/sci/ - Science & Math

>considering combating climate change would have a demonstrably negative economic impact itself by making energy more expensive

by "combating climate change" i meant the traditional scheme of carbon taxes and cap n' trade but there are other options such as nuclear that wouldn't negatively effect the economy as much... although any limit in the freedom of a market would have a theoretically negative affect as people are most likely to choose the cheapest option when they are given it

wtf I love Shell now

>It's not real
>Well it's not manmade it's natural
>Ok so it's manmade but it's overblown
>Maybe it's not overblown but it's not our fault it's just China
>So what if it's also our fault it's too late now
>Fucking big green did this how could they do this
I thought the right was wary of slippery slopes

>>11099522
sounds legit, just as pizza gate; thanks buddy!

>>11099522
This is the biggest scandal since Watergategate

>climateGate again
I thought this literal big oil propaganda nothingBurger had been laid to rest already?

>Eight committees investigated the allegations and published reports, finding no evidence of fraud or scientific misconduct.[15] The scientific consensus that global warming is occurring as a result of human activity remained unchanged by the end of the investigations.[16] However, the reports urged the scientists to avoid any such allegations in the future, and to regain public confidence following this media storm, with "more efforts than ever to make available all their supporting data – right down to the computer codes they use – to allow their findings to be properly verified". Climate scientists and organisations pledged to improve scientific research and collaboration with other researchers by improving data management and opening up access to data, and to honour any freedom of information requests that relate to climate science.[85]

>In May 2010 Senator Jim Inhofe requested the Inspector General of the United States Department of Commerce to conduct an independent review of how the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) had dealt with the emails, and whether the emails showed any wrongdoing.[117] The report, issued on 18 February 2011,[118] cleared the researchers and "did not find any evidence that NOAA inappropriately manipulated data or failed to adhere to appropriate peer review procedures". It noted that NOAA reviewed its climate change data as standard procedure, not in response to the controversy. One email included a cartoon image showing Inhofe and others marooned on a melting ice floe, NOAA had taken this up as a conduct issue. In response to questions raised, NOAA stated that its scientists had followed legal advice on FOIA requests for information which belonged to the IPCC and was made available by that panel. In two instances funding had been awarded to CRU,[117] NOAA stated that it was reviewing these cases and so far understood that the funds supported climate forecasting workshops in 2002 and 2003 assisting the governments of three countries.[119]

every real scientist knows globa warming is a hoax, at least the way hte media and "climate scientists" portray it
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BiKfWdXXfIs

>>11099636

>"I've just completed Mike's Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie, from 1981 onwards) and from 1961 for Keith's to hide the decline."

>The most quoted email is from Phil Jones discussing paleo-data used to reconstruct past temperatures (emphasis mine): "I've just completed Mike's Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) and from 1961 for Keith's to hide the decline." "Mike's Nature trick" refers to a technique (aka "trick of the trade") used in a paper published in Nature by lead author Michael Mann (Mann 1998). The "trick" is the technique of plotting recent instrumental data along with the reconstructed data. This places recent global warming trends in the context of temperature changes over longer time scales.

>The most common misconception regarding this email is the assumption that "decline" refers to declining temperatures. It actually refers to a decline in the reliability of tree rings to reflect temperatures after 1960. This is known as the "divergence problem" where tree ring proxies diverge from modern instrumental temperature records after 1960. The divergence problem is discussed in the peer reviewed literature as early as 1995, suggesting a change in the sensitivity of tree growth to temperature in recent decades (Briffa 1998). It is also examined more recently in Wilmking 2008 which explores techniques in eliminating the divergence problem. So when you look at Phil Jone's email in the context of the science discussed, it is not the schemings of a climate conspiracy but technical discussions of data handling techniques available in the peer reviewed literature. More on the hockey stick divergence problem...

>>11099644
>his arguments
>your argument
Your argument is a picture young man. Keep up, use your words.

>>11099664
A picture is a worthy response to a YouTube video. Just be glad for the (you)

>>11099664
>Dyson agrees that anthropogenic global warming exists and that one of its main causes is the increase of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere resulting from the burning of fossil fuels.[59] He has said that in many ways increased atmospheric carbon dioxide is beneficial,[60] and that it is increasing biological growth, agricultural yields and forests.[61] He believes that existing simulation models of climate change fail to account for some important factors, and that the results thus contain too great a margin of error to reliably predict future trends.[59][62]

>Dyson's views on global warming have been criticized.[24] Climate scientist James Hansen said that Dyson "doesn't know what he's talking about.... If he's going to wander into something with major consequences for humanity and other life on the planet, then he should first do his homework—which he obviously has not done on global warming."[24]:140 Dyson replied that "[m]y objections to the global warming propaganda are not so much over the technical facts, about which I do not know much, but it's rather against the way those people behave and the kind of intolerance to criticism that a lot of them have."[63]

>Dyson replied that "my objections to the global warming propaganda are not so much over the technical facts, about which I do not know much

>my objections to the global warming propaganda are not so much over the technical facts, about which I do not know much

>about which I do not know much
....

>>11099675
>taking humility for a weakness
Listen to what he says youngun

>>11099559
>youre not radical/polar enough
>youre flip flopping
>this means we should support full blown aids communism

>>11099704
>Humility
>goes into random fields which he has virtually no experience in and tells everyone in the field they have no idea what their talking about, yet provides absolutely 0 data for work to support his claims and instead just runs his mouth in interviews.

Yeah real humble, why don't you listen to him? He even admits he doesn't really know what he's talking about, and his complete lack of work on the subject fully collaborates this. Your taking everything he says at face value is simply a textbook appeal to authority.

>>11099711
If there are market based solutions to the problem, maybe right wing parties should have been suggesting them, rather than trying to deny basic physics for the past 40 years like they have been.

>>11099711
>you believe them damn "scientists"
>you must be a fuggin gommie

>>11099630
>Eight committees investigated the allegations and published reports, finding no evidence of fraud or scientific misconduct

climatologists investigated themselves and their (((((peers)))) and found nothing wrong

C O N V E N I E N T

Fucking read the emails yourself.. you can read how they obfuscated or just out right deleted shit. They were being dishonest at some level and it supports my argument that you should be S K E P T I C A L of what the IPCC puts out, because climatologists have been caught being dishonest and the IPCC has soooo much to gain, like 3 trillion dollars through Cap And Trade. A bunch of elites like Al Gore literally bought into this Cap And Trade scam and they promote it because they are holding the bag like people who bought bitconnect or Enron stocks. Enron invented emissions trading.

>>11099644
>>11099675
ad hominem

>>11099711
This is boomer tier holy shit

>>11099739
>Muh Jewish conspiracy

This is so boring. It’s the same dumb shit every time.

>>11099711
i thought its a chinese hoax?

>>11099739
Nice boomer image here's mine

>>11099522
ClimateGate’s a nothingburger. It’s really strange how people keep repeating the same disproven talking points again and again and again like they’re robots or something.

>>11099711
woah holy shit

>>11099711
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laurel_wreath

Literally retarded

>>11099739
>The eight major investigations covered by secondary sources include: House of Commons Science and Technology Committee (UK); Independent Climate Change Review (UK); International Science Assessment Panel Archived 9 May 2013 at the Wayback Machine (UK); Pennsylvania State University first panel Archived 25 September 2010 at the Wayback Machine and second panel Archived 30 January 2012 at the Wayback Machine (US); United States Environmental Protection Agency (US); Department of Commerce (US); National Science Foundation (US).

So to summarize, everyone in said 8 committees is part of a global conspiracy to sell solar panels?

>Fucking read the emails yourself.. you can read how they obfuscated or just out right deleted shit.
I have, it's funny how they are all completely reasonable in context.

>ad hominem
It's how is quoting the man himself a personal attack? Tell you what, why don't you post his published work on the topic and we can hash out if his evidence is sufficient to collaborate your claims.

>>11099720
>market based solutions
de-regulate nuclear and it all goes away pal .. the FREE MARKET is the only market based solution we need

BUT NOW LIBERALS ARE SUPPORTING A FUCKING TRADING PYRAMID SCHEME INVENTED BY ENRON AND FUCKING GOLDMAN SACHS?!??!?!?!?

BIZARRO WORLD.. LIKE WHEN LIBTARDS SOCIALISTS ARE SO FUCKING LIBERAL THAT THEY ARE CONSERVATIVE ABOUT FUCKING GENDER PRO NOUNS

YOU ARE PART OF THIS ILLOGICAL FUCKING BULLSHIT

https://youtu.be/cpEcPFSEIwQ

>>11099725
The data is provably exagerated and they present it in a dishonest way. Such as the one anon that spiralled because i said we are in a warming period and he said i was wrong because "the little ice age ended." Which is a fucking warming period. They are fucking manipulating YOU! And climate skepticism is more about being conservative in our approach to dealing with rising temperatures instead of engaging in alarmism which is provably serving a giant fucking global elite political structure.

why is the qatari prince using his state sponsored Al Jazeera news agency to promote climate change if it's so bad for big oil?????????

(qatari prince owns a fuck ton of oil reserves)

https://www.aljazeera.com/topics/issues/climate-change.html

>>11099739
>climatologists investigated themselves
who should investigate the climatologists? retards like you?

>>11099746
Its going to happen soon look up JADEHELM fexas its real

>>11099522
>last thread was full of useful idiots claiming that it's "unscientific" to question the recent "adjustment" of temperature because climatologists have a good track record
>but they don't.. their track record is piss poor and you always have to take into account political motivation when looking at ANYTHING... just look at the scientific community memeing gender spectrums for example
So you start with the classic defence of 'I'm just being scientific by being skeptical' before the inevitable post totally devoid of skepticism of the side you agree with.

You could've literally spent two minutes more on the internet to learn that 8 independent committees investigated these documents and none of them found evidence of academic dishonesty.
Take for example what they found of "Mike's nature trick":
>This "decline" referred to the well-discussed tree-ring divergence problem, but these two phrases were taken out of context by global warming sceptics, including US Senator Jim Inhofe and former Governor of Alaska Sarah Palin, as though they referred to some decline in measured global temperatures, even though they were written when temperatures were at a record high.
>The final analyses from various subsequent inquiries concluded that in this context "trick" was normal scientific or mathematical jargon for a neat way of handling data, in this case a statistical method used to bring two or more different kinds of data sets together in a legitimate fashion. The EPA notes that in fact, the evidence shows that the research community was fully aware of these issues and that no one was hiding or concealing them.

Tell us again how you have to take into account political motivation when looking at ANYTHING.
Tell us how you're not politically motivated despite the various clues in your post.

>>11099754
> The data is provably exagerated and they present it in a dishonest way.

Prove it.

> Such as the one anon that spiralled because i said we are in a warming period and he said i was wrong because "the little ice age ended."

I don’t think “one anon” is representative of the scientific community at all. Do you?

> why is the qatari prince using his state sponsored Al Jazeera news agency to promote climate change if it's so bad for big oil?????????

Maybe he’s not interested in lying about basic science and has the foresight to look into alternative sources of income because their oil reserves will eventually dry up? They’ve got some big solar farms down there.

>>11099744
>>11099744
> It’s the same dumb shit every time.

yes liberals calling anyone who disagrees with a global authoritarian banking system and government an anti-semite

glad you agree.. nice argument

>>11099754
>?!??!?!?!?
>..
>LIBTARDS SOCIALISTS ARE SO FUCKING LIBERAL THAT
>caps
>tranny obsession springing up for no reason
>YOU!
>oil?????????
Can you go away you literal boomer

>>11099763
>"I've just completed Mike's Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie, from 1981 onwards) and from 1961 for Keith's to hide the decline."

