/sci/ - Science & Math

>The retraction of the article came on the same day that the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change released its latest report on the impacts warming on oceans and ice-covered regions

How do warmers sleep at night?

>>11021736
>"Despite the revised uncertainties, our method remains valid and provides an estimate of ocean warming that is independent of the ocean data underpinning other approaches."

>>11021714
When I'm a scientist shit's gonna be so real. I haven't given up yet man. It's just time and more time and more time and with every second more heinous shit goes down. I can help. I swear man.

>the Arctic will be ice free in 2016
>the UK will have Siberian climate by 2020
> get a nobel prize for peace for it

>>11021714
>>11021829
When I get to my scientist stage I'm gonna spell this shit out real fuckin slow for every dumbass denier

>>11021830
yes, I do deny the retarded and ridiculous claims made by Al Gore's nobel prize winning documentary

>>11021836
whatever, global warming is bad and it's human caused is my point
idk the solution, all the solutions are either shit or super shit
so just like feed bad

>>11021842
You understand the things that Al Gore was saying there wasn't in any way out of the mainstream. All of them were saying this stuff. You can find quotes from Jim Hanson and the like saying pretty much the same shit. They turned out to be laughably wrong in an embarrassing way.

So if you see a pattern of lies and ridiculous claims over and over from one side, what is your natural assumption going to be? Believe these people? Just because they have the media and establishment on their side, propagandizing young children in the classroom?

I've never been able to just suck the shit served to me by the elite, I've always been a bit of a rebel. Would rather die than conform.

>>11021852
We should make decisions based on what the science says, so media figures and politicians don't concern me. Provide citations for published work which made predictions which have proven to be lies or ridiculous in any way. Then maybe we can have a productive conversation.

>>11021842
Protip: you won't get that far in science if you fall into correlation equals causation mindset.

>>11021889
I hope you're not implying that the causative relationship between human emissions and global warming isn't causative

>>11021889
you don't understand science, correlation never equals causation but causation is never in reach anyways
look, humans are emitting CO2 into the atmosphere
CO2 traps IR radiation
Preventing radiation from the earth's surface also prevents radiative cooling
this is *simple* physics, the correlation vs causation only applies when the causation is unclear
you would have solid footing for that argument in the fucking 30s or some shit Mr Trump or whoever you are

>>11021895
>CO2 traps IR radiation
Yeah and also helps green areas thrive. That is where the Greenhouse effect name comes from.
>>11021895
>this is *simple* physics, the correlation vs causation only applies when the causation is unclear
You (and most of the general public) are under the assumption that it is simple.
If you actually took the time to study everything related to what you just cited instead of eating what the media spoonfeeds you daily, you would see that its a much more complicated topic and there is no settled science.

>>11021956
nah the basics are pretty simple, actually providing meaningful useful predictions is incredibly difficult, fortunately modern climatology is pretty fucking good.

>>11021956
>If you actually took the time to study everything
LOL COME ON NOW ANON DON'T BE MEAN AND MAKE THE LAZY IGNORANT RETARD LEARN

>>11021972
>fortunately modern climatology is pretty fucking good.
How the fuck can you say that when everyone in the field of climatology is spewing their own horseshit hypothesis of what's happening and what's going to happen? On top of fear mongering like parasites.

>>11021988
the irony is palpable.

>>11021956
Bro you're way out of depth, I'm not some random retard though I act like one

>>11022001
As my image shows modern climatology is providing accurate meaningful predictions like only proper empirically based science can.

>>11022006
>As my image shows modern climatology is providing accurate meaningful predictions
>predictions
look again at your graph and where it ends.

>>11022006
>>11022008
And also, a prediction is only made accurate when it happens. Which means there have been accurate predictions. There are currently no accurate predictions because once a prediction is either debunked or proven right, it ceases to be a prediction.

>>11022006
Yeah, that's predicted past.

>>11022008
that's entirely intentional, it's a graph of past models compared to present temperature observations to show exactly how accurate it was.
Now have a more recent, model.
Note: most uncertainty comes from the impossibility of predicting human emissions. Each different scenario makes different assumptions about the level of GHGs emitted by humans.

>>11021972
>I'll post the same graph in every thread, then people will start agreeing with me

But also,
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-4651742/2020-deadline-avert-climate-catastrophe.html
http://content.usatoday.com/communities/ondeadline/post/2009/12/gore-new-study-sees-nearly-ice-free-arctic-summer-ice-cap-as-early-as-2014/1#.XZLV20YzZPb
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2005/oct/12/naturaldisasters.climatechange1
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2004/feb/22/usnews.theobserver

>>11022006
>>11022008
>>11022014
BASICALLY, ANON, WHAT THE FUCK DO YOU THINK IS GOING TO HAPPEN LOL TELL ME TELL ME TELL ME

>>11021842
>global warming is bad
that doesn't sound like science to me
>>11021988
kek
>>11022005
>i was only pretending to be retarded
>>11022020
sharpie in pooper

>>11022019
so are you going to post actual citations or shitty newspaper links? Try again.

>>11021956
>Yeah and also helps green areas thrive. That is where the Greenhouse effect name comes from.
LOL! Good one - I actually snorted!

>>11022014
You do a good job predicting what I'm about to tell this dummy. But you tell it better.

>>11022018
>Note: most uncertainty comes from the impossibility of predicting human emissions
holy fuck why are we even having this conversation? No, you're right. I'm ending it here. You're a fucking retard.

