/sci/ - Science & Math

>>15563515
i really wish someone would call something fake and gay on tv. normies would be shocked and outraged, all 4chan users would have a laugh. Someone would eventually let normies in on the joke and ruin it

>>15563515
>Dusty old ass CEO claims something controversial
>surely this isn't a ploy to drive outrage views for money
You posted a twitter post of a (((journalism))) story on a science board. >>>/pol/ is that way. Find something in your local elections to get mad about, you might actually impact your life that way.

Eschatology has always been wrong, people who fall for the chicken little routine are low IQ

>>15563543
the post is either glow in the dark or mad niggerish. I cant figure out which

>>15563573
>don't listen to mainstream media
>fed
Brain damaged beyond repair

>>15563565
All men have a telos. It's simply a question if you share communally such delusions, or possess the audacity--perhaps even constitution--to create one for one's self.

>>15563541
when the aussie leaked some classified documents some news channel reported that people didnt believe him and thought he was fake and gay

>>15563645
kek. i need a link to this

>>15563515

>>15563515
>a literal fucking weatherman says dumb shit
fascinating

>>15563573
It's glow. Looks like he got banned.

>>15563721
https://www.engadget.com/2015-08-06-australian-dod-employee-leaked-secrets-to-4chan.html

>>15563565
The christian guy is right though...

Didn't Greta the climate scientist predict the world would end by last month?

>>15563515
>Dr. Eli David
>Hebrew subtitles
Come on, post that racebait on /pol/, not here.

>>15563515
[The founder of the weather channel] held a bachelor's degree in journalism and stated in interviews that he has not conducted any scientific research in the area of climate change.
lmao absolute brainlet. Why would anyone care what he has to say about the climate or global warming?

>>15565125
Yes.

>>15565125

>>15563645
>some news channel reported
some stuff of their agenda which origin is unprovable.
"Some people" is just the transport of their lie

>>15563515
I believe him. is he starting an army or
anything? I'll join.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=IaEgcRgE__M

>>15563515
> He called global warming the "greatest scam in history"[11] and made numerous false or misleading claims about climate science.[12][13] Coleman held a bachelor's degree in journalism and stated in interviews that he has not conducted any scientific research in the area of climate change.[12][13] Coleman's views contributed to his decision to drop out of the American Meteorological Society.[14]
Dude was a Good Morning America host that convinced a moneybags to fund a TV channel. Not some legendary researcher.

>>15565583
He was right about global warming being a scam though. Must be pretty intelligent.

>>15564745
Greta..i'm sorry for what they did to you.

>>15563515
nothing really

>>15565584
Yeah.
This thing that will cost shitloads of money to deal with and which directly impacts the most lucrative industries in the world is a huge scam.
Global warming's risk and danger being covered up or heavily suppressed would be the more likely scam, if there was ever one.

>>15565629
>This thing that will cost shitloads of money to deal with
Shitloads of plebian tax money as well as all of your freedoms, and mysteriously no money from anyone else. Obviously they have your best intentions at heart.

>>15565643
>no money from anyone else
Anti-emissions programs will drive many large petroleum producers out of business as well as many large shipping companies, except for the few that have already been implementing green technologies.
Those are massively important and lucrative industries. So clearly this isn't a scam by the powers that be.

>>15565653
>This gives ultimate power of who stays in business and who goes out of business to the powers that be.
>So clearly this isn't a scam by the powers that be.
Obviously.

>>15565655
If they're strong enough to organize this, they're strong enough to drive those companies out of business without fabricating some global conspiracy involving hundreds of thousands of fake researchers creating fake data and going to fake schools to learn fake information that had to have been planned a century in advance.

>>15565659
>that had to have been planned a century in advance.
How would this be necessary?

>>15565661
Because we've been doing climate research since the 1800s and have created mechanical models for climate change based on the presence of 'greenhouse gasses' since the turn of the century.
The roots of this conspiracy had to lay over a century ago.

>>15565674
>Because we've been doing climate research since the 1800s and have created mechanical models for climate change based on the presence of 'greenhouse gasses' since the turn of the century.
And if you look at the data collected back then, it totally disproves the modern lies. Congrats you played yourself.

>>15565676
How does it do that?

>>15565679
Because they have to lie about it to make it fit their global warming hypothesis. If they didn't lie about it, their hypothesis would fall apart.

>>15565685
How are they lying about that data?
Its existence or its content?

>>15565687
Its content. They lie about what the recorded temperatures were in an effort to pretend the past was colder than the present.

>>15565690
How do you know that it was warmer or as warm as today, back then?

>>15565693
Because the actual measured temperatures are a matter of historic record and exist independent of lying climate cultists.

>>15563515
Nothing. Opinions are fake and gay.
Fuck off back to >>>/pol/

>>15565702
Is your comment just an opinion?

>>15565694
Can you post places where the actual measured temp and the listed temps in official climate 'timelines' differ?

>>15565707
Everywhere.

>>15565709
That isn't relevant to your claim.
Post some temperature data from like 1900 that contradicts official data.

>>15565711
There's plenty of evidence. Just google it. I'm not going to do the job for you.

>>15565711
>That isn't relevant to your claim.
It's literally the most relevant possible thing to my claim. It shows that all measured data from the past is altered to make it appear colder.

>>15565713
You will because you made the claim.

>>15565719
As you can see from my helpful graphic >>15565709, all you need to do is look at the raw data and you'll see the reality of their manipulation. If it was really warming they wouldn't need to cool the past and warm the present with arbitrary "dark" temperatures.

>>15565705
Ok let me clarify:
You can not opine on reality and not be fake and gay. Why? To derive the nature of reality opinion is unnecessary. The only thing that is needed is observation.

In the end having an opinion simply means not to know. To me this can be discarded and is fake and gay, and that is a moral statement.

>>15565751
This comes off as schizophasia desu.

>>15563515
TO THOSE WHO BELIEVE using government to force climate policy on everyone. Please tell me what events will occur due to climate change that will negatively effect humans, and their magnitude.

