/sci/ - Science & Math

>>11149810
Defund UCs

Stop pretending for us to have an impact on it. The Sahara used to be a rainforest. It took a hundred years for it to turn into the driest desert on the planet. If earth choses to slightly alter its position, things change. Nothing we can do about it.

>>11149810
All stop signs are yield signs.

>>11149813
Who?
>>11149814
https://xkcd.com/1732/

remove boomer

>>11149810
Mandatory "no preheat" instructions on pizza boxes. Do not cook lasagna noodles, just soak until soft.

>>11149810
Fill the Panama Canal.
>>11149821
Fuck you. Remove those who disrespect boomers.

>>11149819
Le epik fabricated research published by people who operate on questionable models and are willing to make up evidence to finance their make-belief scientific field. Temperature changes happen, and these pseuds can't change that.
https://www.nature.com/scitable/knowledge/library/green-sahara-african-humid-periods-paced-by-82884405/

>>11149818
What?
>>11149821
Why?
>>11149824
Won't be enough

>>11149810
Gear bicycles to go 70 MPH.

>>11149826
Do you know what "average global temperature" means? Pro tip: sahara is not the globe

>>11149810
>climate change
Not science.

>>11149832
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climatology

>>11149831
Do you know what "actual evidence" means? Pro tip: It's not the fabricated claims you base your believes on.

>>11149827
Dude. All kinds of gas, rubber and brake materials are wasted, stopping at a 4 way when no one else is even there.

>>11149834
The evidence is listed on the right side of the image

>>11149833
Bullshitology. Is bullshit a science too?

>>11149839
If it uses the scientific method, yes

Find a way to detonate Krakotoa on command

>>11149842
Pretty sure it does.

>>11149834
Just use the data from your Exxon overlords

>>11149844
In order to?

>>11149844
How does that help

>>11149810
Stop daylight savings time. I don't care what time it is. Just quit fucking with it.

>>11149847
You do realize that in thermodynamics we understand that these models of infinite growth are usually wrong as there's a limit to work that can actually be done on the gases? Is one of the reasons why we came up with certain constants like a Planck's constant.
it seems clear that you're some sort of undergraduate or someone that's not familiar with the physics behind the graphs that you post.

>>11149865
It's not my graph. Exxon made it, and they never lie

>>11149868
People that think that are right are not lying.
Science is not faith based. If you don't understand what the graphs imply I the natural world you are a zealot not a thinker.

Nuclear war. Solves several root issues at once.

No survivors

>>11149865
the pic is a '80s prediction and is has been accurate as fuck
go back to blowjobbing retards

>>11149878
Hubble constant was accurate as fuck for a long time until it wasn't. If you don't understand the physics you are a retard repeating what others tell you.

>>11149878
You go to a UC huh?

>>11149828
If professional cyclists can't do 70mph on a flat surface then you sure as fuck ain't doing it. It takes a lot of energy to go that quickly.

Air resistance is your main enemy when you're trying to go that quickly, so your best bet would actually be an enclosed recumbent, for aerodynamic efficiency.

Pic related, which set the speed record for a human powered vehicle in 2016, at a speed of 89.59mph. But that was on a very slight downhill. And it was a guy who was presumably pretty fit and giving it everything he had.

https://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/a22946/human-powered-speed-record-aerovelo/

So yeah. With enclosed recumbents you can do 70mph but you'd probably need to expend quite a lot of energy to do it. And you'd probably need quite an expensive recumbent.

Why not speed up climate change to get over with it?

>>11149810
Well step one would be to sterilise drooling denialist retards like this:
>>11149814
>>11149826
>>11149832
>>11149834
>>11149839
>>11149865
>>11149873
>>11149886
>>11149889

>>11149886
Explain the physics

>>11149899
Citation needed. How do you know that deniers are the main contributors? A lot of them like to live effectively.

>>11149865
this random jumble of sentences has absolutely nothing to do with what you're replying to. Please for the love of god attempt to explain what was going through your clearly empty head when you typed this garbage.

>>11149900
There is a limit how much work co2 can do as an insulator / energy about before a state of equilibrium will be reached. There will be drop off from temperature where CO2 cannot do work as a "greenhouse gas" it's not an infinity climb. That kind of logic was disproven in the late 1800s.

>>11149907
Killing all deniers would eliminate most of the people blocking political action on climate change, which would allow us to reduce GHG emissions virtually overnight.

>>11149915
>infinity climb
Where did you get that strawman from?

It's the cirrrcle of life!

>>11149907
I didn't say they were the main contributors

The reason to sterilise them is because they are denying facts which is damaging to our survival as a species

You can be sterilised too because you're clearly on their side

>>11149915
>i can't read a y axis
jesus christ this might be the first time i've heard someone claim 3.2 is infinity

>>11149912
Just goes to show how retarded climate students are. They are not taught physics. They are taught memorized dogma

>>11149918
Oh. Because politics are efficient. Fuck off.

>>11149920
The Exxon graph assumes it. Post the paper the graph comes from and I'll show you

>>11149918
Always enjoyable to watch children argue geopolitics and business. Stick to your lab, but please, for the love of god, don't get involved in arguments outside of your containment space. There's a reason you people aren't allowed to talk to anything but erlenmeyer flasks.

>>11149926
please oh wise boomer, explain what physics concepts limit the greenhouse effect like you claim.

>>11149924
>UC education
Post the paper retard

>>11149927
they would be more efficient if we killed the retarded deniers, you can't deny this.

>>11149932
Post the paper and I'll break it down for you

>>11149923
Already sterile. Im on the middle side.
>>11149918
12 lanes of grabass in L.A. Real effective.

