1996 35.9MT, in 2015 42.8MT
germany: 1996 18.9MT, 2016 24.4MT
russia: 1996 34.9MT, 2016 73.3MT
US: 1996 62MT, 2016 62.9MT
italy: 1996 8.3MT, 2016 8.0MT (holy shit drastic decline we bout to starve)
spain: 1996 6.0MT, 2016 6.4MT

WORLDWIDE :1996 578.6MT, 2016 749.5MT A 29% INCREASE. EVEN IF WHEAT PRODUCTION FELL 30% TOMORROW WE WOULD STILL BE AT 1996 LEVELS,i certainly don't remember the late 90s as a time of dearth if anything we were producing way in excess of what we needed

>>10150048
Sources?

>>10150150
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_wheat_production_statistics#cite_ref-unof_8-0

>>10150048
Not only that but wheat and corn production is projected to go up even further with global warming.

>>10150201
recent numbers tell a different story, seems global wheat production reached it's peak and may decline because of climate change
https://www.graincentral.com/markets/global-wheat-harvest-to-fall-for-first-time-in-six-years-igc/

>>10150174
Thanks. And on the claim on no significant warming in the last 20 years?

>>10150250
is .3 degrees significant? is this slight increase in temperature responsible for the 30% growth in wheat production?

>>10150223
>seems global wheat production reached it's peak and may decline
how did you reach that conclusion?

>>10150271
>is .3 degrees significant?
Well yeah.
> is this slight increase in temperature responsible for the 30% growth in wheat production?
Perhaps. Though improved wheat strains, and farming techniques certainly have had their impact.

>>10150276
ever watered a plant?

>>10150320
exactly

>>10150350
?

>>10150320
.3 isn't all that significant, it's not uncommon for temperatures to swing of similar or even larger amounts within a decade

>>10150271
What's the source for the 0.3 though?

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1871174X16300488

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2003/08/030828071722.htm

https://phys.org/news/2018-03-geologists-earlier-evidence-impending-mass.html

https://skepticalscience.com/Lee-commentary-on-Burgess-et-al-PNAS-Permian-Dating.html

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/07/170731090834.htm

https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms15872

https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2009JC005602

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/281855222_Shakhova_N_et_al_2015_The_East_Siberian_Arctic_Shelf_towards_further_assessment_of_permafrost-related_methane_fluxes_and_role_of_sea_ice_Phil_Trans_R_Soc_A_373_20140451_httpdxdoiorg101098rsta20140451

>>10150406
nasa apparently

CANNOT HELP BUT IGNORE THE DISTURBING SIMILARITIES BETWEEN THE WORST EXTINCTION (((((IN THE HISTORY OF LIFE ON EARTH)))))) AND EVENTS HAPPENING TODAY.

I'm not a robot

>>10150444
>THE WORST EXTINCTION (((((IN THE HISTORY OF LIFE ON EARTH))))))
the holohoax?

>>10150432
0.3 = 0.5?

>>10150446

Dude, Ron Paul confirmed it. The holohoax is not real and detention centers were made for special housing, not mass murder!

>>10150448
>late 90s [math]\approx[/math] .5
>mid 2010s [math]\approx[/math] .8
>difference is .5

I think it's fair to say that any short term benefit plants would derive from having more c02 would be outweighed in the stretch by rising temperatures and weather irregularity. It's already happening. More is on it's way.

>>10150472
>last 20 years
>from the mid 2010s
>not 2018
>late 90s to middle 2010s = 20 years?

>>10150487
the data on wheat production i gave you goes from 1996 to 2016 if you bothered to check the resource you requested dumbdumb

>>10150493
Ah so then why are you calculating from the late 90s and not the mid 90s?

1996 temperature anomaly ~ 0.3
2016 temperature anomaly ~ 1.0
Temperature difference = 0.7

Thanks for clarifying that you meant 0.7 and not 0.3.

>>10150500
>what is lowess smoothing

>>10150507
Ooooooh you meant the smoothed temperature increase, OK:

>1996 temperature anomaly ~ 0.4
2016 temperature anomaly ~ 0.9
Temperature difference = 0.5

Thanks for clarifying that you meant 0.5 and not 0.3.

