/sci/ - Science & Math

>>12670173
> according to the study
And also in real life.

Assuming I understand this correctly
>Greenhouse gases come in different types
>Each type has an albedo effect at a different part of the spectrum
>Infrared albedo bad
>Visible range albedo good
>Each type also has a different lifespan, so trying to get good albedo but minimal bad albedo is difficult
Is that what they are saying

So all we need to do is build an enormous can of hairspray each year and global warming is solved.

>stop the pollution they said
>it causes global warming they said

>>12670173
>globe goes warmer when polluting
>globe goes warmer when not polluting

what the fuck?

>>12670795
>>12670804
>Why yes, we can't read, how could you tell?

>>12670173
>ten year average goes up: see it’s anthropogenic global warming
>ten year average goes down: see it’s anthropogenic climate change

>>12671572
When did the average temperature go down?

>>12670840
Don't hate on drugs. I've done a lot of drugs, but I still can read, unlike.
>>12670795
>>12670804

>>12670173
Do brainlets actually think this is a gotcha moment?
Sulfates are well known to cool the globe. They're part of a proposed last ditch effort to avoid catastrophic warming.
The issue is carbon emissions. Sulfur is a totally separate thing.

Lol. Now let's predict: will they proclaim that lockdowns are harmful, or will they invent some new abuse?

>>12672936
>Do brainlets actually think this is a gotcha moment?
Yes, you king of the brainlets.

Wow how interesting. It paves the way for Bill Gates to push his global cooling plans forward.

>>12672936
>The issue is carbon emissions

Wonderful, guess I will go out and travel more to counter the global warming.

>>12670173
>Car pollution
>CO2 causes global warming
>particulates have a cooling effect

Why not put more particulate matter into the atmosphere without the CO2?

>>12672967
Even in the OP it clearly says the cooling is due to smog and sulfates. These are totally separate to carbon.

>>12673004
Which particulate would you preferably breathe in?

>>12673004
It's been proposed as a possible desperate measure if the earth heats too much, but fucking with the atmosphere like that may have unintended consequences, so it's best to try reducing our pollution overall.

>>12670173
You have this shitpost up once already.

>>12672936
Wait, but if the temperature increased, wouldn't that mean that most emissions actually cool the planet? Since the albedo effect is greater than the heat trapping effect. What kind of petroleum emission doesn't release particulate? Do they eventually settle down while carbon dioxide doesn't unless absorbed by geological/biological processes? Otherwise, it doesn't make much sense to have a net heating when it should be a net cooling.

>>12673016
From https://geoengineering.global/stratospheric-aerosol-injection/

>The stratosphere (see NOAA image below) is a layer of the Earth’s atmosphere that ranges between 7 to 31 miles above the ground between the Troposphere and the Mesophere. The stratosphere is an ideal target for atmospheric geoengineering because it relatively isolated from human populations,

and

> It is considered relatively safe for the environment because volcanoes have been injecting sulfate aerosols into the stratosphere for eons and the biosphere naturally processes sulfates using multiple pathways in the sulfur biogeochemical cycle.

>>12673024
The cost of mitigating warming is far less than de-industrialization and the inevible zero or even negative economic growth that would result in de-industrialization, which has been proposed by environmental extremist groups like the Sierra Club and the Club of Rome.

>>12673004 >>12673024
There's a movie about that.

It didn't ended so well.
(dystopian post-apocalyptic)

https://youtu.be/nX5PwfEMBM0

Scientists overdose the cooling agent dosage.

>>12673024 >>12673016 >>12673004

There's a movie about that.

It didn't end up so well.
(dystopian post-apocalyptic)

https://youtu.be/nX5PwfEMBM0

Scientists overdose the cooling chemical dosage.

>>12673056
>wouldn't that mean that most emissions actually cool the planet?
No because the temperature is rising despite aerosols.

>>12670173
Climate science is probably the most retarded discipline ever created.

>>12673065
>getting your science from a Hollywood movie

>>12670182
You have it right.

>>12673056
No because we empirically observe the opposite, so clearly not.
Secondly, these people are misleading you by leaving out the fact that most emissions reductions here were a very particular kind, containing large amounts of sulfates etc. such as found in aeroplane emissions.

>>12670840
>this here says X
>but you must read it as Y because X is not a CORRECT APPROVED OPINION

>>12673327
So you're saying that it doesn't say
>This temporary warming effect from fewer particles was stronger in 2020 than the effect of reduced heat-trapping carbon dioxide emissions, Gettelman said. That’s because carbon stays in the atmosphere for more than a century with long-term effects, while aerosols remain in the air about a week.
In the OP?