>>11149936
Not science
Go back to pol

>>11149933
have fun
>http://www.climatefiles.com/exxonmobil/1982-memo-to-exxon-management-about-co2-greenhouse-effect/

>>11149865
>infinite growth
No one claims that. You're pulling that out of your ass. On the millennial scales the ocean can regain its ability to uuptake that additional CO2 but in the meantime we'll have major climate upheaval

>>11149918
BASED and redpilled

>>11149926
>>11149927
>>11149930
>>11149939
>>11149942
>>11149943
>drooling denialist morons pretend that they're scientific, episode 999,999,999
Yeah you're going to be sterilised

>>11149874
How is this the only post here that mentions the term "nuclear"? THE ANSWER IS NUCLEAR POWER. HELLO!!

>>11149946
>Memo
WTF is this. Lol this isn't a scientific paper.
And by the way it does assume infinite growth. They don't present any case for their model other than a volume association with temperature not actually given with any physical explanation. they are comparing rates between different charts over a smal of time and called it good.
His also involves some quack science between the ratio between fossil fuel Reserves and a theoretical equilibrium with the atmosphere which was later proven to be untrue as of reservoirs are much bigger than originally estimated.
The data is straight copied from NOAA with the exxon advisors doing any verification on their own, so this becomes quite circular as referencing material as NOAA changed their model from this as one of their many models changes.
yep as they go through this all this references other material not included in the memo. There is no physical explanation for the connection between Rising temperature and CO2 presented in any sort of model supported by experiment or physics.
Have you actually read this or did you just take the graphs that seem like it supported your stance?
If you post the references I can break down the physics for you but this memo includes no physics.

>>11149971
You haven't read the "memo" clearly.

>>11149974
Very definition of blue pilled with a touch of black pill nihillism. Absolute retard.

Why does Trump try and deny climate change when actually his country will be on of the worst affected among developed nations?

>>11149989
>denialist moron tries to call people with facts on their side "retards"

>>11149993
>UC undergrads calling other people retards

>>11149990
I'll give you a hint: $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Oh, also, if you were affected by the fires in California, you'd know he doesn't give a shit about environmental disasters that occur in blue states. As long as his family stays in one of the less-affected red states, they can remain in the upper class while those near the coastline lose everything.

>>11150002
>Blaming California fires on climate when California ignored Forest services on danger and need for reducing density and fuel.

>>11149998
I don't even know what "UC" is lmao

If you're a climate denialist then by definition you're a drooling retard, lol.

>>11150002
Yeah true. But surely the US will have to take stock of reality at some point, otherwise the whole country will go to shit

>>11149990
Can't wait to watch Americans die from my European safe haven

>>11150013
Europans are retards

>>11150011
It can be both, you know. Californian politicians have the same concern for our well-being as any given Republican, but they always have and it's a little suspicious that the mismanagement is catching up to us all at once. I've lived here for 20 years, and I never saw the sky turn bright white until the destruction of Paradise.

>>11149810
C02 scrubbers
Anyone who thinks the world is going to come halt their own progression to come together and save the world is living in a fantasy land.

>>11149980
you keep moving the goalposts, but here's a report referenced in the previous link
>http://www.climatefiles.com/climate-change-evidence/1979-report-carbon-dioxide-climate/
I'd especially like you to explain section 3.1. Citations for the Delta Q estimates are in the text. Oh and please include citations for any claims you make.

>>11150031
can't wait for dumbass Americans to be eating bugs because the midwest is a desert. Bet they still figure out how to be fat as fuck.

>>11149810

Alien here: We won't allow your species to interfere with our terraforming efforts.

>>11150044

Forgot pic

>>11150032
Who's moving the goal post? There is clearly no physics presented in the Exxon memo and justification for the model other than loose correlation. Now that I point that out you go to a different report.
Blackbody radiation is limited and its luminosity based on temperature. because of the law of thermodynamics there is a limit to how much CO2 can do at certain temperatures. It does not self feed and some sort of perpetual motion machine, as it will reach a state of equilibrium.
This would be clearly understood if you understand how blackbody radiation works which is invoked with CO2.

>>11149810
>stop
Too late. What you should do in the future is to move to higher elevation, lol.

>>11150065
what evidence do you have which suggests the delta Q's referenced are at all unreasonable? Again please cite sources.

>>11150031
You say that but then it comes down to what's cheaper doesn't it? E.g. if it's cheaper to just install a load of solar panels and wind turbines, than it is to produce carbon capture technologies, then surely countries are more likely to use the former.

To put it more simply, if you think countries have no incentive to spend money on renewable energy, then why would they spend money on carbon capture? Surely if they're not going to invest in zero-carbon technologies then they're not going to invest in carbon capture either?

In reality many tools will be used of course. Pretty much every country is investing in renewable energies, so that will be part of the solution, and yes carbon capture will probably be another part too.

>>11149918
Your hearts in the right place, but it's not people influencing politicians; it's the corporations. Personally, I think the CEOs know exactly what they're doing and only pretend to be denialists, and that extends to the politicians they bribe.

>>11150073
Show your work and we can have a discussion.
You made a claim in the affirmative it's one you. But we will find is that these figures are being shoehorned in and you're not being derived from experimentation.

>>11150078
I would consider the people funding denialists to be denialists themselves, especially if they know they're lies.

>>11150072
>Too late.
No it's not. If everyone died today, the Earth will just restore to its temperatures. Everyone who is saying "too late" is a retarded alarmist

>>11150081
>>11150078
Jesus Christ stop talking politics retarded nerds who never took a geopolitics 101 or a history course or political theory or know anything at all about how the world works. The thread is about SCIENTIFIC ways to stop climate change, it's not a /pol/ thread to spew your misunderstandings about how the world works.