>>10150517
more like .45 and .85 but whatever the point stands. so this increase in temperature is the sole responsible of the 30 % increase of wheat production right?

>>10150507
Did you smooth the data when you calculated the change in wheat production? Because if not it would be improper to smooth the temperature data since both are annual figures.

>>10150537
I have no idea, I'm not even the person you were responding to, I just saw that your math didn't make any sense.

>>10150538
i gave you the data you can do that yourself if you're interested. i can tell you that 2016 being a rich harvest and 1996 being a smaller one aren't two single peculiar data points, there was a consistent increase and 2016 as far as i know was followed by an even greater number in 2017, and 1996 wasn't a particularly poor year in fact 2003 was smaller. can't say the same for the temperature with 1996 being a relatively cooler year and 2016 (and 2015) being record hot years while for the most part temperature anomaly was relatively stable at around .6 (a .2 temperature difference) in this 20 year span

>>10150538
>>10150542
>>10150567
tl;dr wheat yield has been consistently rising in the past 2 decades while temperatures were relatively stable for the better part of this time span and only saw a significant surge in the past 3 years, that's why talking of .5 degree difference just looking at the first and last year and ignoring the data in between is dishonest, but i've learned to not expect much better from doomsaying climate alarmists

>>10150537
Nope, it's 0.4 to 0.9.

>>10150572
>that's why talking of .5 degree difference just looking at the first and last year and ignoring the data in between is dishonest,
LOL you're the one who framed the data that way, buddy. And global warming has already reduced wheat yields >>10138768 as will continue to reduce them https://www.nature.com/articles/nclimate2470

Californian wouldn't have forest fires if the hippies and hipsters just allowed logging.

>>10150678
>framed the data that way
i haven't framed anything i gave both raw data sets and a cursory glance is enough to notice wheat production has been consistently increasing there wasn't just a boom in production in the last couple years, the same cannot be said about temperatures, but i know alarmists aren't interested in the truth they're just about pushing their dogma
>articles dated 2015
>wheat yield is bout to fall trust us
>meanwhile yield still increased in 2017 for 6 years straight
>Global wheat production is estimated to fall by 6% for each °C
good thing wheat production increased by more than 30% i guess we'll be safe for quite a while

>>10150386
ever heard of droughts?

>>10150845
and?

>>10150694
Incorrect, allowing logging has no significant effect on wildfire rates. It's the climate that determines the rate.

>>10150768
>i haven't framed anything
>there hasn't been any significant warming in the last 20 years
>WORLDWIDE :1996 578.6MT, 2016 749.5MT A 29% INCREASE
mmmhmmm

>wheat production has been consistently increasing there wasn't just a boom in production in the last couple years, the same cannot be said about temperatures
Why would there be a boom in recent years?

>wheat yield is bout to fall trust us
They already did fall due to global warming, that's what the articles show. But you're just ignoring this.

>good thing wheat production increased by more than 30% i guess we'll be safe for quite a while
Safe from what? Reduced wheat yields is not good even if they grow overall. Not to mention that demand for wheat is also increasing.

>>10151044
i don't think i need to repeat i need to repeat myself considering my posts are still up here
>>10150572
>>10150174
so if you still can't understand this there's not much i can do. wheat is increasing not reducing deal with it but you decide to ignore this

>>10151058
None of this responds to the research I posted which shows global warning has reduced and will continue to reduce yields. Until you respond, I'll just assume that you agree.

>>10151089
it hasn't tho retard >>10150174

>>10151154
This says nothing about what caused what. It has >>10150678

>>10151454
it says wheat yields are at an all-time high and not declining

>>10151498
That doesn't respond to my point: global warming has reduced wheat yields.

>>10151502
facts disagree with your feelings i'm afraid

>>10151502
thread's about to die anyways, so you might as well stop being cryptic. actual real world data in wheat yield has shown a CONSISTENT increase in yield to this very year. whatever your dumb research/model predicted 3 years ago is simply being refuted by FACTS