So much for the anthropogenic climate change.

>>12670173
why post this thread again, you already got a lot of replies the last time?

>>12673332
>humans pollute
>pollution causes global warming
>humans bad
>actually it doesn't always do
>but disregard that because humans bad

>>12673375
The cooling effect of aerosols isn't some super controversial covered up information.

>>12673375
We've literally known this for over half a century
It's literally the basis for the old and redundant "Global cooling" Theory that you regularly pretend BTFOs global warming for some reason.
>Aerosols cool the planet
>However their effect isn't enough to overtake warming from CO2
>And obviously, as they have a shorter lifespan, if we stop emitting them in pollution, we'll see a fast warming effect
Of course you don't have the capacity to read this entire post so I don't know why I even bother

>>12673375
you know full well sulfates are completely different to carbon compounds

>>12673383
>>12673377
>aerosol cooling
>nothing to see here, move along citizen
Oh yeah, must be the reason why pic >>12673103 properly accounts for such a major feedback mechanism as albedo change due to increase in cloud coverage with rising temperature.
Oh wait, it doesn't. Because it won't be screaming DOOOOOOM otherwise.

>>12673073
well, theres a tv show as well, expands the universe quite a bit

>>12673383
It’s all speculation and computer models. We are talking about chaotic systems and you can’t predict it. Anthropogenic climate change is an urban legend.

Why didn't a single one of these so-called climate scientists predict this? They can't predict anything. The models are all trash and they have no idea of what's going to happen.

>>12674785
But it doesn’t matter they‘ll still get the grant.

>>12670173
I love how science just pulled the curtain back from the liberal climate change campaign

I fucking love science soibros! It proves you're fucking stupid, just like we said lol

Have no fear OP, when we start polluting at the same rate again, that also will cause temperatures to rise.

>>12673327
More like
>this here says X
>but I want to believe Y
>therefore it actually in fact says Y
(that's you)

>>12674785
>Why didn't a single one of these so-called climate scientists predict this?
we've known for ages sulfates have a cooling effect, e.g. by observing volcanic eruptions

>>12673375
if you are able to hold more than 2 pieces of information in your head at once this shouldnt be confusing

>>12673413
The increased greenhouse effect from water vapor dominates unfortunately. Water vapor is a positive feedback not a negative one unfortunately.

>>12675703
Yes, but no one predicted that lockdowns would have a net cooling effect. The reason being that their models are complete trash and have no predictive power.

>>12677065
The models were constructed to model long-term effects, not accounting for sudden and large scale alterations to human industry.
Over a short-term it is well known the sulfates dominate and have a brief cooling effect as they have a short lifespan in the atmosphere. Over a long term, carbon dominates and has a net heating effect.

>>12673087
Not even Hollywood, it's korean-czech joint venture.
Nobody in this thread said they get their science from snowpiercer, just like nobody will ever tell "I love you" to a loser that has nothing better to do than derail threads with sojaks all day long.

>>12676982
Protip: clouds are not water *vapor*

>>12677081
No, "the science" kept saying the pandemic will have a positive effect on climate change. It clearly didn't.

Clown world.

>>12673024
>so it's best to try reducing our pollution overall.

Source?

>>12674764
No it is not and Science is settled over that question.

>>12670173
Jesus Christ the lengths jews will go to scam goys into the global warming cult!
Thanks for sharing.

>>12670804
>>12670795
global warming was scrapped for climate change years ago. I remember this from middle school

>>12678234
Everything is global warming related. There's semantic structures that pins everything onto global warming because it's a great alarmist headline and funding generator with no critique allowed at all.

Weather warmer: global warming
Weather coolers: global warming
Dry weather: global warming
Wet weather: global warming
Human caused event: No actually it was global warming that caused it
Anything bad happening: Global warming caused it.

Oh sorry, I meant Global Catastrophic Climate Apocalypse Crisis, because that's the latest buzzword for it, need to keep it fresh.

>>12678262
Human Caused Catastrophic Climate Apocalypse Crisis Avoidable Through Taxes. Get it right fascist republitard.

OP, please refrain from posting climate change related topics for the time being. We're currently dealing with a persistent polnigger infestation here on /sci/ and the only way to erradicate them is to starve them out. This kind of post just feeds them.

>>12673383
This isn't even a problem. Just dumps sulfates into the high atmosphere problems solved

>>12672863
Discard the details. The point is to be scared always about everything.