>>11150080
It's properly cited in the paper so I assumed you could find it yourself, but I guess i can spoonfeed you as well.
Here's one of the papers referenced
>https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1029/JC084iC08p04949

Here's some more recent work on the topic.
>https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0804/0804.1126.pdf

>>11150129
You don't get it, Anon. If the data doesn't support his claim, it's obviously manipulated

>>11150132
i'm just waiting for him to admit he has no data

>>11149852
He probably means like maybe the dust can cool the earth down or something

>>11150135
He doesn't need it, because the burden of proof is on you and you only have fake data

>>11149810
embrace climate change it's making the northern continents more habitable

>>11150154
>fake data
citation needed

>>11150158
Because the physics™

>>11149810
There's no such thing as climate changes. The reason the planet is warming is because of this little thing called THE SUN. Perhaps you've heard of it?

Climate change is a concept invented by communists and libtards in order to destroy Capitalist economies and erode our rights and liberties. If you believe in climate change you're a filthy commie and you don't belong in this country and you should fuck off to North Korea you fucking traitor.

>>11150162
i'm pretty sure this is satire but just in case

>>11150129
No experimental data
Nice goalpost move.
I'm sure you can make it in climatology with approximation but if you want to come to a science and math board maybe you should show your work and not your faith

>>11150106
Climate change has become a political issue whether you like it or not. All the technology in the world won't help stop global warming if people don't vote to use it.

most of my beliefs on anything arent based in proof at all. i dont believe in climate change, not because i have proof of the contrary. but because jews and gay people like it and its on my tv. when have jews and gays liked something on the tv that was good for anyone?

>>11150174
All experimental data is cited, you do know how to look up a citation right?
How have the goalposts moved? it's all work that is referenced in the original publication by Exxon.
I'm still waiting for you to actually substantiate your claims.

>>11149918
>Killing all deniers would eliminate most of the people blocking political action on climate change
you forgot to add the part where you kill all yellow and brown and black people.

>>11150183
That's not experimental data. That is correlated data. Where is the data on the blackbody radiation of CO2? You rely heavily on correlation and don't even understand it.

>>11149978
Sorry, nuclear POWER solves little. First, there's only uranium for about 40 years. Yes, that'll buy us time until we switch completely to renewables. Second, reactors emit greenhouse gases, too (not CO2 obviously). From the nucular alchemy. Yup. Bet you didn't know that. Third, NP does not reduce the number of people on the planet and does not create a nuclear winter like NW does.

>>11150192
You can make correlated dada's between any selected. Of time as long as it suits the theory you want to support. By
cherry picking complex systems and limiting the amount of time that you allow for observation.
Yeah in order to justify the luminosity of CO2 blackbody radiation, they have skipped it in favor of proximation and Reliance on correlation.

>>11150189
>yellow
Yes.
>brown
Eh. I live in a predominantly Indian part of America, and while I kind of can't stand interacting with them, I have a feeling they'd get with the program if things got dire AND the West made a serious effort to collaborate.

The Chinese are hopeless, though, but I'm not sure if that can be helped.

>>11150154
>he
Kek

>>11149923
>damaging to our survival as a species
i love to watch death fearing atheists cry when their life or "the species" is threatened.

>>11150192
the experiments are all cited go look it up if you're curious

>>11150200
They are not. And you know they are not or at least you don't want to see because you're using faith rather than science to come to your conclusion.

>>11150177
Everything you say is embarrassingly retarded

>>11150194
>there's only uranium for about 40 years
Meme
>reactors emit greenhouse gases
Meme
>nucular alchemy
Kill yourself

>>11150197
>I have a feeling they'd get with the program
when was it about getting with the program? im just saying if were going to kill the orientals we might as well kill the browns and blacks too.

>>11149974
What are your contributions?

>>11150203
Clear example of goalpost moving on part of the co2 climate change proponent. as what was discuss was the physics behind CO2 blackbody radiation in which he responded with unrelated papers. And when pressed further on it makes the false claim that the originally requested data is in further citations.
it's clear that he doesn't know what he's talking about but doesn't want to admit so instead floods Links of papers that are unrelated to the original proposition.
Climatologists can run circles around people in Media but if you ask a physicist grounded in experimental outcomes he will not let you forget it.

>>11150194
>Bet you didn't know that.
I did know it. I find the "40 years" claim dubious, as it ignores the possibility of alternative nuclear fuels or more efficient power plants. Yes, the plants emit greenhouse gases, but you get so much more energy out of the deal that it's practically negligible compared to oil-based fuel.

We can't switch completely to renewable because of the fundamental nature of thermodynamics. It can theoretically become sustainable, but it's not feasible at all.

>>11150207
I literally stated a fact. I said something undeniably true, and that's retarded. Okay.

>>11150002
California deserves whatever abuse anyone gives them.
t. Californian

>>11149810
Implement national carbon taxes and a cap and trade bidding system for emissions rights, and reduce income tax relative to those tax earnings. This is the real, honest to god solution that humanity needs to implement tomorrow, in every country.

>>11150233
Uncle Tom.

>>11150223
wrong, the original discussion started with me requesting proof that estimates of climate sensitivity of 3C per doubling of CO2 are impossible, that retard has just run around in circles because he's fucking clueless and can't read a fucking paper, and apparently wants every single to re derive well know figures for absorption spectra from scratch every single time. He's doing this because he has absolutely no ground to stand on and clearly can't understand even the basics of the work discussed in the referenced papers. So instead he's dancing around the truth like it's fucking lava.

