/sci/ - Science & Math

>>8734906
>Americans, explain yourselves.
we are a capitalist country and money is above ethics

He also tried to sue the EPA 8 times
He's not even the worst member of Trump's cabinet.

>>8734911
That's a motive for a policy decision. This is just a factual question, and it's being left to the least qualified person. The EPA has scientists who study the subject, why aren't they the ones making determinations of fact? Politicians can set policy priorities, but the question of what is actually happening should be left to the experts in that field.

>>8734911
Thanks, I'm glad we got the elephant in the room named.

But more insidious than the obvious detail of putting a lawyer who has actively looked for legal challenges to climate science policy into the EPA, there is the ever so small matter of his statement today contradicting his statement to Congress during his confirmation hearing in which he said that he believed the head of the EPA "has an important role when it comes to regulating carbon dioxide".

Americans, do you not care that your new govt is full of blatant liars and incompetents?

>>8734926
It's not like it's something new, the U.S. has always been at the bottom in this field, this just makes it worse than it already was. Unless they start seeing more benefits in fighting climate change the situation won't change, and this will probably stay like this for many years until it's too late.

>>8734923
Sure it's a factual question, but despite how much Pruitt or Trump or others like them complain about "political correctness," they also love to use the concept to quash their opponents. While it may be factually correct that humans are contributing to global warming, for the Republican party that fact is politically inconvenient, and so it is essentially politically incorrect. The Trump administration doesn't care what is factually correct, only what is politically correct.

>>8734926

>Americans, do you not care that your new govt is full of blatant liars and incompetents

Most of the people who voted for Trump severly lack knowledge of government, science and economics beyond high school. Because of this they can't logically deduce Trump and his team are effectively hacks who are ab libbing their way through most of the executive process.

I like to believe some of these people are starting to realize what they have done but it will probably take war or China overtaking us economics wise before they realize they fucked up seriously.

And even then they probably won't understand why this shit is happening.

>>8734906
russians have mafia boss
china is a corporation
japan is stagnant and isolationist
eu is weak, incoherent
usa is a trade zone "governed" by dumb
mena is a religion cave
SA is not developed enough
africa is not even

where did we go so wrong, who will save us if something bad happened

>>8734976
They'll never realize that they fucked up, because that would require admitting to themselves that they made a mistake, which human beings are generally very bad at unless they've been specifically trained to be comfortable with the idea that they can be wrong.

Instead, they will naturally seek out sources of information that will reassure them that they made the right decision. All the bad things that will happen as a result of their mistake will be left out or blamed on someone else. The people who voted for Trump will never realize that they made a mistake because they will only listen to sources that paint him in a positive light.

>>8734991
HERE'S THE SHOCKER
they couldn't have not made a mistake
hillary was just as shit and you know it

not that they couldn't have preserved some more dignity instead of shilling and spreading meme news all over the world

i still have a 0.5% hope trump won't be a total disaster and will be just a white obama

>>8734991
Astute. And it's already happening, with his attacks on the media and the resulting sympathy from his followers. The woman in Nebraska last week quoted on a BBC article, "...the media, always criticising him, thinking they know better than him."

>>8734995
> they couldn't have not made a mistake
> hillary was just as shit and you know it
There were several places that they could have not made that mistake. Voting for Hillary, as bad as she was, would have been a better option. Or they could have avoided having to choose between the two by backing someone else in the primaries.

>>8734976
>Most of the people who voted for Trump severly lack knowledge of government, science and economics beyond high school
>Of course, I don't actually know any, because I'm not a bigot.
>But trust me on this, Steven Colbert told me so on the tee vee

>>8735013
>Voting for Hillary, as bad as she was, would have been a better option.
no, no she wouldn't have.

at any rate, take this to /pol/

It just amazes me that someone that is so ignorant, so uneducated in a field in which he has no expertise can come out and make such an absolutist statement. You're appointed to be the head of the EPA, an organization designed to regulate emissions and pollution, and you make a statement that directly contradicts all of the scientific evidence on greenhouse gasses that we have collected over the past few hundred years. A baseless statement that is not supported by a shred of evidence.

Has American had worse morons heading scientific institutions in the past? Yes, but it's incredible in an age where information is at your fingertips, including most scientific literature, that someone can be so willfully ignorant.

That said, the man is bought and paid for by special fossil fuel interests, so I'm not surprised in the slightest, but claiming that CO2 is not responsible for the warming trend we are directly observing is just asinine. It's insane that the Bush admin was more "progressive" about scientific issues than the Trump one is. Just fucking insane. It's like living in a twilight zone episode in which the most bizarre decisions and statements are made on an almost daily basis.

>>8735013
>They'll never realize that they fucked up, because that would require admitting to themselves that they made a mistake

>>8735018
Give me a fucking break. I despised Hillary, but you know she wouldn't do dumb shit like appoint Perry to head the DoE or Pruitt to head the EPA. Even if she was just a continuation of Obama, why would that have been bad? Look at the type of people Obama appointed to head scientific institutions and compare it to those that Trump appointed. Nobel prize winners and nuclear physicists vs. bachelor degrees in law.

Regardless, it's democrats fault for running such a terrible candidate in the first place. Literally anyone else could have beaten Trump, I mean Hillary herself almost did and she was a godawful candidate.

>>8735007
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jan/27/donald-trump-michigan-voters-media

> “I think he’s doing a phenomenal job.”
> Redmond was unaware of the critical coverage that has saturated newspaper front pages and cable news reports since inauguration day. “Papers? I’ve no idea what they are talking about – I don’t see them. If it don’t put a dime in my pocket, I don’t worry about it.”

