/sci/ - Science & Math

>>10395466
>Can you red pill me
No, you're looking for /pol/ we don't redpill people here.

Climate change is real and a portion of it is anthropogenic.

>>10395466
It’s good for most developed countries

>>10395474
and bad for niggers

>>10395469
/pol/ isn't that greatest for "science" topics. If I want to know about Zionism I'll go there.

Red Pill just means a revealing of information that his hidden to you.

Because there is so much clouding of Climate Change, I figured I'd come here.


What percentage is caused by people?

>>10395474
>most developed countries
I don't think those words mean what you think they mean.

>>10395483
>What percentage is caused by people?

>>10395466
Global Warming / Climate Change statements and rebuttals.
https://skepticalscience.com/argument.php

>>10395466

>>10395483
>Red Pill just means a revealing of information that his hidden to you.
Redpill is a reference to a movie that came out before you were born. It is used by racists and conspiracy theorists and when you use it it makes normal people think you are a crazy moron.

>>10395483
>Red Pill just means a revealing of information that his hidden to you.
No, it doesn't

>Because there is so much clouding of Climate Change, I figured I'd come here.
No, there's not

>What percentage is caused by people?
93%

>>10395513
This thread is for ALPHAS

Go eat onions and jerk off to anime.

>>10395483
look up potholer on youtube. He'll answer all your questions in such a way that even a /pol/tard could understand.

>>10395514
It seems like the scale goes up in a few places before 1900s.

>>10395521
None of the information I've presented you has any dates listed. Are you feeling okay?

>>10395526
Oh shit, wrong person.

>>10395529
Lol

>>10395518
Is the s-o-y to onions filter still active?

>>10395510
>100 years

Those diagrams will never stop not being a joke.

Now show 5,000 years.

>>10395466

Is climate changing? Yes.

Are humans responsible? Nobody fucking knows and everybody saying otherwise is lying.

We should be more worried about pollution and plastic.

>>10395548
Alright. Notice any massive changes before the industrial revolution?

>>10395552
I can't help but notice that 1950 is 69 years ago, nice, but also why does your chart not show the present?

>>10395556
Because he's either a useful idiot or trying to find some

>>10395556
The present is scary, 1950 was a better time when women and blacks knew their place.

It’s of no concern to civilized world

>>10395474
>>10395642
fossil fuel shills at work

continuous environmental degradation is not a good thing

>>10395642
South America is a net exporter of food, any damage to them is damage to us.

>>10395642
The horde of third world refugees might not be very fun either.

>>10395669
Climate refugees will be a bigger problem then the lack of food imports

>>10395466

>>10395711
I heard the 90% was a bull shit study and 90% was really Californian Scientists only.

>>10395642

Enjoy your Lyme disease.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5872223/

>1 million people are predicted to get infected with Lyme disease in the USA in 2018. Given the same incidence rate of Lyme disease in Europe as in the USA, then 2.4 million people will get infected with Lyme disease in Europe in 2018. In the USA by 2050, 55.7 million people (12% of the population) will have been infected with Lyme disease. In Europe by 2050, 134.9 million people (17% of the population) will have been infected with Lyme disease. Most of these infections will, unfortunately, become chronic.

https://www.epa.gov/climate-indicators/climate-change-indicators-lyme-disease

https://www.nrdc.org/experts/juanita-constible/new-reality-climate-change-and-lyme-disease-canada

http://www.euro.who.int/en/publications/abstracts/lyme-borreliosis-in-europe.-influences-of-climate-and-climate-change,-epidemiology,-ecology-and-adaptation-measures

https://www.iamat.org/country/russia/risk/lyme-disease#

>>10395731
I heard that “climate scientists” excluded a bunch of types of relevant scientists so there’s that.

>>10395731
You heard wrong.

>>10395482
How can you even attribute a cause of death to climate change?

>>10395466
We're all going to fucking die

>>10395466
The redpill is that the bulk of climate change is caused by "solar radiation management", ie, weather control through atmospheric aerosol injection which they then beam with ground based phased array radar. This allows them to divert rain and so forth by creating localized pressure domes. The material sprayed is highly toxic and settles onto the ground, damaging tree root systems.

https://www.youtube.com/user/danewigington/featured

>>10396118
Natural disasters like wildfires, floods, hurricanes, droughts, starvation from ecological collapse causing food shortages, wars (probably nuclear) over dwindling resources, there's plenty

>>10395482
You mean the IQ of Pakistan and India goes up by like two standard deviations?

>>10395466
its true but the media is overreacting like its the end of all life on earth or shit

>>10396245
It is. Just for different reasons.

>>10396133

>>10395552
>Are humans responsible? Nobody fucking knows and everybody saying otherwise is lying.
Every climatologist knows it's humans, you're the one who's lying.

>We should be more worried about pollution and plastic.
CO2 is the largest pollution problem.

Also your graph only shows temperature up to 1855, before most of the global warming and doesn't even show global temperature.

>>10395483
Go back to /pol/, you underage zoomer cunt.

>>10396133
>>10396249
Schizophrenic posting belongs in >>>/x/

>>10396470
Have you actually watched some of his videos, or read the site? It makes quite a bit of sense.

You act like I was manufactured believing this. Right off the assembly line. No personal thoughts, doubts, reasoning. No humanity.