>>11150248
No it's very clear that way he asked for was the physics behind the claims. What he got were papers about the correlation of data when he was asking for the experimental data. From the Exxon document it made a claim of luminosity of blackbody radiation from CO2. But it gave no explanation of how they arrived at that figure.
The following paper that you provided also did not provide experimental data but simply restated as if it was fact. to which he responded to you that it was derived from there correlation and not from experimentation.
You further provided papers that continued along the lines of correlational facts rather than the experimental of CO2 providing the necessary Luminosity to support those facts.
So what happens is that the correlation references become circular where all CO2 is assigned responsibility for heat through blackbody radiation and that Luminosity is given by the correlated facts and not by experimentation.
That is completely circular. I'm in some cases may be a violation of the law thermodynamics. So it's completely understandable that he accuses you of goalpost moving when you haven't provided the original needed physics for him to break down for you because they simply are not in the sources that you're quoting.

>>11149890
Pretty sure some woman went way faster than that but whatever. I ain't gonna look for it. There are asterisks attached. A dual final drive with a big wheel while the smaller ones shift up at higher speeds and human leverage hydro assists for higher gear on a triple sprocket set. I don't care if nobody's done it or if it couldn't be called a bicycle.

You cannot do anything anymore. The ratio of absorption to emission of co2 and other greenhouse gases is getting lower day by day and its gonna reach the point of no return where the earth goes into a temporary ice age. All of this might happen in the next 50-80 years so be prepared for WW3, famines, and ice age

>>11149810
pump Atlantic ocean into Sahara and use massive solar stills to create freshwater oasiseses and slowly swallow the desert in trees

>>11150265
Apparently I need to teach you idiots how to read citations.

>The above mentioned seasonal latitudinal and inter- hemispheric differences in the CO: heating rates are caused by the temperature dependence of the 15-#m Planck function and that of the opacity of the CO: hot bands. Both the 15-#m Planck function and the CO: hot band opacities decrease exponentially with temperature [Augustsson and Rarnanathan, 1977

which when we follow the citation like someone with a functioning brain
>https://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/pdf/10.1175/1520-0469%281977%29034%3C0448%3AARCMSO%3E2.0.CO%3B2
Which is more applications to climate sensitivity, and literally it's first citation is this
>https://www.osapublishing.org/view_article.cfm?gotourl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Eosapublishing%2Eorg%2FDirectPDFAccess%2F70FFC645%2DBBC9%2D8A79%2D70411D4DD6A76518%5F12959%2Fao%2D1%2D6%2D759%2Epdf%3Fda%3D1%26id%3D12959%26seq%3D0%26mobile%3Dno&org=University%20of%20Colorado%20at%20Boulder%20Library

So now that I've taught you how to read a published paper, could you tell me what exactly makes any of this completely impossible like you claim? I can't wait to hear your next excuse.

if we killed everyone who cares about climate change then it won't be a problem anymore

i am an expert at problem solving
we may need to kill the people who have a problem with us killing the people who are against climate change though

>>11150333
scientifically speaking what's the best way to determine who needs to die? Should 4chan and social media posting history be submitted as evidence before the death panels?

Create a bio weapon that is difficult for modern medicine to treat, send it to overpopulated eastern countries, watch the population go down. Most of the world's carbon comes from there, so if you live in the first world, all your activism and virtue signaling is probably pointless unless you can destroy all the corporate factories the west puts in the east, or seriously cull their numbers.

>>11150336
Just make a government watchlist of everyone who protests for climate change and then round them up and send them to FEMA death camps.

>>11150339
But only westerners care about climate change. If we killed all the westerners instead nobody would care about climate change so the problem would be solved.

>>11150339
>>11150340
Honestly it would probably be the end of civilization as we know it as anyone with IQ>90 would be on the chopping block. Be pretty fun to watch the aftermath desu

Reminder that actual physics can only tell that doubling atmospheric carbon dioxide results in an increase of temperature between 1,5 to 4°C.

Since the biosphere is not counted by the IPCC and mitigates climate change, we're more likely to reach the low end.

>>11150358
>Since the biosphere is not counted by the IPCC and mitigates climate change, we're more likely to reach the low end.
Please quantify these effects

>>11150358
empirical evidence from paleoclimate data suggests 6C is quite possible.
>https://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/abs/ha00410c.html

>>11150319
Plank didn't actually do these experiments based on kirchhoff. You know that right?

>>11150377
Planks blackbody equations are all thought experiments not experimental.

>>11150365
A study said 1/8th just by the greening of the eath.
But there are other factors such as microbes.
See :
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/05/are-methane-seeps-arctic-slowing-global-warming

>>11150384
it's sadly not even making a dent in human emissions. Not to mention things like methane released in thawing permafrost driving large amounts of positive feedback is far more likely

>>11150377
I feel like I'm conversing with a chatbot who can only respond to specific buzzwords while being incapable of understanding the meaning of anything I say.

>>11150358
The terrestrial biosphere can't help a lot in capturing carbon. Look at the reservoir size and the residence time.
The ocean is the major player here and the ability for it to take up CO2 is crippled by ocean acidification and a slowing of the AMOC since Atlantic deepwater formation is crucial to transpor CO2 into deeper waters

>>11150411
solubility of CO2 in water also decreases as the temperature increases, so it's actually quite possible the ocean will become a net emitter of CO2 in the future as it becomes saturated.

>>11150410
Those are not buzzwords the paper use cited cites Planck for blackbody radiation. Planck did not do the experiment this is a thought experiment by planck and if you did the experiment him yourself you would see that it does not work the way his forumla predicts.
This is all mathemagician nonsense.
Show experimental evidence of CO2 blackbody radiation as described by planck no wonder your quack science persist. all you do is call to authorities you have faith in but never do the experiment yourself.