The way I see it, climate change existing or not doesn't matter, as humans will just subvert any problem encountered.

>>15565784
Why?

>>15565726
>If it was really warming they wouldn't need to cool the past and warm the present
What does that one thing have to do with the other? If the earth was warming they wouldn't try to calibrate the past data to get a better understanding of the climate? What do you think those scientists' jobs are? Sit in the lab or the office until they find a warming trend and then they go home? Corrections are independent of any trends. If you think that since trend or your conviction should affect calibration, then you're not a scientist but a lying degenerate who should get the Gaddafi treatment.

>>15563515
>asking a weather guy about the climate
that's like asking your electrician about the future of the petrodollar

>>15563515
news should be abolished at this point.
besides documenting discussions on any subject from science to politics there is no use of letting people with 0 knowledge to misinterpret crucial clarifications and statements, to incite and distort, and assimilation of elements without any affiliation.
this is a joke it must stop

>>15565751
you are the fakest, gayest faggot ITT

>>15564745
I can save her

>>15566632
>there is no use of letting people with 0 knowledge to misinterpret crucial clarifications and statements, to incite and distort, and assimilation of elements without any affiliation.
There is a use, to all that, its how the CIA manipulates the low IQ midwit general public

Climate proponents
>Climate change is real! We need to reduce emissions from humans, factories and farm life to save the planet!
Climate Deniers
>Climate change is fake! Those people just want us to get rid of our cars and le eat bugs!
Governments
>strategizing future defense, mining and trade possibilities for both Greenland and the Artic's future

I think it's clear how this shit is going to go down.

>>15563515
Climate alarmism is just a ruse to take the heat off corpo-fascists and take away rights from individuals while raising their taxes. It's just a cover for statists to demand a boot on everyone's necks

>>15567559
>using language this loaded and dishonest
You're so brainwashed, but you don't even realize it.

>>15567601
Precisely.

>>15567604
And what does that make the governments of America, China, Greenland and Denmark anon? Because regardless of how much you think I'm brainwashed that doesn't affect the behavior of the governments in question.

>>15567675
lol you're so gullible

>>15567697
heh, that guy probably thinks we aren't living under a one world government, what a gay

>>15567601
wow the faggots on this board arent useless morons after all and starting to learn how the game is played. cheers anon

>>15567992
Come on, shake your bodhi, baby, do the conga
I know you can't control yourself any longer
Come on, shake your bodhi, baby, do the conga
I know you can't control yourself any longer

>>15568009

>>15565148
now do greta the terrible.

>>15568017
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hc-8Me-lq34

>>15563515
>>15568022
>whataboutism

>>15568069
calling out hypocrisy, more like.

>>15568078
Greta is a fucking figurehead for funding you dense motherfucker, people aren't citing greta as an authority on if climate change is a thing or not.
OP is citing this guy as proof that the entire scientific establishment is lying, while weatherman has never researched the subject and has a goddamn BA in journalism.

>>15568078
You mean because they're equally qualified to talk about climate change? And while the right constantly bashes Greta, now they're suddenly like "yass, king weatherman"? You're right. Let's not listen to greta or corporate TV guy, but something like the IPCC reports. This whole person cult and pointless debates has distracted us enough from the actual topics.

>>15568146
who on the right is like "yass, king weatherman?" you are just spewing retarded shit. This bitch has literally been held up as a saint y leftist media for nearly a decade by every media outlet there is. No one has even heard of this weatherman dude. I hate you fuckinig liars with a passion. You need your head split open with a hatchet fucking faggot

>>15568179
OP and everyone in this thread who unironically thinks that this is a solid post.
>You need your head split open with a hatchet fucking faggot
Showing your true colours, caveman.

>>15568183
I will choke you with my cock you troon faggot

>>15568187
Eww why do you want a blowjob from a trannie?

>>15568191
Im old enough to remember when blowing a tranny meant you had car trouble

>>15568219
The 90s seemed gay and clownish at the time, but considering how horrifying clown world is now it really makes you nostalgic.

>>15568219
>poorfag can't afford a working car
Why am I not surprised?

>>15563565
>people who fall for the chicken little routine are low IQ
The chicken little act plays into their narcissistic savior complex desires via their confirmation bias

>>15569252
>i'm gonna save the world from *made up fake end of the world scenario*
>Thats why you have to give me all of your money and do everything I say
yep, thats the narcissistic savior complex
ppl who believe in global warming are not just stupid, they are genuinely evil

>>15570187
Global warming is a grand scale version of Munchausen by proxy

>>15570595

>>15563565
>Eschatology
I had to look that word up, am I low IQ?

Lets assume climate change is happening at a significantly higher rate than what believe has happened in the past.
Lets assume climate change is a result of human actions.

Please list the things you believe will happen as a result of climate change. Tell me which ones will impact humans. Tell me which of those negatively impact humans.

What negative things to humans will climate change create that you believe gives justification to use the state and policymakers to change human behavior?

I personally, so far, do not believe the government should be used to force people to change their behavior to alter the course of climate change.

>>15570595
Just like covid.
https://kirstenmortensen.com/munchausen-syndrome-by-proxy-on-a-societal-scale/

>>15571572
If you want to understand the world, you should learn meta religion concepts and terms very well. Everyone has a religion that explains their behavior, even if it's not a traditional one or doesn't have a spiritual component.

>>15563541
>I am telling you, right now, that motherfucker is fake and gay!

>>15572530

>>15568022
and al gore

https://youtu.be/NKpsEbf4GRg

>>15572255
https://twitter.com/TheRoyalSerf/status/1681462448824659968

>>15573609
Increasing CO2 levels are good
Its not the job of plants to remove the increased CO2, plants are their to benefit from the luxury of a healthier, more productive atmospheric gas mix

>>15573953
>plants are their to benefit from the luxury of a healthier, more productive atmospheric gas mix
And I am here to eat the animals which eat those plants

>>15575097
So we all agree that higher CO2 levels are beneficial to everyone.