> “I don’t know what’s going on, I have no idea,” said Doreen McVay, 47, a waitress in Angelo’s diner in Sterling Heights
> That doesn’t stop her from feeling passionate about Trump in the White House. “The world is going to hell in a handbasket, and from what I’ve seen he’s going to fix it. Sure, he’s blunt and says what he thinks, but he doesn’t take any shit.”

>>8735023
> Regardless, it's democrats fault for running such a terrible candidate in the first place.
If the people who were registered as independents joined the democratic party, then they would be able to vote in the primaries in any of the states, instead of just the states that had open primaries. There really isn't a good reason to be an independent, all that does is put you at the mercy of a primary process in which you don't have a say. People just want to act like they're above it all, when in reality that puts them in an even worse position than the people inside the major parties.

you people lend too much creedence to what people say and not what actually goes on paper.

no sound bites or twitter comments. but actual pen and ink legislation is the only thing that matters. so with that being said, what has Trump actually done thats so unreasonable?

>>8734995

Here's the thing with Hillary, yeah she was most likely corrupt but she at least knew what she was doing, how the government worked and where the priorities were when it came to keeping America on top.

Assuming we give Trump the benefit of doubt that he is being 100% sincere with making America great again. His insular attempts in trying make America regroup as a nation while downplaying involvement in international affairs gives China the needed opportunity to over take America in its role as the de facto super power.

So even if we gave him 8 years to build the wall at the border, reform health care, increase tax cuts, block all immigrants from unstable nations, bring back industrial jobs, purge media of "fake news" and it's liberal slant, cut down on government programs and make voucher schools the new norm.

It will all account for nothing because China would in the meantime expand its trade partners, invest more in India/ build up sub-sahara Africa effectively assuming heavy economic sway, increase political and economic ties with South America (something they started doing during the Bush administration when we were busy trying to fight a bunch of terrorists in literal who countries the average American didn't know existed back when), build up on it's own infrastructure (they are starting to phase out career factory workers and retraining them to do 3d printing/automation) continue building up their STEM projects like the biggest radio telescope and fastest super computers, expand it's education programs in other providences and expand their military.

This was shit Hillary and her ilk already knew about and had plans to deal with it. Trump on the other hand is just getting introduce to this shit but has zero plans to deal with it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pRenGy0cg5s

Long video (documentary) but explains very well how climate change deniers operate.
It's kinda scary how effective their tactics are. For instance they knew tobacco caused cancer and knew the truth would come out about it, but through their tactics they were able to delay the truth from coming out for 50 years AND not loose money doing so. They're still making profit off tobacco despite all that's happened.
I'm not sure the planet can last their delaying and stalling tactics for 50 years with out major casualties to human life and plant/animal life and ecosystems.

>>8735015

>Implying the average person who has advance knowledge in government, science and economics would vote for a candidate who not only has zero experience in both national and international politics but also doesn't understand that the government cannot be run like a private business

You would never actively allow a janitor to head the surgery team on one of your family members. So why the fuck would you actively choose to allow a realestate businessman to head the executive branch of government which handles law, military and international relations?

>>8735093
For the same reason Obama got elected. People are "sick and tired of the government" and wanted to vote for something different for a change.
>You would never actively allow a janitor to head the surgery team on one of your family members.
By that analogy, when people get sick and tired of what their doctors have to tell them they often turn of alternative medicine.

>>8734906
Why isn't there a federal law requiring any head of the department to become skilled/have years of training in the department they are looking to be assigned in?

To be head of Urban Housing & Development, being a house realtor for 2 years should be enough. A neurosurgeon doesn't know shit about Housing and Development.

meanwhile the millions of people who work in the artificial green industry are complaining about "muh money"

>>8735082
I think you have idea how much Trump intends to do
Without fixing the demographic death of America, which is exclusively the white population, there is no point in doing anything else

>>8735104
Obama was at least a senator and before that a state senator. Trump had zero governing experience. He was born with a silver spoon in his mouth and still managed to do worse than if he just took his inheritance and put it into index funds. All he does is sell the right to use his name.

>>8735091
>climate change deniers
>they
>video (documentary)

>>8735104

>By that analogy, when people get sick and tired of what their doctors have to tell them they often turn of alternative medicine.

Yeah and 9 times out of 10 it turns out poorly for them because they have zero knowledge of the historical and cultural perspective that involves alternative medicine. They don't realize that alternative medicine acted as an augment to a particular lifestyle instead of a general treatment like prescription drugs which usually ignores lifestyle.

>>8735134
> muh white genocide!
If you think that issue is more important than literally anything else, then your priorities are royally fucked.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mc_4Z1oiXhY

>>8735151
> If you think that issue is more important than literally anything else
It is more important than anything else.
Name a more important issue than the destruction of civilization.

>>8735210
Are you talking about climate change, because that's exactly what it entails.

>>8734906
I won't even call Pruitt a man, he's less than that. He's a parasitic creature attached to the nipple of very wealthy donors.

>>8734911
He is right. The United States is a very religious country, but the primary religion isn't Christianity. It's free market capitalism. The way the American right speaks of the free market is the way most of us would describe our most pleasurable orgasms. The market can do no wrong, thinking the market can do wrong is tantamount to witchcraft or the denunciation of Christ's divinity. In this country, too many Americans labor under the belief that they too are just one key life decision away from becoming wealthy, Rubio's ''temporarily embarrassed millionaires.'' Americans will gladly raise their children to the altar, plunge a knife into their soft bellies, and praise the gods of capitalism.