What's the matter with you? You're the one with something wrong with you.

>>10396489
>You act like I was manufactured believing this.
Nope, most conspiracy theorists have their belief stem from a single personal tragedy that rocked their current life and belief structure.
The loss of a loved one or a traumatic injury can cause one to "loose faith" in god or society or government or ascribe meaning to events or accidents or coincidences where there is none. "If the world were right my mother wouldn't have died." "It can't be random chance that terrible things happen to me." "I'm a good person, why did this happen?" They tend to reform these thoughts into a new belief structure and often times in a much more powerful way than they ever believed before their trauma.

>>10396508
So in your belief system, we all live in the true(r) truth, until something happens whereby to escape suffering we are forced to manufacture something less than and apart from the truth, to cope. An extension of the school of thought stating that we're born perfect and it's life and trauma that taints us such that innate wisdom is lost to us.

Now even in that case, what's to stop most people from -already- having succumbed to this process? Where it's the norm, not the comic-book villain style exception?

>>10396515
Nah, you can be wrong without personal trauma. The simple fact is that unless your parents or teachers taught you that there were planes shooting death lasers at sovereign citizens to make their acne worse then you found your conspiracy after being normal for at least a few years.

>>10396527
Why is it so hard for you to believe that someone would lie to you, and that large groups of people could believe things that aren't true? By your own logic, with us crazy conspiracy theorists, it's possible. So why not in the other direction as well?

>>10396531
>So why not in the other direction as well?
Occam's razor, There are vastly more people who work in an industry like space and aviation than those who are conspiracy theorists. The conspiracy theorists provide no evidence and thus I pick the option with the fewest number of moving parts. AKA dumb people be saying some wild shit about chem-trails or whatever.

>>10396545
>The conspiracy theorists provide no evidence
In my experience, plenty of evidence is provided, but all of it is ignored. Based on that I have to assume it's more about group security and avoiding the trauma of accepting the overarching cultural narrative is false.

Anyway, you have the link to his channel and their website. You make up your own mind.

>>10396550
>In my experience, plenty of evidence is provided
>You make up your own mind.
In my experience you wouldn't know evidence if you were given an entire semester course on the subject and managed to show up for every class.

>>10396554
Now the anger, bit of push behind it. Nice self awareness.

I'll leave you to your ritual.

>>10395731
>Californian Scientists only
>Californian Scientists
I'm as skeptical as they come...but, really?

>>10395513
Oh fuck off you sanctimonious cunt. Not everyone that makes references to some old movie is a racist. You're probably the kind of idiot that literally sees Nazis everywhere.

>>10395731
Can you find any studies that actually dispute the fact that the climate is warming and that humans are the major cause? If there's no consensus, it would be trivial to do so, wouldn't it?

>>10395466
>red pill me
GTFO pill-popping /pol/esmoker

>>10395518
>onions
found the newfag

>>10395731
>>10395764
>I heard
I heard you sukkdikk

>>10395711
there's a TON of money to be made from climate change too

>>10395466
Why is this board so fucking retarded?
Did none of you guys learn to read cross-referenced papers? Do you guys only digest information from pseudo-intellectual youtubers and infographics?

Oh wait, almost forgot that 99% of the board majors in computer science

So much for "/sci/"

>>10397398
kek
retards say the darndest things

>>10395469
Based and redpilled

>>10397282
Based and redpilled

>>10397036
>You're probably the kind of idiot that literally sees Nazis everywhere.
Nah I mostly just see them on /pol/.

The real question is:

Can we do something about it? Is the tipping point preventable?

>>10397581
renewable energy is not a permanent trillion dollar market?

>>10395474
AHAHAHAHA

but the migrants you dolt

>>10395548
Absolutely btfo by
>>10395555

>>10397806
Oil is a larger market than renewable energy you absolute zoomer

>>10395466
When my parents were my age, everyone was scared about Global Cooling... As someone with a PhD in physics, I can say that (1) modern science [funding and hiring] is extremely political and (2) I've never read a global warming paper that I would call "good science".

It's a field of fear-mongering frauds, as far as I can tell, and smart people knew this even back in the 80s:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qdTlXuTwvEQ

>>10397925
I want to say also that those frauds have had an additional 50 years to cherrypick data, sew propaganda into our primary education system, and generally push the idea that if you aren't mad about global warming then you HATE THE EARTH and are an evil bigot (probably Hitler).

There's no substance to their position. They operate entirely on the basis of shame, and making it look cool to agree with authority. It's gotten this bad because we didn't do anything about it 50 years ago. Mark my words, lies don't go away on their own (as scientists would like to believe), but rather they become indistinguishable from the truth and guide us all into a blind future devoid of skepticism and thus real creativity.

>>10397925
>When my parents were my age, everyone was scared about Global Cooling
Source?

>As someone with a PhD in physics
Source?

>>10397925
>posts a video of a physicist explaining why climate science is incorrect
I wonder if you would be so enthralled by a climate scientist giving a talk about why solid-state physics is incorrect.

Also, Giaever works for the fucking Heartland Institute who spent decades with Philip Morris trying to bury smoking research and funding research trying to show that smoking has no link with lung cancer. lmao, dude.