>>11099761
>you could've literally spent two minutes more on the internet to learn that 8 independent committees investigated these documents and none of them found evidence of academic dishonesty.

climatologists investigated themselves and their (((((peers)))) and found nothing wrong

C O N V E N I E N T

The fact you just take that statement at face value shows you are an irrational BIASED NPC.. who will believe anything as long as it's from a perceived "official" source.

You are cannon fodder

you are sheep

u r npc

>why is the qatari prince using his state sponsored Al Jazeera news agency to promote climate change if it's so bad for big oil?????????

probably because Quatar is both Coastal and already an equatorial desert making it vulnerable to both rising sea levels and increased temperatures would likely make it completely uninhabitable I guess the prince is worried about his children having a home more than he's worried about lying for short term unsustainable profits. Maybe you could learn something from him

>>11099652
already addressed >>11099778
read your own thread retard

>>11099778
derp herp
DURP duur..?!?!?

>>11099778
>npc memes in fucking 2019 (the current year)
Holy shit my dude

>>11099778
you may lose all professional credibility and your dignity, but big oil and the heartland institute will make you rich, it's a tossup.

>>11099770
>Full belief in 19th century Russian conspiracy theories
>Full belief that the NPC meme is an accurate model for real humans
>Neither of these things has any evidence and both of them align with the political views of the poster
Shouldn't you be in your containment board?

>>11099763
>Maybe he’s not interested in lying about basic science and has the foresight to look into alternative sources of income because their oil reserves will eventually dry up

BAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHA (BREATHS IN) AAAAAAAAAAAAAHHAHAHHAHAHAHAHA

WHY WONT HE TRY AND LOBBY FOR NUCLEAR POWER THEN!??!?!?!?!?!?!?

HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM

have you ever considered the fact that if carbon cap and trades gets implemented on a global scale that will INCREASE THE VALUE OF HIS OIL?!?!?!?!??!?!?!?!?! (obviously the saudi affiliated states will get the most "permits.)

>dry up

bbahahahahaha fucking peak oil pseud npc ahahahahhaha


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_proven_oil_reserves
>qatar
>number 14
>about 10 percent of saudi
>still a metric fuckton
>almost as much as entire united states which requires fracking at like at least 25 dollars a barrel (prob more)
>can be pumped at like 4 dollars a barrel and with free market competition that could push them down closer to that
>greentext

YOU HAVE A PROVABLE IRRATIONAL BIAS TOWARDS BELIEVING ANYTHING THAT SUPPORTS CLIMATE CHANGE AND "OFFICIAL" SOURCES

YOU NEVER CONSIDER ANYTHING BELOW THE SURFACE LEVEL PERCEPTION

>>11099805
And none of that will matter if sea levels rise and temperature changes make Quatar completely uninhabitable
>WHY WONT HE TRY AND LOBBY FOR NUCLEAR POWER THEN!??!?!?!?!?!?!?
They definitely don't want their unstable neighbors like Iran to have access to unlimited enrichable uranium

can someone post a pdf of this: Lansner and Pepke Pedersen (pic related)
i have no access but see every alt right arguing with it.
while arctic ice is melting and whole world burning, it says the world is cooling down..

>>11099559
>Jesus isn't real
>well OK but historical Jesus was only a man
>all right Jesus was divine but he was only a messenger created by and subservient to God the Father
>OK OK OK Jesus was God's only begotten Son, but He was first born a man and then infused with God's essence
>well all right, Jesus the Son is one with the Father in holy hypostasis, but the Holy Spirit flows from the Father only and never from the Son

>>11099815
Is it any of these?

https://www.google.com/search?client=ms-android-google&sxsrf=ACYBGNQEzxDr3TcAWK2YACb8zzC5ko_S5w%3A1572295108145&ei=xFG3XbKrCMLK-gTf76-4Dw&q=Temperature+trends+with+reduced+impact+of+ocean+air+temperature+lansner+and+pepke+pedersen+filetype%3Apdf&oq=Temperature+trends+with+reduced+impact+of+ocean+air+temperature+lansner+and+pepke+pedersen+filetype%3Apdf&gs_l=mobile-gws-wiz-serp.12...4807.7464..11842...0.0..0.0.0.......3....2j1.we8KC-r89c8

>>11099815
https://send.firefox.com/download/92a393423dcaea95/#DyEGuPgNnAG71NdiAEN5zg

>>11099824
uh ok
are christians the new fedoras?

>>11099824
Dumb, Jesus was barely even a historical figure. Most of his stories are rewrites of the stories of other candidate messiahs from when the church wrote the New Testament.

>>11099739
>>11099746
lmao why are boomers so retarded

>>11099813
bro you just fucking ASSUME they have good intentions.. it's fucking npc cringeworthy

are they concerned about sea levels?? MAYBE

you think that fucking dubai and fucking qatar cant afford state of the art sea walls?? It's not like the gulf coast (usa) where hurricanes hit them semi regularly. They are literally swimming in fucking money dude. And most of their terrority is like 100 feet above sea level.

ARE YOU DENYING THAT QATAR STANDS TO MAKE MORE MONEY OFF OF THEIR OIL RESERVES IF A GLOBAL CAP AND TRADE SYSTEM IS IMPLEMENTED?!?!???!?!

>they definitely don't want their unstable neighbors like Iran
BAHAHHAHAHAHA WHO MADE THEM UNSTABLE?!?!?! YEAH BECAUSE THEIR CURRENCY WOULD BE FALLING WITHOUT SANCTIONING???

ALSO

>unlimited enrichable uranium

NEW FUCKING REACTOR DESIGNS DONT FUCKING REQUIRE AS MUCH ENRICHMENT... WHAT IS A FUCKING THORIUM REACTOR YOU FUCKING NEAR SIGHTED FUCKING NPC GENERATION Z FUCKTARD???

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accelerator-driven_subcritical_reactor

>Unlike uranium-235, thorium is not fissile—it essentially does not split on its own, exhibiting a half-life of 14.05 billion years (20 times that of U-235). The fission process stops when the proton beam stops, as when power is lost, thus the reactor is subcritical. Only microscopic quantities of plutonium are produced and can be burned in the same reactor.[

WHY ARENT THEY INVESTING MORE INTO FUSION WITH HIGH TEMP SUPERCONDUCTORS?!?!?!?

PROLIFERATION IS A FUCKING MEME YOU FUCKING INSUFFERABLE NPC

PROLIFERATION IS AN EXCUSE THE FUCKIGN ENERGY CARTEL USES IN ORDER TO LIMIT THE ACCESS TO CHEAP ENERGY OF NATION STATES AND INDIVIDUALS... SEE IRAN AND LIBYA

>>11099849
>Jesus isn't real
>>11099852
>well OK but historical Jesus was only a man

>>11099815
>whole world burning

it's fuckin mild af right now.. im loving it

GO OUTSIDE YOU AUTISTIC FAGGOT

>>11099824
kek

>>11099870
Read a post thoroughly before sperging out you ADD boomer he's on your side

>>11099824
>holy hypostasis
This nigger casting spells

>>11099713
you're putting words in my mouth and in his mouth
Why is it so hard for you to listen to the old geezer and consider his arguments? Could it be, no it couldn't possibly be that... could you be afraid of not being able to counter them?
Could the old geezer's brain actualy frighten you?

Come on lad, his arguments are totally logical and you're not even trying to explain how they aren't.

Try again.

>>11099869
If you want to ignore the history of your cult then be my guest, but your concept of "Jesus" is very far removed from reality.

>>11099866
>WHAT IS A FUCKING THORIUM REACTOR
a reactor design with 0 commercial successes
>FUSION
a pipe dream that's been 20 years away for 70 years.

>PROLIFERATION IS A FUCKING MEME
yeah you're fucking retarded, I guess we should just listen to you and let every two bit dictatorship have all the nukes they want, that'll show the libs!

>>11099888

>you're putting words in my mouth and in his mouth
he said it not me

Show me his research on the topic, right now all that's been provided is "I'm right everyone else is wrong because I say so"

>>11099866
>NEW FUCKING REACTOR DESIGNS DONT FUCKING REQUIRE AS MUCH ENRICHMENT... WHAT IS A FUCKING THORIUM REACTOR YOU FUCKING NEAR SIGHTED FUCKING NPC GENERATION Z FUCKTARD???
By new reactor it turns out you actually meant 'theoretical or prototype' reactors that don't actually exist yet, and might never exist.

>WHY ARENT THEY INVESTING MORE INTO FUSION WITH HIGH TEMP SUPERCONDUCTORS?!?!?!?
Fucking loads has been invested into fusion already and we're not there yet, you can't just throw more money at it like it's a video game. What high temp superconductors would that be anyway? Insanely high pressure gases that would be a fucking nightmare to work with and currently have zero other applications?

You fucking stench of underage IFLS optimism, come back here when you've graduated high school and learned how science and technology works in the real world.

>PROLIFERATION IS A FUCKING ME...
More political bullshit, wahoo

>>11099891
>all right Jesus was divine but he was only a messenger created by and subservient to God the Father

>>11099901
damn, I thought we had already reached peak boomer like 30 posts ago, how wrong I was.

>>11099901
You're reaching so far that it's making my arms hurt.

Jesus was not divine and your idea of who Jesus was is nearly entirely wrong because of the lies of the church.

Can we stop beating around the bush and make this a gospel song thread?

>>11099824
This is probably gunna be the most retarded/ridiculous counter-argument that will happen on /sci/ this week. Fucking keked

>>11099845
thanks

>>11099870
herp derp

>>11099879
no. i really wanted to know what is the paper about. i dont even see how the paper states something about global warming or denies it in any way ..

>>11099923
I mean it's obviously bait

>>11099926
*about global warming denial

>>11099926
it doesn't really say much, it's just an analysis of some incredibly specific regional data sets, to claim it says anything about global temperatures is reaching really really far

Come on now, this is clearly a thinly veiled attempt by OP to start a hip-hop thread.

>>11099932
i honestly can't tell with boomer-posters

>>11099522
climate scientists are mostly NASA and other government employees who want to promote a hysteria agenda in order to keep
>cutting the funds for NASA
off the table

>>11099912
>everyone who disagrees with me is a boomer
>>11099913
>tips fedora

>>11099936
i know ... but google this paper and how many "people" claim its a proof against global warming; im loosing hope in humanity ...

>>11099923
Would you go so far as to say that You Can't Even?

>>11099947
You shouldn't be surprised people who are claiming basic physics is a Jewish conspiracy are grasping at straws.

>>11099522
The legacy of
>muh climate change
is a bunch of people with academic degrees who act like drama queens
their only agenda item is making other people hysterical
it's a truly sick way to behave
literally trying to infect other people with your own sense of impotent frustration and dread
I think hatred for the so-called
>climate scientists
is warranted
these jerks should be beaten to a pulp until they shut up
letting these rabid psychos infect other people with their disease is wrong

>>11099949
You better habeeb it Anon, we may well be approaching the point of "can't even".

>>11099954
>beaten to a pulp
Won't do humanity a lick of good while their coethnics control the news and entertainment media.

>>11099954
Glad we've finally gotten to the cave-man stage of discourse. I'll never understand why some people have such a violent reaction to the truth.

>>11099951
those are harmless retards, its getting difficult with those who post or tell cherry picked information; as mechanical engineer this is out of my reach to say instantly whether its true..