>>11150422
I think I lost 5 IQ points reading this retardation Planck's law has been empirically verified countless times, I haven't been unironically trying to converse with an electro universe nutcase this whole time have I?

>>11150454
Name one time. Plancks Experiment for blackbody radiation does not hold under thermal imaging

>>11150454
No electric universe here. Sun is hallow is quack science like any field that relies on kirchhoff and his descendant derivatives on the subject of black body radiation.

>>11150338
Don't change the subject.
>>11150338
>>11150336
If you're on 4chan, you deserve to die.

>>11150460
>>11150467
I'm done with you idiots, you can't even accept some of the most experimentally verified physics in history, go pedal your crackpot theories somewhere else.

>>11150460
[citation needed]

http://asl.umbc.edu/pub/chepplew/journals/nature14240_v519_Feldman_CO2.pdf

>>11150467
Wrong.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck%27s_law#History

Pay taxes

>>11150778
>Cites Wikipedia unironically

>>11150851
>attacks the source unironically
You lose.

>>11150778
Are you retarded? This is the same correlation nonsense using non experimental data on co2 to intrerpret climate data, not a physical experiment to verify co2 blackbody radiation.
You are citing papers you don't know how to read.

>>11149810
stop having so many godamn babies and work the population back down to like 500million or whatever scientists can agree on.
Any other measure is nothin more than delaying the inevitable famine wars that will take us back down to 500 million or wtvr after it's too late.

>>11149832
/thread

>>11150620
It's not verified because kirchhoff and Planck never actually did these tests. These were imagination playthroughs on blackbodies radiation and matching other people's data with arbitrary figures they derived mathematically. And in kirchhoff's case sometimes included limits that had zero in the denominator. Making his equations mathematically undefined. Planck moved these around but attempt to insert a single carbon speck in his thought Experiment as argued incorrectly it was a a catalyst . This simply is not the case in Experiments. Which planck did not do.
you are basing entire theory of climate and arguing International policy based on non verified thought experiments which have yielded theoretical physics not in line with reality. But due to the size of Industry many have been reluctant to walk back a centuries worth of bad ideas. when you can clearly do the blackbody radiation experiment yourself and see that plank and kirchhoff's equations do not hold to reality in the lab.

>>11150854
Wikipedia literally is not a source. Your undergrad level is revealed. Freshman? Maybe a high school senior?

>>11150860
The climate change proponents should lead the way and volunteer for sterilization.

>>11150856
>This is the same correlation nonsense
Not a correlation, direct observation.

>using non experimental data on co2
It's experimental.

You lost, get over it. Lying and providing zero evidence does not help you.

>>11150871
Bruh what the fuck are you on? Wikipedia is more reliable then most things. It has clear sources in the citation, if the particular article has problems point them out and give base to your claims.

Get out of here ya 4th grade English teacher who uses internet explorer

>>11149810
If the cause of it is too much of CO2, then the solution is obvious:
Plant more trees.
But trees grow too slow and whet they burn, they release that carbon back in the atmosphere, so I'd say
Legalize Cannabis, at least the most of it doesn't burn.

>>11150874
Wikipedia by definition is not a source. Climate cucks are fucking retarded

>>11150882
https://nmsu.libguides.com/sources/types

Maybe, 3rd grade. I'm pretty sure my 4th grade teacher taught us the difference between primary and secondary sources.

>>11149810
>What's the best plan to stop climate change?
I don't believe in stopping climate change. I believe in global cooling. Sea levels lowering and lands rising from the ocean with ancient ruins.

>>11150870
>It's not verified because kirchhoff and Planck never actually did these tests.
That doesn't follow. Experimentalists did the tests and verified it.

>And in kirchhoff's case sometimes included limits that had zero in the denominator.
Where?

>you are basing entire theory of climate and arguing International policy based on non verified thought experiments which have yielded theoretical physics not in line with reality.
Then show the evidence of it not aligning with reality. Oh you can't, because you're a lying quack.

>>11150872
2nd

>>11150871
If you want to play this game then you're baseless claims are not a source and must be ignored. Thanks for playing.

>>11150893
fucking yes

>>11150882
Your post is not a source. You lose, again.

>>11150874
If there's a study that supports your stance and is irrefutable, he'll tell you why the study never actually happened. He clearly has some underlying conviction that is at odds with the overwhelming evidence, so he'll spend more effort inventing reasons to ignore you than even attempting to understand the data. Don't let him waste your time.

>>11150912
>conviction
It's called mental illness.

>>11150913
>mental illness
Nah man, I had psychotic mania for a little while, and even my most nonsensical ideas didn't try to refute what had already been established by 99% of the scientific community. Dude's just straight-up mentally retarded.

>>11150936
>99% of the scientific community
Did you make the meta-analysis or have you just swallowed what you were fed?

>>11150959
What the fuck are you even getting at? You think you're smart for having an unpopular opinion? When has scientific consensus led you so astray that you decided not to trust it on principle?

>>11150959
>consensus of published research is invalid
>but one anon's posts with no evidence and no citations are valid

>>11150959
>if you don't swallow what I feed you then you just swallowed what you were fed!

>>11150959
Why are you trying to talk about what is scientific and what is not when you have failed in every single instance to give scientific evidence for your claims? You are a massive hypocrite.

