/sci/ - Science & Math

>>15195900
lmao, this retard doesn't understand greenhouse effect, sun doesn't change in 100 years you retard. All the heating is from greenhouse effect

>>15195903
The Science is settled chud. Global warming isn't man-made.

So I guess everyone is agreed on the fact that whatever is going on the solution will be man made.

>>15195903
total solar output can vary substantially across just a few days.

>>15195956
The solution to solar cycles? Unless you plan on blowing up the Sun those will keep happening.

>>15195900
This paper is from 2015, why bring it up now?

>>15196011
Not relevant. By analogy, the temperature varies widely with the seasons yet this has absolutely nothing to do with annual variation in temperatures. In other words, variation on one timescale doesn't imply a trend exists in another. Solar variation over the relevant timescale of global warming is essentially 0.

>>15196084
Because he's a shill.

>>15196104
A shill for what? Truth?

>>15196074
We could try to make a mini sun closer to earth like a moon and then blow up our sun and go hurling off into space lol

>>15195956
We just gotta make more plastic garbage

>>15196074
this is so retarded it's not even wrong

>>15195900
sure bud

>>15196263
>source: SATIRE
Yeah it sure sounds like. Come back when you have a peer reviewed source, freak.

>>15195900
Then explain stratospheric cooling.

>>15196270
https://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/
https://climatedataguide.ucar.edu/climate-data/total-solar-irradiance-tsi-datasets-overview

>>15196294
OP's article is a peer reviewed paper from a respected institution. Go back to /pol/ with this chud science denial you're spouting.

Threadly reminder to sage and ignore AGW scam threads. All AGW threads are green shill threads.

>>15196294
>nasa.gov
same folks who said they could build jwst in 12 years for $500 million? they're not good with numbers. nasa is a nearly all female organization these days, u're getting ur science from linda ham

>>15196296
no it isn't, it's been debunked

>>15195903
A larger resolution image for anyone interested.

>>15197067
thanks, I like this painting

So now that it's confirmed that Global Warming isn't happening, what should the repercussions be for all the people who lied about it? What criminal statute does a fraud on that scale get charged under?

>>15197491
>What criminal statute does a fraud on that scale get charged under?
picrel

>sunspot garbage
Into the thrash it goes

>>15198101
You must have a few ideas. Maybe defrauding the federal government? Criminal negligence?

>>15197491
>what should the repercussions be for all the people who lied about it?
Tied to solar panels or windmills?
Fed to the crustacians?

As much as I appreciate some people grasping at any paper that appears to confirm their views... Here's a piece of a newer paper from the same authors:
Connolly et al (2021)
https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1674-4527/21/6/131

So far, the authors have simply not proven that the Sun has strongly influenced the Northern Hemisphere temperatures, let alone global temperatures. They've admitted that themselves.

>>15198263
Sounds like bullshit to me. The data clearly shows their earlier conclusion is right, they just have to write things like this to avoid cancel culture.

>>15198263
>not proven
99.99999999% of science is "not proven".
Some scientists still argue over the causes of gravity.

>>15198278
They have to include language like this in order to get published/not get grants halted. The Feds actively sabotage people who publish things against muh consensus by maliciously excluding them from funding.

>>15198269
>they just have to write things like this to avoid cancel culture.
>>15198279
>They have to include language like this in order to get published/not get grants halted. The Feds actively sabotage people who publish things against muh consensus by maliciously excluding them from funding.

Claims without any trace of evidence - into the trash it goes. Especially amusing considering how many papers these authors have published so far.

>>15198278
>99.99999999% of science is "not proven".
Would "the authors haven't made any strong claim about the Sun influencing NH/global temperatures" be more to your taste?

>>15198279
>The Feds
Huge source of problems in the world, if not the main source.
Science is held back by the government and politics.
Thank goodness for people like Elon Musk who tells the government to go fuck itself.

>>15198305
>Claims without any trace of evidence
The babbling of a psychotic who pretends to be a scientist on the internet. If you really were a published researcher you would know exactly what I'm talking about.

>>15198308
>If you really were a published researcher
I've never claimed to be a researcher. Could you stop lying?
I merely linked a paper to show that Soon and Connollies are not quite certain about the Sun causing the temperature rise. Could you address their position/paper?

science: good news everyone, we're not going to die from global warming

popsoi soience experts: NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!

>>15198317
No. They won't. These threads all become anti environmental circlejerk threads because anti environmentalists are unreasonable, illogical and do not use proper debate protocol.

The bulk of posters here want to see the environment improved but you just can't argue with anti environmentalists.

>>15200371
>anti environmental
You mean various energy-lobby-sponsored greentards shilling fake climate science and pusing environmentally-destructive """green""" energy?

>>15200398
>Insert random text here<
Nobody wants to talk to you and we all wish you would simply go huff the car exhaust you love so much.

>>15200422
Nigger, you left your friends back at reddit. Pretty much everyone here hates you and calls you out for the shill that you are.