>>11099951
>there is no plainly visible Jewish conspiracy to enslave mankind, to which they openly admit and gloat about at every opportunity
>no, there is an OIL COMPANY conspiracy to destroy the planet for no sensible reason, and they also started the Iraq War by giving Dick Cheney several tens of thousands of dollars, enough for a new Jetta

>>11099961
Shouldn't you be crying about modern society in r/TheDonald or something?

>>11099559
Conflating the underemphasis on the Chinese elephant in the room with denialism is disingenuous at best. China is still venting fucking CFCs directly to the atmosphere. Most of the ocean's plastic waste comes from China. China adds several Canadas worth of emissions each year. Fuck China, and fuck China apologists.

>>11099983
The fucking post wasn't about China not being an issue, it was about China being used to divert what blame is there with whataboutism
China being overthrown is probably one of the few things that would make both political wings happy

>>11099974
>for no sensible reason
uh to continue to make money?

>>11099892
Proliferation is a meme though because several tinpot dictators already have nukes and are willing to sell. And that's just nukes that we know the location of. Which is not all nukes.

>>11100002
>several tinpot dictators already have nukes and are willing to sell
really like who?
and which of them can actually get away with it?

>>11099898
>a reactor design with 0 commercial successes
There have been a few thorium reactors throughout the decades and there is at least one reactor online that could burn thorium but doesn't because regulatory situations make it cheaper to run enriched uranium like everyone else.

>>11099892
>a pipe dream that's been 20 years away for 70 years.
With high temp superconductors you could make a reactor that had net power gain far cheaper than ITER which is going to also come online. You are literally parroting a fucking boomer meme without doing the research. Look into ARC and SPARC.

>let every two bit dictatorship have all the nukes they want, that'll show the libs!
After 911 the military accepted that there would be a major nuclear detonation in a western city every 10 years and they thought that the systemic damage could be mitigated thoroughly. We are all paying too much for energy when we could just accept the risks of one or two western cities blowing up once in a while. That many people probably die from the effects of expensive energy around the world anyway.

>>11099898
> that don't actually exist yet, and might never exist.
Only because of political red tape (liberals) are people not allowed to experiment with nuclear reactors and free market forces take effect like they did with computers.

>fusion.. we're not there yet
ITER.. and a cheaper design could use high temp super conductors ie ARC, SPARC

>What high temp superconductors would that be anyway?
rebco (fucking read wiki before posting) tapes

>stench of underage IFLS optimism
Nice opinion, you stench of reddit snark.. go back

>More political bullshit, wahoo
we can accept a few cities getting glassed for cheaper energy

>>11099913
>niggers jews kumbaya niggers jews kumbaya my lord commies globalist niggers jews kumbaya niggers jews kumbaya my lord commies globalist jews faggots my lordd..

>>11099939
yo yo dog roses be red
violets bluee
global warming is fake news
and im going to take a poo

>>11099962
>violent reaction to the truth
oh hey reddit pretentiousness

the truth is that there is a huge motivation for climatologists to lie and theyve been caught lying so youre irrational for believing everything they say at face value

deal with it dude

>>11100010
>We are all paying too much for energy when we could just accept the risks of one or two western cities blowing up once in a while.
Thanks for destroying your own argument, saves me the trouble

>>11100020
>huge motivation for climatologists to lie
For big oil yes.

>theyve been caught lying

for big oil yes, see Willie Soon.

>>11100010
based binary post, boomers seething

>>11100010
>>>/trash/

>>11100025
>see Willie Soon
What if I want to see Willie Later?

>I should warn you that some data we have we are not supposed to pass on to others. We can pass on the gridded data – which we do. Even if WMO agrees, I will still not pass on the data. We have 25 or so years invested in the work. Why should I make the data available to you, when your aim is to try and find something wrong with it. There is IPR to consider.

BASED climate scientists protecting their magic data from scrutiny by evil deniers by threatening them with lawsuits, I freaking love science!

>>11100025
big oil isn't telling governments what to do and how to act, climate scientists are

>>11100045
>big oil isn't telling governments what to do and how to act,

>>11100048
what is the big oil equivalent of the Paris Accords?

>>11099522
boomer thread belong on >>>/x/

>>11100057
buying the republican party?

>>11100057
The fossil fuels lobby that donate literal millions to those politicians with anti-climate change agendas?
To think you're here doing it for free, you should write BP an email asking for some $$$ too.

>>11099896
>"I'm right everyone else is wrong because I say so"
literally what "climatologists" do

literally what this anon >>11099962 does

https://www.newsweek.com/why-climate-scientists-are-hurting-their-cause-75125

>>11099755
freeman dyson

>>11099606
>pizza gate
esptein wasn't running a hihg level pedophilia black mail ring ok... pizzagate was a fucking RED HERRING put out by media matters (pizza shops owners boyfriend) to fucking discredit the shit they knew would leak out about epstein and the like

>>11099797
the fact there is a fucking industry around climate shilling should prove that taking any of their data at face value is IRRATIONAL

>>11100038
based.

https://climateaudit.org/2005/10/15/we-have-25-years-invested-in-this-work/

>>11100028
>>>>>>>/reddit/

>>11100025
whhy does the qatari prince fund climate alarmism?

>>11100021
the american military has destroyed many more cities in the same time... kosovo got fucked up and they are ok now.. it's worth the risk for fucking super fucking cheap power that could help us get off this planet and cure age related disease.. in fact the growth rate of society would make up for it.. and we have fusion soon anyway

>>11100059
>when i run out of arguments i just use personal attacks and reddit snarkiness

>>11100061
yes, without big oil buying the republican party there would be no market for energy in people's homes. without their propaganda deceiving people, their desire to have warm homes and use electricity would nto exist. damn you big oil and your lies.

>>11100010
>ITER.. and a cheaper design could use high temp super conductors ie ARC, SPARC
An unfinished experimental reactor and some theoretical reactors, nice job pointing out how we're not there yet

>>11100064
I don't need to prove a consensus faggot

>>11100062
why is it okay for climate scientists to lobby the government but not oil companies, why is it only evil when oil companies do it

>>11099522

>>11100071
Name some climate scientist doing this

>>11100065
how altruistic they are! thank you oil companies!

>>11100078
michael mann, james hansen, joe romm

>>11100063
>literally what "climatologists" do
No they publish rock solid peer reviewed research, of which you can refute none of.

>freeman dyson
what has he published?

>whhy does the qatari prince fund climate alarmism?
you mean report about the truth? What a shocking idea
>>11099779
>>11099813

>the american military has destroyed many more cities in the same time... kosovo got fucked up and they are ok now.. it's worth the risk for fucking super fucking cheap power that could help us get off this planet and cure age related disease.. in fact the growth rate of society would make up for it.. and we have fusion soon anyway

so your argument is that America should let anyone have nukes so anyone can blow up American cities because we don't mind blowing up other people's cities?
If you don't see the issue you're beyond help

>>11100082
Got any numbers on how much they've spent? Got any sources?

>>11100070
>consensus
of an INDUSTRY (alarmist shilling) proven to lie

see>>11100038


the fucking fact you say that and believe "official" shit at face value shows your IRRATIONAL BIAS

here's a test:
Who do you think is responsible for 911?

>>11100071
>oil companies
just want money and don't give a shit about the truth
The U.S. spends $26 billion annually subsidizing fossil fuels.

>>11100087
they generate influence, power and status for politicians which is more important to some than the money that oil companies can give

Don't let the libtards trick you
Get redpilled like Neo from The Matrix

>>11100089
>Who do you think is responsible for 911?
Lyndon B. Johnson and AT&T?

>>11100089
>Who do you think is responsible for 911?
Mossad
>>11100092
US federal grants should stop subsidising the climate science industry

>>11100087
lobbying isn't necessarily bribing people with money you dingus. you need a source for the James Hansen hearing?

>>11100063
>>>/hm/

>>11100089
it's not the consensus of an industry, it's the consensus of scientists from pretty much all countries
and it's not a "bias" to listen to the FACTS
you're the one who distort reality to fit to your political opinions

>>11100101
> climate science industry
>industry
kek

>>11100096
Which politicians have they generated power and status for?

>>11100085
>No they publish rock solid peer reviewed research, of which you can refute none of.
they got caught lying.. fucking subject of the thread

>what has he published?
idk he's smart though.. nice meme

>you mean report about the truth?
are you going to deny that facts can be presented different ways in order to manipulate public sentiment??? Are you really that much of an NPC.. i dont think even you are that much of an NPC?

>so anyone can blow up American cities
We allow people to use encryption to communicate... do you reall think it's ok to allow terrorists to use encryption to talk to eachother??? Shouldn't we ban encryption as australia is doing???? What about electriciity?!?!? TErroriustss are using electricity?!?!? WE SHOULD BAN ELECTRICITY DUDE!!!!!! BRO TERRORISTS CAN USE ROCKETS SO WE NEED TO MAKE ROCKETS ILLEGAL DUDE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

Nuclear energy is the most powerful thing on the planet and it should be a basic human right to be able to use it. Even if we are going to regulate the shit out of it we need to make sure the regulations actually allow for people to get through them instead of CREATING AN ENERGY CARTEL.

>>11100110
all the ones that use muh climate crisis as an issue to get elected on, so, most of them?

>>11100107
>it's the consensus of scientists from pretty much all countries
yeah except for these guys, who don't count as scientists for some reason: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientists_who_disagree_with_the_scientific_consensus_on_global_warming

also when you have a large group of people who disagree with you, there is still a "consensus" somehow!

>>11100111
>>>/x/

>>11100107
>consensus of scientists
those scientists form a COTTAGE INDUSTRY of grant chasing and publishing papers so you can then be hired as a professional SHILL

>>11100107
>and it's not a "bias" to listen to the FACTS
YOU LISTEN TO THE WHOLE NARRATIVE. AND YOU ARE NOT SKEPTICAL OF POSSIBLE EXAGGERATION WHICH HAS BEEN PROVEN TO ALREADY HAVE HAPPENED MANY TIMES.

>you're the one who distort reality to fit to your political opinions
>if youre enemy blames of you of something just turn around and blame him of the same thing
t. niccolo machiavelli

>>11100116
>also when you have a large group of people who disagree with you
They're a small group compared to the scientists that do believe in it, consensus doesn't imply 100% agreement.

>>11100116
>also when you have a large group of people who disagree with you, there is still a "consensus" somehow!
huh somehow

>>11100119
this. i don't understand why these fucking retards in this thread don't understand an obvious professional conspiracy when they see one. they are all incentivised by US grant money to maintain the narrative and people who challenge them are attacked by very non-scientific means such as lawsuits and having their employment threatened.

>>11100122
science isn't a democratic election and there is never a "consensus" on anything

I wish boomers would ease off the caps lock
It feels pointless to argue with someone doing an "I AM SILLY" of themselves

>>11100112
So all the ones you don't like? How do you feel about the $30 million oil companies donated to the Republicans in the 2000 elections? Does that raise any alarm bells with you?

>>11100116
>2 retarded people per country vs thousands of other scientists in the said countries
also almost every scientist from your stupid list knows nothing about climate because there are FUCKING ZOOLOGISTS AND ECOLOGISTS LEARN TO READ FUCK

denying the scientific consensus isn't /sci/

>>11100119
I listen to the facts, the data, not some stupid "when I go outside it's hot" or "if we take this particular set of very specific data it shows there's no global warming"
dude you're literally on the flat earth level
>>>/x/

>>11100123
when you control the peer review process you can simply ignore or not review papers that are sufficiently critical of you, don't you understand selection bias? the Connollys are still trying to get their troposphere paper published, nobody will take it. it's a fucking racket.