>>10397890
they genocided them once, they'll do it again

>>10397957
>Source
Never heard of Global Cooling? It's the lie that Climate Scientist used to launched themselves into fame.
>Source
pic related should suffice. You'll have to trust that I haven't misrepresented my parents.

>>10397988
>Physics as a discipline is thousands of years old and seeks to understand reality at the deepest level.
>Climate science has been around for 50 year and reverses it's position every 20.
Yeah I guess I'd trust the physicist if I had no other information, but otherwise I don't believe things based on authority because I'm not an idiot. I consider the information from both sides. I always do. I've NEVER EVER heard a climate scientist (or anyone defending climate science) address even the most obvious criticisms of climate science. They are not scientists by the standard I was taught. FFS THEY PREDICT THE WEATHER. They claim we will all be dead in a few decades if we don't DO SOMETHING (enter politics). It should be rejected as the fear-mongering fanaticism that it is.

>>10398052
>Never heard of Global Cooling? It's the lie that Climate Scientist used to launched themselves into fame.
Oh I've heard of it, it's something a lot of retarded deniers talk about but never provide any evidence of.

>Physics as a discipline is thousands of years old and seeks to understand reality at the deepest level.
Most physicists agree with the conclusions of climatology, so are you arguing that thousands of years is not enough? I'm confused. Why do you disagree with the majority of physicists?

>Climate science has been around for 50 year and reverses it's position every 20.
Climate science has been around since physics has, the Greeks invented it. And what has it reversed positions on?

> I always do. I've NEVER EVER heard a climate scientist (or anyone defending climate science) address even the most obvious criticisms of climate science.
Like what?

>FFS THEY PREDICT THE WEATHER.
Climate is not weather, you have no idea what you're talking about.

>They claim we will all be dead in a few decades if we don't DO SOMETHING (enter politics)
Who does?

You should be ashamed of yourself, no scientist should lie about other scientists.

>>10395552
>posts graph that ends about a century ago
I'm genuinely curious: what do you get out of posting lies and propaganda on here?

>>10395469
Red pilling people is all science has ever done, starting with geocentrism.

>>10395764
I heard your wife took you to the local glory hole last night and forced you to watch as she sucked two dozen cocks. I also heard she then kissed you deeply, then laughed and handed you the divorce papers.

>>10395510
>muh only showing the last 100 years on every image
#zoomout

>>10397925
Are you saying that the climate science consensus used to be that we'd see global cooling? Cause that would be a lie, and then I'd be forced to ask you why you're lying on here. How did someone manage to get a PhD in physics while remaining so intellectually dishonest?

>>10398115
>Climate is not weather, you have no idea what you're talking about
>He thinks my arguments hinge on the meaning of defined words.

>They claim we will all be dead in a few decades if we don't DO SOMETHING (enter politics)
Stop wasting our time:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/science/2018/12/10/climate-change-was-behind-weather-disasters/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.8a28658f3f8d
https://www.wired.com/story/the-climate-apocalypse-is-now-and-its-happening-to-you/
https://www.cnn.com/2018/12/05/health/climate-change-cop24-who-study/index.html
Literally "millions will die if we don't give more grant money to my research field."

>Most physicists agree with the conclusions of climatology
I'm seen this too. Funny thing though, of all the physicists I've argued with about global warming, I'm the only one who's actually read some CS papers. Physicists aren't immune to politics. They jump on a bandwagon as quickly as everyone else. Read more carefully and stop wasting our time:
>I don't believe things based on authority because I'm not an idiot

>>10398164
>Are you saying that the climate science consensus used to be that we'd see global cooling?
Nope, merely saying that their primary tactic (and source of success) has always been fear-mongering. Glad I could clear that up.

>global warming is real, scientists agree
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jastp.2018.10.020

>>10395466
here is a picture

>>10398177
Welp, I guess it's time to pay my carbon tax.

>>10398172
There is only one axiom in climate science:
1. Millions will die

Corollary: Unless we gets billions more dollars in grant money.

For perspective, we might have cured cancer decades ago if thousands of scientists and trillions of dollars hadn't been invested in this CS. Do you think if the entire world went completely green, climate scientists would just find something else to study? Hell no, and as the need for CS becomes less and less, their fear-mongering will only grow to sustain their emotionally extorted funding.

>>10398173
>merely saying that their primary tactic
Who's tactic exactly? Cause it sounds like you're doing some conflating here.

>>10398172
>>He thinks my arguments hinge on the meaning of defined words.
So what is your argument exactly? FFS THEY PREDICT THE CLIMATE?

>https://www.washingtonpost.com/science/2018/12/10/climate-change-was-behind-weather-disasters/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.8a28658f3f8d
>https://www.wired.com/story/the-climate-apocalypse-is-now-and-its-happening-to-you/
>https://www.cnn.com/2018/12/05/health/climate-change-cop24-who-study/index.html

None of these have scientists claiming we'll all be dead in a few decades.

>Literally "millions will die if we don't give more grant money to my research field."
If you actually read the article it says millions of people die from air pollution from fossil fuel combustion. Do you disagree with that too or is it just climatology that you deny?

>Funny thing though, of all the physicists I've argued with about global warming, I'm the only one who's actually read some CS papers.
Good for you? You mentioned obvious criticisms of climate science that no one has answered. Perhaps you could tell me a few you got from reading these papers? Because I doubt you understood them.