>>8735151
yes, and the US alone will destroy civilization in the next 4-8 years.

truly, this one country will completely dispose of all climate change research on earth for all time to come. political control is not cyclical at all.

>a gust of wind being a bit warmer for 1.5 minutes minutes 2 times a year means we need to go back to preindustrial revolution tier production levels
just admit you are a luddite already

>>8735268
>>a gust of wind being a bit warmer for 1.5 minutes minutes 2 times a year means we need to go back to preindustrial revolution tier production levels

This is a strawman. Please go back to primary school or just go pound rocks together and scream MAGA.

>>8735272
that is exactly how the noaa came up with there "record temperatures" so you cant say anything about accuracy when they consider random wind "a major shift in trend"
>does the climate change?
no shit all natural climates change
>do humans have an effect?
yes no one ever said we dont
>isNT this effect CATASTROPHIC!?
no and there is no evidence of that, humans inherently change our environment to better facilitate our own livelihood, to be against this is to be against humanity, despite the fact that climate related deaths have been decreasing dramatically since 1900's when we started altering "mother earth" the most or whatever hippy shit you call the planet

> a gust of wind being a bit warmer for 1.5 minutes minutes 2 times a year means we need to go back to preindustrial revolution tier production levels

why not, how much money has been spent on a squabble in a middle eastern country that has been fighting since forever

>>8735283
Do you even know how to greentext? Who are you quoting here? Nice epic conjecture memes though, really shows how you don't actually have anything of value to add to the conversation.

>>8735260
It's gotten us to become the only superpower in the world. I seriously understand what your saying here, but you've got to convince 300 million people why the economic ideology that's led them to become the most powerful nation in human history is flawed...

>>8735288
because the more fossil fuels we produce the more lives are saved and dont die bc of climate

>>8735291
im arguing against yalls stupid premises bc this whole thread is a pos everyone only says "this current administration is so dumb amirite XD"
i thought this was a science board not a bandwagon politics board

you convieniently dont rebuttle the fact that the more we alter our environment the less climate deaths occur, nice one

inb4 muh ocean is warmer

>>8735294
if you are poor in the united states you still have: a roof over your head, climate controlled ac and heat. food storage, clothes, and communication capability and technology available to you.

>>8735283
>no and there is no evidence of that, humans inherently change our environment to better facilitate our own livelihood, to be against this is to be against humanity

This is the main argument for stopping global warming. There are entire ecosystems that'll be destroyed due to minor fluctuations in temperature change. Nobody can say these ecosystems aren't important to human survival because most of them aren't studied enough. We could wipe out an ecosystem that could hold the cure for cancer or aging and never even now it. Keeping the Earth's temperature steady and keeping these ecosystems alive long enough to understand how they work is in the best interest of humanity.

>>8734926
Sorry, my govt is run by rich oligarchs. Private companies wr8te our legislation and legally bribe our politicians to pass it. What the average citizen wants has ZERO effect on what the government does, we just get cucked by rich people.

>>8735294
The US got to where it is because of:
1.) Active government involvement in building infrastructure, funding education, and developing new technology. Take the iPhone for example. Pretty much all of the technology that goes into an iPhone is the product of publicly funded research.
2.) The US was largely spared in WW1 and WW2 while the rest of the industrialized world was demolished. Combined with that active government intervention, it produced a massive boom in American power and wealth.

>>8735306
but "global warming" =/= protecting micro ecosystems

we are constantly getting better technology and effeciency which is important i agree but the solutions for "global warming" and "climate change"(a fucking retard statement bc all natural climates change) are all luddit tier bs that wont actually save the ecosystems in question

imo the best thing would be waste management and transportation efficiencies were to increase would do the most help to preserve vital systems

>>8735313
flight, automobiles, and now space all prove that the gov intervention is slow, expensive, and not as efficient as private counterparts

>>8735296
Your rambling incoherent resonses that say nothing aren't even worth responding to, but the fact that you "believe" that humans have a negligible effect on the environment and climate shows how astronomically ignorant you are. The better question is, what is someone as dumb and gullible as you doing posting on /sci/, especially when you apparently have no respect for scientific evidence?
By the way, the topic at hand is directly related to /sci/ since it's about the administrator of the fucking EPA denying the most basic of climate science; the effect that anthropogenic CO2 has on climate.

>you convieniently dont rebuttle the fact that the more we alter our environment the less climate deaths occur, nice one
What the fuck are you even talking about, what does this have anything to do with climate change, and once again, it's baseless CONJECTURE. Maybe go read a dictionary and understand what that word means before you spew bullshit. Also, learn to use spellcheck, embarrassing.

>>8735283
>that is exactly how the noaa came up with there "record temperatures" so you cant say anything about accuracy when they consider random wind "a major shift in trend"
Explain what the fuck you are referring to and be specific, because it's clear you have no idea what you're talking about.
>no shit all natural climates change
Stage 2. See pic related.
>no and there is no evidence of that
Absolutely wrong, a simple understanding of paleoclimatology and geochronology will show you otherwise. Rapid climate change leads to mass extinction, we're already living in an anthropogenic extinction. Our agriculture is going to be effected by climate, our coastal cities, our civilization, fisheries, mass migrations, water supplies, etc.

>despite the fact that climate related deaths have been decreasing dramatically since 1900's
Again, what does this have to do with any of the severe impacts of climate change that are bound to occur in the coming decades?

