/sci/ - Science & Math

>>15685724
Meh, is just another moron who supports ukraine and therefore should be sent to the front as cannon fodder. Even his masters realized CO2 claims are ridiculous, so now those idiots are blaming cow farts.

>>15685747
This is a science topic. Go back to /pol/ if you don't want to discuss anything.

>>15685748
Phil Mason is butt-hurt because Elon Musk is a billionaire, meanwhile Phil is a single loser with no money, who lives in a dilapidated shack.
While I agree with a lot of his opinions busting junk products, including those of scam artists like Elon Musk, he's completely wrong about climate change since he doesn't seem to understand anything about history.

>>15685724
Why doesn't he debunk the climate change fraud and the carbon cartel? I doubt that he is genuinely this stupid. You always gotta follow the money.

>>15685724
This part is hilarious.
He says that "the atmosphere, what you can't see, is 80% nitrogen, 20% oxygen (which is 100%)."
So uh Phil, which part is responsible for "climate change"?
Is it the part that's so insignificant you didn't even mention it since it's less than 1% of the entire atmosphere?

This isn't a doomsday cult btw

>>15685748
Fuck you, I also believe in mass medical experimentation, genital mutilation, and the soience.

This dumb motherfucker doesn't seem to understand that coral reefs are made from calcium carbonate, which is CaCO3.
And it gets that CO2 from the atmosphere and respiration.
https://www.coralguardian.org/en/carbon-balance-in-corals/
https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/999030
Fancy that, coral reefs do better in warm waters that have more energy from the sun.
That's why you don't find coral reefs at the poles.

https://theconversation.com/plants-absorb-more-co2-than-we-thought-but-32945
This is why atmospheric concentration of CO2 has only increased about 1% since the 1800s, even after adding trillions of tons of CO2 to the atmosphere. Almost all of that CO2 has been absorbed by plants or the ocean.

>>15685802
>based thundert00t giving the current finger

Here's a good one: he thinks this chart is accurate, even though it was warmer in the 1930s when the Dust Bowl happened.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/07/14/newly-found-weather-records-show-1930s-as-being-far-worse-than-the-present-for-extreme-weather/

This moron uses Lake Mead, a man-made resevoir that provides water to millions of Americans (who wouldn't even be living there if it wasn't for a large water source) as "evidence" of climate change.
https://www.newsweek.com/hilary-boosts-lake-mead-water-levels-second-day-running-1821539

Meanwhile, Lake Mead is filling back up and drought restrictions have been eased.

Back in the real world, there has been no change to the water levels of any of The Great Lakes in the US.
https://www.mlive.com/weather/2017/08/worlds_largest_freshwater_lake.html

By this point in the video, he has to be trolling, right?
https://coloradosun.com/2021/05/31/colorado-pine-beetle-epidemic-waning-timber-industry/

The pine beetle devastation has mainly stopped, and trees in Colorado are growing more rapidly now.

https://www.cpr.org/2021/01/29/how-these-scrapwood-startups-could-help-colorado-fight-wildfires/
Oh, and this wouldn't have been such a problem if environmentalists and Democrats didn't engage in fire suppression, which helps to kill tree beetles and allow for new tree growth.

>>15685724
>repeating the "CO2 is plant food" fossil fuel propaganda verbatim even though more trees haven't and will not make a dent in absorbing CO2 because the residence time of the terrestrial biosphere is too short

>>15685803
>https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/999030
Corals in a single reef showing tolerance to heat stress doesn't negate the devastation seen across the globe

>>15685886
Weird how that graph only shows the last 10,000 years of history.
What is this some Christian blog of something?

CO2 is also absorbed into the ocean, coral reefs, and lots of other organisms.
https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/features/CarbonCycle/page2.php

>>15685891
Coral reefs are growing all over the world. The problem is from over fishing, not "climate change". The only coral reefs that have problems are the ones that are over-fished and are closer to cities, and thus have more farm/storm run-off.
So it's not "climate change" as it is "human habitation".

Oysters also help to sequester carbon, but of course Leftists and Environmentalists have made it de facto illegal to start oyster farms. The permitting process for growing oysters is absolutely insane, meaning that only multi-million dollar operations can do it, even though all it takes is a few thousand dollars worth of equipment.
https://seagrant.gso.uri.edu/how-eating-more-oysters-could-reduce-greenhouse-gas-emissions/

Well at least this confirms that /sci/ is sick of hearing from losers like Phil Mason.

>>15688009
thats only because sci is infested with poltards and contrarians

>>15685724
>Humanity is simply returning all of this stored carbon dioxide back to the atmosphere.
But humans hav't evolved with the same c02 levels as dinosaurs, surely you see the problem

>>15688065
I’m all about hearing alternative viewpoints, as long as they make sense and are backed by evidence.
Phil’s latest rant is completely unhinged, and he has to rely on ad hominem attacks instead of presenting factual data.

>>15685891
Hey buddy there's this new thing they just discovered in called natural selection. It's how life survives environmental changes, both gradual and catastrophic.

>>15685925
I don’t know why you keep talking about the carbon cycle as if it wasn’t evident that anthropogenic emissions weren’t drastically faster than in the last million years.
Funny how you pivot to talk about oyster permits when confronted with the reality that coral reefs all over the world have been devastated by warming temperature

>>15685724
>finally ending the immoral cycle of suffering with a planet-wide extinction of all living things
>bad
why are nataltards like this?

>>15685724
The issue being, theoretically, is the decrease in salinity in the water around Greenland (due to glacial melt).

Why is this a potential issue?

The gulf stream.

The change in ocean salinity of the North Sea has the potential to shut down/divert the gulf stream, which would cause Europe to descend into a dry frozen wasteland in a matter of decades.

Out of all of the climate alarmists, this theory does hold some weight.

>>15688378
>400 ppm
oh no
that's only like 5 million years ago
where is was 4 degrees warmer
which we aren't seeing
and now soientists are placing more emphasis on methane now that they realize that the co2 concentration really doesn't affect the climate that much among other factors
while they push renewable energy that just leads to more co2 and natural gas leaks that would just be equivalent to dumping a shitload of methane
because the renewable energy is actually backed by natural gas and coal
great job

>>15688378
Zoom. Out.

>>15688418
Nice cope. Even in the onset of the PETM, and later the glacial/interglacial cycles, both carbon concentrations and temperatures are rising 9-10x faster now than they were then.

>>15688408
desalinate the pacific coast to get water for crops instead of the braindead idea to run an aqueduct from the great lakes
extract the rare metals from the sea water and put the pure salt on barges to dump by the Greenland coast
pay for it with Californian taxes because they are retarded and feed the world with the water you're using to hydrate the desert
use the uranium from the extraction to power nuclear and sell the other metals
why the fuck am I not paid millions of dollars as a public policy advisor? this shit is a solved problem.

>>15688420
Irrelevant to our civilization and global ecosystem. Temperature were hotter at certain times in geologic time but the ecosystem had established for millions of years in those conditions.

>>15688431
So you agree we have no idea how higher CO2 concentration would affect our civilization because there were no precedence?

>>15685787
>>15685724
>>15685748
>>15685803
>>15685816
>>15685851
>>15685873
>>15685925
Ingest 0.04% of your body mass in botulinum toxin you disgusting shill rat. Shouldn't be a problem seeing as it's such a low percentage eh?

>>15685724