>>11100126
But cruise control means you don't have to drive

>>11100119
>loving oil tycoons this much
retard bootlicker

>>11100128
>How do you feel about the $30 million oil companies donated to the Republicans in the 2000 elections? Does that raise any alarm bells with you?
i care more about the climate scientists trying to tax me into non-existence than oil companies bribing people so they don't get taxed into non-existence

>>11100111
>TERRORISTS CAN USE ROCKETS SO WE NEED TO MAKE ROCKETS ILLEGAL DUDE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1
Uh yes retard
If you give the entire population access to a "kill everyone" button some fucking incel or raghead or bible basher is going to push it

>>11100124
based

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/c/cottage-industry.asp

>>11100124
>there is never a "consensus" on anything
I might go jump off a skyscraper then, there's no scientific consensus on what might happen so maybe I'm missing out on a cheap and legal thrill?

Can a denialist tell me what they think of this image?
Just wondering

>>11100130
>denying the scientific consensus isn't /sci/
testing a hypothesis is litearlly the foundation of science

>FUCKING ZOOLOGISTS AND ECOLOGISTS LEARN TO READ FUCK

climate science isn't one field it pulls together all kinds of shit together, it's no surprise that many different fields are represented here. why the fuck would an ecologist not be interested in complex dynamic systems that affect the biosphere?

>>11100123
that's only counting anyone who agrees that "humans are a factor of global warming"

i would be included in that group you dumb ass

>>11100142
unironically i hope you do

>>11100145
i think here is a graph by a communist called thomas piketty created to promote communism

>>11100138
>oil companies bribing people so they don't get taxed into non-existence
I don't think taking $26,000,000,000 from the tax revenue each year is very conducive to keeping taxes low

>>11099522
Is this the thread when Americans act like total retards and other people laugh at them?

>Even im not saying that global warming isn't real but I am saying it's reasonable to suspect exaggeration of the data
IPCC is fairly conservative in their predictions. It's more likely to expect under-estimation.

>>11100147
>he thinks climate change is an "hypothesis"
>he thinks a consensus is an "hypothesis"
dude you literally don't belong here. You should really leave because you're making a fool of yourself

>>11100157
Hmm interesting
And this slide?

they bring up "big oil" so much because they cannot win on the facts of global warming because the scientific case does not hold up

>>11099522
Anti-fossil fuel climate scientists simply cannot do anything wrong - they have absolutely no reason to be deceptive. They have an immaculate understanding of how the climate works, and they must be getting their predictions from a crystal ball they're so good.

There is zero financial, political or career pressure to ensure the data shows as much warming as possible.

Yes, there are fraudulent climate scientists, but they only exist on the denial side and are funded by big oil rather than the government who have no real stake in this.

The government's (and green energy's) greatest wish is for the next IPCC report to show that we're going to be safe and we can continue as normal using cheap fossil fuels. Alas, it seems that taxing CO2 is the best chance of saving the planet.

There's not much time left, we need to panic. Our house is on fire. Start eating bugs.

>>11100145
>the top 10% are climatologists!

>>11100138
Uhh anon climate scientists don't tax you the government does

>>11100164
Nothing wrong with that. We are nowhere near a new high in terms of inequality, and when the rich get too out of line, the poor usually genocide them and with that normalize inequality.

>>11100162
if anthropogenic global warming isn't a hypothesis then it isn't testable and if it isn't testable then it's not science

>>11100174
climate scientists and the government exist in a symbiotic relationship where one generates political narratives for the other in exchange for increased funding and prestige

>>11100140
>access to a "kill everyone" button
a rocket doesn't do that dude?

do you think ar-15s should be banned?

and if they are going to heavily regulate something they need to still make it accessible.. fucking rocketry is more accessible than nuclear

loik if they regulate nuclear to the point that you can only build a reactor in the desert and you have to pay federal employees to watch over you then that wouldnt be soooooooo bad but it's even worse than that where they literally just dont let you do it or call your country a harbor of terrorism

with fusion it will be harder but i guarantee the energy cartel will find a way to keep all but the most elite of elites able to have access to it.. probably they will make it about the tiny amount of radioactive waste it does generate

the fact you dont see a problem with the way they are regulating nuclear power shows you are a cuck and are biased to agreeing with authority

>>11100170
Exactly, deniers avoid talking about the science as much as possible, and ignore everything that doesn't fit their propaganda narrative.

>>11100171
>There is zero financial, political or career pressure to ensure the data shows as much warming as possible.
are you kidding? watch this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bOHrYY3yAGE

>>11100180
i said stop making a fool of yourself

>>11100174
npcs like you should be banned from using spurdo

you know what he meant you fucktard but youre just doing the thing on reddit where you nitpick every fucking little detail so you waste everyones time and derail the thread

>>11100185
you mean alarmists. the warmists cannot defend the CRU's "hiding the decline" or Mann's unspeakable PCA botches to generate his hockey stick.

>>11100171
based

>>11100187
>are you kidding?
I thought that was obvious from the first sentence?

>>11100191
>Banned from using a meme
Please don't attack my freedom of speech like that Anon

>>11100194
Well we addressed both of them like 5 times in this thread already so...

>>11100187
>Watch the video
Every fucking time you brainlets recomend a motherfucking video instead of an scientific articles and expect other people to take you seriously. And on top it's tony fucking heller. Is your cranium cavity filled with rotten straw or something?

>>11100182
They're regulating it too much (and Germany is fucking full retard) but that doesn't mean I want no regulations whatsoever like some ancap idiot.
It's not some binary situation. Also equating a rifle to nuclear material, I don't even know what you're trying with that.

>>11100182
>>11100191
>>11100194
>>11100179
>>11100170

is it the same shitposter or collective of retards?

just trust NASA and NOAA guys, don't ask them why they have to "adjust" the data to generate the warming trend, it's there i promise, you just need the special court astrologers at NASA to help tease it out.

>>11100206
>i only evaluate information from my pre-trusted authorities which are guaranteed to reflect back my own opinion.
if you're so convinced the video is shit maybe you can tell us what the reasoning is behind eliminating the error bars to show the absolutely maximum warmest graph possible

>>11100185
>Exactly, deniers avoid talking about the science as much as possible, and ignore everything that doesn't fit their propaganda narrative.

BRUHHHHHH, IT'S BECAUSE WE CANNOT EVEN GET UP STEP ONE. WHICH IS TO ESTABLISH THAT CLIMATOLOGISTS HAVE AN INTEREST TO PROMOTE ALARMISM WHICH MEANS IT'S ONLY RATIONAL TO BE SKEPTICAL OF THEIR DATA.

AND THERE IS FUCKING PROOF OF THEM ALTERING THE DATA OR PRESENTING IT IN DECEPTIVE WAYS.

Until we can establish that a rational person ALWAYS suspect the people that control them of being manipulative and dishonest, THEN WE WILL ALWAYS JUST BE STUCK HERE.

Right now your argument is just basically "hey you should trust every official source because they are official"

>everything science (tm) says must be true
>totally not dogma at all

http://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2016/gender-lines-science-transgender-identity/

>>11100198
HEY BRO I HAVE NEWS FOR YOU!!!!!?!??!

REMEMEBR NET NEUTRALITY!??!?!?!?!??!?!

https://www.privateinternetaccess.com/blog/2019/03/eu-passes-new-copyright-law-which-will-lead-to-a-more-censored-internet/

>>11100213
>Right now your argument is just basically "hey you should trust every official source because they are official"
this is the foundation of their argument though "our tribe controls the institutions and yours doesn't, so what we say must be true"

>>11100212
Videos are shit by definition, because it's harder to verify the facts listed or copypaste it to highlight the errors.

>what the reasoning is behind eliminating the error bars to show the absolutely maximum warmest graph possible
Where? Name the publication.

>>11100220
AAAAHHHH FUGGG NOOOOOO

>>11100208
>like some ancap idiot.

there are still rules in ancapistan

when you go to church camp they have special rules you follow or you get kicked out??

and also spess will be the real ancapistan

and most ancaps are actually very practical and no one wants to just turn government all off at once but rather gradually work towards having the least amount of government VIOLENCE possible

also i have just confirmed that when you speak out against the climate alarmist agenda you will be hit with more annoying captchas

>>11100230
just watch it you fuckin homo

>>11100213
>AND THERE IS FUCKING PROOF OF THEM ALTERING THE DATA OR PRESENTING IT IN DECEPTIVE WAYS.
where?

>Right now your argument is just basically "hey you should trust every official source because they are official"

I've read the best arguments both for and against AGW and i can confidently state the case for AGW is virtually bulletproof science grounded in basic physical principles while arguments against are the most nonsensical self contradictory bullshit I've ever read. I've examined the evidence and made an informed decision can you say the same?

>>11100171
NEW COPY PASTA WRINRAR

>>11100233
Stuff it up your arse. Learn to use sources like an adult.

>>11100008
South Africa sold to Israel and Pakistan sold to North Korea. North Korea will sell to the highest bidder the moment talks break down.

>>11100235
>where?
He thinks ClimateGate is the proof and he's convinced himself all the independent committees who reviewed it are in on the act. Classical cognitive dissonance coping.

>>11100220
I remember when /pol/ was against SOPA and PIPA but then did a 180 on the matter when it became a "political issue" as net neutrality
That was before the election tourists though so you might not have been there

>>11100233
that bullshit gets posted in by every single denier cuck in every single climate bait thread. It's the same old Tony Heller doing his same retarded fucking cherrypicking so retards like you will listen to him because you aren't smart enough to question his methods and ask why every single chart he shows is in a different time place, and measuring something completely different

>>11100235
tony heller's channel is 95% taking apart the various ways alarmists adjust the data to generate warming trends based on totally spurious reasoning. if you are ignorant of this stuff you do not understand the opposing argument at all.

> virtually bulletproof science grounded in basic physical principles

so bulletproof that Mann cannot re-generate his hocky stick, that scientists hide their data from people. have you looked at the Connolly troposphere paper making the case for Kirchoff's law of radiation applying meaning the net warming of the greenhouse effect is zero?

>>11100232
Sure but there's no way to make nukes for all work out
I really miss text captcha

>>11100246
HIS video is picking apart the cherry picking of a climate scientist and asking questions of why he did this and showing the obvious motivations behind altering the data to generate magic warming trends from nothing.

>>11100245
It's hilarious, they'll claim twitter and Facebook need to be regulated so they can't censor people, and claim net neutrality is evil in the same sentence.

>>11100251
here's a tip, all his videos have corresponding blog posts, go there grab what you think is the best evidence, and I'll tell you exactly how he manipulated the data.

>>11100252
>>11100245
net neutrality was a fight between two big groups of corporations (carriers vs application level) and were trying to create a political issue so that one group wouldn't have to pay the bandwidth bill rather than the other. it had nothing to do with censorship and was of no concern to the average voter.

Anti-fossil fuel climate scientists simply cannot do anything wrong - they have absolutely no reason to be deceptive. They have an immaculate understanding of how the climate works, and they must be getting their predictions from a crystal ball they're so good.

There is zero financial, political or career pressure to ensure the data shows as much warming as possible.

Yes, there are fraudulent climate scientists, but they only exist on the denial side and are funded by big oil rather than the government who have no real stake in this.