>>15200422
Your cult is hated and your masters are losing control. If you weren't anonymous, you would hesitate to shill your cult's agenda under your real name because you fear the reaction it will cause.

>>15200437
Based and me-pilled.

>>15195900
>climatemongler.jpg
>fridays for t-rex

>>15195900
So you agree then that to offset the solar we should reduce greenhouse gasses?

>>15200536
Why would we starve the planet over a beneficial natural cycle?

>>15200437
How do you know my "cult" is hated when:
a) You don't know who I am and,
b) You don't know what we stand for.

At this point I'm convinced you are some kind of extremist group desperately trying to recruit from any polarising topic. I'm only posting this to inform you that you are only capable of recruiting morons like yourself which puts you at a serious disadvantage. Which is a good thing.

Carry on.

>>15200652
You are hated and your handlers are afraid.

>>15200658
I am the handler lol.

>>15200662
You will never be a handler. You will always be an oblivious, remote-controlled drone for your handlers.

>>15200663

>>15200652
>How do you know my "cult" is hated when:
>a) You don't know who I am and,
>b) You don't know what we stand for.
Uh ok AGW shill. 2 more weeks, right?

>>15200740
What is this supposed to mean lol. I already explained how CO2 was a deflection campaign. Now you chose another. Another deflection campaign. Also I'm not here to prevent you recruiting midwits. You can have them. I'm basically the most interesting poster to regularly school you noobs in these threads but your content isn't amusing enough to engage me as often as you would like.

Anyway carry on. Your type won't achieve anything.

>>15200859

>>15200859
>I already explained how CO2 was a deflection campaign.
If you don't believe in AGW then why do you come here to get humiliated with all the AGW shills? Just don't post if you already agree with us.

>>15200371
>No. They won't. These threads all become anti environmental circlejerk threads because anti environmentalists are unreasonable, illogical and do not use proper debate protocol.
I'm quite aware. There is, however, something bizarrely adorable in pointing out a flaw in their arguments, and seeing all those deflections and personal insults.

>>15200398
>You mean various energy-lobby-sponsored greentards shilling fake climate science and pusing environmentally-destructive """green""" energy?
THIS.
BIG OIL is the one being the whole "climate crisis" crap, so they can push for limiting oil and causing the prices of their reserves to skyrocket, making them more money.
Government goes along with the Green Scam since it means more tax money for them due to higher gas/oil prices, so more money in their pockets also.

Obama was worth less than 1 million when he entered politics, now he is on the way to being a half a billionaire. Grift dude. Big grift.

>>15200652
>a) You don't know who I am and,
a nobody who thinks its a somebody

>>15200652
>b) You don't know what we stand for.
lies, global destruction, deceit, scams, fascism, communism, etc.
Scum.

Not that anon you replied to, but it is obvious what you are. An enemy to freedom, humanity, and the world.

Board that is a room full feds circlejerking each other while thinking they brainwash the masses. Lul.

>>15197491
Keelhauled across the grate (heh) barrier reef. in that beautiful sailing ship >>15197067

>>15198263
Lets be honest though, very little has been satisfactorily answered. I would venture to say that there has recently been a preponderance of
.....not so fast " to our anthropocentric apes of wrath.

>>15201274
>I would venture to say that there has recently been a preponderance of .....not so fast " to our anthropocentric apes of wrath.
I encourage you to start reading actual scientific papers and IPCC reports. Right now, it sounds like you've read some sensationalist Daily Mail articles and thought 'This is what the science says'™

>>15201955
>actual scientific papers
You deny the ones that undermine your energy-lobby-funded green scam.

> IPCC reports
Literal propaganda.

>>15201169
Yet how will big oil make money after the transition? Surely they are entitled to charge the consumer for the cost of that transition. Especially when so many of us hold shares in these companies through 401k, superannuation or whatever your government calls the local compulsory retirement fund. Yes, that makes you a part of the problem.

Then when big oil tries to invest in green energy to repair their reputation and ensure their long term survival, the very same people who will be relying upon increasing share prices in these companies to ensure a comfortable retirement complain.

I can only laugh at the idiocy. Idiocracy was prophetic.

>>15201975
>Yet how will big oil make money after the transition?
"Big oil" hasn't been a thing in ages. It's just the energy sector now, and they're planning to make bank from artificial oil scarcity before transitioning to various green scams they've been investing in for decades.

>>15201960
>You deny the ones that undermine
I don't recall 'denying' any paper in this thread. Are you okay?

>Literal propaganda.
They coalesce hundreds of scientific papers which can be read directly. Why are so hostile towards anything that doesn't align with your confirmation bias?

>>15201978
See >>15201960. Either way, your narrative has no traction here, shill.

>>15201977
I already pointed that out in the post you linked. Put most simply, whether there is oil in the ground or not we simply can't continue to use it to poison ourselves and the environment.

You can complain about the basic functions of capitalism all you want. It just makes you look really stupid. Unless you have a solution that isn't pumping up more poison to contaminate the Earth.