>>15571961
The people who've been tricked by these pysops can never admit to themselves that they were dumb enough to be tricked, because thats too much of a blow to their self image. The smarter you presume yourself to be, the easier you are to trick with the pysops

>>15576169
Narcissists are easily fooled by someone who makes them feel smart and superior.

>>15567604
>you are using loaded language
>you're so brainwashed

>>15576289
He's merely stating an observable fact, Mr. Basedjak.

>>15571945
Life will only get better with those changes tho. Everyone in the future will have free electricity at home and will never pay for gasoline again. All the money you ever spent on electricity, gas, gasoline, just made some other random guy rich.

I love how deniers and oil shills are in desperation mode now that warming is becoming tangible for everyone to experience

>>15576327
Why does your chart stop at 1981?

>>15576326
Please explain why "Everyone in the future will have free electricity at home and will never pay for gasoline again."

>>15576336
The chart stops literally today.

>>15576350
Go figure a climate cultist is this stupid lol

>>15576354
I don't think the retard who doesn't know the difference between start and stop is a cultist. Sure, he might pretend that climate change isn't real, but he's just stupid, not a cultist.

>>15576366
I can tell that you're emotional and upset by your use of profanity and your attempt at being insulting, however science is for rational people, not emotional basket cases with no self control.
Do you really think you're going to convince people to change their minds and agree with you by hurling insults and profanity at them?

>>15576345
Easy. Once you install solar panels and a battery they will pay for themselves, then you can charge your car from the that.

>>15576384
>Once you install solar panels and a battery they will pay for themselves
kek!

>>15576371
Don't get your panties in a twist snowflake

>>15576336
There's no daily Sea Surface Temperatures before that date because there were no satallites to provide such high resolution data, however Extensive annual records exist

>>15576397
Says the guy who can only argue with cherry-picked data, otherwise he folds like tissue paper.

>>15576402
Combining data gathering methods without a control is unscientific. You can see that the scale change (confused for heating) occurs precisely due to instrumentation change.

>>15576389
Yes, they pay for themselves because you no longer have to give money to the electric company.

>Solar panels typically pay for themselves within nine to 12 years.

>>15576412
Solar companies are scamming you out of your money by promising pie-in-the-sky profits after their warranty period is over and you can't complain.

>>15576403
Not cherry picked. But keep trying sweetheart, I'm sure big oil appreciates your bending over for them

>>15576416
Do you work or profit from the oil industry or something?

>Panels typically come with a 25-year performance warranty.

>>15576407
>the scale change (confused for heating)
A scale chance would look like _Γ, but this looks like _/
Seems like you're the confused one.

>>15576420
Why do your corporate masters pay you to do this when your rhetoric is so terrible?

>>15576422
The chart is smoothed in a way that prevents such plateaus from being obvious, but you can see where it does form after the 70s.

>>15576371
>Do you really think you're going to convince people to change their minds and agree with you by hurling insults and profanity at them?
No, but by raising the blood pressure one mmHg at a time I continue to their early death which is beneficial for the planet. God, I wish we could just lynch oil shills in the streets already.

>>15576430
Threatening your opponents with physical violence because you want to silence any criticism of your agenda is a sign of mental health.

>>15576429
Sauce that it's smoothed? Sounds like you just made that up.

>>15576423
Nice projection. Enjoy this final (You), and consequently your final 2 cents

>>15576407
Love this cope. Whether it's monthly instrumental or satellite derived, the trends are the same

>>15576436
Look at that huge spike due to instrumentation changes at the end of the 70s.

>>15576433
you're not criticising, you're shilling And I don't want to silence you I want you to stop breathing.

>>15576444
>everyone who disagrees with me is a shill
Take your meds.

>>15576433
>sign of mental health
You got that right buddy. Now stop breathing

>>15576441
>huge spike at the end of the 70s.
Are you high?

>>15576436
>source: climate change institute
next show us the graph from mcdonalds that proves mcdonalds has the best hamburgers

>>15576441
>instrumentation changes
Nice try at deflection, but that's demonstrably false. Different datasets give the same results

>>15576464
I don't understand. It's not the climate institute that took the data, they just put the data in pretty plots so that even the most retarded people can understand what's going on. We know you can't reed a single paragraph in the IPCC reports, so please appreciate that the information is condensed into your attention span.

>>15576471
>Different datasets
Funny that your new chart completely dispenses with pre-satellite measurements so we can't see the instrumentation change.

>>15576476
I already posted non-satellite monthly
data you retard keep up.
Love the coping and and seething at being proven wrong, good stuff.

>>15576483
>Love the coping and and seething at being proven wrong, good stuff.
Extremely ironic post.

>>15576485
>if the data proves me wrong I'll just come up with some bullshit about instrument changes
Nice arguments

>>15576436
I don't understand? It stayed exactly the same. What's your point?

>>15576486
If the argument didn't rattle you, you wouldn't have cherry-picked your rebuttal to exclude pre-1980 data. You're caught in a corner with no way to argue out of it and so you have to resort to this.

>>15576471

>>15576489
>cherry-picked your rebuttal to exclude pre-1980 data
If he had posted a different plot, you would have made up a different "flaw".
>You're caught in a corner with no way to argue out of it
lmao at this wannabe Jedi.

>>15576519
>If he had posted a different plot, you would have made up a different "flaw".
You're assuming that his new chart would be flawed. Why is that?

>>15576489
>exclude pre-1980 data
I already posted non-satellite data from 1850-2023 multiple times, you're just choosing to ignore it by coming up with some bullshit about instrument changes, whatever that means.

>>15576499
>edited
Didn't fit your narrative without editing, huh? Global warming deniers are so pathetic

>>15576525
If you can't figure out why dramatic instrument changes in the middle of a dataset are problematic then climate science is too advanced for you. A basic stats course at the 100 or 200 level is about your speed.