>>11149810
>Obligatory nuke the US
>Demystify nonsense about nuclear plans
>Regulate marine trade, ban trash trade, put tariffs on stuff produced with lot of waste
>Regulate trucks, replace them with trains
>Invest more in R&D for renewables
>Cheap and effective public transport
>Reduce un-necessary consumption

>>11150968
Not in principle, but when I see the way you fags argue, I know something is fishy.
Also most of central concensus of POPULAR science is wrong:
In cosmology Big Bang Theory is asinine (many true cosmologists are aware of that)
In quantum physics Copenhagen Interpretation is insane (most physicists prefer other ones)
In biology Central Dogma is wrong, but it's wide accepted that it is.
In linguistics most of the concepts are wrong.

>>11150971
>>11150974
t. the Goerment

>>11150976
I just joined your friendly jerk circle.
Also you're unscientific right now, this I can try to talk.

>>11150870
You're literally a clueless quack making shit up, Planck's and Kirchhoff's work has been extensively verified that's why its a fucking law. It was verified when the equations were published, it's been verified independently more times than anyone has bothered to count, you can literally find people verifying it with light bulbs and USB sensors it's so easy. Stop trying to re write history because it doesn't fit with your insane quackery. Now fuck off back to /x/ with your schizo shit

>>11150936
he's literally re written history in his head, thinking there hasn't been a physics experiment since literally 1900. He's fucking beyond help

>>11150995
i mean on one side I see a bunch of references to published work, and on the other I see some guy who claims physics stopped at 1900 and hasn't been predictive since because he says so.

>>11151030
I'm just some unbiased bystander randomly coming in to the thread to evaluate the conversation and obviously the guy who claims physics stopped at 1900 is more trustworthy. Also, please don't pay any attention to my incoherent grammar being similar to that guy.

>>11150987
>everything is wrong because I say so
Ah so this is how real science works.

>>11149990
there is undeniable correlation between non-white presence and climate change. now I'm not saying correlation equates causation but the only way we can be sure is by populating all those red regions with white people immediately, starting with the USA.

>>11151030
Physics could be meddled with in this century, because some really scary magic it began to teach. I am not a physicist, I'm a linguist with a broad interest in other fields (thus I deny bbt & copenhagen) so I can only speak of common scientific approach: consensus is nothing, and this field is obviously biased (I was in busiiness communities where they asked attendees if they accept global worming, and those who didn't (even with argumentation) were evicted.
Also here's a good case about it, please argue that:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GujLcfdovE8
I also had a good sum-up from this guy, but I could only find the collection of him talking about it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DrWznOFq38s&list=PLMNj_r5bccUwgm4-u98iH5X0EUD0w0L1j

>>11151064
What exactly do you need me to explain for you?

>>11151090
You need to explain and provide evidence for your claims. Otherwise they will be ignored.

>>11151095
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t88ejuhSmCA

>>11150894
Not true

>>11151120
History doesn't change no matter how much you deny it.

>>11151012
Faaaalse.
Their blackbody radiation equations and thought Experiments do not play out the same in a lab today.
You quacks just pretend it has because you rely on it for interpreting co2 in atmosphere

>>11151024
It's clear you have never read the source material and seen that these were proposals borne from thoughts not Experiment derived results.

>>11151051
To be fair I never claimed it physics stopped. I'm seeing these specific claims were never verified by experiments
Theoretical physicists have continued to use the terms without verification because they were more reasonable approximation then the original Lord Kelvin approximation that had an infinite energy problem with frequency

>>11151124
>>11151126
every result has been verified repeatedly you're literally making shit up as you go

>>11151126
The fact you somehow never read the extensive experimental evidence supporting their work is undeniable proof you're a mentally unstable schitzo making shit up.

>>11151122
You can claim it history when a certain way all you want but I'm telling you kirchhoff and plank did not verify their theories with experiment. go and read the original work on blackbody radiation and go test it

>>11151133
>>11151135

False.

>>11151136
>Rubens & Kurlbaum 1900b
literally verified straight from the start you absolute lunatic

>>11151136
>You can claim it history when a certain way all you want but I'm telling you kirchhoff and plank did not verify their theories with experiment.
As I already explained, this is a non sequitur. Kirchhoff and Planck are not the only people who can verify their theories experimentally. So you haven't even provided a valid response to my post, let alone shown how it's "not true." The lack of focus and substance in your posts indicates you've already given up on defending your lies.

>>11151132
>I'm seeing these specific claims were never verified by experiments
They were, the history of the theories and citations to the experiments have been provided. You ignore them because you have no argument, just repetition.

>>11151136
you mean an experiment so trivial undergrads do it all the time with lightbulbs?
>https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0143-0807/31/6/012

>>11151085
>Lord Monckton and Stefan Molyneux
You've just hit a new low.

>>11151171
>Physics could be meddled with in this century, because some really scary magic it began to teach. I am not a physicist
I dunno anon, it's pretty hard to get lower than this utter retardation and complete lack of self awareness.

>>11151109
So you can't explain it or provide evidence. Yes I knew that already.

>>11151181
I can't wait to see this guys continual decent into madness, I can't wait until he's homeless bitching about how the jews at arXiV are suppressing him with Tooker.

Someone should probly sceencap this as empirical evidence of mental stability and scientific rigour of ACC deniers.

>>11149915
The relationship between CO2 and atmosphere temperature is logarithmic. There is no limit to the amount of heating CO2 can produce save for the energy output of the sun. Logarithmic functions are an infinity climb.

>>11151171
> ad hominem
So why are you commies pushing that shit? To give even more levers to the machine? Is it because your parents guarantee you a warm place in the system?

>>11149810
Nuke China and India

>>11151217
it's the truth.

>>11151223
Add America to the list and you're onto something.

Don't reply to obvious shills

>>11151240
Have these big guy oil company shills actually used the word "victory" in their microsoft powerpoint presentation slides? Yayikes.