The government's (and green energy's) greatest wish is for the next IPCC report to show that we're going to be safe and we can continue as normal using cheap fossil fuels. Alas, it seems that taxing CO2 is the best chance of saving the planet.

There's not much time left, we need to panic. Our house is on fire. Start eating bugs.

>>11100243
>independent committees
CLIMATOLOGISTS FOUND OTHER CLIMATOLOGISTS NOT GUILTY

C O N V E N I E N T

debunk this faggot:
https://climateaudit.org/2005/10/15/we-have-25-years-invested-in-this-work/

>>11100259
Give me your best argument as to why telecomms shouldn't be treated as common carriers, or better yet why shouldn't common carrier laws exist?

>>11100258
if you watch the video you will see exactly how he manipulated it and why, and also why nobody should take these fake warming trends seriously

>his argument is spam

>>11100269
i literally don't give a shit about this issue and said it was of no concern to average people, it was an invented issue designed to create public outcry to justify one group shifting their costs onto the other

>>11100259
>>11100252
>>11100245
it's even funnier when libtards make the EU their darling as an example of how net neutrality is good then the EU censors memes and UK bans porn

AHHAHAHAHAHA POETRY HAHAHAHAHHAHAHA

and yes it's about censorship becuase the fucking assumption should always be that GOVERNMENT SHOULD KEEP THEIR DIRTY PAWS OFF THE FUCKIGN INTERNET

>>11100270
I've watched the video you faggot, post what you think is his best evidence and I'll tell you why it's complete bullshit

>>11100267
There's nothing to debunk, because there's no argument.

>>11100279
why don't you just defend the changes made to the data so that they max the error bar and look the warmest, can you admit that there is an incentive for scientists to adjust the data so they conform to this pre-existing political narrative

>>11100278
>EU censors memes and UK bans porn
Sounds like you've been lied to and you fell for the lies. It's not surprising, considering that mutts have a tendency towards such irrational behaviour.

>>11099522
here's the deal with climate change. the liberals were right all along, but even with the truth on their side they just can't help themselves from using deception tactics to sell it, thus they managed to make the truth look like a lie.

>>11100278
Are you fucking retarded article 13 was hated alongside the net neutrality shitshow
Did you just find out about article 13 because it isn't some new shock like you're implying

>>11100278
>becuase the fucking assumption should always be
Who made you king of what should always be?

>>11100267
>https://skepticalscience.com/Freedom-of-Information-FOI-requests-climate-scientists.htm

>Then came the storm. Between 24 July and 28 July, CRU received no less than 60 FoI requests, and 10 more between 31 July and 14 August. The requesters demanded access to both raw temperature station data and any related confidentiality agreements. The Review found evidence that this was an organized campaign (one request asked for information “involving the following countries: [insert 5 or so countries that are different from ones already requested]”). The Review says “such orchestrated campaigns [have] literally overwhelming impacts on small research units.”

Fraudulent FOI requests with no goal other than to prevent CRU from actually doing any work. They ignored them

>>11100288
the truth isn't on their side, they have been tampering with the data and "updating" the instrumental temperature record for decades to generate fake warming trends, the second a competing temperature record (satellite data) came out they flocked onto it like vultures and used Mannian adjustments to bring them in line with the fake trend

>>11100278
DATA HIGHWAYS GOOD
I LOVE CORPORATE COCK

>>11100267
>CLIMATOLOGISTS FOUND OTHER CLIMATOLOGISTS NOT GUILTY
They committees weren't made up of climate scientists, not that you care since that would counter your world view which cannot possibly be inaccurate

https://web.archive.org/web/20100127215847/http://www.parliament.uk/parliamentary_committees/science_technology/science_technology_members.cfm

>>11100284
I'm not wasting my time on nebulous claims, post specific evidence and I'll whack it.

>>11100294
>climate scientists consider peer review a form of fraud

>>11100299
i have asked you to defend the specific adjustment made in the satellite record as presented in the video. you are unable to do this because you apparently object to the information being presented in the medium of video.

>>11100295

>>11100311
this obviously depends how you calculate it. but what is the sauce?

>>11100311
Source?

>>11100298
That committee is made up of politicians from the three major political parties who all want to tax CO2.

>>11100061
>muh big oil bought the republican party
Debunked conspiracy theory that's about 15 to 20 years out of fashion. Congrats you're a boomer

>>11100325
>I only trust people who tell me what I want to hear
Are you a fan of The Jolly Heretic per chance?

>>11100334
How's that debunked? It's not that hard to find the donors.

>>11100319
>>11100320
source is Zeke Hausfather it's a combination of several graphs made for the Guardian

https://www.carbonbrief.org/explainer-how-data-adjustments-affect-global-temperature-records

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2016/feb/08/no-climate-conspiracy-noaa-temperature-adjustments-bring-data-closer-to-pristine

If you want to dig deeper, links are provided to his published work on temperature adjustments

>>11100354
>Zeke Hausfather
lol, he is employed as damage control for Tony Heller and refuses to debate him. i wouldn't mind people believing in global warming but the fact that they try and pretend that detractors from their theory do not exist really pisses me off.

>>11100363
Debate is meaningless without live fact checking, Zeke is too busy doing actual science at Berkley Earth to waste time on that retard. Especially when everything Heller has ever said is so easily discredited by data

>>11100376
>muh institutional gatekeepers are the only authority

>>11100376
>Especially when everything Heller has ever said is so easily discredited by data
his whole point is that it's not the data but the unreasonable adjustments made to it to produce desired outcomes

>>11100379
Well, If you don't trust the institutions, then you don't trust the data. If you don't trust the data, all you have left is pure conjecture. If all you have is pure conjecture, you should leave for >>>/x/.

>>11100311
>I only trust people who tell me what I want to hear
Politicians have never used scientists to push an agenda before, they're independent, so you can't get a better committee than that.
>The Jolly Heretic
Never heard of him.

>>11100388
if the data was fine they wouldn't need to keep adjusting it every few years to maintain the trend

>>11100394
What data have been adjusted and how?

>>11100398
the instrumental record. to produce a warming trend. the satellite record was set up to verify it and it showed no warming trend until they got to it and did the same adjustments it to bring it in line with the spurious trend they created on the instrumental record.

>>11100411
>the instrumental record
Which one?

>>11100412
the USHCN

>>11100416
USHCN is an organization. Link the actual data.

>>11100423
you want me to link you to the USHCN's website that gives you access to their temperature dataset?

>>11100436
I want you to show me what data do you mean precisely, so that there is no misunderstanding.

Can you give me a quick rundown on this thread?

>>11100446
it is gone into in extraordinary detail here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-JkEEq3k8yM

>>11100449
I'm terribly sorry anon. I'm currently listening to "Russian Doomer music vol.8" and I can't be bothered to pause it and listen to your video. If there is any worth to it, then it should exist in a written form. If there's no written article, then I'm afraid you fell for a fraud.

>>11100457
just watch the fucking video

>>11100457
>wojak playlist
Not sure I like this website anymore

>>11100462
нeт, I ain't giving you no clicks.

Use the form adults use: Written form. Or begone.

>>11100388
>then you don't trust the data
Why do you trust instrumental temperature data from the 1880's - 1960's as being accurate and complete enough to be included in a graph about global temperature?

>>11100457
https://thsresearch.files.wordpress.com/2017/05/ef-gast-data-research-report-062717.pdf

Hey op could you do me a favor man?
Can you start posting with a tripcode so I can filter you? Thanks, have a nice day.

>>11100506
Can you start eating bugs?

>>11100506
He'll grow out of it

>>11100462
>Using YouTube as a reference

>>11100502
Now we are talking. But I'm afraid your paper is terribly amateurish. Citing "https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com" as a source? That's the biggest red flag I ever saw in a research paper.

Formal complains
>Too much filler, very little substance
>Good half of it relies on references to the blogs, and thus is discarded
>Claims lack citations e.g. page 9 has plenty of claims, but zero evidence to back them up with

Factuals
>muh heat islands are not accounted for
They are (https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2012JD018509).). Plus they aren't even that relevant (https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2005JD006548))

>Figure IV-2
The authors here are clearly disingenous. They suggest that the data have been manipulated to remove a cyclic pattern, but ignore that the original "pre-manipulated" data are just previous correction; they are not the "raw" data. In reality the "raw data" suggest the exact opposite of what authors are claiming. Pic related should illustrate what I mean.

>>11099824

>>11099644

>>11099746
I'm disappointed in the lack of mini skulls floating in the bottle and syringe.

>>11100734
the warming cycle began in the late 1700s

why doestn the author of yuor graph want to show that?

>>11100802
We don't want it to be TOO scary

BZZZT BZZT
AGHH NO NOT THE CLIMATE AGENDA
MOMMY LOVES YOU OK

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-b5X69vREAg

>>11100734
Now that the "cyclical pattern" and "heat island" memes have been debunked, what else is there?

Figures V1-V7, V12, V19
Cherrypicking, won't even bother.

>Figure V8, 13, 14
Blogs.

>Figure V-9
Am I retarded or are they retarded? If you get one record high, then the next record high must be even higher. That's bit worthless as a measurement.

>Figure V-11
Completely irrelevant and a show of bad scholarship.

>Figure V-13
>It is telling that, in fact, the Arctic city cyclical trend pattern is similar to that of the selected U.S. cities as shown in Figure V-14 below.
"Arctic city"? Don't tell me that's American geographical knowledge in action.

>Muh US adjustements
debunked here: http://www-users.york.ac.uk/~kdc3/papers/crn2016/CRN%20Paper%20Revised.pdf

Don't see anything else worth of note. Consider yourself schooled and don't fall for every stupid blog you find on the web. Most of them are bs.

>>11100825
Myou graph doesn't care, because it's not what """""Dr.""""" D'Aleo is claiming in the paper.

>>11100493
Do you have evidence which suggests temperature reconstructions are less accurate than the provided range of errors? Could you post this information?

>>11099522
It was disproved by the same institutions that profit from alarmism. I think they would know better than you.

>>11100384
Yet he can't actually prove anything, he has to go to ridiculous lengths to manipulate data, and is completely unable to show unadjusted data is less accurate than adjusted data.

>>11100939
It's disproved by literally anyone reading the emails in context you illiterate schitzo

wtf is this /x/?

>>11099553
>>11100137

? Shell has already heavily cornered alternative energy markets. The fundamentals have been laid out for big business to get into one line about how to use climate change. Currently I just see the programs and tax adjustments used to shift middle and upper middle class incomes to be more in line with lower class (destroying middle class through a number of measures). Though that's also tied in and heavily correlated with the on going globalist ideology by those in power who benefit from this at the expense of everyone else involved. Idk why leftists also say 'bootlicker', as if they're enlightened wanting to lick the boots of some corrupt party members e.g. like in China.

>>11099739
>>11099744
When Springer can't even detect obvious bullshit papers generated through an application called SciGen (and got 18 nonsensical jargon papers published), science should be treated with a lot of skepticism.

>>11100872
>Dr
oh wow someone that memorized a bunch of shit and took a test... cool

university selects for submission to authority

look how medical doctors will say shit like marijuana is bad for you or that heroin cant be used safely.. which we know is pure bullshit and a total synthesis by the military prison industrial complex and pharma companies

phds are the same in a lot of ways and gender science and climate science are both cottage industries chasing grants and careers for people that suck at real "science" like engineering

t. friends with a lot of physicians through my work (a lot of them are on adderall)

>>11100971
>Shell has already heavily cornered alternative energy markets
Not even close, do you ever check anything before you spew bullshit or outright lies?
https://energyacuity.com/blog/top-10-renewable-energy-companies/

>science should be treated with a lot of skepticism.

so be skeptical, post facts and figures which collaborate your beliefs, I can, why can't you? Mindless questioning of everything without evidence isn't skepticism it's mental illness.