>>15576522
Hi, I appreciate that you discuss with us in English even if you're ESL. Did you notice the little " marks in that comment? The have lots of uses in the English language. Here, you could think of them replacing the word alleged. By using quotation marks, the anon emphasises that it's not his understanding that there are flaws but that the other anon would call the graph flawed (the quotation marks are implying that it isn't).
Don't get discouraged if you don't understand such subtleties. Keep up the hard work and eventually you'll become proficient in English!

>>15576533
You can keep repeating the same lie over and over, that won’t make it true.

>>15576533
>A basic stats course at the 100 or 200 level is about your speed.
Stats courses (I assume you meant to write statistics) teach maths, not instrumentation. In fact, nothing in statistics speaks against combining data from different sources, as long as the uncertainties are clearly stated or comparable. That's actually how most of the world works. Sensors break, are replaced, improved or upgraded.

>>15576549
>as long as the uncertainties are clearly stated or comparable.
This is the important part here.

>>15563515
So?

People who reject climate change have no problem rejecting the consensus of experts, so what's wrong with me ignoring a cherry picked expert to represent that side?

This is your problem. You can't ignore expert opinion then suddenly start paying attention to expert opinion when you find one that agrees with you.

Is he right about the facts? I don't know. I'd have to become a good climate scientist to find out. But then we would only have one more good climate scientist and the outcome of the planet would be the same. Not enough people can become climate scientists, not even just policy makers. Science needs votes in the end. If Galileo couldn't convince other scientists to change their votes, we could not benefit from his new knowledge. If scientists can't be convinced of the truth, science doesn't work, no system works, and we are doomed.

>>15576557
That isn't what you said before. Before you complained about the combination, which isn't problematic. The other day I was looking for some absorption spectra at work and one was constructed from a total of 10 different publications, each covering a small section of the spectrum.

>>15576579
>the consensus of experts
>expert opinion
>Is he right about the facts? I don't know.
>Science needs votes in the end.
>If scientists can't be convinced of the truth, science doesn't work
True believers are always better than parody.

>>15576579
You have a lot of good points, but you got one thing wrong. The guy isn't even an expert. Such "false experts" are one of the most common cheap tricks grifters use. "Yeah your guy [legitimate expert in the field] says this but my guy [either complete layman or expert in an unrelated field] says the opposite. I don't know what to believe!"

>>15576585
There's no belief involved. Warming is a thoroughly measured and quantified fact
>>15576549
I also have to love how this guy is deflecting about a some instrument change which he has not once provided a source to avoid talking about the data itself. Good thing that there's extensive documentation and quantification of uncertainties in the ERSST dataset which contradict his silly claims.

>>15576596
>There's no belief involved. Warming is a thoroughly measured and quantified fact
You people and your lies tire me greatly.

>>15576600
Yes, keep coping

>>15576579
you have a terrible, ill-informed misunderstanding of the galileo story. no doubt you think that the atheist propaganda version of that story is true and your beliefs are based around your ignorance of history.

>>15576596
Oh no, the uncertainties are smaller for the younger data that clearly show a warming trend. It will take the grifter 14 nanoseconds to come up with an explanation why this means the climate can't be warming.

Explain to me why we should base climate policy around the minority opinion. Or just any policy on any minority opinion in science. No other discussion matters until you do this. It doesn't matter if your minority opinion is bang on 100% correct and not believing you will result in disaster. You have to answer this question.

>>15576618
>It doesn't matter if your minority opinion is bang on 100% correct and not believing you will result in disaster.
That's an odd qualifier. Isn't it important to make decisions based on the correct information?

>>15576607
if galileo was a heretic that won why can't you guys just do that again? It should be much easier if you are correct and not shitting on god and his best creation this time.

>>15576625
That's a good idea. How do we get presidents and legislators to open the magic box and see which information is correct?

>>15576627
By allowing free and open debate on every topic and not rushing into drastic decisions based on incomplete information.

>>15563515
The only question is who profits from it?

>>15576384
Solar panels are not free. Solar panels do not last indefinitely.
Batteries are not free. Batteries do not last indefinitely.

These costs mean it will not be free. Further, I believe the cost of these things is greater than fossil fuels and nuclear. If you disagree tell me why and preferably give evidence.

>>15576625
How do you identify what's correct and what's incorrect? Everything that has implications which might cause inconvenience to you must be wrong?

>>15576412
Is this claim true without subsidies? Is this comparable to all locations in the country?

If so, please direct me to a seller.

>>15576631
>rushing into drastic decisions based on incomplete information.
Great idea, let's wait another 50 years. By then I'll be probably dead and won't have to do shit. I wonder if they're going to say the same then.

>>15576636
>How do you identify what's correct and what's incorrect?
Through free and open debate without interference from the government.

>>15576631
That's still just picking a side. They still can't be certain on which side is correct. Nor can they even be certain if the decision is time-senstitive or not, the need for action may have been drastic 10 years ago for all they know. So we're just back to that question. In that position, as a policy maker that's not a scientist, why would you ever choose the minority scientific opinion?

>>15576647
For how long? The debate has been going on since the 70s at least and the government only recently became active.

>>15576647
>>15576649

>>15576649
You're arguing from a disingenuous perspective that requires too many caveats to be logically sound. The best solution is always to treat situations logically and carefully, and not to get swept up in doomsday prophesying and other scare tactics used by kooks.

>>15576647
What's the difficulty you're still having with accepting basing observational evidence of warming?

>>15576655
basic*

>>15576655
Proponents are having difficulty presenting it without significant governmental pressure on the scale to assert their case.

>>15576652
The distance between the peak of the 1930s hot period and the trough of the 1970s cold period is 40 years. Waiting 20 years from our current hot period to reach the beginning of the next cold period should settle the debate satisfactorily, and you can continue on to complaining about global cooling.

>>15576528

>>15576654
>The best solution is always to treat situations logically and carefully, and not to get swept up in doomsday prophesying and other scare tactics used by kooks.
So stall forever, never act, never publish that article you've been writing for years?

>>15576665
Just treat every situation with judicious thought and don't rush into kooky delusions of disaster.