>>11151217
Nice try goverment. I know that the devil lurks in your dark skin. Why do you continue to usurp throne from Ashtar?

>>11151247
> cui bono
> thinks of oil companies
> completely ignores government agencies

>>11151223
>India
India produces less waste than the US, despite having like 4 times the pop. Mutts deserve the nukes and Vladimir has more than enough aimed at them.

>>11151265
How do government agencies benefit?

>>11151205
That's a sure sign you know nothing about blackbody radiation

>>11151279
More taxes, more grounds for bribe extortion, more levers in general. Rather obvious, ne?

>>11151301
Nice try retarded shill

>>11149810
rapid buildup of high temperature nuclear breeder reactors for hydrocarbon fuel synthesis

Stop considering uneducated opinions. This includes /sci/, those 'extinction rebellion' protestors, politicians and twitter.
None of you, or them, have any clue what you're talking about.

>>11149990
He will be cuddling up to putin in mother russia

>>11149810
Im working on something right now but I'm expecting it to be obscenely profitable so you'll have to forgive me for not sharing the details

>>11149810
CO2 causes a little warming. CO2 with a positive H2O feedback could cause a lot of warming. Lucky for us all observations to date falsify the feedback part of AGW theory. The anthropogenic signal is consistent with CO2 acting alone. We're looking at 1-1.5C warming by 2100.

It's literally not worth the economic effort to try and stop that.

And if there was a strong H2O feedback, and we were looking at IPCC worst case scenarios of 6-8C of warming by 2100, then the only way to actually stop it with current technology would be mass adoption of nuclear power. Anyone who does not support this is not serious about global warming no matter how much they protest, cry, demand action, or claim their childhoods were ruined.

>>11151332
> nuclear breeder reactors
Meme

>>11149826
Actually, that one was even worse. It stated at the beginning that it evened the spikes down and up out. Combined with the scale of thousands of years being blended down to small gains and losses it is completely misleading you by the end.

Pure deception.

If it was honest, it would stay at the same scale throughout and either smooth the increase at the end to the same level, or include all the spikes and valleys in the data from before the modern era.

Then you could see that the variations are all within normal heating and cooling parameters.

But that doesn't serve their neo-luddite doomsday cult.

>>11151386
>uneducated opinions
So was you actually taught why that issue is not a hoax or was you just brainwashed to repeat what you were told?

>>11149810
>What's the best plan to stop climate change?
Stop greenhouse gas emissions. Also stop deforestation and plant as many trees as possible.

>>11151591
>scientists
>luddites

Yeah that figures, given how climate models need clusters of supercomputers for their calculations.

>>11151617
not enough

>>11150236
Stupid bluebilled economist "solution" to profit off climate change
>>11150315
>You cannot do anything anymore.
Dumb alarmism
>>11150318
>thinks climate change can be solved by patching Sahara
>>11150339
>brainwashed amerimutt tries to deflect the blame to China
>>11150986
Some good ideas but gets bluebilled by the end

>>11149810
here is the plan.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y-mRJmfFjFE

>>11150236
I'm so happy that I live in the first country that follows your appeal! A carbon tax became law yesterday! The economists are spraying themselves with champagne!

Only, the way it "works", it's going to do zilch to reduce CO2 emissions.

>>11149810
kill niggers= stop overpopulation

>>11150986
>>Reduce un-necessary consumption
Who gets to decide what's necessary? I NEED a 70"TV, two 3.5 litre SUVs, two dozen flights a year, just to survive. Nearly forgot the two holiday homes and the mansion here cause I take them for granted.

>>11151644
Go on genius, give me the redpill. Is it genocide or nuclear war?

>>11151651
>Hello this is tony heller
But I guess some little genocide is really needed.

>>11151696
>Who gets to decide what's necessary?
General secretary of the neo luddite committee.

>>11151301
>More taxes
Then why haven't they instituted carbon taxes? They could do this at any time if they actually wanted to.

>>11149824
you have to go back

>>11149810
why stop it?

>>11151570
>Lucky for us all observations to date falsify the feedback part of AGW theory.
[citation needed]

Please explain how all research on climate sensitivity is wrong. Please explain how directly observed feedback loops don't react to warming from CO2.

Watch this post never be replied to.

Mastering of nuclear fusion.

>>11151602
>false dilemma
Nice try, /pol/nigger, maybe if you were intellectually honest and argued in good faith you'd learn something.
Actually, I have published papers detailing the effect of methane emissions to atmospheric carbon. Before you come at me with accusations of shilling, the people funding me would much rather downplay the impact.

>>11151624
it is enough, if we do it now

>>11149831
Literally something thats impossible to measure. Where is it sampled? What altitude? Time of day? Shade or sun?

Both the models and measurements are dubious.

>>11149810
Let's just not.

>>11151776
Where?

>nooooo you must take responsibility for greedy whitoid and kike capitalists and 3rd world shitters perma breeding noooooo
how about no :)

>>11152016
>Where is it sampled?
Anywhere.

>What altitude?
Any altitude.

>Time of day?
Any time of day.

>Shade or sun?
Surface temperatures are always measured in shade.

>Both the models and measurements are dubious.
Your uninformed opinion is dubious.

>>11152092
You take responsibility so you don't die

>>11149810
What about not stopping it, but making it better?

>>11149890
Are you dumb? Do I have to make airtight house and fart for so long to run methane engine to make you feel dumber?

Do I have to cycle at home to charge tesla model S?

Your records seems pathetic.

>>11149890
Human powered?

The "engine" ate human flesh?

we kill the sun

when do I pick my nobelprize?

>>11152125
That's not science.
Northern and southern hemisphere won't be effected the same so why are measurements not classified for those conditions?