You also failed to provide evidence of a global cooling scare, and failed to provide positions climate science has reversed. I guess the only conclusion is that these claims are false and that you avoided supporting them because you know they're false.

>They jump on a bandwagon as quickly as everyone else.
You certainly swallowed a bunch of false denier memes and jumped on the political bandwagon quickly.

>I don't believe things based on authority because I'm not an idiot
No one asked you to believe anything based on authority, but based on the scientific evidence. You're the one who brought up the opinion of physicists.

>>10398174
respond to this pls

>>10398174
I'm curious why he uses UAH data and not RSS data. The researchers behind RSS found a major error in the satellites' diurnal correction that was causing a large cooling bias. The UAH data has not yet corrected this.

>>10395466
K

>>10395466

>>10395466
This one is from the south pole for all you retards that think the warming periods were somehow limited to Europe.

>>10398274
source? when did they spot this in rss?

>>10398298
Oh i grabbed another greenland chart for that last one. Let me fix that

>>10398289
GISP is not the same as GISP2 and ice cores aren't global, but nice try.

>>10398293
>graph ends in 1855 and is not global

>>10398172
>Literally "millions will die if we don't give more grant money to my research field."
More like "all of humanity will suffer negative consequences unless we decarbonize our energy use."

>>10398298
>another mislabeled graph that doesn't show modern temperature and isn't global

>>10398304
>yet another non-global graph that doesn't show modern temperature

>>10398310
We know the temperature from 1855 to now. And it isn't higher than it was in the warming periods.

>global

The Ice core data correlates with worldwide historical data, pollen trapped in ice, and ice cores on the other fucking end of the planet.

>>10398322
Look on the far left where it says "Estimated current temp"

>>10395466
>Can you red pill me on Climate Change?
It's happening and it's too late to do anything about it. Steps that should have been taken in the 1960s or 1970s weren't and as such damned us.
The war was fought and lost by the previous generations

Climate Change is just the cherry on top of a perfect storm of overpopulation and resource depletion that will definitely end industrial human civilization across most of the planet before the century is out. Likely within your lifetime around the middle of the century assuming the various stresses of it don't kickstart a major war in the meantime.
We're already in the middle of a global mass extinction via the small changes in temperature and we'll be lucky if humanity survives it in the long run.
The key phrase of climate change is "faster than expected" and the varied organizations that monitor climate change are hyper conservative in their estimates
BOE by 2022

>>10398331
Estimated how? Current temp of what?

What they did was say "there has not been temperature change over the last 200 years, therefore current temperature is the same as the end of the graph." It's laughable pseudoscience.

>>10398328
>We know the temperature from 1855 to now. And it isn't higher than it was in the warming periods.
You don't even know what that graph is the temperature of, you lying hack.

Do you understand what the word global means?

>>10398328
Wrong, see >>10398307

>>10398307
Why wouldn't ice core samples from both poles be considered a reliable, if not the most reliable method of determining worldwide climate patterns? Are you really just going to say "ice core temps aren't global"? Why? We know that in the last 10k years entire cities have been swallowed up by rising seas due to warming, and revealed again due to cooling.

We know the Fremont people disappeared because of climate change drying out their land

We can tell that snow pack in the Rockies was deeper 300 years ago and shallower 700 years ago.

All of this coincides with the ice core samples. The burden of proof is on you to convince us that they are not global.

>>10398139
It's from ice cores, dude.
If the snow is not buried and compacted into ice it's not going to make a very good ice core. And you need a decent amount of compaction (and time) before the snow turns to ice.

>>10398361
>Why wouldn't ice core samples from both poles be considered a reliable, if not the most reliable method of determining worldwide climate patterns?
Because they are only two local samples? Why would you consider them a representative sample?

>Are you really just going to say "ice core temps aren't global"? Why?
Because they aren't. It's not that hard to understand.

>We know that in the last 10k years entire cities have been swallowed up by rising seas due to warming, and revealed again due to cooling.
And your point is?

>All of this coincides with the ice core samples.
Why does that matter if two locations are enough to give us the global temperature? So you admit we need other samples? OK, this has already been done in several reconstructions, enjoy.

>>10398361
>The burden of proof is on you to convince us that they are not global.
No, it's not, but nice try.

>>10398382
I would love to dig into the sources for this reconstruction. Can you spare them?

>>10398361
Here's a longer reconstruction.

>>10398393
(dark blue 1000–1991): P.D. Jones, K.R. Briffa, T.P. Barnett, and S.F.B. Tett (1998). "High-resolution Palaeoclimatic Records for the last Millennium: Interpretation, Integration and Comparison with General Circulation Model Control-run Temperatures"

(blue 1000–1980): M.E. Mann, R.S. Bradley, and M.K. Hughes (1999). "Northern Hemisphere Temperatures During the Past Millennium: Inferences, Uncertainties, and Limitations"

(light blue 1000–1965): Crowley and Lowery (2000). "Northern Hemisphere Temperature Reconstruction". Ambio 29: 51-54. Modified as published in Crowley (2000). "Causes of Climate Change Over the Past 1000 Years"

(lightest blue 1402–1960): K.R. Briffa, T.J. Osborn, F.H. Schweingruber, I.C. Harris, P.D. Jones, S.G. Shiyatov, S.G. and E.A. Vaganov (2001). "Low-frequency temperature variations from a northern tree-ring density network"