>>8735313
Goddamn, I wasn't expecting you to know your history that well :(

>>8735317
> flight, automobiles, and now space all prove that the gov intervention is slow, expensive, and not as efficient as private counterparts
Which is why the US has the most efficient health care in the world.

Oh wait, no it doesn't. It pays more than nations with government run healthcare and produces thoroughly mediocre results.

>>8735317
>Muh free market will fix it
Now it all makes sense, another retarded libertarian climate change denier. Fucking libertarians...

>>8734906
>New head of EPA hates the EPA and everything it stands for
>Not even the worst choice the T-Man has made

>>8735336
paying more doesn't mean its worse. just means that people there have more money

Of course the high price of health care was deliberate by the government.

>>8735336
The US doesn't have private healthcare, the entire healthcare sector is a mess of government subsidies, government regulations, and government programs. An actual free market healthcare system would be vastly superior.

>>8735296
>yalls
lmfao what

>>8735336
The united states has the highest cancer survival rates in the world.

>>8735140
>He was born with a silver spoon in his mouth and still managed to do worse than if he just took his inheritance and put it into index funds.
You just removed any doubt there might have been about you being an utter retard. Congratulations.

>>8735349
> paying more doesn't mean its worse
No, the fact that it produces results that are no better and in some cases worse yet still costs more is what makes it worse.

>>8735345
The guy he appointed to head the Department of Energy first said that he wanted to eliminate it, then later retracted that and tried to excuse it by saying that when he called for its elimination he didn't actually know what the DoE did.

>>8735317
>but the solutions for "global warming" and "climate change"(a fucking retard statement bc all natural climates change) are all luddit tier bs that wont actually save the ecosystems in question

Wrong

Reducing the population will solve climate change AND solve environmental problems

>>8735362
US has the best overall health care outcomes in the world

>>8735361
http://fortune.com/2015/08/20/donald-trump-index-funds/
> Donald Trump would be richer if he’d have invested in index funds

>>8735331
i am saying your NOAA data is not reliable bc it is adjusted bc they repeatedly were incorrect but they ignored the satellite data and "corrected" it to what they think the date "ought to be"

>muh denial
climate change isnt a dispute its not a religion, im not a denier just bc i dont believe we are doomed
if you took al gores dick out of your face you could read my posts better bc i have said this multiple times
>>8735336
government is entrenched in the us heathcare system and is directly related to issues we face, also despite it the usa still has the best medical treatment on the planet thats why everyone comes here for it
>>8735342
>government creates a problem
>lets make the government even more involved to fix the problems the created ;^)
great idea, really profound

>>8735369
>>8735369
>climate change AND solve environmental problems
difine what those are you fuck, OF COURSE THE CLIMATE CHANGES SHIT HEAD

you need to prove its "catastrophic"

>>8735371
It's not even close to the top.

>>8735380
Satellite data is less reliable than direct measurements and the errors are more difficult to correct for

>>8735380
> despite it the usa still has the best medical treatment on the planet thats why everyone comes here for it
Wealthy people come to the US for treatment because if cost is no object then sure, you can get better care in the US. However for the vast majority of people, that isn't the case.

>>8735384
OVERALL health outcomes, not meaningless stats that shitlibs cherrypick to make the US look bad.

>>8735386
the direct measurements are directly being manipulated, just bc a gust of wind is warm for 1 minute a few days in the artic of one year doesnt mean a shift in trend

and that still does not prove its catastrophic
>>8735391
so fucking what, maybe dont buy an iphone and stop drinking 40's and maybe you can save up for a physical exam

everyone gets treated in the ER no matter what

>>8735377
Considering that his net worth was probably negative before he became president, that's not very hard.

Doesn't matter now of course. By the time his presidency is done, he'll be the richest person in human history.

>>8735380
>le Al Gore meme
>le tamper meme
>le NOAA is fraud meme
>le climate religion meme

Hitting all the usual denier bases I see. By the way, if you referring to the Karl et al. paper, which has been validated by multiple studies that reproduced the results, you're just plain wrong. If you're referring to that bullshit TDM article from last month, you're again wrong about your "data manipulation" angle. Please understand why temperature adjustments are made before you spew out a bunch of bullshit about a subject you don't understand. I know that it's hard to read things that go against your conspiracy narrative, but you have to actually try to understand something if you want to talk about it seriously.
http://berkeleyearth.org/understanding-adjustments-temperature-data/

>>8735403
>the direct measurements are directly being manipulated
[citation needed]

inb4 correcting for changes in the way data is collected is "manipulation"

>>8735403
> maybe dont buy an iphone
The cost of an iphone is tiny compared to healthcare premiums in the US.

>>8735386
>>>8735380
>Satellite data is less reliable than direct measurements and the errors are more difficult to correct for
Damn you're funny

>>8735416
Wtf I love Trump now
Warmists btfo forever

>>8735416
no matter how many times you post these .gifs it doesn't make them true, sorry to tell you

>>8735410
>By the way, if you referring to the Karl et al. paper, which has been validated by multiple studies that reproduced the results, you're just plain wrong.
which has been replicated by other people who also replaced good buoy data with bad ship intake data
ftfy

You've got to love it when Karl contradicts Karl, pic related. Poor guy caved to political pressure.

"Analysis of warming since 1881 shows most of the increase in global temperature happened before 1919 before the more recent sharp rise in the amount [of pollution by so-called greenhouse gases. The debate over global warming came during the American Geophysical Union's fall meeting. The greenhouse effect theory is that carbon dioxide and other gases emitted by industrial and automobile fuel burning is accumulating in Earth's atmosphere, acting like the glass of a greenhouse to trap heat from sunlight. Computer models by Hansen and others suggest that by the middle of the next century, Earth's average temperature may rise 4 to 9 degrees Fahrenheit, possibly altering storm patterns, triggering droughts, making crops fail and raising sea levels] carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, said Thomas Karl, of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's National Climatic Data Center in Asheville, N.C."

