/sci/ - Science & Math

Caused and accelerated by humans.

>>10766747
>accelerated by humans
Why would the planet be warming naturally without anthropogenic sources?

Caused by humans and accelerated by retards posting climate change threads on /sci/

>>10766747
whatever it is it is for sure gonna be an expensive affair and will greatly impact the global economy

>>10766770
>>10766778
>>10766802
>Caused by humans
>Humans

What is:
>Volcanism
>Milankovitch cycles
>Plate tectonics

>>10766906
97% sure the OP is referring to the current warming trend.

>>10766906
Has volcanic activity seriously increased over the past 100 years?
Has the orbital eccentricity of the earth changed significantly in the past 100 years?
>plate tectonics
what about them?

>>10766747
>just accelerated by humans
I detect a freshly renewed press to an old meme in the AGW denial strategy. Already the grotesque machinery of professional trolldom has its empty cans hinged upon it >>10766906 to the same old jeering effect.

ask yourself before posting here: what will this accomplish?

winning a few /sci/ lurkers over to reason? really? these threads are for republican climate denier shills and their uneducated sheeple.

i never post in /sci/ climate change threads because they are basically /pol/. the anons who defend sanity are admirable, but maybe, just maybe, it is better to sage and ignore the poltard retards who spam anti-science shit

>>10767528
I really just try my best to make retards feel unwelcome on this board.

>>10766906
>self portrait

>>10766747
Caused by geoengineering / chemtrails.

I thought that the current warming trend started 12 or 13 thousand years ago. How could humans have started it? Are we making it worse? I think so

>>10767828
>Well you see if you go back a billion years there's actually a cooling trend!

>>10766747
>CLIMATE CHANGE
not science or math

>>10767870
climate change is part of climatology

denialtards don't know what science is

>>10766747
without humans Earth would be in an ice age

>caused by humans or just accelerated by humans?
What do you even mean by this question? Many things, including but not limited to human activity, can affect the climate. That is extremely obvious. Human activity is one of the things currently affecting the climate.

>>10766747
>another global warming hoax thread

>>10767991
Fuck off shill

>>10766871
lol boomer
>>10767514
>professional shills are after me
>>10767528
poisoning the well
>>10767544
commencing circlejerk
>>10767964
unproven claim that Al Gore never made

>>10767996
>i don’t know atmospheric physics or anything about ecology but feel comfortable denying empirically verified climate change
very cool

>>10766747
CLIMATE CHANGE IS CAUSED BY HIVE COLLAPSE
CLIMATE CHANGE IS CAUSED BY HIVE COLLAPSE
CLIMATE CHANGE IS CAUSED BY HIVE COLLAPSE
CLIMATE CHANGE IS CAUSED BY HIVE COLLAPSE

>>10766747
439-450= -11
332-338= -6
29-17= +12
Humans are the only contributing factor

>>10767964
nope, without humans still 5000+ years away
with humans not for 50k years at least
https://youtu.be/ztninkgZ0ws?t=10m

>>10768079
Actually most damage to climate is done by cutting down trees, humans do this at an alarming rate. To save climate we need to stop mining coal, stop mining tar sand, and start a massive reforestation program.

>>10766919
volcanoes don't warm, they cool
>but then they cant warm the planet durrr
they're not warming it now, they were cooling it then, when we started our modern accurate measurements.
Krakatau, novarupta etc...

>>10768190
dis

>>10769864
Volcanoes cause warming in the long term. They release both CO2 and sulfur gases. Sulfur gases temporarily cause cooling, but have a shorter residency time than CO2 in the atmosphere.

>>10768190
co2 will reforest everything, keep your ac on and buy an suv to save the planet.

>>10766747

https://www.iceagenow.info/climate-change-the-not-so-hidden-agenda-of-totalitarian-control/

>>10769963
https://skepticalscience.com/argument.php
#44
c3 & c4 type plants either can't use the extra co2, or can't use it because of the heat.
Droughts and wildfires on top of that.

I wonder when alarmists will start to capitulate.

>>10771098
They won't capitulate, they will just say praise themselves for what they've done to help the planet

>>10771098
>6 months snapshot, still showing +0.6C anomaly

140 year trend
https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/long-term-warming-trend-continued-in-2017-nasa-noaa

>>10766747
I'm gonna largely stay out of this to avoid turning this thread more into /pol/ than it already is but I do wanna ask one thing:
Do we actually know how much carbon dioxide (or other climate gasses for that matter) correlates to how much of a temperature increase?

>>10771205
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth%27s_energy_budget

>>10771205
based self-aware /pol/tard

>>10766747
accelerated by humans


But who gives a fuck

>>10766747
>implying correlation implies causation
we have data that supports that there is a positive correlation of greehouse gas emissions with deviations of the expected increase of earth temperature
then again, we also have a positive correlation between drinking water and dying...

>>10766747
Both. But does it really matter? The problem is real, and has to be solved.

>>10771438
We also have empirical physical evidence for the reason increasing greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere CAUSES increases in global temperature. So to provide a better metaphor we know that not drinking water is correlated to dying quickly. And we know the physical mechanisms that explain why extreme dehydration causes death. In other words you should stop consuming all fluids because correlation does no equal causation and by your logic you'll be fine. After all science has been subverted by water companies so you can't trust them!

>>10771438
>implying correlation implies causation
This is the most pseudo intellectual answer. Black people commit more crime b-but correlation does not imply causation! You guys are just as pathetic as SJWs you despise

Well, fact doesn't care about your feelings.
1. Human have increased CO2 in the atmosphere, undeniable fact based on 12C/13C ratio
2. Increased CO2 caused tropospheric warming AND stratospheric cooling. Increase radiative forcing is the only mechanism capable of causing both.

>>10771517
>I wonder when alarmists will start to capitulate.
never; when the Little Ice Age will be in full swing they'll still blame climate change

>>10771624
>increasingly nervous man predicts global cooling any time now for the 208359700592785th time this century

>>10766747
Or just natural

>>10771655
https://xkcd.com/1732/
NOOOOOOO
FUNNY LEDDIT MAN SAID IT WAS OUR FAULT
I NEED THE SHAME

But how does the temperature go back down again every time?

>>10766747
The increase in global temperature is caused primarily by the heat given off from burning fuel, rather than increased thermal retention from the carbon dioxide released.

>>10771655
It's incredible how misleading you can make a graph when you zoom it out 400k years, imply antarctic temperature is global temperature, and label an ice sample from 1950 as present.

>>10771690
Stay in school kids

>>10771655
>>10771703
actually looking at the source data that spike at +1.33C labeled present is 397 years old.

>>10771684
normally changes in orbital eccentricity, axial tilt, and precession which slightly increase and decrease the amount of solar radiation the earth absorbs over 100,000 year periods are the largest influencers of climate. All this changes pretty quick when atmospheric CO2 magically start spiking. Then forcings from GHGs become more dominant especially over the short term. As you can see from the graph orbital forcing take thousands of years to have a significant effect.

>>10771122
Gee I’ll bet that data from 140 years ago is perfectly accurate )as long as its “interpreted” correctly.

>>10771703
>scale is admittedly geologic time
>1950 somehow not 'present'

>>10771703
It’s incredible how we can ignore the warming spike 120,000 years ago.

>>10771794

>>10771730
More like 1600
>if you ignore all recent warming there's no problem!
genius.

>>10771798
How about you compute the rate of change and tell me how it compares to current warming?

The better question to ask is how the Grand Solar Minimum is going to affect the climate.

>>10772540
>Grand Solar Minimum
anyone using this term is guaranteed to not understand anything about climate or the evidence for AGW