>>15201981
I'm not having any kind of discussion with you. I'm just reminding others whose interests your likes actually serve. (Protip: it's all the major polluters and economic scammers)

>>15201980
I'm not sure why you're so upset. Feel free to start making proper arguments backed with sources instead of just spewing insults.

>>15201993
Nobody needs to have any arguments with you. It's perfectly good to continue undermining your narrative when you can't respond and then dehumanize and shun you when you arrive and try to "deboonk" anything.

>>15201983
This thread contains a handful of reasonable posts by people with enough intelligence to grasp the full picture and a whole lot of moronic posts like yours lol.

I even try to space my paragraphs out to make it easier to read but you just type some random dumb shit after only reading the first sentence. My sides. Please continue.

>>15201998
The only thing you've undermined so far is your image.
What papers have I denied? What propaganda is there in IPCC reports?

>>15202000
The full picture is that "big oil" and "green energy" are the same people.

>>15202003
Your corporate narrative has no traction here. You're a hated and undesirable parasite. You will never be part of any discussion.

>>15202009
Why have you accused me of ignoring papers, and the IPCC of serving propaganda, when you cannot post any concrete examples?

>>15202004
I said that already up here >>15201975
Additionally I explained why that is the case. Yet you're all still trying to poison us all with toxic shit that comes out of the ground. ROFL.

Which one of us is really the "enemies of mankind".

>>15202013
>Why have you accused me of ignoring papers, and the IPCC of serving propaganda
Because it's irrefutably true and everyone knows it. Your narrative has no traction here, parasite. Autohiding all further posts from you. You will reply again like a nonhuman drone even though no one will read your post.

>>15202017
Glad you concede that "green energy" is a scam. Call me back when you have a solution that isn't being shilled by scammers and polluters.

>>15202020
Transitions take time and money you poor, tragic fool. Unless you have a better solution maybe you should just take a step back, sit down, shut up and let brighter minds work on the solutions.

>>15202018
It was worth sticking around to see your eventual meltdown.

>>15202025
So you don't have any "solutions" besides green scams perpetrated and lobbied by the very same people responsible for all the environmental destruction you complain about?

>>15201981
>we simply can't continue to use it to poison ourselves and the environment.
i am the savior of mother nature, thats why i need to commandeer all of your resources and use them as i please
i'm doing it all for you
you owe me bigtime for this
baizuo baizuo baizuo

>>15202031
We live in a democracy. Don't hold me up as some kind of effigy. I'm an environmentalist and as such I am glad to witness the transition away from fossil fuels. I only wish it had begun sooner.

I'm just a guy on the internet with opinions man. What power could I possibly have.

>>15202030
It is what it is. I'm glad to have them on board. They have a lot of money and that is going to help. We are all limited by the rules of capitalism. Everything has to have an economic incentive.

>>15202051
>It is what it is.
So you don't have any "solutions" besides green scams perpetrated and lobbied by the very same people responsible for all the environmental destruction you complain about?

>>15202077
Sure. It's just futile to discuss my visions in a thread like this. After all, this is an environmental deflection thread with a handful of midwits jerking each other off. I gain absolutely nothing by having a conversation about building upon the environmental changes being made in here, with you...

>>15202051
>hey maaaaan, don't try and hold me accountable for my own expressed opinions, i'm only trying to commandeer everything you own to waste it on my idiotic soience fiction end of the world messiah complex scenario
>the planet is dying and its all your fault, pay up!
how about you give me all of your money and i promise i'll use it to pay mexicans to plant trees or something, i'm doing all for you, and for mother earth, you owe bigtime for this favor, you should worship me like a hero and gibes me dat money

>>15202097
>It's just futile to discuss my visions in a thread like this.
Your vision involves bending to the whims of the scammers and polluters you complain about in the first place. You need to be publicly lynched.

Allow me to put this as simply as possible. The future goes one of two ways.

The young people insist on money being taken from people who are about to retire or,
The people who are about to retire insist on sending the young people to die in another war.

It's not looking good.

>>15202139
Completely wrong. Zoomies are obedient corporate slaves.

>>15202097
don't cry your eyes out over it too much, maybe the vaxx will wipe out most of humanity and that will fix ur imaginary global warming phobia. how many boosters are you on?

>>15202140
Big money wants to keep the young people and it doesn't care how long it has to wait for return on investment. I don't think people are going to tolerate further viruses reducing the retiree burden. To bring consumption under control a variety of methods are being employed. Further measures may be required.

The big problem with taking money from the old people is that they need to be alive for their retirement funds to be poached. If they die their money is split between their children and consumption goes up.

I guess I'm just an idealist and life is messy.

>>15202141
I skipped the nanobots and just got the fancy brainchip installed. It has a higher rate of integration.