>>11100869
>cyclical pattern"

hasnt been debunked you self aggrandizing reddit piece of shit

the earth obviously goes through cool and warm cycles as evidenced by the multiple ice ages

what elese goes in cycles???

hmmm

hmmm

could it be?

hmmmm

yes


THE SUN??!?!?!?!?

nooooooo????

what exactly is the obfuscation method you are trying to pull here?

>>11101054
>Redditspacing
>Unreletad babbling
>Conspiracy crap

Yup, that's a mutt.

>>11101066
where the fuck is your graphs Y axis you goddamn retard?

https://www.iflscience.com/environment/we-could-be-heading-mini-ice-age-2030/

wow i fucking love science now

:^)

>>11101066
>it's the sun
try again boomer

>>11101066
What kind of subhuman would accuse others of being reddit, while redditspacing? The kind of subhuman that responds to posts he doesn't understand.

>>11101071
STRIKE!

>>11100449
Go to sleep tony nobody wants your shit here.

>>11101068
>snarkiness
>no argument
>appeals to authority
>appeal to ridicule

yep it's a libtard redditor

over a million non violent people are in prison because of the war on drugs and it's demonstrated that pharma companies fund the "partnership for a drug free america" and doctors will parrot their rhetoric.. you just show yourself as an even bigger bootlicker for trying to use this as appeal to redicule

>>11101074
how do greenhouses work?

>>11101077
wow someone drew a couple lines

>>11101090
What have drugs to do witht he topic of climate change? That's right nothing.

So I'm going to kindly ask you to be American somewhere else.

>>11101074
oh and btw i was showing that the correlated MACRO cycles were going on for thousands of years and there are many micro periods of uncorrelation and since 1800 1985 is the first tiem temperature is uncorrelated to tsi

>>11101070
idk man who cares

>>11101075
it's called irony.. artists use it

>>11101095
>What have drugs to do with the topic of climate change? That's right nothing.

The fact DOCTORS will tell you drugs are bad in blanket statements which is false, and a product of drug war propaganda. The other anon was trying to say that because a (((((((((((((((((dr))))))))))))))))))))) said something that it's gotta be true (appeal to authority.) He was talking about a Phd but my example shows that university education does not make someone a magical truth teller.

go be a snarky redditor libtard jew somewhere else dude

>>11100869
are you claiming that (((climate scientists))) have never falsified data or exaggerated data or predictive models????

are you saying scientists are immune from bias??

what about economists that make predictive models on economic impact of climate change??

are they all perfect???

also what abotu the hockey stick?

>>11101120
Learn2read untermensh. When I put those "" around his title I was mocking that dude, because he doesn't have a real title. He failed in his studies, because he couldn't write a disertation. He's faggot with no authority.

btw intelligent people have no problem passing such trivialities as university tests. Only people of lesser genetic worth do.

>>11101107
>1800 1985 is the first tiem temperature is uncorrelated to tsi

DING DING DING! We have a winner folks! now for our bonus question what's suddenly different after the industrial revolution!?!?!?!?!

>>11101093
green house gasses transmit short wavelengths and absorb long wavelengths slowing the rate of heat transfer into space.

>>11101158
my argument still applies because it's fallacious for you to discredit someone just because they dont have a Phd

>btw intelligent people have no problem passing such trivialities as university tests. Only people of lesser genetic worth do.

actually it's the other way around.. people who are actually smart cant stand being forced to memorize a bunch of jewey pointless shit and the only creativity that universities bread is people who are good at cheating

https://news.uark.edu/articles/41210/research-suggests-creative-people-do-not-excel-in-cognitive-control

success is the best measure of intelligence so why are so many phds lower middle class???? why are so many billionaires drop outs??? why do artists have a tendency to drop out??

>>11101164
the correlation got stronger after the industrial revolution but the current cycle started in 1800.. i argued this over and over again in the other thread

C02 levels were correlated before the industrial revolution

idk what youre trying to prove but there are many micro time periods over thousands of years where temperature and solar tsi fell out of correlation briefly but the macro trend was correlation always

im not saying there is no acceleration of the warming phase because of emissions

are you saying that we would not be in a warming cycle if it had not been for the industrial revolution?

>>11101175
what is producing the wavelengths in the first place?

>>11101258
>what is producing the wavelengths in the first place
https://youtu.be/x26a-ztpQs8?t=39m

>>11101058
> posts a top 10
... Why aren't you posting the reddit science section?

Anyway I will post a document of oil company subsidies.

https://newclimateeconomy.report/2015/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2015/11/Fossil-fuel-subsidy-reform_from-rhetoric-to-reality.pdf

Do mind though the font is very awful to read. Very interesting takeaways are found though:

> Taking into account these gaps, Koplow (2014) added the available data on subsidies for fossil fuels, renewable energy and nuclear power and calculated that a total of $840 billion was spent on energy subsidies annually (roughly 1% of global GDP), of which fossil fuel subsidies make up roughly 70%.

Under 5.2.1
> Recent research has also found that Exxon Mobil and Shell are the third and sixth most significant lobbyists of EU institutions, spending almost €10 million a year.134

The reason why Shell uses green investment and will probably take over an alternative if given the opportunity is because they get a ton of government subsidies. My government (Netherlands alone) gives them a ton of subsidy I don't know the exact amount there are various Dutch sources reporting very different numbers. The take away though is that Shell has money and connections to powerful people (fact). They use this money to leverage their position and will adopt alternatives through government money if needed. This is because due to connections + money they have a much better lobbying power than other groups so if forms of alternative energy would become an existential threat they will likely change business model.

In my country they just use the government bucks to invest in green and keep up a good image etc. They will use the green lobby as a way to say "look we need subsidy to change our business model and we'll develop green alternatives''. And it actually works for them as well lol.

>>11101288
what's perturbing the EM field that the greenhouse is capturing?

>>11101138
are you saying shitposting shills are immune from bias??

>>11101289
why is the qatari prince funding al jazeera to promote climate alarmism?

could it be that a cap and trade system would make oil reserves of established oil producers worth more money???

sure maybe frackers would get fucked, but you think saudi wont be able to sell their oil over time (desert nigger oil is 4 dollars a barrel at the pump,) which is finite???

>>11101291
>word salad
Please translate into non-autistic

>>11101300
question with a question

>>11101307
in our solar system what is the largest emitter of electromagnetic waves?

>>11101308
answer with a answer

>>11101315
NBC?

>>11101315
>in our solar system what is the largest emitter of electromagnetic waves?
My e-dildo collection.

Are you trying and failing to make an argument, or do you just enjoy posting pointless questions and patting your own ass for being the next Socrates?

>>11101315
John R. Brinkley

>>11101326
I'm waiting for him to outright say he's the only one that's realized the sun is earths primary source of thermal energy. And that no one in the history of mankind has used TSI to compute the earths energy balance. and If he ever figures out how small the changes in TSI he's sperging out over are I just want to see how strong his cognitive dissonance can become

Why are we still having these debates where people post papers they barely understand, attack sources they haven't read, argue ad hominems, appeals to authority, and quote conspiracy theories?

Man made climate change is so easily provable you test it in your garage.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPRd5GT0v0I

Holy fuck, why are we still having this debate?

>>11101258
Okay, I think I understand your argument now. You're arguing that climate change isn't as bad as people say it is because we're already in a warming trend and any warming caused by man made greenhouse gases is nothing compared to what warming we'll get from normal cycles.

Is that your argument? Because that's just dumb fuckery.

Here's the Steffan-boltzmann energy balance equation
https://scied.ucar.edu/planetary-energy-balance-temperature-calculate

You understand that right? Hopefully you're not arguing from an uneducated or an undereducated position and I don't have to go through the explanation of blackbody radiation or color spectrums and all that shit and just get to the meat of the debate and where your flaw lies.

Some things we know:

The total energy the Earth receives from the sun.
The overall temperature of the Earth
How much contribution the Sun has on Earth's temperature.

Hint, it's 253 degrees Kelvin. The rest is caused by greenhouse gasses trapping outgoing heat, a total of about 34 degrees C. We know the absorption spectrum of the atmosphere and I'll spare you the calculus but based on all that water vapor accounts for about 90% of heat trapped in the atmosphere and CO2 about 10%. 10% of 34 degrees is about 3 degrees. Therefore a doubling of CO2 will raise the temperature of the earth another 3 degrees.

Right? This isn't rocket surgery. I spared you the calculus so the only thing left is simple algebra. You must accept that a doubling of CO2 in the atmosphere will raise the temperature about 3 degrees and have absolute devastating consequences on weather and climate.

You lose. Stop arguing.

We are saying that climatologists have been caught lying, and there is a huge motivation to exaggerate, and the economic models are alarmist.

We're also saying that the proposed solutions are terrible, authoritarian, and probably worse than global warming itself. Additional nuclear fission and fusion would be better than wind and solar and by the time global warming *might* be a problem economically we will have cheap fusion to the point where we can absorb enough carbon to offset the situation. Additionally the economic cost of cap and trade would be higher than building sea walls.

Also there is an energy cartel, and the saudis and qataris using media organizations like Al Jazeera to promote climate alarmism, is proof of it.

>>11101359
nice try to strawman us with "you believe there is NO global warming"

also we believe we would be in a warming cycle regardless of emissions but emissions are accelerating the warming cycle which began in 1800

>>11101416
>any warming caused by man made greenhouse gases is nothing compared to what warming we'll get from normal cycles.
didnt say that

>>11101424
Then what's the argument? I'm simply trying to follow here.

So we can't trust NASA and climate scientists because they're working in their own self interests to prop up the green energy industry but we can trust Big oil companies like Shell and big mining companies because they aren't working for their own self interests to prop up an industry? They give us jobs or something?

>>11101433
im busy rn but just tell me when you think the world c02 level will double?

like what year?

and also when it really comes down to it the argument hinges on what you value as an individual.. i would rather risk the unknown of temperature affect weather and economies in the future in order to avoid globalist energy cartel cap and trade cuckism scams

obviously you are the kind of person that much prefers other men telling you what to do than any kind of hypothetical risk

>>11101438
>but we can trust Big oil
why are the saudis and qataris using their state media, such as Al Jazeera, to promote climate alarmism???

could it be that people with oil reserves stand to profit more over time from a cap and trade system????

>>11101447

But that makes no sense. If we all go 100% green then how do the saudis profit off that? They got nobody to sell oil to and it's their biggest and if not, only export. They'd effectively go bankrupt overnight.

>>11101440
We're already suffering the consequences of climate change NOW and we haven't even reached a doubling yet.

You think this is okay?
https://time.com/coral/
You think this is okay?
https://phys.org/news/2017-01-effects-glaciers-tropical.html
You think this is okay?
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/2019/04/world-mountain-glaciers-melting-sea-level-rise/
You think this is okay?
https://www.livescience.com/64535-climate-change-health-deaths.html
You think this is okay?
https://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2019/09/25/Climate-report-1-billion-will-face-water-food-shortages-by-2050/2371569409065/
You think this is okay?
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/08/climate/climate-change-food-supply.html

Because you have some conspiracy theory about global capitalists and energy production? Listen up friend. The cost of doing nothing is far greater than the cost of making changes now.