>>15576654
Did an AI write this post? It's a simple question. Why should a policy maker buck the majority of climate scientists on planet earth and go with a minority position?

>>15576670
>the majority of climate scientists on planet earth
But only a minority believe in AGW doomsday hysteria.

>>15576669
by waiting, you have sided with the minority because the minorities position is to do nothing, and the majority's position was to act now and in the past. Why is this a good idea?

>>15576678
Because the side you portray as a minority (despite being in the majority in reality) is being prudent and has the correct perspective.

>>15576677
Whats your point? That lawmakers only need to act if it's a "doomsday" scenario? I'm not even sure what that means. But it doesn't matter. It can be as bad or as not bad as you decree it to be.

>>15576686
>Whats your point?
That your leading line of argumentation is based on a fraudulent premise. And regardless of your feelings we shouldn't listen to a minority of kooks who preach eschatological pseudoscience.

everyone knows global warming is fake

>>15576680
>despite being in the majority in reality
You want to back that up?

> is being prudent and has the correct perspective.
You don't understand nigger. Even if you can prove you are right the the majority of scientists are being dumb ninny heads making fart noises with their mouth, you can't prove it to a politician because they are incapable of appraising the evidence.

>>15576669
>>15576663
Why? All of the measured natural forcings like solar radiance, orbital parameters and volcanic aerosols are trending towards cooling (this is something that can be observed in climate records). At the same time there's measured increased radiative forcing from CO2 in the atmosphere.
Any debate about any of these basic measurements is just silly.

>>15576689
>That your leading line of argumentation is based on a fraudulent premise

The claim that most scientists believe climate change to be a threat large enough to require government intervention to mitigate is correct and not a "fraudulent premise". It doesn't matter if doomsday scenarios are or aren't on the table.

>>15576695
why do you keep on spamming the debunked hockey stick graph?

>>15576694
>You want to back that up?
The study from which the oft-cited 97% claim originates only had a firm pro-AGW position from 25% of recently-published papers. 50% of the authors in the final number were merely "inferred" from Oreskes' opinion on their body of research and the rest were based on much shakier ground. Oreskes herself stated in her 2007 book that some authors she counted as pro-AGW in her original study "might believe that current climate change is natural." but didn't think that finding out was important to her conclusion.

>>15576700
Do you have any arguments against the methodology of the PAGES 2k group or are you just stating it’s false because you don’t like reality?

>>15576698
The 97% consensus paper has been debunked for years. Only 25% of published climate scientists involved in that study believed in AGW at all.

>>15576704
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2023/05/01/mcintyre-reverse-engineering-a-hockey-stick-shows-bogus-methodology/

>>15576680
>>15576701
>>15576707
Hey you guys seem pretty knowledgeable and I had a question about something else that's been bugging me. Do any of you think that evolution is a fake consensus?

>>15576686
lawmakers should never act. If climate change creates a problem, the free market will yield the best solution.

The proof of this is to look at the soviet union or modern china. The greater the state control, the shittier things get.

>>15576726
I'm not sure what you mean by that.

>>15576709
I suggest you don't try to post "rebuttals" from a a guy that oil companies call a strategic partner
This is pretty funny
>the current PAGES reconstruction – the “Woke Reconstruction” for short and used in IPCC AR6
Surely there's no bias from someone describing data as woke
>So I suggested that @detgodehab see what happens when last 50 years of data not used?
>when @detgodehab chopped off 100 years
Wow you mean to tell me that when you purposely alter the methodology of a single record out of 692 that are used in PAGES 2k you can erase warming in a tree record that overlaps with the instrumental record and we know it agrees with instrumental observations?
This is the kicker even this loon says
>This doesn’t disprove global warming

>>15576767
Do most biologists believe in evolution?

>>15576776
"Evolution" contains a lot of different concepts under one umbrella. You'll have to be more specific if you want a good answer.

>>15563565
stop posting that nazi you stupid fuck. just because his drawing style doesn't look hideous it doesn't mean your smart.

go fuck off back to /pol/.

>>15563541
> Someone would eventually let normies in on the joke and ruin it
What joke?

>>15576700
Explain the melting ice caps.

>>15576778
This one I guess

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution

>>15576812
What specific theory do you want to know if scientists generally subscribe to? Darwin's original theory of the origin of species? Punctuated Equilibrium? Some process of speciation like Macroevolution? Microevolution?

>>15576809
>more long since debunked fake news global warming doomsday memes

>>15576813
I didn't know this would be so hard. Like if I asked about theory of gravity I think it would be accepted to mean the latest and greatest theory of gravity and we could move on to the answer.

Macroevolution I guess.

>>15576824
There isn't a general scientific consensus on the mechanism behind macroevolution as commonly understood. Several theories have been proposed and rejected over the years, but currently there is no widely-agreed-upon model for the formation of large scale biological structures and the cause of speciation (or how to define a species in the first place, e.g. taxonomy vs. fertility). The person who definitively models it will get a Nobel Prize and probably become the most famous biologist in human history.

>>15576814
>anon asks about ice caps
>you post sea ice
Good stuff

>>15576836
Wait so you think some species changed into others? I wasn't asking about the details.

>>15576848
The details are the only important part, anon.

>>15576851
But what about intelligent design

>>15576857
That would be a counter-position to the origin of species, and there are biologists who accept that theory as valid. It's a surprisingly larger number than you would expect, considering that moniker covers both directed panspermia (which is popular with more woo-wooey atheists) and religious models of life.

>>15576842
>source: NASA
a government propaganda agency, not a scientific organization

>>15576861
>>15576848
>climate deniers are also creationist retards
makes sense

>>15576866
So you ran out of room to sealion, and when the answer you received wasn't satisfactory in confirming your biases you jumped to your preconceived conclusion anyway. Quite interesting as a study of the climate cultist's mindset.

>>15576864
As opposed to the antarctic sea ice measurements you posted which come from NASA as well?
Which one is it then?