>>15197067
A lower resolution image for anyone interested

>>15202159
>the big problem with taking money from the old people is that they need to be alive for their retirement funds to be poached.
inflation doesn't care how old or dead you are or aren't, inflation, formerly known as debasement, is ZOG's key method of theft and how they prevent the lower classes from accruing wealth.

>>15202159
>To bring consumption under control a variety of methods are being employed. Further measures may be required.
Corporate slave. The only measure needed is torturing and killing you and your handlers.

>>15202170
A lot of people who thought they were special are starting to realise that they are only middle class. The middle class takes money from the bottom class. The top class takes money from everyone.

But... They are going to spend it again. On goals I align with for the most part.

Anyway. There are ways to break into the upper echelons. The ratwheel keeps the midwits who want to climb up from getting anywhere. I dunno man. Things are gonna be rough but there's good times ahead.

>>15202181

>>15202196
Selfies go on /soc/. Your corporate handlers will not "control my consumption", but I can't wait for them to try so that you could finally get the treatment everyone has been itching to give you.

>>15202198
Sorry mate. Tiny, petty little people like you are too small minded for me to worry about.

>>15202209
I'm sure your rulers will remain in power forever and always protect you from the majority of the population that's unwilling to live around you or tolerate your values anymore. :^)

>>15202213
If voter sentiment is any indication, the views I hold are generally shared by the majority. You won't change that. You're incapable. Just look at this thread lol. Your big claim to fame, your pride and joy. You're a laughing stock.

>>15202229
the necessity for blatant, large scale election fraud proves that the views you hold are only held by yourself and a minority of stooges

>>15202229
>the views I hold are generally shared by the majority
The views you hold are universally hated and ridiculed.

>>15202009
hi cancerboy

>>15202246
>>15202248
Yeaaaa. This highlights how detached from reality your type is. There's no need for sham elections when you can just buy everyone who is on the ballot paper. You have an infantile understanding of the world. I can't believe you aren't humiliated by your own posts lol.

global warming is 100% fake

>>15203033
what does chuck schumer want adidas to do?

>>15195900
how does that say that it isn't happening? it states the reason, but not that it isn't happening. you're still gonna burn, incel boy.

>>15202281
You are losing your mind with rage because more and more people are turning against your globohomo hoaxes.

>>15204052
Why are you so upset that the global warming you've been worrying about your entire life having been a false alarm. You'd think people would be happy to find out that the world isn't coming to an end because of global warming, but instead getting the good news makes them angry. WTF, scientifically speaking

>>15204083
>Why are you so upset that the global warming you've been worrying about your entire life having been a false alarm.
Because it means the "climate change deniers" he has spent his entire life frothing at the mouth against were right and his ego can't take it, so he'll side with the scammers and die on the AGW hill before he admits he's been fooled. It's a neat trick: you a bunch of socially and politically unpalatable characters to rally against your scam and the midwit animal will automatically align with you and against them.

>>15195900
Climate change has always been a much smaller issue than energy scarcity. We're running out of coal, natural gas and oil.

We only have 40 years left of oil, 100 years left of natural gas and 150 years left of coal.

Remember; once a resource starts running dry we'll be using another one even more. Once oil runs out in 40 years that energy demand will then be taken from natural gas in the form of CNG cars and coil-to-oil industrial processes so neither oil nor natural gas will last as long as the numbers suggest.

>>15198269
This. We saw the exact same thing during COVID era w.r.t. masking. Definitively shown to be dubious at best in a clinical setting and harmful at worst outside of healthcare for over 30 years of studies, all tossed to the wind during COVID. Stuff like this:
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2020836#article_related_articles
I.e., strong-arming people into the “correct” interpretation of the data, has ruined the layman’s faith in science, and rightfully so. The people in the medical community that allowed that to happen have given nay-sayers to any field of science a leg to stand on. Not to mention the whole James Watson and racial intelligence fiasco. You can’t censor scientists like this, or the layman will no longer believe anything the so-called scientific community has to say. It’s that simple. If you care about climate change and really believe it’s an issue, then you should direct your outrage at those giving the scientific process a bad reputation.
>bonus: go after people like SBF (pic related) with equal fervor

>>15204379
>Climate change has always been a much smaller issue than energy scarcity. We're running out of coal, natural gas and oil.
According to the same hoaxsters who astroturf climate panic?

>>15195903
>sun doesn't change in 100 years you retard.
So the sun remains exactly the same and doesn't change at all, or go through any minute fluctuation over the course of a century?

>>15204608
Fluctuation is not irrelevant if the long term trend is flat. See >>15196101

>>15196154
For Big Oil, just like the paper's author:

https://www.chronicle.com/article/a-climate-crusader-melts-exposing-a-profitable-link-to-harvards-name/

>>15195903
Is your critique of a scientific study really just "That study is retarded"?

>>15198269
>The data clearly shows their earlier conclusion is right
Not really, no. They used outdated solar data that shows more correlation than actually exists. And they don't even give a hypothetical mechanism for how such small variations in solar forcing can cause these temperature changes over the long term.