(light turquoise 831–1992): J. Esper, E.R. Cook, and F.H. Schweingruber (2002). "Low-Frequency Signals in Long Tree-Ring Chronologies for Reconstructing Past Temperature Variability"

(green 200–1980): M.E. Mann and P.D. Jones (2003). "Global Surface Temperatures over the Past Two Millennia"

(yellow 200–1995): P.D. Jones and M.E. Mann (2004). "Climate Over Past Millennia"

(orange 1500–1980): S. Huang (2004). "Merging Information from Different Resources for New Insights into Climate Change in the Past and Future"

(red 1–1979): A. Moberg, D.M. Sonechkin, K. Holmgren, N.M. Datsenko and W. Karlén (2005). "Highly variable Northern Hemisphere temperatures reconstructed from low- and high-resolution proxy data"

(dark red 1600–1990): J.H. Oerlemans (2005). "Extracting a Climate Signal from 169 Glacier Records"

/sci/ has made you all too cynical. It's true that for lay audiences there's a lot of misleading information and arguments being made to suggest that climate change is either not happening at all or not anthropogenic. All you needed to point out is that the overwhelming majority of the data, and pretty much the entirety of the reliable data, shows that climate change is real and manmade.

All you had to do.

>>10398368
Okay well what's the point in just posting ice core data that ends before the human caused warming really gets going as an argument that the human caused warming isn't happening (or that we don't know if it is)?

>believing in climate change
>not knowing thermometers drift with the gravitational constant

>>10398853
>drift with the gravitational constant
>drift
>constant

>>10395469
Nigger

Science is the redpill. Science continually blows the fuck out of peoples' preconceptions about complex issues and tears down every spiritual value they have. Copernicus and Galileo were redpillers. Darwin was a redpiller. Their theories still cause problems today as people cant accept that humans aren't the centre of the universe and that humans aren't divine creatures and that humans aren't all equal and magical and valuable. Saying that a human is an object to be examined just like everything else in science is literally the most offensive thing you can say today. Science since its conception has stripped away all the spiritual veneer that people use to form their values and feel good.

A better understanding of neuroscience and genes will allow scientists to look at humans as the biological computers every living thing is.

I cant wait for the outrage to come when China starts becoming more dominant and conclusively proves niggers are genetically retarded.

>>10395711
Wow

What's more likely? Small scale chinese homeopathy supplement companies are trying to make a profit or BIG PHARMA and DOCTORS are trying to repress this natural medicine to protect their artifical chemical sales?

Big companies always bad and chinese homeopathy WORKS.

>>10398889
>supplement companies are like scientists
Why are you here moron? Go back to your containment board >>>/pol/

>>10398894
I see big pharma has already brainwashed you.

It's a shame you're a slave to big corporations.

>>10398853
>what is glaciers melting

>>10395510
>>10395548
>>10395555

This needs more attention

>>10397604
>>10397610
Blaised and Greg pilled

>>10397925
Global cooling was a minority opinion during the 70s. A meta analysis of studies conducted during that time show that even though the climate was getting colder at that time the overwhelming majority of climate scientists were still predicting an overall warming trend for the future.

The media is to blame for any global cooling panic, not the scientists. As always if you did any research you would know this but you conflate scepticism with intelligence so here we are.

>>10395519
Is there anyone else than potholer where I can get information about climate change from on YouTube?

Why do people on 4channel keep misusing the term centrist?

>>10395466
It's proven that climate is slowly warming overtime. Leftists wish to assert that it's human caused, but it hasn't been fully proven yet.

Make no mistake, the Left doesn't believe in CC anymore than the right does. It's just a platform for them to push more taxes and migrants on the West. They REFUSE to adopt nuclear energy despite their belief that climate change will end the world.

>>10399303
>It's proven that climate is rapidly warming overtime.
ftfy

>Scientists have shown that it's human caused, but it nothing in science is fully proven.
ftfy

>>10399303
hilarious meme.
but lets not forget that more often than not the right also wants migrants for a number of reasons. you need to work on your hypothesis.

It's happening and it's definitely manmade. Will it be the end of the world? Probably not but don't underestimate how much it's gonna make life miserable for everyone involved. Solutions are definitely being implemented but it'll take time and it'll be difficult because would rather argue over schematics than trying to come up with alternative solutions.

>>10397904
and oil is forever?

>>10398052
>muh PhD in physics
you studied lasing. that doesn't mean you know shit about climatology, as exemplified nicely by how you apparently believe climatology is about predicting weather.

took me about 5 seconds to find his dissertation.
>https://repository.lib.ncsu.edu/bitstream/handle/1840.20/35772/etd.pdf
congrats on your degree, you magical dumbfuck.

>>10399522
B-but I have a degree in mechanical engineering and I know everything there is to know about petroleum engineering because both fields have engineering in the name. It just makes sense.

>>10397890
What do you think is easier, getting the whole world to stop driving gas cars and eating beef, or sending open border liberal politicians to the guillotine?

>>10397629
its over bro
venus-tier by 2020

>>10399532
Once you send the politicians to the guillotine then you would have to also send their constituents which would take some time and effort. The price would be an authoritarian state and a shit ton of murder and then at the end you would still have climate change and a war on your southern border with few allies to help you because you turned to tyranny.