Source: https://www.newspapers.com/newspage/68079093/

Funny, Karl once said that most warming happened before the big increase in anthropogenic CO2. But that didn't fit that narrative. So in the end, Karl gave up on being scientific and decided that it was OK to replace good ocean buoy data with bad ship intake data.

>>8735415
premiums prices are the governments fault....
>>8735416
whoah you can make graphs? good job! too bad the data is shit
>>8735410
direct measurement adjusted bc "it should be warmer if it was closer to the city"
non of the things you are saying is proof that it is catastrophic!
none, i NEVER once said climate does not change, and yet you keep spouting meme labels as if that means anything

>>8735427
>no matter how many times you post these .gifs it doesn't make them true, sorry to tell you
> doesn't make them true
So who's lying? NASA ... or NASA?

>>8734906
I honestly don't give a shit.

Most CO2 comes from cities and guess who they voted for?

When the sea level rises we can enjoy watching the city faggots starve to death in their own concrete tomb.

>>8735377
Why are you still posting? You already proved that you're an idiot. Posting click bait articles for morons just reaffirms that.

That "investment" would require 1 billion dollars to make, which means putting all his alleged networth into a single fund, which no one but an utter moron would do. It would be timed right after a small dip and before two bubbles. He would also get raped on capital gains taxes if he chose to sell, and most certainly would not have the real estate, and now political, empire he has now.

But do preach about what amazing investments you would make with a billion, which you will never make to begin with, and the benefit of hindsight to boot.

>>8735444
>>>8735416
>whoah you can make graphs? good job! too bad the data is shit
>NASA data is shit
Why don't you call up the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies and tell them?

>>8735452

Rich people and their bitches are con men and criminals and should be barred from government service.
In fact, there should be no rich people at all.
This is a prime example of the stupidity and magical thinking of humans, that the rich guy and his friends with no knowledge of the job are just miraculously going to know what to do.

They know how to con stupid people.

Kill the rich; kill the stupid people. Save the Planet.

>>8734978
India will save the world

>>8735468
India has poo.

And it has loads of corruption.

Crazy how many morons don't even think to question global warming. Is it because it's scientific treason to do so? Nice system you got there.

>>8735464
Look at Venezuela if you want an example of your shitlib tripe in action. No food, no electricity, rampant crime. That is what leftist policies get you.

>>8735444
>premiums prices are the governments fault....
Then why is it that in places with actual government run healthcare costs are way lower?

>>8735498
Because their healthcare is utter shit compared to the US, so of course it costs less. You get what you pay for.

>>8735498
bc they pay more on a regular monthly basis through tax then the services they are provided

>>8735498
Because they do shit that the US doesn't do like let all the worse off people die on waiting lists or ignore male health problems

>>8735503
>>8735504
>>8735510
Lol shitlib BTFO

>>8735515
its funny how they talk shit about politics then get mad and call people names when thigns get specific then when actual data is posted they stfu and then talk shit about the usa in general and still get btfo

>>8734906
>Americans, explain yourselves.
We got tired of winning. Enjoy being dragged down with us.

Climate change is a fraud. I'm glad we finally got someone in the White House that isn't delusioned by the liberal ivy leaguers

>>8735457
Cause they already know it's phony. They made it to justify their bullshit liberal dogma.

>>8735081
Appointed Ajit Pai

>>8735583
>He actually believes this narrative
Seek help, you have a severe case of delusional fantasy.
>>>/x/ would be better suited for your "arguments" by the way. That, or you could get back to r/The_Donald.

>>8734906
>Americans, explain yourselves.
Politicians lie if they think it will help them, and businessmen will say anything to make money.

>Why does America think this man is qualified to determine America's stance on a scientific matter?
Why is belgium's health minister a 500lb whale? Why are scandinavian defense ministers women?

IT IS A MYSTERY.

>>8735013
>Voting for Hillary, as bad as she was, would have been a better option.
My fucking sides.

>pick the openly corrupt warmonger that lies a lot over the business man who says dumb shit and lies a lot
It wasn't even a choice for anyone with half a brain.

>>8735625
> openly corrupt
Trump bragged about how corrupt he was
> warmonger
Trump is cutting everything in order to boost military spending, goes on about how we're going to "start winning wars again" and says that he would start a war with Iran because some dudes on an Iranian ship flipped off some dudes on an American ship.

>>8735637
> Trump bragged about how corrupt he was
Never happened.

> says that he would start a war with Iran because some dudes on an Iranian ship flipped off some dudes on an American ship.
So he says some dumb things sometimes. Who cares? Shillary took huge bribes from the Saudis and flat out said that she would start WW3.

>>8735648
>this is what Trump voters actually believe

>>8735649
What, you mean they believe the truth? No shit.

when did skepticism become wrong?

>>8735018
>He believes Hillary is an evil witch who eats children.

>>8735707
cuck

>>8735698
Skepticism, you think climate change denial is "skepticism?" Where have you been the past few decades? Climate change denial is a well-oiled, industry funded machine, it's not scientific, it's not skepticism, it's special interest obfuscation mixed with edgy contrarianism. There is no legitimate scientific skepticism to be found in climate change denial, it is an anti-science crusade with an industrial, anti-regulatory agenda that is extremely well funded, with that funding being well hidden, but not impossible to see. It's complete politically and economically motivated, which is the great irony because that is exactly what the gullible idiots that take up the fossil fuel industry's crusade believe about a legitimate scientific body. They are too blind to see it themselves.