>>15200546
Going on a diet isn't starving, fatty

>>15203033
>global warming is 100% fake
Proof?

>>15204083
>Why are you so upset that the global warming you've been worrying about your entire life having been a false alarm.
That paper says global warming is occurring, so how is it a false alarm? The paper says global warming is correlated with solar activity, which is indirect, but it doesn't claim global warming is fake. So which is it? The paper is correct or global warming is fake?

theirs plenty of thorium.

>>15204621
His critique is that the Sun shows no long term trend to explain warming, and that the greenhouse effect does. Are you not able to read English or are you deliberately misrepresenting his post?

>>15204628
>out of date graph
NASA's TSIS-1 is what's used for present solar tracking until the TSIS-2 launch this year.
https://lasp.colorado.edu/lisird/data/tsis_tsi_6hr/

>>15204677
Point being, the data was outdated even back when they used it (cherrypicking).

>>15204660
>that the greenhouse effect does
based on what data and how long

>>15204689
The data isn't incorrect that the TSI floor has raised over the last century.

>>15200371
>>15201055
could you explain why your position is about dishonest advocation of scammers who have no interest or intention or working solution to fix the environment? because at the end of the day, your moneyed science and faith in scams will be problem. and when it comes to pollution there are concrete facts about who is doing it and why.

>>15204660
>his critique is literally just taking the conclusion of the study and inverting it
Okay, soi.

>>15204460
No these guys are actually legit and have data to back them up.

>>15204695
Data: https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2021/11/IPCCWG1ar6slides_SBSTA_MASTER.pdf

>how long?
Since the Industrial Revolution

Also, we can directly measure warming from CO2: https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2020GL091585

>>15204703
They didn't use the TSI floor, nor would they, because the variance is so tiny that it doesn't explain anything.

>>15204728
That's as reductionist as saying that the study is just taking the conclusion of every other study and inverting it.
At least you admit that his critique is not "this study is retarded."

These niggas on that primo oil reserve. Supplier? chevron, shell, etc... grim really.

>>15204785
>ipcc.ch
Ni hao ma

>>15204704
You're accusing me and the next guy of some weird straw-man thingies - please don't do that, or at the very least back your claims with evidence.
However, you seem to dislike pollution so it seems we have one thing in common.

>>15204432
>strong-arming people
they aren't being forced, they're doing it voluntarily as a means of extracting personal gain from their dishonesty.

>>15204904
Not an argument. Thanks for conceding it's the greenhouse effect.

>>15204969

>>15204969
What if capitalism is actually better then communism and we create a communist hellhole for no reason?

>>15205119
Faking other people's content in order to fearmonger? Cool, but I do not see any proper arguments backed with evidence.

>>15205129
Baseless fearmongering without even a fake image - no points for creativity.

>>15205166
>Faking other people's content in order to fearmonger?
Fearmongering == letting people know that the world actually isn't ending, that you don't need to give the government all your land and property, and actually you can just have kids and live a normal life.
Ok.

>>15205174
Denying climate research and claiming that adaptation and mitigation of climate change will result in a "substantially worse world": yup that's fearmongering, or perhaps even the whole package - spewing fear, uncertainty and doubt.

>>15205193
>claiming that adaptation and mitigation of climate change will result in a "substantially worse world"
I'm not the one making those claims. Your cult is making those claims, and saying that if we don't knuckle under to their fearmongering we'll all die.
All I'm giving people is the truth. They have a choice not to listen to you.

>>15205166
look at the reddit kike chimping out over seeing original content on 4chan
>noooooo!! you can't just shoop a picture on 4chan!!
>thats not fair!!!
>only cartoons from officially approved msm sources are allowed
why are you on 4chan if you hate seeing top grade photoshop work?

>>15205198
Keep seething about fictional cults and refrain from providing any sources. Way to go bud.

>>15205211
Did I hit a nerve? You can't reply to what I've said so you've made up fake claims.

>>15205271
All the sources are in this thread. If you wanted to read them and deprogram yourself you would have done that already. There is no excuse for die-hard climate cultists.

>>15202166
Based

>>15205284
>All the sources are in this thread.
Which source do you mean? Is it the linked IPCC document? Or the article about Willie Soon being funded by oil industry? Or the paper from >>15198263?

>>15205329
The only scientific source you linked has data which disagrees with your conclusions. Try harder next time.

>>15205348
Which data?

>>15205119
yes, climate hoaxers need severe punishment, they've earned it

>>15205516
for sure

>>15204083
>Why are you so upset that the global warming you've been worrying about your entire life having been a false alarm. You'd think people would be happy to find out that the world isn't coming to an end because of global warming, but instead getting the good news makes them angry. WTF, scientifically speaking
Excellent point anon.

Climate change skeptics always confuse me. Even if you don't believe the climate change is happening, less pollution and cleaner air are surely a good thing, right? Do you want to turn the West to the smog-filled Asia?