>>15576868
I'm the anon that was asking questions and I got my answer, that guy is some opportunist. I guess distrusting the consensus on evolution your ilk won't shut the fuck up about is "sealioning"? I wanted to know if it was also like that bullshit 97% study that dickwaved around

>>15576911
You could have just asked that question first and it wouldn't have seemed disingenuous. To answer it, I don't think anyone has ever done a study claiming that 90%+ of biologists believe in evolution. If they did then it would have to resort to that kind of deceptive wordcel wrangling, because even among people who disagree with intelligent design there are many competing theories and their proponents argue bitterly about which one is right.

>>15576911
Consensus is irrelevant when the observations of rapid warming are self evident

>>15576918
If they were self-evident, AGW proponents wouldn't have to lie about it so much.

>>15576920
>if i keep repeating that the data clearly showing warming are fake that'll make it true
Deniers are so funny and transparent

>>15576926
You lying and deflecting doesn't make warming real, no matter how much you want to pretend it is. Even if you get rid of every mercury thermometer in the world people will still notice it isn't getting hotter.

>>15576917
>You could have just asked that question first and it wouldn't have seemed disingenuous.

Why is the answer easy if the question is about 97% of biologists, but "most" biologists required an ontological breakdown of what evolution what supposed to mean? The answering process felt disingenuous but I let that anon proceed with how he wanted to answer it.

So if 90% requires deceptive wrangling, what figures would not surprise you? You can give a range if you want. I'd be surprised if it was never measured with all the court trials for public education. My biology teacher and psych professor didn't believe in it. But if someone believes in evolution they claim consensus every time.

>>15576917
>>15576936
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Level_of_support_for_evolution

>>15576931
>no I will ignore every single piece of evidence and basic temperature measurements

>>15576936
Based on my experience with professors and students I would say 60-70% of biologists in general believe in some type of macroevolution. Of that group I'm really not sure how many agree with which theory but 99% of them would deny classical Darwinian evolution and affirm one of the more modern models, whether explicitly or implicitly.

>>15576866
low IQ post

>>15576951
Creationist boomers should stay in facebook

>>15576957
2 for 2, losing brain cells

>>15576947
>Based on my experience with professors and students

lmao there's your problem. You need to feel the pulse of biologists that publish or at least have a real job

>I would say 60-70% of biologists in general believe in some type of macroevolution.

I would expect these numbers for boomer general practitioners that check your balls out, not biologists

>>15576986
>lmao there's your problem. You need to feel the pulse of biologists that publish or at least have a real job
You'd unironically get more creationists or at least evolution agnostics if you looked in industry. Academia is usually more pro consensus on most topics because of the gatekeeping effect of departmental hiring.

>>15563565
True

>>15576783
Lmao, troglodyte

>>15576951
Imagine being outwitted at every turn and completely fucking owned before you are pulled underwater and ripped to pieces, and the only entity that could save you is an extremely advanced species that only wants to film it happen. Then the last seconds of your life culminates to something to laugh at on a shitposting discussion board. I don't know who got it worse. This seal or that penguin that was raped by a walrus.

>>15576988
Or, maybe because industry is lower IQ on average. Profs overwhelmingly have phds, and almost 0 masters degrees. Industry you'll find an even spread of bachelors, masters and phds.

>>15576999
That doesn't really pass the smell test.

>>15568138
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36790301&p=3#36795361

>>15576412
This is only true due to saving electricity bill costs. How will someone who never paid such a bill, but definitely paid for a solar panel, be able to claim such a thing?

>>15576421
And they aren't free. Unless you sell the electricity to someone else you have not profited from them and thus the electricity isn't free. If everyone has these panels, you won't be able to sell to them thus you will not have free electricity.

>>15576999
there are people on this board like this who really think spending two more years in school studying minutiae makes you some gigabrained genius. this is what a psued hack looks like. Dont be this guy

>>15576581
that poster has been consistent and it seems like you are bouncing around trying to find anyway to discredit his very understandable point. Looks to me like you got BTFO and are coping

>>15563515
It clearly is happening but theres no reason to believe its doomsday or even negative. Biodiversity has always been at its highest in warm periods. Co2 was over 2000 ppm at some point and life thrived. Right now is one of the few times in earths history that ice caps even existed.

>>15577140
The warm temperature isn’t the problem. It’s how fast it’s warming. In the past climate change has lead to mass extinction multiple times

>>15571572
I also had to look it up and I was disappointed it had nothing to do with scatology.

>>15577140
>Biodiversity has always been at its highest
Why is it declining then?
>Right now is one of the few times in earths history that ice caps even existed.
It's also one of the few times in Earth's history humans exist. Seems like humans only existed while ice caps existed.

>>15577065
>spending two more years in school studying minutiae makes you some gigabrained genius
You got cause and effect different. Spending a few hours on a TOEFL test doesn't make you speak English. But if you don't speak English, you'll fail your TOEFL. Likewise, when you're a brainlet, you'll drop out of school at least 2 years earlier. Not all people without degrees are idiots, but there's a strong correlation.

>>15577053
>>15577055
Yes, they are free. You have 2 options: give the money to the electric company and just get electricity, or you can buy the solar panels with that money instead. And after you’re done paying for them in 9 to 12 years you no longer have to keep paying the electric company so that money never leaves your pocket. Even if the panels only last the 25 year warranty you’ll get 13 to 16 years of free electricity after paying for the panels.
You can also use as much electricity as you want. No more thinking about how much money you’re spending. You’ll use your cooling and heating systems very differently. It’s freeing.

>>15577363
>Why is it declining then?
Because humans keep literally genociding animals and insects into extinction either intentionally (pest control) or unintentionally (habitat destruction for monocrops).

>>15577953
>i am the savior of the precious animals
mental illness

>>15577367
there is zero correlation that people who have a masters or phd are more intelligent than people with a bachelors when comparing the same field.

>>15578470
No, I'm not. Where did I say that?