>>8735714
compelling argument

>>8735368
Too be fair, most people in America don't realize that the Department of Energy is responsible for the maintenance of our Nuclear Arsenal.

>>8735491
This is what US sanctions get you faggot

>>8735714
You really showed me. How can I even recover?

>>8735727
DoE does far more than that and is itself a large research-based scientific body, which is why appointing Perry in charge was one of the dumbest decisions Trump has made. We went from two nuclear scientists, one of them a nobel prize winner to Rick fucking Perry, Mr. I get straight Cs in animal science.

>>8734926
>Americans, do you not care that your new govt is full of blatant liars and incompetents?
Always the case in any government across the globe. Democracy naturally attracts people whose only skill in life being an armchair theoreticians and massive bullshitting. Full enfranchisement was a mistake.

>>8735723
racism belongs to >>>/pol/ libtard

>>8735714
wow libtards absolutely BLOWN THE FUCK OUT WITH NO RECOURSE amirite hahsaha maga xd

>>8734926
What's contradictory? The head of the EPA does have an important role when it comes to regulating carbon dioxide, that role is to fucking stop doing it to the exclusion of all other considerations.

I do find the cries of "lying government" rich after years of ignoring concerted deception by government employees on the matter though.

I love how these threads, no matter what board they are started on, always have the same circle of comments for the first hour or so of the discussion. It is like I am on reddit.
Really gets the noggin' joggin'.

>>8735741
The GOP exists to reduce government size at least nominally on paper. If you want someone killing an agency no better way to do so that to staff it with someone who hates, doesn't see any value in it, and can't even comprehend what it does. You might think it's myriad of functions is important, but clearly the administration does not.

>>8735768
Stop trying to paint a "le master GOP plan! 5D chess!" skew on every stupid decision Trump has made. Sometimes stupid people do just that, make stupid ass uninformed decisions.

>>8735767
>>>/pol/

dumb frogposter

>>8735741
>nobel prize winner
The diplomatic equivalent of good boy points. Interesting.
>>8735775
Can't freeze my flow.

>>8735742
Trump wasn't a product of democracy though, his opponent got more votes. Americans are very proud of the fact that they are not a democracy and that the popular vote doesn't matter.

>>8735777
>he thinks a nobel prize in the sciences is the same as the peace prize
>he thinks a nobel in the sciences has anything to do with diplomacy
why are all frogposters so dumb /sci/?

>>8735782
Trump voters literally believe every single one of those extra votes Hillary got are from illegals.

>>8735783
>why are all frogposters so dumb /sci/?
>appealing to the board as a whole
I never understood the mascot bullshit. Animeposting I get, but the mascot shit is just weird.
And a nobel is a nobel, you are a fool if you think they don't use the other awards in a similar fashion that they do to the peace prize.

>>8735786
A large portion of them also believe that humanity was created in its present form by god less than 10,000 years ago and that human evolution isn't a real thing. That doesn't make it so.

>>8735791
>hurr physics nobels don't mean anything because i said so!!!
>Steven Chu's nobel prize was given to him as a diplomatic gesture for some reason!!!
his nobel was awarded in 1997 when he was still a prof at Stanford

just shut up you /pol/ brainlet, you're out of your depth on this board

>>8735720
Just once I want to see somebody who buys into the totality of climate-change-as-presented-in-popular-media put forth an honest effort to represent an alternative viewpoint instead of this sort of thing.

>>8735773
This isn't the dumb 5D chess meme. It is is literal policy position. One of the few that he has. He wishes to reduce government size and regulation. The head of your agency is more like to reduce regulation and agency size if he thinks your agency is stupid and does jack shit. In fact you'll notice it's a running theme with all the appointments. It's why the head of the EPA is a man who previously sued the EPA for overreach.

>>8735797
>who buys into the totality of climate-change-as-presented-in-popular-media
I don't "buy into" any narrative you dumb fuck. I study the scientific EVIDENCE, yes meaning I read peer reviewed literature, primary sources of scientific information. I read blogs run by actual climate scientists and hear what they have to say about their research and their papers and current news in their field of specialization. That's where I get my information and understanding of climate science from, because I'm an Earth science graduate myself and am interested in the field. Failing that, I MSM reporting on issues of climate science is abysmal as is, there are many science oriented websites like Ars, Science, Nature, Nat Geo, New Scientist, etc. that do good reporting on scientific issues that are worth reading that I read a lot as well.

There is no real "alternative viewpoint," scientific facts don't have alternative viewpoints you fucking moron, they are scientific FACTS based on EVIDENCE. Do you even know the first fucking thing about science or the scientific process itself? Stupid fucking moron, yes I'm "triggered" by your nonsense. I'm guessing if you're looking for "alternative facts" you voted for the right administration though, too bad there is no alternate reality for those facts though, only the one we live in.

There's a reason I'm pissed off and angry about this bullshit, fucking DECADES of this denialist crap purported by special interest groups, "think tanks," and other associated energy industry fronts, spending hundreds of millions of dollars to spread misinformation and lies, and cast doubt about the reality of climate change.