>>10395513
How many gallons of nigger-semen do you swallow on an annual basis?

>>10399583
0

>>10399587
rounding down i see

>>10399588
I rounded to the nearest picolitre.

Climate Change based on 99.9999% of scientists with PhDs is absolutely happening as I type this, the question is how much is being caused by humans? The answer almost doesn't matter because the solution is the same. The solution is for us to stop all pollution of greenhouse gases across the board. Even if someone were to think that humans aren't having any impact on climate change, is it really reasonable to believe that humans are helping with climate change by pulluting the atmosphere even more? At the very least we are making climate change worse, so why not change what we can and if it still happens at least we did everything we could to stop it and it wasn't our own doing. Why choose to self destruct? That's what cowards do because they place more importance on current money/profit than they do on human life/future generations of humans. Just my 2 cents lol you may carry on how you wish.

>>10399635
>the question is how much is being caused by humans?
anthropogenic contribution is much larger than natural variation

>>10399647
I completely agree! I was simply playing devil's advocate to prove to those who don't believe this is happening that it doesn't matter if humans are causing it or not, why would you choose to add fuel to the already burning fire by not doing anything to solve the climate change problem.

>>10399656
But what if we make the world a better place for nothing?

>>10399661
Well what do you mean for nothing?

A very warm climate is bad for humans but perfect for lizards, think about it, who will profit?

>>10395552
>We should be more worried about pollution and plastic.
an Ice Age would be terrible too

https://electroverse.net/professor-valentina-zharkova-breaks-her-silence-and-confirms-super-grand-solar-minimum/

>>10399855
>Ice Age

oh bullshit, you're like a 600 lbs pizza gobbling fatfreak worried about losing too much weight

https://youtu.be/ztninkgZ0ws?t=9m50s

"winter is coming" source: game of thrones
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gdRXY1Vly2M

>>10397904
The U.S. spends $26 billion annually subsidizing fossil fuels.

... on top of that, the trillions of dollars wasted and thousands of lives lost in Iraq Wars I & II.

>>10398303
https://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/JCLI-D-16-0768.1

>>10398303
https://youtu.be/LiZlBspV2-M?t=3m50s


Sensitivity of Satellite-Derived Tropospheric Temperature Trends to the Diurnal Cycle Adjustment
Carl A. Mears and Frank J. Wentz
Remote Sensing Systems, Santa Rosa, California
(Manuscript received 23 October 2015, in final form 22 February 2016)

>>10399982
Basically the young are going to have to rise up

And they are, finally. Have no mercy on these boomers

>>10396458
Bakey bakey, kike

>>10400445
People like you are the reason there are climate change deniers.

>>10395711
>implying the oil cartel wouldn't have the resources or motivation to control both sides of the debate to steer it where their agenda suits

>>10395466
ayy lmao

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/End_time#Linear_cosmology

>>10395466

There is no :"Humans advanced GW for 96.43% in last 150 years, with 3% increments yearly." document.

But,it is proven that a lot of human industry reflects badly on Ozone layer,
also we have crossed the point of no return, this why they doubled down because
now only really high leap in technology could help.

I'm old enough to know difference in temperature(4 vastly distinguishable seasons turned into 2, softer ,shorter winter=hard summer), it is a real thing and we DO feel it.

Hurricanes,tsunami's and other really weird weather stuff happens really frequently on places they never happened in last ~20-30 years, it could be totally coincidental but I doubt it.
i'm afraid that old generation will die of, new generation wont even notice things changed(except that every year is more and more warmer until Earth will literally be inhabitable , and we are not talking about 1000 of years, we are talking about 50-150 years).

I have an tinfoil theory : biggest fuckup was nuclear testing in '50,'60&'70, literally some scientist ran thru hallways of Pentagon/Kremlin and crying at generals:"You just made an hole in atmosphere , we don't know how to fix it , you have to stop, you literally cant drop another!"

Basically baby-boomers ruined life on Earth, figured it out and went partying , other generations forgot and here we are..

>>10399065
Faced and leg pilled

>>10400703
They already did this. They pushed back for as long as they could. Since then, their power is waning. They are not going to be able to stop us

>>10400646
>People like you are the reason there are climate change deniers.

Thats retarded. Everybody knew deep down that the time would come they would have to pay the

>>10399664
What if we prevent air pollution, stop deforestation, preserve the climate for wilflife, and nobody makes a single dollar more than their fellow man?

>>10395469
Nigger

>>10398274
>>>10398174
>I'm curious why he uses UAH data and not RSS data. The researchers behind RSS found a major error in the satellites' diurnal correction that was causing a large cooling bias. The UAH data has not yet corrected this.
> major PROBLEM in the satellites' temperature data fulfill pre-determined "science" of massive warming
ftfy


Dr. Roy Spencer foretasted that RSS TLT data will be altered :

“I expect there will soon be a revised TLT product from RSS which shows enhanced warming, too.

Here’s what I’m predicting:

1) neither John Christy nor I will be asked to review the paper

2) it will quickly sail through peer review (our UAH V6 paper is still not in print nearly 1 year after submission)

3) it will have many authors, including climate model people and the usual model pundits (e.g. Santer), which will supposedly lend legitimacy to the new data adjustments.

Let’s see how many of my 3 predictions come true.