The risk is not 'hypothetical' It's happening NOW.
https://thehill.com/opinion/energy-environment/409002-the-global-climate-refugee-crisis-has-already-begun
https://sealevelrise.org/states/florida/

>>11101462
>global capitalists
nice job trying to shoe horn capitalism in there

it is objectively anti free market to create a UN protected energy cartel

by calling it a conspiracy are you denying that cap and trade is the most politically popular option and it's the option that will have the middle class pay for most of the consequences????

>>11101462
>You think this is okay?
>https://time.com/coral/
>You think this is okay?
>https://phys.org/news/2017-01-effects-glaciers-tropical.html
>You think this is okay?
>https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/2019/04/world-mountain-glaciers-melting-sea-level-rise/
>You think this is okay?
>https://www.livescience.com/64535-climate-change-health-deaths.html
>You think this is okay?
>https://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2019/09/25/Climate-report-1-billion-will-face-water-food-shortages-by-2050/2371569409065/
>You think this is okay?
>https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/08/climate/climate-change-food-supply.html

i dont give a fuck about animals or africa and i value cheap energy above most things because im not a bootlicking welfare queen

>>11101440
that's entirely up to us
RCP 8.5 assumes no efforts to reduce emissions. Which fortunately isn't looking likely. 6.0 assumes emissions peak in 2080 then decline, 4.5 2040. Currently somewhere between 4.5 and 6 seems most likely. So we're looking at about 2060.

>>11101483
Spoken like a true sociopath, the only time you'll care is when the midwest's crops fail due to heat blight and you're stuck paying 100$ a pound for steak.

>>11100076
most scientists just copy what the one or two smartest ones are doing

>>11101438
>So we can't trust NASA and climate scientists because they're working in their own self interests to prop up the green energy industry

why are they against nuclear?? why would you trust one group with a blatant motivation over another??? i will freely admit that frackers and more independent venture deep water drillers have an incentive to discredit climate change, because they are at risk for being denied permits. But do you not understand that big companies with state connections have an interest in raising the price of oil?!??!

Fracking and shale deposits are not profitable unless oil costs a certain amount. The saudis and qataris can pump oil for 4 dollars a barrel so they are always good even they are funding climate alarmism, why do you think that is???? You think the saudis are just informing you of climate change out of the goodness of their heart?!!?!??!?!?

but do you get the difference between being reasonable about the options in the future and alarmism

>WE GOTTA SURRENDER OUR FREEDOMS NOW!!!
>OUR HOUSE IS ON FIRE REe LOL xDdddd

or we just fuckin' deal with it when it comes down to it and we'll be better off if energy is super cheap so that coastal residents will have an easier time relocating (if they have to) or they can build sea walls??? is that hard to understand????

why are you not as worried about asteroids or a fucking solar flare that could do WAYYYYYYY more damage over a much shorter period of time???!?!?

are you fucking aware that we just barely missed a solar flare, by 11 days, unironically in 2012??? you realize millions would have fucking died?!?!??! where are all the liberal do gooders promoting power grid upgrades to protect us from a similar event?!?!?! in the 1800s a fucking solar flare cuased telegram poles to catch fire!... you realize what that would do now?!?!? Anyone with an older un upgraded grid would be left wihtout power for potentially months!!! and it would cost a fuck ton

>>11101503
>why are they against nuclear?
economics mostly, renewables beat nuclear by every possible metric, without concerns about safety and proliferation.

>ig companies with state connections have an interest in raising the price of oil?!??!
So you claim that a carbon tax with proportional redistribution somehow makes oil companies more competitive? When renewables are already competitive? Please never try to talk about economics again you're clearly braindead.
>funding climate alarmism, why do you think that is
we addressed it several times in the thread already, they stand to lose more than they gain from climate change so they report on the truth it's simple.

>or we just fuckin' deal with it when it comes down to it and we'll be better off if energy is super cheap so that coastal residents will have an easier time relocating (if they have to) or they can build sea walls??? is that hard to understand????
coastal damage will far exceed costs from an energy transition.
What's your plan to preserve agriculture? With 3C of warming the % of days over 90 degrees in the midwest with increase drastically, destroying corn and onions yields. What's your plan to prevent this? Air conditioning and entire continent? Not to mention water shortages.

>>11101343
>how small the changes in TSI
wtf does that have to do with solar panels, with 1000x more energy than needed coming as light?

>>11101503

Okay but if the saudis really are funding all this climate alarmist propaganda then they're just shooting themselves in the foot for no good reason. People buy into the alarmism they promote and what, we go full green energy? Full nuclear? Either scenario they lose out on their western customers and a fuckton of money. What if the rest of the world follows suit? Then they'd have nobody to sell their oil to and they'd just go back to being some irrelevent backwater shithole again. Wouldn't it make more sense for them to play down concerns over climate change so they can keep selling oil as long as possible? Why spend all this money to orchestrate this global event just so you can jack up the price of oil for two decades at most? They got nothing planned after that. There's nothing left for them to export after that. If this is what they're doing then they're truly retarded.

>>11101490
>Spoken like a true sociopath
nahh actually im extremely empathetic and that's why i can tell the people promoting climate alarmism, and the associated carbon taxes or cap and trade system. have malevolent authoritarian cartel-like ulterior motives

the fact you wont even admit those things shows you are not a reasonable person to discuss this with.. and what about geoengineering?!?!? If the WORST CASE scenario turns out to be true then we still have a bunch of terraforming options on the table, some of which have already had some development, like stratospheric aerosol injection (artificial volcano blast.)

it's totally irrational to look at hte worst case predictions and then go straight to "we need to give all our power to this very small group of people and make energy way more expensive!" I thought libtards were all about "Muh 1 percent?" What about the people brokering cap and trade?? Why are you so forgiving of them???

and cheaper energy means the markets are better able to respond to future threats, such as solar flares, asteroids, or even the worst case "our house is on fire" scenarios...

if you were actually even a little bit reasonable you would consider other options but you don't which shows you have an extreme, masochistic, bias towards cucking yourself... or you are just straight up a shill or something

>>11101517
read the post again anon you're clearly confused

>>11101511
>without concerns about safety and proliferation.
i dont believe it.. it's only expensive because dumb regulations

what would the cost of plutonium or uranium be wihtout regulations???

>>11101416
>>11101424
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth's_energy_budget

>>11101519
>i dont give a fuck about animals or africa and i value cheap energy above most things because im not a bootlicking welfare queen
wow so much empathy, you really seem like a good person anon the rest of your post is just so full of absolute ignorance of basic economics I don't even know where to start.

>>11101523
>wihtout regulations
>oh noes, reality
kek, erry time

>>11101523
>what would the cost of plutonium or uranium be without regulations???
priceless because no one would be left to mine the fucking stuff, you seriously believe nuclear should be completely deregulated? Please for the love of god attempt to justify this utter retardation.

>>11101523
fuel isn't even the expensive part of nuclear you ignorant fool

>>11101518
>saudis really are funding all this climate alarmist propaganda
theyre not funding ALL of it (nice alarmist twist)

theyre demonstrably funding some of it

>People buy into the alarmism they promote and what, we go full green energy? Full nuclear? Either scenario they lose out on their western customers and a fuckton of money.

you fucking kidding me? no one seriously thinks we will go full greta retard? That is the overton window they are shifting YOU into. They KNOW that the most likely outcome is cap and trade and if you look at it the IPCC has promised exceptions and permits to the biggest producers/polluters currently.. ie China and Saudis. The pollution credits they promised China are higher than they even use right now. THe people that would be most impacted by cap and trade is the middle class and they will offload carbon credits to them through options trading kind of like subprime mortgages.

You should look into man.. it's a full blown scam

even greta tardburg said "developing countries should still get to use oil" or something shit which gives the whole ideology a loop hole for southeast asia, and the only way they got china on board was to over promise them for the future.. they dont have to start reducing their emissions for like another 10 years according to the agreement and would get to increase it until then

and it just has that white protestant self flagellating vibe to it where other countries would get to use cheap energy but the american middle class would be cucked, and white protestants LOVE self cuckery

>Wouldn't it make more sense for them to play down concerns over climate change so they can keep selling oil as long as possible?

it's IMPOSSIBLE for them to eliminate ALL oil sales and they KNOW that with their partnership with the american military complex if only four states are allowed to produce oil it will be Saudi Arabia, UAE, Kuwait, and Qatar! Perfect for them! Maybe there is a tiny risk but HUGE reward.

>>11101547
First of all, you've ignored all legitimate science, because you can't refute any of it. So fuck off with your claims of alarmism. Second your entire bullshit conspiracies fall apart instantly when you consider the economic growth of renewables and just how competitive they are. At the rate we're going renewables are already more economical than most fossil fuels, and a carbon tax or cap and trade system will only accelerate their growth. We were going to move away from oil anyways might as well do it sooner and not destabilize the entire planet in the process.

>>11101533
it's a fucking measurement of the price to run a fucking reactor you greta tardburg

>>11101529
>believe nuclear should be completely deregulated?
I didn't say we should deregulate it completely over night but we should always be striving to have as little regulation and government VIOLENCE as possible. And eventually property rights will be all we need for safety of the species. You follow special rules when you go to church camp don't you? You will be kicked out if you say naughty words. If we work hard at replacing governments with market forces property agreements will rebalance out such that it does a better job protecting people than corrupt bureaucracy.

Above is speculative but the point is nuclear is OVER REGULATED and there is very deliberate red tape to keep 99.99 percent of people out of it. For example if you have someone who is an entrepreneur who has a sketchy record he should still be able to build a reactor in the desert with a reasonable amount of oversight that didn't cost 250k per inspector.

Liberals talk about human rights all the time, like right to healthcare, well don't you think an entrepreneur has a right to harness the most powerful source of energy on this planet? Think of all the cool atompunk shit we would have. Atompunk was thought up when they thought energy would be dirt cheap but computing expensive.. they didn't foresee the regulatory energy cartel!

>>11101528
reality is nuclear is stupid regulated to a point where it's fucking retarded.. we could account for everything way cheaper.. even if nuclear power plants had to be built only in certain areas or something.. are you really denying that there isn't an incentive for governments engaging in cartel-like behavior when it comes to nuclear energy?

then there are all the fucking missing nuclear warheads which are probably in the hands of international crime syndicates. You think they really are "lost?" Why don't we get Dr. Evil type shit all the time? also fusion

>>11101560
>because you can't refute any of it.
you cant support it either.. all you have is quotes and speculative predictions from a group of "scientists" that have lied in the past and have a huge motivation to exaggerate some more and spout alarmist economic models of the future that have questionable basis in reality... EAT FUCKING BUGS DUDE OUR HOUSE IS ON FIRE DONT YOU SEE IT?????

>just how competitive they are.
they're only competitive because of REGULATION (cartel shit)

if a common person like you or me wants to get into energy it's basically the only option because of regulations but nothing can beat saudi oil, russian gas, or fucking a lump of coal you are sitting on

>At the rate we're going renewables are already more economical than most fossil fuels
only because of the energy cartel

>and a carbon tax or cap and trade system will only accelerate their growth
how has artificially propping up one thing in a market and artificially punishing another worked out historically???

>We were going to move away from oil anyways
bro markets decide that type of thing not mere mortals

>might as well do it sooner and not destabilize the entire planet in the process
YEAH BECAUSE THE GLOBALISTS HAVE SUCH A TRACK RECORD OF KEEPING THE WORLD STABLE RIGHT?!?!??! JUST ASK MY FRIEND FROM IRAQ WHO HAD HALF HIS FAMILY KILLED?!??! OR HOW ABOUT THE FUCKING BOAT FULLS OF SOROS IMMIGRANTS???? HMMM?? YEAH REALLY TRUSTWORTHY SMALL GROUP OF INDIVIDUALS TO GIVE A BUNCH OF POWER TO?!??!? SOOOOO STABLE!!!!!!!!!