>>11022030
https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2016/carbon-dioxide-fertilization-greening-earth/
https://phys.org/news/2019-06-urban-pollution-formation-aerosols-amazon.html
https://www.climatedepot.com/2018/09/01/study-rising-co2-levels-greening-earth-equivalent-to-two-times-the-continental-usa/
https://phys.org/news/2016-04-co2-fertilization-greening-earth.html

>>11022031
Cheers /b/ro!

>>11022038
because if we listen to retards like you and the GOP RCP 8.5 here we come. While if we actually take action and reduce emissions RCP 4.5 or lower is still very achievable. I'm not sure why this is difficult for you to grasp.

>>11022042
olololololololol rekt

>>11021881

>The media and politicians don't matter, just the facts in question.

I'm sure you agree that fertilizer runoff is terrible. It kills fish, poisons runoff and makes algal bloom. The science is absolutely rock solid, nobody doubts this. And so you'll agree that we need to completely phase out all fertilizer use by 2030, in the largest economic transformation in all time. We'll convert all food production to organic, start a planet wide birth-control and rationing program. All meat production, tobacco and alchohol will end. We'll need to mobilise a large number of urban workers and send them to the fields. The fate of the world depends on it.

What's that? You doubt our dire predictions of apocalypse that we've been using to gather support for these policies? Show that we're wrong in our arcane scientific papers that we publish, prove that fertiliser runoff DOESN'T cause algal bloom. See, you can't. Problem solved.

All of the scientific predictions are accurate but mostly useless. They just don't justify the response that the media is demanding. If you've ever read an IPCC report, you'll know how cagey they are about actually specifying the risks quantitatively. They say things will get worse, but don't say how much.

https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/ar5_wgII_spm_en.pdf

Meanwhile the media has hyped everything to the point where life is supposed to end in 10-15 years, terrifying children.

>>11022042
Ok now this is hilarious, this is the level of ignorance we're dealing with here.

>>11022046
What's difficult for me to understand is how climate works. And i'd like to understand, but all i'm getting from you is fear mongering nonsense all having to do with "predictions" that may or may not come true depending on a FUCKING PLETHORA OF VARIABLES

>>11021972
Do you know what a finite element analysis is? If you do, please give the estimated predictive accuracy on a very simple material science application (example, the thermal performance of a metal rod of known composition) Engineers will understand where I’m going with this...

Climate scientists think their climate modeling (which ignores 99.9999% of the actual system’s characteristics and compositions at current state, much less precious states at t=0-n for any n) can predict global temperatures to an accuracy acceptable enough to dictate global policy.

What’s more infuriating is that they have the audacity to ask skeptics to falsify unfalsifiable studies.

>>11022050
It's not even possible to sustain the population on without artificial fertilizer, of you vegan fuckers want shit to happen you better start convincing people.to stop breeding and leave climate change to the smart people

>>11022050
I've read quite a bit of AR5 and it paints a pretty clear picture, if you knew anything about agriculture you would understand just how sensitive it is.

>>11022051
>lol can you believe these idiots they're all sheep i'm the only true free thinker

>>11022056
The variables that matter are under human control at this point in the game. We control if the predictions come true or not.

>>11022062
The guy who thinks the greenhouse effect is named as such because plants are green is sure some kind of thinker...

>>11022066
>Greenhouse
Was that so difficult for you anon? Do you need something else?

>>11022066
But you know what a greenhouse is right? You know what they do right?

>>11022064
>We control if the predictions come true or not.
We control what we understand. We don't understand how climate works. We have no control over the climate.

>The guy who thinks the greenhouse effect is named as such because plants are green is sure some kind of thinker...

fucking weak bait, confirmed troll. i had a good tiem while it lasted.

>>11022070
A greenhouse (also called a glasshouse, or, if with sufficient heating, a hothouse) is a structure with walls and roof made chiefly of transparent material, such as glass, in which plants requiring regulated climatic conditions are grown.[1] These structures range in size from small sheds to industrial-sized buildings. A miniature greenhouse is known as a cold frame. The interior of a greenhouse exposed to sunlight becomes significantly warmer than the external ambient temperature, protecting its contents in cold weather.

>The interior of a greenhouse exposed to sunlight becomes significantly warmer than the external ambient temperature

> exposed to sunlight becomes significantly warmer

>significantly warmer

>>11022077
STOP FEEDING THE GOD DAMN TROLL THERE IS NO MORE VALUE TO BE HAD FROM THIS DISCUSSION AT THIS TIEM. COME BACK LATER

>>11022056
>"predictions" that may or may not come true depending on a FUCKING PLETHORA OF VARIABLES
Let me give you a hint, there are no perfect predictions, there are no perfect models. The earth operates on geological timescales so the effect mankind may or may not have on climate is yet to be fully understood.

>>11022075
>We control what we understand. We don't understand how climate works. We have no control over the climate.

citation needed, humans are currently the most significant drivers of climate period.

>>11022082
That's like saying a meter may or may not be 100 cm. What fucking planet do you live on asshole?

>>11022085
it's a troll gettin it's kicks /b/ro, feed with caution.

>>11022081
>Noooooo stop the discussion my feelings are hurt because my belief system is being challenged

>>11022090

>>11022081
There's rarely any value in climate threads period, as long as it's obvious I'm taking bait, and anyone who denies such simple science is an ignorant troll not welcome on /sci/ I've done my part.

>>11022098

>>11022058
/thread
warmers fuccin seeethingg

>>11022058
There's a reason we make fun of engineercucks on this board.