-Roy”

P.S. Going after Spencer with ad hominem is not a counter argument.
P.P.S. The adjustments were ad hoc and not justified; fudged to fit the models
http://notrickszone.com/2018/08/19/rss-suspected-of-serious-data-doping-german-scientists-say-values-fudged-to-fit-models/

>>10398382
Oh noes! I spliced high frequency instrument data onto low frequency proxy data. Instant hockey stick.
Sorry that we Climate "Scientists" aren't very numerate.

>>10400058
Pal reviewed rubbish:
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/03/02/the-karlization-of-global-temperature-continues-this-time-rss-makes-a-massive-upwards-adjustment/

From Drs. Spener and Christy:
The paper is for MT, not LT…but I think we can assume that changes in one will be reflected in the other when Mears completes their analysis.

From what little we have looked at so far, it appears that they did not correct for spurious warming in NOAA-14 MSU relative to NOAA-15 AMSU…see their Fig. 7c. They just leave it in.

Since this spurious warming is near the middle of the whole time period, this shifts the second half of the satellite record warmer when NOAA-14 MSU (the last in the MSU series) is handed off to NOAA-15 AMSU (the first in the AMSU series).

Why do we think NOAA-14 MSU is at fault?

1) AMSU is supposed to have a “Cadillac” calibration design (that’s the term a NASA engineer, Jim Shiue, used when describing to me the AMSU design, which he was involved in).

2) NOAA-14 MSU requires a large correction for the calibrated TB increasing with instrument temperature as the satellite drifts into a different orbit. The NOAA-15 AMSU requires no such correction…and it wasn’t drifting during the period in question anyway.

So, it looks like they decided to force good data to match bad data. Sound familiar?

>>10399067
Rubbish. Are you capable of saying something that isn't a John Cook paraphrase?

285 Papers on Global Cooling/Weakness of CO2 warming:
http://notrickszone.com/2016/09/13/massive-cover-up-exposed-285-papers-from-1960s-80s-reveal-robust-global-cooling-scientific-consensus/

Examples:

Cimorelli and House, 1974

“Between 1880 and 1940 a net [global] warming of about 0.6°C occurred, and from 1940 to the present our globe experienced a net cooling of 0.3°C. … [I]t has since been found that the rate of temperature increase decreases with increasing CO2 and increases with increasing particulates. Therefore, global particulate loading is of foremost concern. … [A]n increase in man-made global particulates by a factor of 4.0 will initiate an ice-age. In order that we safeguard ourselves and future generations from a self-imposed ice-age it is necessary that we effectively monitor global concentrations of particulate matter.”

Angell and Korshover, 1978

“[T]he 1976 surface temperature equated the global record for the lowest temperature set in 1964; but even so the trend in global temperature since 1965 has been small compared to the 0.5°C decrease during 1960–65.”

Schultz, 1972

“The nine-banded armadillos (Dasypus novemcinctus) have been moving northward in the Great Plains region from the late 1800s to the 1950s but now seem to be retreating from their lately acquired northern range. The armadillos have a nontypical homoiothermic blood system which makes them fairly vulnerable to cold climates.”

Wendland, 1977

“The cooling from about 1950 to 1974 is ~0.3°C (Brinkmann, 1976). Moran (1975) suggests that the recent drought of peninsular Florida is largely due to decreased frequencies of tropical storms, associated with the general atmospheric and oceanic cooling since about 1940 (Wahl and Bryson, 1975).”

>>10395469
based and realismpilled

>>10395514
watch out. [[they]] gonna call for more dirty coal now.

>>10397925
>fear mongering frauds
>tries to make people think """"having"""" a PhD makes him an authority in everything
Gotta love these elaborate NEET LARPs, or the full off-the-med schizo delusions: so full of bullshit.

>>10395642
1.) there is no climate change
2.) there is climate change but it's not human-made
3.) human-made climate change is real but it only hits the shit hole countries anyway, it's actually good for us <-----
4.) it's real but we're fucked anyway with all these assholes around, nothing you can do
5.) geo-engineering will fix it soon, no need to change anything now
6.) ok, geo-engineering made it worse but now we learned and can stop it(it's too late)
7.) fucking leftists destroyed the world, as expected

>>10395552
>Are humans responsible? Nobody fucking knows and everybody saying otherwise is lying.
The best available data suggests we are. Saying "WE DONT KNOW" is technically true, but insisting that humans have absolutely nothing to do with it is pretty disingenuous.

>>10397398
That's absolutely true, but there's not an already-established trillion dollar industry with personal operators whose investments are literally generational.

>>10398052
>>10398172
>>10398202
>guy has a criminal record
Ayyy lmao. Not too surprised to be honest. Someone who criticizes """authority"""" while trying to pass off a PhD as the justification for bullshit conspiracies/accusations is not likely someone to take seriously.


RIP north carolina state producing loon spooners like these though.

>>10402249
0.) human-made climate change is real but is only significant in the form of geoengineering, by the method of high voltage transmitter arrays combined with heavy metal aerosols

It's been discussed for decades. We need to stop it. NOW!