>>15204656
>That paper says global warming is occurring, so how is it a false alarm? The paper says global warming is correlated with solar activity, which is indirect, but it doesn't claim global warming is fake. So which is it? The paper is correct or global warming is fake?
Excellent point anon.

>>15205801
nobody has any issue with smog, but CO2 isn't a pollutant. Focusing on that with myopia while trying to steal people's money over a nothingburger is the part people think greens are retarded for.

If you all advocated for fission power or geothermal or shit that's actually any good we might respect you.

>>15205801
They just want to deny in order to preserve the illusion that they are smarter than others. Rationality and consequences don't matter.

>>15205804
With reducing smog*
For example catalytic converters are good. Scrubbers on power plants are incredibly good. Coal power in the US is clean of smog due to how advanced scrubbers are now, yet you green retards still oppose it.

>>15205804
>CO2 isn't a pollutant
But it is.

https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2020GL091585

>>15205810
Your ideology has been debunked for centuries. CO2 has no negative consequences for the biosphere and this is the lowest it has ever been in geological history.

>>15205818
>Your ideology has been debunked for centuries
What ideology is that?

>CO2 has no negative consequences for the biosphere
But it does. Rapid changes in CO2 cause rapid changes in temperature, which are associated with mass extinctions in the past, and negative consequences that are being observed right now. Large increases in CO2 also acidify the oceans, which has widespread ecological consequences.

It's unfortunate you have no evidence or arguments, just pathological denial of reality.

>this is the lowest it has ever been in geological history.
What does geological history have to do with the biosphere? The current biosphere is insignificant in geological history. Mass extinctions are insignificant in geological history. Do you even think about the schizophrenic contradictions in your rhetoric, or are you just parroting what you've hard others say? What is your agenda?

>>15195903
You confuse global warming with man-made global warming.

>>15196263
is irradiance the only energetic activity of the sun? how do we confirm global average temperature in 1880? show me a single proxy dataset that confirms the planet is hotter now than a century ago.

>>15195900
Even if climate weren't changing at all the excess amount of co2 and other fossil fuel related toxins in the air and environment would be terrible for us.

>>15206733
There's no confusion evident in his post. Solar forcing is negligible over this time period.

>>15206752
>is irradiance the only energetic activity of the sun?
It's the only significant activity.

>how do we confirm global average temperature in 1880?
Thermometers and temperature proxies.

>show me a single proxy dataset that confirms the planet is hotter now than a century ago.
Like... all of them?

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6675609/

>>15206752

>>15195900
checked and mongled

>>15206822
I mean of course a single proxy, so not a graph of various measurements pasted together. for instance, tree rings only.
thermometer data is extremely sparse from 1880, so proxy data is where we guestimate global temperature, which is why I'd like a single proxy dataset.
why is irradiance the only important energy output?

>>15206793
It is very evident. OP talks about the fact that man-made contributions are negligible, while that Anon confuses that with
>Global warming not real lmao

>>15206884
>I mean of course a single proxy, so not a graph of various measurements pasted together. for instance, tree rings only.
OK, but why? Why would you not look at all the data?

http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~rjsw/N-TREND/Wilsonetal2016.pdf

>thermometer data is extremely sparse from 1880
Wrong. See >>15206822

>so proxy data is where we guestimate global temperature, which is why I'd like a single proxy dataset.
Your mistaken impression of the thermometer record explains why you want a temperature reconstruction from proxy data, it doesn't explain why you only want one source of proxy data.

>why is irradiance the only important energy output?
There is solar wind, which doesn't have an effect on our climate, and indirect magnetic effects which have a weak effect on cloud formation. Nothing significant compared to irradiance.

>>15206944
>OP talks about the fact that man-made contributions are negligible
But that's wrong and the paper does nothing to show that. It uses outdated data to find a correlation, and then assumes that correlation is the only explanation needed without any causative analysis. By that logic, if they had looked for a correlation between CO2 and temperature first, then they could conclude solar irradiance has no effect. Meanwhile, calculations of how much warming both factors cause shows that solar forcing is negligible, and direct observations show warming from CO2. See >>15196101 and >>15196294

>>15206944
>while that Anon confuses that with
>>Global warming not real lmao
Please explain what part of what he said indicates he was attempting to refute "global warming isn't real." You just made that up.

>>15206992
I did not say anything about the validity of OP's statement. Please work on your reading and discussing skills.
>>15206999
Why should I spoon-feed you?

>>15204804
>That's as reductionist as saying that the study is just taking the conclusion of every other study and inverting it.
It's not, though. The study is a reasoned, extended argument based on empirical evidence and engages with past arguments. The useless twat in this thread didn't do anything more than invert the study's conclusion on mere say-so.

>>15207279
>I did not say anything about the validity of OP's statement.
LOL, you called it a "fact" that man-made contributions are negligible.

>Why should I spoon-feed you?
Thanks for admitting you lied.