Because republicans are genuine idiots

It's not any more complicated than that

>>8735796
Nobel prizes are notoriously racist and sexist. No wonder why you SJWtard shitters think it has meaning.
you don't belong to this website >>>/r/eddit

>>8735818
>(((climate scientists)))
Opinion discarded

>>8735821
>>>/pol/ bernout mouthbreather

>>8735825
Meanwhile, Republican states have the lowest IQs, have the worst economies, receive the most federal welfare buxx, are consistently mismanaged by shitty, corrupt state and local officials and lead the nation in incarceration and shitty healthcare. There's maybe one slight exception, and that's Texas because it has a strong economy. Pretty much all other repub stronghold states are garbage tier.
I happen to live in one these shithole states, if not the shittiest in the country, guess what part of the country it's located? I would kill to be able to live in a place like Colorado compared to this shitheap.

>>8734976
That's because America has effectively allowed itself to become a caste system, with minorities at the bottom, the majority in the middle, and the rich on top.

Whenever they want to wean in on some overreach of power, the first thing they do is find some minority scapegoats, and let everyone turn on them, and then fuck the rest of the American people, who will suck it up and stay complacent.

The jobs left the country in the 70s/80s? What to do? Nothing. It's the nigs and their welfare! Yeah, that's the ticket. People have been promising "we'll get you those jobs back/darkies taking government money!" since the jobs left the country, and it works EVERYTIME.

Gun control? Can't let those darks get their hands on those weapons.

No jobs? It's the Mexican'ts!

You'd think that Donald would be a bridge too far, but nope. The Republican Party has an entrenched voting base that will vote for them no matter what, and better yet, this time, you don't just have to blame the colors, you can shout about liberals, who want YOU to CHANGE YOUR AMERICAN VALUES for OTHERS.

With Donald in office, it's perfect. They can skip having to pretend to care about the rest of the country, and then when the fallout happens, emerge as the heroes of the country who cast out the evil Trump.

>>8735013
Hilary could have been in that pizza shop touching children, and she'd stll throw a better cabinet together than Donald.

>>8734976
I realized it the night of the election, watching it was very exciting, because a man was literally meme'd into office, the highest office in the land. I laughed loudly at the images of Hillary's rally and all the crying people, it was exciting to watch a lot of people get butthurt and upset. Then, as I was falling asleep the dread set in, this guy was actually elected and was going to be our president, and all the retarded bullshit he said that I disagreed with, especially on scientific issues, was going to be implemented. It was a fucking mistake... the election was fun and all, but what a train-wreck now that reality has set in...

>>8735104
Obama had plans to help out the tired and scared coal workers.....and it was rejected by the Republicans.

Donald sold them snake's oil and it worked as usual with these dumb fucks.

>>8734906
He's "SMART" though anon, so that qualifies him in the eyes of americans.

You and I may understand just how intricate a system can be, and that a great deal of knowledge is required to reliably make correct decisions. But the average American doesn't believe knowledge has any value.

They figure if he's "intelligent" enough, he'll "hire the right people", and then those people will "tell him what he needs to know" to make all the right decisions.

>>8735818
Your capslock key and vitriol not withstanding, science is not an infallible deity. Evidence is only as good as the tools and methods used. And the scientific method doesn't establish immutable truths in any event.

>>8735853
>Obama had plans to help out the tired and scared coal workers
You mean keeping them on the dole until they die. Amazing solution.

>>8735823
Hey, look who it is!

>>8735872
Do you think there is one person making fun of SJWtards in this board? How retarded are you?

>>8735875
You forgot your trigglypuff.gif

>>8735875
/sci/ is a slow board and it's pretty easy to identify posters

nice try at deflecting though

>>8735471
poo is important for vegetation and plantation.

and corruption 'may be' the fight against elites.

>>8735872
I'm just here waiting for the autist that spams climate change denial images and goes on conspiracy rants to show up. Maybe he's already here.

If you put a cap on CO2 you'll just stifle the innovation required to stop it. You can stop it now but only by returning to a technological stage of advancement of 100 years ago. There is a great benefit in pollution and that's modern society and eventually those advancements will solve the major problems of environmentalism. There is no way of living without effecting the environment. Climate Change won't even be notices by people its long term no on will die, it'll take 5,000 year to melt the ice caps completely. The government doesn't have to take over the entire economy to save us in fact it would probably slow progress.

>>8735818
> I read peer reviewed literature, primary sources of scientific information
this is why we can't have nice things. you're of good will, i'm pretty sure about that. but quoting the ones who claim they have scientific knowledge or evidence doesn't make that what you think is closer to the truth, for several reasons.
- they're actually as full of shit as the bad guys. We have a fool-proof scientific method, in theory. but the truth is, few people actually repeat an experiment, few people try to avoid luring people with cherry picking, and there's a huge amount of empty publications that exist because there's an economic niche and it's raining citations... that's why i left this big science factory
- you don't go against the flow. there's no money for that, plus, you'll get crushed by the popes of your field.

in the 80's the scientific consensus (minimal but existing) on the subject was fearing the world was dangerously cooling.

let time do his job. any scientific truth thas has less than 40 years of age has very few chances to be understood correctly.

>>8735019
All environmental regulation has a trade off and those have to be considered that's what the left forgets. Those regulation do hurt consumers and business, it's not just business.

>>8735890
You are 100% talking out your ass, and it's extremely clear how misinformed and uneducated you are on this topic.
>in the 80's the scientific consensus (minimal but existing) on the subject was fearing the world was dangerously cooling.
>le global cooling meme

So fucking predictable and tired.

you're 100% wrong. No, articles in newsweek and other newspapers don't count as scientific literature.
http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/pdf/10.1175/2008BAMS2370.1
https://www.insidescience.org/news/my-1975-cooling-world-story-doesnt-make-todays-climate-scientists-wrong

>any scientific truth thas has less than 40 years of age has very few chances to be understood correctly.
Again, you show how absolutely misinformed you are about climate science in general. The scientific field is older than 40 years, and the basic chemistry and physics that the greenhouse effect is based on has been known since the 19th century.