>>15577012
Because why formulate an argument when you can just say something vague which is supposed to refute everything with no context. Also industry is more likely to be influenced by oil companies, and thus would have an incentive to deny climate change. Doubt you'll see very many petroleum engineers claim climate change is true no matter how intelligent they are. Profs are quite isolated from industry.

>>15578508
Academics tend to be people who can't hack it in the real world. Especially in the earth sciences. The smartest people are working for almanacs and consulting for futures traders.

>>15578494
I'm sure you can back this up by data.

>>15578508
>industry is more likely to be influenced by oil companies
What about the giant monopoly on force that regularly uses extortion to fund it's activities and is allows itself to infringe everyone else's property rights?
Could the government not have a far greater influence on industry?

Instead of begging the government to make even more restrictions over what you can and cant do with your own bloody land, why not just quit buying shit from people you feel are making some icecubes melt?

>>15578566
>post data to prove my data-less assertion wrong!
low IQ post

>>15565583
Is Karl Marx Wikipedia page written like this?

>>15565583
This reads like someone being smeared by the clergy for heretical beliefs.

>>15578701
If you take a look at the talk pages on wikipedia you'll quickly find the barrier for information to be included goes from 'scientific consensus' to 'wikipedia editors consensus'.

>>15565583
I used to watch this guy every morning as a kid. My grandma used to love the way he would say KUSI San Diego. "Kayyyy-YOUUU-ess-eye." I didn't know he passed away in 2018, that is sad to hear. I do remember him speaking out against global warming in 2007, it was actually a big deal at the time in our local area, because he was a generally well-respected member of the community.

>>15565583
>wikipedia
not a valid source of information

>>15580117
Modern so-called environmentalists are bugman urbanites who get panic attacks when they leave their cities and go into the forest.

>>15578672
>why not just quit buying shit from people you feel are making some icecubes melt?
Because that would only work if a large majority of people agreed to do so, and there's a significant proportion of the population who would never agree to it no matter what. Also much of the world is explicitly designed to require fossil fuels, for instance it's almost impossible to live in America without a car.

This is by far the most retarded comment on climate change I've ever seen, you're not just a single person, and saying that is tantamount to just telling a fish to stop breathing water after some company dumps industrial chemicals into the ocean.

>>15580805
so instead you propose to give a bunch of money to the government because...

>>15580808
Stop asking questions, goyim.

>>15580808
Well I don't think we should give money to the government. In fact I think we should probably keep it exactly the same, just transfer all that money we use on military welfare queens and roads and put it into passenger rails and trolleys (while also changing zoning laws). Realistically after that just stop oil/farm subsidies and put that into green energy.

>>15580814
>put it into passenger rails and trolleys (while also changing zoning laws)
Oh you're one of those "urbanists." Shouldn't you be posting on reddit with your brethren?

>>15580814
yes we should [reduce military spending and weaken ourselves] and [increase the amount of infrastructure that depends on huge, complicated contraptions that must be produced by a global supply chain and managed by a bureaucracy] and then we should [stop funding local producers of vital resources] and [increase funding for big tech grifters peddling meme non-solutions that also depend on a global supply chain to produce]
How coincidentally beneficial for globalists!

>>15565583

>>15580827
Not even an urbanist, and in fact I'm kind of hesitant to car free living as an American. I just acknowledge that if we are to keep the planet habitable there's practically a 90% chance cars need to be eliminated depending on how batteries look, and it's not looking good. Same thing with planes and trucks, both are practically impossible to decarbonize or hinge on theoretical technologies.

>>15580829
Newsflash faggot: everything you do already props up the global supply chain. That car you drive? Japan or Germany, oil from saudis, practically everything from China. At least if everything we used for transit was like a train or trolley it would eliminate like 90% of the manufacturing/fuel required to do literally exactly what we already do. Trains/trolleys use exactly the same materials as cars, and can be sourced from the exact same places, just requiring like a miniscule amount of resources compared to how many cars are on the road right now.

>>15580864
>I just acknowledge that if we are to keep the planet habitable
lmfao what a dupe. you fell for it hook line and sinker.

>>15580864
>bro the centralization of the economy through a global supply chain is so bad so you know what you should do? centralize even more by making everyone totally dependent on things that still require the global supply chain and banning all alternatives for your protection

>>15580855
>liberty alliance
Wow, I'm sure this is a 100% unbiased foundation with absolutely 0 partisanship or oil lobbyist funding involved whatsoever.

>>15580865
>THE WORLD IS COMING TO AN END
>THE SKY IS FALLING
>I'M THE VICTIM
>EVERYONE OWES ME BIGTIME BECAUSE OF MY MADE UP FAKE SUFFERING
my imitation of a contemporary environmentalist, what do you think?

>>15580958
you forgot
>I NEED TO SAVE THE WORLD (by being put in charge and ruling it as a tyrant, ordering it according to my exact whims and preventing anything I don't like from happening and punishing the kids who bullied me- I mean the sinners who don't do exactly what I want- I mean my political opponents- I mean)

>>15580958
I'd say it's a nonargument strawman, not that anon

>>15580958
>>15580969
Absolutely spot-on.

>>15580867
Daily Reminder that Antifa is a Jewish, communist, terror organization whose mission, since its inception, is to terrorize white people into not fighting back against a Jewish, communist takeover of their country and the Fascists were the people who rose up to stop them

>>15580117
>somebody spent more than a few minutes drawing this nonsense
Totally organic

>>15580805
>Because that would only work if a large majority of people agreed to do so
False, you would stop your contribution to climate change.
Secondly, the reason why most people won't follow your lead is because climate change is not enough of a problem to be perceivable.
Stop using the state to force people to do things you scum bag.

>much of the world is explicitly designed to require fossil fuels
Instead of being a cunt, go innovate a new technology that is just as cheap or cheaper than fossil fuels while not making the sky fall on our heads, then market it to everyone and thus displace those fossil fuels.

> tantamount to just telling a fish to stop breathing water afte
I don't care about fish as they are not important to human survival. If you care deeply about them you can bare the cost and keep them in a pond.