>>15207289
>The study is a reasoned, extended argument based on empirical evidence and engages with past arguments.
No it doesn't. It has no causative analysis, so how can it refute anything to do with the greenhouse effect? You didn't even read it.

>>15196263

https://youtu.be/0SYpUSjSgFg

>>15207330
Retard. Work on your reading comprehension.

>>15207669
Not an argument. Thanks for admitting you lied about what you said and the other poster said.

>>15195900
>Harvard
kek

>>15204617
Like fucking clockwork

>>15208344
Shills are indeed like clockwork, they can only repeat the same pathological pseudoscience over and over no matter how many times it's refuted.

>>15206830
the single greatest meme in all of 4chan history was a paleontologist, one of our own, and /sci/ just doesn't even care or seem to notice.

>>15207680
You didn't provide any argument, instead creating strawmen. That's why I called you a retard. There, an argument.

>>15209172
>Can no longer argue about the original point, just attempts to obfuscate

>>15209172
>You didn't provide any argument
>I did not say anything about the validity of OP's statement.
>>LOL, you called it a "fact" that man-made contributions are negligible.
This is all the argument necessary to refute your lie. You have no response. You also imnediately deflected when asked to explain why you thought he was refuting "global warming isn't real." Thanks for admitting you lied.

>>15209163
Maybe you should accept that anonymous is smarter than you are, knows more than you do and manifests an agenda of which you are ignorant.

>>15207330
it is a fact that man-made contributions are negligible.
>Conclusions
> it seems that most of the temperature trends since at least 1881 can be explained in terms of solar variability, with atmo- spheric greenhouse gas concentrations providing at most a minor con- tribution. This contradicts the claim by the latest Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reports that most of the temperature trends since the 1950s are due to changes in atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations

>>15209404
So you are claiming that the paper's conclusion is a fact. Why did you lie?
And it's wrong. See >>15206992

>>15195900
By now, I somewhat endorse jail time for people denying manmade climate change

>>15209404
>I did not say anything about the validity of OP's statement.
>it is a fact that man-made contributions are negligible.

>>15209181
>>15209236
Seething samefag. Read again what the first post I replied to said. Just read it. Then tell me how it addresses the point
>man-made climate change is negligible
instead of trying to make it sound like OPs post tried to say global warming isn't real. You started this, so the burden if proof is on you.

>>15209455
That Anon isn't me, but basedjak posting and samefagging this hard is a perfect display of your mental capability.

>>15209869
>Seething samefag
Seething retard. Is it possible for you to be right about anything?

>Read again what the first post I replied to said.
How about you explain why you lied twice.

>Then tell me how it addresses the point
>>man-made climate change is negligible
>instead of trying to make it sound like OPs post tried to say global warming isn't real.
No part of it indicates that's what OP tried to say. It said that the author doesn't understand the greenhouse effect and the lack of change in solar forcing. Why are you lying? You can't even explain your claim and demand I prove something that is nowhere in the post doesn't exist. Prove there isn't a leprechaun in your room right now. The burden of proof is on you. LMAO, just stop posting, you dumb piece of shit.

>>15209874
>That Anon isn't me
Sure it isn't. No one believes you, shill.

>>15209941
>Mobile data vs wifi
You're not fooling anyone. I haven't lied a single time here. How about you stop being mad, baselessly accusing me of lying (about what?), samefagging, and actually contribute something to the discussion?

>>15202166
Thanks, I like this painting

>>15210456
>You're not fooling anyone.
You're right, I'm not trying to.

>I haven't lied a single time here
You lied about the other poster's post attempting to refute "global warming isn't real," you lied about not saying OP's point is valid right after calling it a fact, and now you're lying about not lying.

>>15210491
You're just the same shill who posts the same verbiage in all these threads. Go outside for once and look at the world. It's nothing like what your masters want you to tell us it is.

>>15196074
yes, and?

>>15210498
You're projecting. You're a shill repeating the same garbage lied and then failing to argue when it gets refuted.

why do the climate hysterics get so upset when they're given scientific proof that they aren't on the verge of dying in a flaming global warming inferno where the atmosphere catches fire and kills everything because ppl drive cars?
also why concern over cars and not private jets and gigayachts?

>>15210684
Because they're paid to spread FUD to undermine people's living standards and freedoms.

>>15206827
my data says the opposite of what yours does

>>15210491
>You're right, I'm not trying to.
You are samefagging hard. It's very obvious. Why lie about it?
>You lied about the other poster's post attempting to refute "global warming isn't real,"
That is absolutely not what I said. Stop putting words in my mouth.
>you lied about not saying OP's point is valid right after calling it a fact, and now you're lying about not lying.
That's not what I said. You need to seriouspy work on your reading comprehension and anger issues. You're foaming from your mouth to the mere fact that you (deliberately?) misread my posts.
And just so you know, you're talking to multiple Anons here.

jannie deleted slightly more than one out of every eight posts in this thread so far. too much wrongthink on 4chan

This topic has been done to death and debunked to hell and back. AGW is not a thing and every serious researcher knows this. You tend to lose your career for even implying it so most don't.