>>11153570
>That's not science.
It is.

>Northern and southern hemisphere won't be effected the same so why are measurements not classified for those conditions?
What do you mean? You can split the data up into hemispheres if you want. If every place was affected the same way there would be no point in calculating an average in the first place. Average temperature tells you the energy balance of the Earth as a system.

>>11153597
Treating earth as a single closed system is incorrect.
Answer this: Does earth lose molecules to space? If yes. its not a closed system by definition.
Hypothetical closed system is not a REAL representation of earth. You cannot apply averages across the entire planet and expect a realistic model of climate / weather prediction.

>>11153866
>Treating earth as a single closed system is incorrect.
Wrong and irrelevant. Where did I say Earth is a closed system?

>Does earth lose molecules to space?
Not in any significant way, no.

>You cannot apply averages across the entire planet and expect a realistic model of climate / weather prediction.
We can and we already have. You don't even have an argument, even you know you're making shit up.

>>11153881
This series of answers lets me know how dishonest you are. Thanks I'll just hide this idiot thread.

>>11153882
Considering you couldn't actually formulate anything remotely close to an argument as to why global average temperature isn't incredibly important data it's hilarious you're accusing him of being dishonest. Now slink away like the fucking loser you are, and stop posting bullshit you can't support.

>>11153882
Please tell me what was dishonest. If you don't we'll know who is the liar.

>>11149826
>le stupid fuck

Just reduce the population. It will solve so many problems, not just related to the environment.

>>11149890
The more compelling demonstration from those speed record bikes is it proves a tiny amount of power (pro cyclists output about 450 watts of useful mechanical energy) can be used to maintain speed if drag losses can be minimized.

>>11153882
This comment is a perfect singularity of projection

>>11149810
Delete India and China

>>11155853
start with the US, those fat fucks are the real problem, despite having contributed more to global warming than anywhere else period, the burgers are the only ones pulling out of the Paris Accords, and straight up planning on doing nothing.

>>11155853
I'd rather delete the US

>>11155874
But you and what Army?

>>11155871
Why is the UK so high?

>>11149810
tax the sun

>>11155887

>>11155895
tax gays

>>11155905
tax thots.

>>11155871
>Per capita
So the obvious solution is to have more babies got it

>>11149990
>tfw living in a blue country
Time to start polluting I guess

>>11153888
He was probably referencing the guy claimed the Earth is not a close system while also saying any loss of atmospheric gas was negligible. Those statements are contradiction.

sorry bot all of you are disable to tall about it, youare the problem with the oil imperium

>>11155926
I never claimed the Earth was or was not a closed system. The claim that the Earth cannot be treated as a closed system is wrong, since the mass transfer between Earth and space is negligible. There is no contradiction.

>>11155971
Seems like you are unaware of the standard model. Description of earth in that case. He probably mistook your ignorance for a lie.

>>11149810
>Not wanting to see antarcica melt and become a tropical paradise.
>Not wanting to find ruins of an ancient civilization and rewrite history.

>>11156072
ah yes the tropical paradise of antarctica where the wind is blisteringly fast and its night for half the year

>>11156072
>working as an engineer designing the weapons which will win the last Great War. Which will determine who controls the last arable land on earth
sounds pretty Kino desu

>>11155871
australia is also planning to do absolutely nothing

>>11149819
Thanks for the xkcd, it iluminated me.

>>11151793
>knocking 25% off the global gdp is good because an eastern euro shithole is slightly better
kek

>>11149810
Kill off all the shitskins for starters.
Humans release methane, shitskins pollute, cut down, destroy.

Guarantee you if whites were the only race we would already be 100% green energy across the world.

>>11156080
Australia is a mess politically, they actually implemented a carbon tax before, which worked fantastically, GDP grew, emissions fell everything was great. Then the conservative party won an election and dismantled it, because "global warming isn't real"

>>11149865
found the fucking pseud. holy shit i hope this is bait. this graph increase a few degrees and you argue infinite growth. you know we see run away greenhouse effects on Venus our sister planet.

>>11156088
Literally Russian shills

>>11156097
>Pseud
>It's not infinite is only one degree
>It's just like Venus!
That's since idiotic way to argue his point.

>>11156096
>because "global warming isn't real"
They're right. "Global warming" as described by alarmist lobbists and retarded hippies is not real, and Australia is better off adapting to the climate change than trying to prevent it using retarded measures like carbon tax. Good for Australian conservatists for not falling for cancer western liberal propaganda.

>>11150199
Dang and i thought this was a science board. Asking a scientific question about how to do something

>>11155985
>Seems like you are unaware of the standard model.
You mean the standard model of particle physics? How is it relevant?

It seems like you are making idiotic excuses for a guy who supposedly left and hid the thread.

>>11149810
kill everyone with an IQ below 100. problem solved.

>>11149810
The answer is simple: Stop acclimatizing to change.

>Honorary soldier, by way of citation

there is no "best plan", but shutting down coal plants is a good start, this will also improve air quality

This may be a crazy idea, but how about we buy some abandoned land and plant trees. You can even buy long forgotten factories and turn them into forests.

>>11149844
1. Give all black people in the world a free plane ticket to Yellowstone
2. Bury a hydrogen bomb right above the magma plate that prevents Yellowstone from erupting into a supervolcano
3. ???
4. Paradise!

>>11158064
As long as the resulting cloud is dark enough to starve the rest of americans, count me in.

Give me and mine attention + resources and I'll solve it in 3 weeks.

>>11157994
you obviously got no idea how many trees you nee, also right now we do the exact opposite, cutting down trees like mad and burning down forests at an alarming rate