>>10402271
>>>/x/

>>10402235
>Cimorelli and House, 1974
This paper says that it warmed more since the industrial revolution than cooled, and says that the cooling was due to large aerosol emissions. Well guess what happened. Governments around the world agreed to regulate aerosols and the cooling stopped! So for you to use this as an argument that global warming is a hoax and that we shouldn't regulate CO2 is fucking retarded. You literally started with the worst possible example of a "global cooling scare" you could have chosen. Are you illiterate?

The rest are talking about the same short cooling period. So thank you for admitting there was no global cooling scare and that regulation of atmospheric drivers is necessary.

>>10398177
>worse than global nuclear war

>>10402220
>>10402228
It's too bad Spencer and Christy initially tried to scare us with a global cooling hoax and now switched to global warming wenthat didn't work. So according to your logic we can't listen to a word they say.

>>10396136
But how can you assign a cause like climate change to a regular natural phenomena like a wildfire or hurricane?

>>10402734
>Shills
Shills are very real though, it's just /pol/ overusing the term.
>>/g/?task=search2&search_text=mbp&search_op=op&
Scroll down a lil bit, you'll see the "Gravitating" posts

>>10402837
Pyramids are real too.

Iunno anon.
Like, have you ever SEEN a pyramid?
Frankly it sounds like hokus pokus to me

>>10402773
runaway global warming would certainly trigger a nuclear war, India got nukes and it will be first to see extreme negative impacts of warming

>>10402261
>but there's not an already-established trillion dollar industry with personal operators whose investments are literally generational
renewable energy

>>10397627
I'm pretty sure the proportion of people who use the term "redpill" who are literal Nazis is very small. Even /pol/ contains probably a minority of unironic Nazis.

>>10395466
you cannot change the chemical composition of a gas without altering its thermodynamic properties. humans are altering the chemical composition of the atmosphere at a fast rate.

co2 traps heat in earths atmosphere.

it is extremely difficult, if not impossible to develop accurate long term prediction models for regional climate variation as a fuction of atmosphere composition.

tldr, humans are altering the atmosphere which will inevitably change the environment. take all “predictions” with a grain of salt.

>>10398310
>>10398313
>>10398322
cool collection of meme images, now post some links

>>10403334
Ironic nazis are still nazis.

>>10404733
>pretending to be something cause you think it's absurd and therefore funny means you literally are that thing
It actually hurts my head to try to imagine what sort of immensely stunted intellect you must have to hold a view THIS ridiculous.

>>10403334
/pol/ is mostly Russian shills,

>>10404892
Spreading a hateful ideology "as a joke" is not a fucking joke.

>>10405383
It is a joke. A bad joke, and not really funny, but it's written as a joke.

The issue is things like sarcasm are harder to communicate via online text.

>>10399559
When the hard times come the do gooders will disappear almost entirely.

>>10398163
population 1900: 1.6 bn
population 2000: over 6 bn

Reminder that we are living in a short break in an ice age and human civilization was only able to develop due to climate becoming warmer 10k years ago.

People using few centuries of data are completely fucking retarded.

>>10395642
Based Chile

>>10395498
Kek, 0.05 W/m^2 natural, 2.29 W/m^2 anthropogenic.

Total change 1.1 degree

So if we didnt do nothing, the earth would have had less than 0.03 degrees in temperature change?

ffs there was a solar global maximum in the 20th century.
Who believes this crap?

>>10404699
Links to what mongoloid?

>>10405460
>human civilization was only able to develop due to climate becoming warmer 10k years ago.
So even more warming outside of the range humans and the ecosystems we rely on have adapted to for millions of years is good? LOL. Ironically, the carbon we're currently rapidly releasing into the atmosphere was sequestered millions of years ago, cooling the atmosphere and allowing for the evolution of mammals like us. Gee, undoing that can't possibly be bad right?

What significance does the temperature hundreds of millions of years ago have for us today? Zero.

>>10405701
Kel, we're approaching a solar minimum and it hasn't made a dent in the warming trend. Solar forcing is miniscule compared to The change in greenhouse effect.

>>10405735
There is also zero proof that humans are responsible for current warming. Are we helping a bit? Probably. Is this going to kill us all? No.

Climate needs to be 10 degrees warmer to cause mass extinctions. Even according to most radical pro climate change models this is simply not happening.

Southern hemisphere is going to suffer a bit but seriously who cares? If anything we in the northern hemisphere should be happy about climate killing our potential enemies.

Ice age is coming back in 10,000 years anyways and we should be fully capable of living in space by then. What we need to concentrate about is stopping polluting environment becasue this is going to hit us for real unlike climate change that will maybe be a problem in thousands of years.

>>10405842
>a bunch of baseless and obviously bullshit assertions
Do you actually expect anyone to take this crap seriously?

>>10405847
Most of humanity does including US president.

>>10405855
No, they really don't. You might be thinking of old, rich people with an agenda

>>10405842
>There is also zero proof that humans are responsible for current warming.
There is a massive amount of proof, including direct observation of radiative forcing from CO2. You have no idea what your talking about.

>Is this going to kill us all?
No one said it would, nice strawman.

>Climate needs to be 10 degrees warmer to cause mass extinctions.
We're already in one, it's called the Holocene.

Why are you just making shit up?

>>10405855
You basically just post a bunch of lies and unsubstantiated bullshit and then claim that most of humanity believes what you're saying. To call your comments laughable would be an understatement.

>>10397925
the split between cooling and warming papers back then was about 30:70 so no we haven't changed our minds