We need to completely rebuild the academic system

>>15196084
The author of that paper was funded1.5 million dollars by Big Oil and personally collected over 800,000 dollars from them, and has been repeatedly involved in some of the worst academic scandals of recent decades, like this one https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soon_and_Baliunas_controversy which resulted in

>>15196084
The author of that paper was funded $1,500,000 by Big Oil and personally collected over 800,000 dollars from them, and has been repeatedly involved in some of the worst academic scandals of recent decades, like this one

>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soon_and_Baliunas_controversy

>>15211601
The kids might call that a shill or a Judas, but keep in mind there were many studies showing no causal links between smoking and cancer nor table sugar and diabetes. (This post funded by British American Tobacco group and British sugar PLc).

>>15211583
Yes. This. Its like saying there are no genetic racial differences of consequence. From the really classy scientific American Anthropological Association for example: https://www.americananthro.org/ConnectWithAAA/Content.aspx?ItemNumber=2583


> Evidence from the analysis of genetics (e.g., DNA) indicates that most physical variation, about 94%, lies within so-called racial groups..... This means that there is greater variation within "racial" groups than between them,,"

Science has gone to the dogs.

>>15195903
>sun doesn't change in 100 years you retard.
sorry chump, science keeps changing, your textbooks are outdated
https://www.wionews.com/science/new-solar-physics-mysterious-vortex-waves-discovered-on-the-sun-travelling-faster-than-expected-465470
https://www.spacedaily.com/reports/A_solar_illusion_Coronal_loops_may_not_be_what_they_seem_999.html

>>15196263
It has nothing to do with the solar activity, but with Earth's magnetic field
http://deeptow.whoi.edu/geomagf.html

>>15196263
1880 lol

>>15205837
>It's important to remember that although the ocean produces at least 50% of the oxygen on Earth, roughly the same amount is consumed by marine life.

https://youtu.be/OVWZyDz--30

Jannie has deleted about one of every eight posts in this thread for wrongthink, heres a link to the uncensored version
https://archived.moe/sci/thread/15195900/

Activists are vowing to kill millions of dogs to reduce carbon footprint:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2022/12/09/fact-check-false-claim-activists-want-kill-dogs-lower-emissions/10807102002/

>>15195903
the earth hasn't been heating for 100 years

>>15196263
Wow bro a 1°C deviation. Thats like less than +/- 0.5% error margin.

>>15195903
The sun is constantly changing - it isn't like a box fan that you set to 'speed 2' and get a constant, steady output. It goes through multiple cycles/subcycles, it has stochastic events like flares and CMEs.

It is illogical to NOT consider the sun. Who would win in a fight? All man-made CO2/greenhouse gas emissions.. or.. THE FUCKING SUN. You know, that thing that all the planets orbit around because it is so fucking huge? That thing. The thing that heats our entire planet, you know, that one.

And as the sun's output varies/the energy we receive varies - guess what, the oceans' impact on climate also runs in cycles & has huge lag time, because.. water can store a hell of a lot of energy and it takes a long time for it to give it up. We have a pile of interwoven cycles. Some inputs have a lag-time of 10+ years before you see effects; some are relatively instant.

Man has not been around very long. You can't look at temperature data from the last couple hundred years, hyperfocus on the last 70-80 or so years.. and then conveniently ignore the hundreds of thousands of years of temperature trends prior to that.

Breaking news: The climate has always been changing. We've been lucky to find ourselves in one of the most stable climate periods in the geologic record. You know what will cool down the planet even more than how much you think we warmed it up? Just one massive volcanic eruption that gets sufficient ash high enough up into the stratos - it happens relatively regularly when looking at geologic time scales - several have happened during the time of modern man - they cool the earth. IIRC, there were 2 massive volcanoes that went off around ~600-500 BCE range... they caused something called 'the dark ages.' We are a bit overdue for some big eruptions if you look at the historical data, so calm your ass down.

Pollution is bad. We should reduce emissions. That doesn't mean the greenhouse effect/man is the primary factor in climate change.

>>15195900
Global warming needs to be accelerated. That way, the Antarctic continents will be warm enough to host jungles again.

>>15195900
NO REFUNDS!!! kek

>>15205797
thats why it was deleted

>>15211583

>>15217675
There is an entire catalogue of errors here making it a logistical nightmare to respond to all of them, but the lamest objection has to be le climate has always been changing. Sure earth has went through several warm and cool periods but dont u think it is important to know what are the main drivers of those fluctuations? Why was the earth several times warmer than today in some periods in the past when solar output was much lower than today? You are willing to entertain any other factor except CO2 levels in the atmosphere.

>>15219262
Your narrative has no traction here. Go back to your corporate platform.

>>15217718
Antarctica has some wonderful geological plundering opportunities that have yet to be exploited. Same goes for Greenland. Whole and completely unmined continents, imagine the mineral availability.