>accelerate their growth
>We were going to move away from oil anyways

WHAT ABOUT NUCLEAR FUSION YOU DUMB ASS?!?!?!??!?!?!?

>>11101526
you're the one promoting government violence.. the road to hell is paved with good intentions

>your post is just so full of absolute ignorance of basic economics

OH SORRY MY PROFESSOR WASN'T A KEYNESIAN LEFTIST JEW?!??? ARE YOU GOING TO BLAME TURMP FOR THE UPCOMING RECESSION????

but at least say why you think it's retarded instead of just resorting to personal attacks.. my guess is you will say something keynesian though?

eat bugs guise

our house is on fire!

>>11101567
>it's a fucking measurement of the price to run a fucking reactor you greta tardburg
it's clearly labeled as price of U3O8, read your own fucking graphs for the love of god.

>Above is speculative but the point is nuclear is OVER REGULATED
I disagree, in fact fukushima strongly implies it's under regulated now substantiate your claims, what % of annual operational costs are due to regulations, and what % of that can be eliminated safely, please cite sources.

>entrepreneur has a right to harness the most powerful source of energy on this planet?
An entrepreneur has 0 right to endanger everyone around him without sufficient oversight.

>also fusion
pipe dream until we get results, try again.

eat busg

>>11101511

>renewables beat nuclear in muh single study while every country that has shifted to renewables has seen energy costs skyrocket and reliance on fossil fuels go up to make up for latency

The only countries to decarbonize their electric grid are sweden and france due to nuclear and hydro.

>>11101597
>The only countries to decarbonize
exactly, replacing functioning infrastructure is always more expensive than the status quo, at least when you don't take into account externalities.

>>11101452

The same way that Germany and California going 100% green did.

By making fossil fuels run to make up for latency and removing nuclear as a supplier of baseload.

>>11101578
>>because you can't refute any of it.
>you cant support it either.. all you have is quotes and speculative predictions from a group of "scientists" that have lied in the past and have a huge motivation to exaggerate some more and spout alarmist economic models of the future that have questionable basis in reality... EAT FUCKING BUGS DUDE OUR HOUSE IS ON FIRE DONT YOU SEE IT?????

You've failed to show any evidence of lies, and can't even address the basic science on a science board. I have peer reviewed extensive empirical evidence that virtually all current warming is due to human activity, and will only accelerate if emissions continue. You have some quotes you took out of context, and baseless speculation. Fuck off with your complete lack of rationality.

>>11101606
Good thing storage is already cheaper than nuclear, the main problem renewables are facing in adoption is how cheap NG is right now. Which is why decarbonization requires economic incentives.

>>11101595
>it's clearly labeled as price of U3O8
i really was hoping was someone else tell me the cost of plutonium with and without regulations.. Because plutonium is artificially created and so it must be correlated to the cost of running a reactor. But i cant find it quickly on google so i give up lol.

>fukushima strongly implies it's under regulated
HMM WHY CAN'T OLD REACTORS GET REPLACED WITH NEW ONES?? NO WAY IT CANT BE THE STIFLING REGULATIONS THAT ONLY ALLOW THE GRANDFATHERED INSTITUTIONS?! NO WE NEED MORE REGULATIONS DADDY!!

The markets would have upgraded or replaced fukushima and the like. And also we have to allow for some mistakes to be made because no one is perfect. The impact on the ocean was pretty minimal. A better thing than government regulations would be third party advocacy groups that helped to protect the surrounding property owners through collective bargaining and negotiated the property agreement for the reactor in the first place. People were very unaware of the safety shortcomings and property owners and market participants need to be better informed so they can vote with their dollars.

>what % of annual operational costs are due to regulations
https://www.americanactionforum.org/research/putting-nuclear-regulatory-costs-context/

i dont have time to really go into the details of that article but it's a fuckton.. they have a chart that says some plants spend 95 percent of their profit to cover regulations? And the cost of building and decommissioning is in the billions which I imagine is mostly permits and bullshit like that. I think the lower costs of annual regulatory budget are for newer plants that havne't had to get rid of as much fuel? It's a shit ton though

>the average nuclear plant must bear a regulatory burden of $60 million annually
>Annual ongoing regulatory costs range from $7.4 million to $15.5 million per plant, mostly related to paperwork compliance.

>>11101595
>An entrepreneur has 0 right to endanger everyone around him without sufficient oversight.

K so someone that owns a truck company can't endanger you when they drive a truck past your honda accord?? We always have to accept some risk and markets are better at mitigating risks than government and give people an opportunity to decide just how much risk they are comfortable with instead of a bureaucrat telling them they are not allowed to work for less than a certain amount of money for example, which limits their options.

And it's not about safety. The fact you think it is shows how naive and biased you are. If it was only about safety then there would be opportunities for entrepreneurs to build reactors in remote locations for bitcoin mining or something shit like that but there is not. You can't go near nuclear without being anointed by god himself. Forget research and innovation that could produce safer designs LOL.

>pipe dream until we get results

you dont think iter is going to work?? you dont think a similar design with high temperature superconductors will be much better??? the only reason fusion WILL fail is because the energy cartell WILL find a way to keep it out of the hands of entrepreneurs.

>>11101670
>K so someone that owns a truck company can't endanger you when they drive a truck past your honda accord?? We always have to accept some risk and markets are better at mitigating risks than government and give people an opportunity to decide just how much risk they are comfortable with instead of a bureaucrat telling them they are not allowed to work for less than a certain amount of money for example, which limits their options.

The amount of regulation that went into making the level of risk acceptable in this situation is massive. Licensing, road maintenance, crash testing even down to mandating exactly how many hours a day that driver is allowed to drive. It's all made the roads a much safer place and is completely acceptable and necessary just like regulations on nuclear power.

>you dont think iter is going to work?
I'm not betting my children's future on ITER working well enough for fusion to out compete fossil fuels in my lifetime.

>>11101618
>Which is why decarbonization requires economic incentives

nah it just needs the energy cartel to stop being jews which will never happen but it's the real solution

>>11101612
>I have peer reviewed extensive empirical evidence that virtually all current warming is due to human activity, and will only accelerate if emissions continue

OH WOW SO I SHOULD TAKE YOUR WORD FOR IT?????

>You have some quotes you took out of context, and baseless speculation.
I took ONE quote out of context probably set as a trap by wikipedia and it still showed the hockey stick was exaggerated. How can you be soooo sure that the articles you've read about the whole controversy weren't biased??? You are doing ZERO critical thinking.

So do you want to go through the emails?? I've already wasted too much time with this but you should be called out for saying the stupid shit you are saying. I'll just start posting them.. maybe some are out of context but if you believe the "8 independent committees found no wrongdoing" quote you are a fucking MMMMMUUUUPPPPPETTTTTT

http://www.assassinationscience.com/climategate/1/FOIA/mail/1120593115.txt
>programmer/hacker complaining of all their fuckery in changing shit
>artificially adjusted to look closer to the real temperatures
>hundreds if not thousands of dummy stations

http://www.assassinationscience.com/climategate/1/FOIA/mail/1120593115.txt
>The scientific community would come down on me in no uncertain terms if I said the world had cooled from 1998," wrote Phil Jones of the University of East Anglia in Britain in 2005. He went on: "Okay it has but it is only seven years of data and it isn't statistically significant."

http://www.assassinationscience.com/climategate/1/FOIA/mail/1212063122.txt
>Can you delete any emails you may have had with Keith re AR Keith will do likewise. He's not in at the moment - minor family crisis.Can you also email Gene and get him to do the same? I don't have his new email address.

>>11101612
>You have some quotes you took out of context, and baseless speculation.
You are reallllllly PEARL CLUTCHING on that ONE quote i fucked up. ARE YOU SAYING THAT NO "CLIMATOLOGIST" EVER HAS FALSIFIED DATA OR EXAGGERATED?!??!?!?!?!??!??!?! ARE CLIMATE "SCIENTISTS" MAGICALLY IMMUNE FROM BIAS?!??!?!??!??!?

>complete lack of rationality.
Oh no that would be trusting people who are telling you "THE WORLD IS ENDING TEH SKY IS ON FIRE" and trying to get you to vote for policies that give them MONEY AND POWER/CONTROL?!?!

Will you agree that Alex Jones has a business model of selling doom and gloom to an audience and then telling them the only way to "fight the globalists" is to buy his supplements??? (hes controlled op but that's another story)

Being overly trusting is not rational.. advocating for authoritarianism based on highly speculative economic predictions is not fucking rational. It's more rational to take a CONSERVATIVE wait and see approach and then deal with any problems once they become evident. You are literally saying we should raise the price of energy and use government violence based on worst case scenarios like fucking massive hurricanes all the time and shit like that. We can deal with higher sea levels if we really had to. ANd i would rather lose a few cities than pay more taxes and be restrained even more by a global banking/energy/transportation CARTEL... you wouldn't because you are a KEK.


http://www.assassinationscience.com/climategate/1/FOIA/mail/1107454306.txt
>If they ever hear there is a Freedom of Information Act now in the UK, I think I'll delete the file rather than send to anyone. We also have a data protection act, which I will hide behind.

http://www.assassinationscience.com/climategate/1/FOIA/mail/1089318616.txt
>even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is

http://www.assassinationscience.com/climategate/1/FOIA/mail/1106322460.txt
>Proving bad behavior here is very difficult. If you think Saiers is in the greenhouse skeptics camp, then, if we can find documentary evidence of this, we could go through official AGU channels to get him ousted. Even this would be difficult.

>>11101681
>Licensing, road maintenance, crash testing
already wayyy too much regulation.. too fucking hard to start a car company and most of the money goes into corrupt bureaucracy and not actually increasing safety.. ive worked for government and i know how they operate which is they do it in the least efficient manner to extract the most amount of money

No reason it should cost millions to crash test a few cars and also if truck drivers want to take drugs and stay up for 48 hours as long as they can pass whatever coordination test we set out for them. Why dont the same rules apply to non commercial drivers??? Only truckers get fucked because it's a labor law designed to mess with the market like minimum wage.

>It's all made the roads a much safer place
People should have different routes with different levels of safety so that you can pick how much of a risk you want to accept. And all roads should be toll roads.

>I'm not betting my children's future on ITER

Bahahahahaha what a fucking cuck holy fucking shit. As if you are anything besides a dumb fucking NEET anyway?? You are not going to fucking reproduce dude.. you are fucking HERE hahahaha. And even if by some miracle you manage to father a child you are sooooo fucked if you think that GOVERNMENT is going to save them. IF YOU ARE NOT FUCKING RICH ENOUGH TO AFFORD PROTECTION FROM SLIGHTLY HIGHER TEMPERATURES YOU SHOULD NOT FUCKING HAVE KIDS YOU FUCKING WELFARE QUEEN WANNABE GRANT CHASER.

Fucking dilate and eat a fucking cockroach you fucking nigger.

THE ONLY WAY FUSION WILL BE STOPPED IS IF THE ENERGY CARTEL YOU ARE HELPING STOPS IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

>>11101417
>We are saying that climatologists have been caught lying, and there is a huge motivation to exaggerate, and the economic models are alarmist.
And all three of those are lies.