Free market capitalism has the solution for all human desires. Big government yields only death and misery. You are evil for demanding it.

>>15580814
>military welfare queens
Did you mean the military, healthcare, and welfare?

>roads and put it into passenger rails and trolleys
I see you've watched Adam Something, and haven't thought critically about anything he's said.

>just stop oil/farm subsidies and put that into green energy.
Have you considered just stopping ALL subsidies? If you don;t have taxes (theft) funding ventures, the free market can kill off unwanted and profitable grifts. Once such subsidy I find especially stupid is the one in which all gasoline must be watered down with ethanol, which has to be grown by corn farmers, wasting precious arable land and using up fertilizers that the environmentalists hate so dearly.

Why not just STOP SPENDING FUCKING MONEY? It's not your's to take, just leave everyone to get on with it. The free market can do all this shit if the government FUCKS OFF!

>>15580864
>acknowledge that if we are to keep the planet habitable
Right here we go, you seem to believe the planet will be uninhabitable due to climate change.

I now request you at minimum state what events will happen and their magnitude that will render the earth "uninhabitable" to humans.

If you do not, you are admitting to this entire thing being a facade for giving the government absolute power.

>>15580864
>Newsflash faggot: everything you do already props up the global supply chain.
The only way to stop your precious climate change will be to exterminate the human race. Please stop campaigning for the genocide of humanity. You need to realize you are in a koolaid cult.

>>15580864
>oil from saudis, practically everything from China.
This is as such due to the past 50 years of climate alarmism creating new restrictions that render western industry untenable, thus it has all moved to china.

>At least if everything we used for transit was like a train or trolley it would eliminate like 90% of the manufacturing/fuel required to do literally exactly what we already do.
No it wouldn't. Trains use loads of steel for rails, require giant bridges and tunnels and more of them due to lower slope tolerances, and the energy savings made by transitioning everyone from one person in a 1 ton metal box to 50 people to a 50 ton metal box are negligible. Further, the inflexiblity of public transport makes it a non-replacement to the role of cars.

Fuck off and let the free market do it. You are a death-cult statist fuckwit, worst type of moron there is.

>>15581687
We only need to eradicate those who refuse to stop polluting our planet. If we had a pool and some people were peeing in the pool, would you say
>the only way to stop the peeing is by killing everyone
That'd be wrong. You only need to kill those who pee. And after drowning the first pisser, the others will most likely stop on their own.

>>15582051
>We
Who? Cultists? Socalists?

>who refuse to stop polluting our planet
What is "pollution", what group is "our"?
All life "pollutes", it uses up resources by eating, it releases pollution by excreting.
It's not your planet as you don't have the property rights to it. Fuck off you stupid murderous communist.

>>15582517
>Who? Cultists? Socalists?
People who want to live on earth.
>What is "pollution", what group is "our"?
CO2, see above.
>All life "pollutes", it uses up resources by eating, it releases pollution by excreting.
If you can't tell the difference between fossil carbon and the carbon cycle, you should probably be put against the wall, just in case.
>It's not your planet as you don't have the property rights to it.
It's your plant as well as mine, but if you destroy our common basis of life, it's self defence.
>stupid
Survival isn't stupid.
>murderous
Standing my ground isn't murder
>communist
lolwut. Ran out of bad things to say?

>>15582539
You are in a deathcult. This is why government should be significantly smaller. Lunatics like you try to use it to assert your will over others. You are evil.

>>15582051
Why don't you just kys to put less of a burden on mother nature then?

>>15583834
Would you kill itself if someone peed in your communal pool?

>>15581676
Scientifically speaking, why does the healthcare industrial complex get paid so much more than any other part of the government or private sector?

>>15582539
CO2 isn't a pollutant, its an absolute necessity for life on Earth, we don't have enough of it in the air currently. Complaining about CO2 is like complaining about rain in the desert.

>>15583964
>we don't have enough of it in the air currently
According to the fossil fuel industry?

>>15582581
>This is why government should be significantly smaller.
Yeah good call. Who keeps the government from getting bigger again? The government?

>>15583966
According to agricultural science.

>>15583969
Source or GTFO

>>15583967
What's your point?

>>15578497
sperg

>>15583966
Do you know what CO2 is?

>>15584023
Do you know what sources are?

>>15584032
Tranny, why post here when you can get a lot of fake points on reddit and wikipedia?

>>15584053
>bringing up gender identity
Why are you so insecure?

>>15584053
If you can't provide sources to your claims, /b/ might be a better board for you.

>>15584059
This is an ideological impasse. We will continue to shit-talk each other like two members of different tribes speaking different languages. Thousands of years ago, in real life, we would have thrown spears or rocks at each other. This is the manifestation of dominance-assertion thousands of years later.

>>15584078
Even today you wouldn't assert your dominance with such nonsense. It would be utterly embarrassing to call someone a tranny out of the blue like that.

>>15584078
When was the last time you spoke to another human being IRL?

>>15584101
why not? what are the rules on asserting dominance

>>15584111
Not being cringe is a pretty big rule. If you Naruto-run behind me and say "nothing personnel kiddo" that'd make you look retarded.

>>15584101
we're all anonymous, we can say whatever. There's no reddit / wikipedia mod to ban me nor social obligations to follow :)

>>15584117
I guess LOL

>>15584059
41%

>>15584118
Calling someone a tranny just shows that you think about trannies a lot. Not that you're more dominant, strong or intelligent than anyone.

>>15584101
clocked
over the internet
without anyone even seeing you
its that easy, sir

>>15584117
Though isn't using the word "retarded" against your karma system? To me, a liberal would try to be more of a savior of all minorities and helpless groups

>>15584134
It's always fun when schizos reveal some of the world they construct in their heads. Did you expect me to call you a schizo like mental health issues are a bad thing? Can you draw a clock for us?

>>15584139
Hey, ease up on the language, kiddo. You're hurting people.

>>15563515
true with all the solar shit and wind power
stupid issue
just hemp farm for food clothes oil and building materials dude loads of hemp will just work