>>8735368
>then later retracted that and tried to excuse it by saying that when he called for its elimination he didn't actually know what the DoE did.
No, he didn't say that. It's pretty amazing how well received propaganda has been this year, just a nudge and people invent these crazy storylines in their heads.

NYT made up some claims about Perry not knowing what the dept of nrg did, based upon a quote from one of the mckennas talking about the transition being a learning curve. mckenna in turn called their story bogus

>>8735093
the government is filled with lawyers who are basically ignorant of all science, both sides are antiscience when it comes to their own bias.

>>8735104
You act as if government knows whats its doing the people engineering shit are in the private economy and have to meet peoples demands and compete for their money, all the government does is steal the money it need to survive and doesn't have to do anything you say and on top of that it's a monopoly.

>>8735890
Once again you go on with your baseless conjecture narrative of government grants and other nonsense you don't understand, just shitty opinions your parroting based on shitty things you read on some climate change denial blog.

It's all a load of crap and you have not one single shred of evidence to back up a word you say, just your shitty opinions and thoughts which mean nothing. Keep on living in a fantasy / conspiracy world where everyone is out to get you though. You just keep proving how little you actually know about the Earth sciences and climate change in general.

Speaking of cherry picking though, ironic that you mention it considering that's the mainstay tactic of climate change deniers, such as starting their "decline" in 1998 for example, or using baselines to alter the datasets to fit their agendas.


>>8735897
Perry now knowing what the DoE is comes from the 2012 GOP debates, in which he was asked to name several government entities he wanted to eliminate, and he couldn't name the DoE. It was a big gaff that effectively ended his campaign.

>>8735906
>Perry now knowing what the DoE is comes from the 2012 GOP debates, in which he was asked to name several government entities he wanted to eliminate, and he couldn't name the DoE. It was a big gaff that effectively ended his campaign
Read the post I was replying to you git. The guy wasn't talking about a crash and burn 5 years ago, he was talking about post-appointment.

>>8735260
>The way the American right speaks of the free market is the way most of us would describe our most pleasurable orgasms. The market can do no wrong, thinking the market can do wrong is tantamount to witchcraft or the denunciation of Christ's divinity.

Its the same way the left speaks of government, there's a very good reason we have capitalism but you probably aren't versed in the science of economics. The fact is you get better results for most people in a capitalist system then some centrally planned disaster. Its the reason why the richest countries with the best standards of living are capitalist. The place where capitalism fails is were the government intervenes to get a positive result. It fails because resources are scarce and the government isn't magical it can't solve all problems with legislation.

>>8735881
...said the projecting SJWtard

>>8735306
You assume that the new ecosystems wouldn't provide this. Theres very little that we know will be bad with climate change except sea level rise and worse hurricanes. It isn't worth destroying our way of life to preserve our way of life. It doesn't make sense, and it isn't even urgent. The problem will solve itself. Every car company has an electric vehicle out , and solar panels are halving in price per watt every ten years. If we deregulate nuclear we'll be in even better shape.

>>8735881
I find this ironic, having apparently been mistaken for other people a couple times so far. People here aren't as clever as you suggest.

>>8735313
Research that was funded by philanthropic organizations has had far more practical use than state funded science. We should be figuring out ways of privately funding research instead of relying on the government to do it.

Europe and Japan are super powers and they were completely destroyed.

>>8735336
Its due to burdensome regulation, mostly centered around insurance that won't let healthcare organize in a cost effective way. The us has the most medical advancements however which the Europeans simply try to cut costs which leads them to rationing.

>>8734978
>russians have mafia boss
Communist Russia was just as bad before
>china is a corporation
China was a collectivist stagnant hellhole before and now it's hellbent on world domination at any cost
>japan is stagnant and isolationist
Japan was a crazy God emperor worshipping morons prior to this turn of events
>eu is weak, incoherent
Constant infighting before the EU... somethings never change I guess.
>usa is a trade zone "governed" by dumb
USA was a fucked up place from the get go
>mena is a religion cave
MENA is constant infighting, now with EVEN more religion
>SA is not developed enough
SA was ruled by foreigners for 600 years. They have no history or cohesiveness and are a bundle of tinder to any idealism/fanaticism
>africa is not even
Same as ever

Things were never good, stop thinking like it was ever any less shit.

>>8735491
at least they aren't contributing to global warming because dead people don't pollute

>>8735386
>study after study shows the ocean data is fucked six ways
>well, let's just edit it to match our models
>we can't maintain all these ground sites
>eh, let's just shut them down and use our model to fill in the gaps
>what's a margin of error?
>hey, this data is pretty muchly showing our models are correct
deniers btfo

>>8735923
Increased droughts, crop blight / failure (especially in vulnerable poor countries), water shortages due to decreased precipitation in regions like the mid-east, the sahel in africa, increased monsoons and flooding in other vulnerable regions, decline in coral reefs (basis of most important fisheries) worldwide, decline in fisheries in general due to over-fishing, mass extinction caused by human activity, as well as by climate change impacting sensitive organisms, ocean acidification causing sensitive marine animals to experience growth decreases in shell density. Extreme weather obviously as already mentioned, warmer waters and increased evaporation will lead to stronger storm systems.

Then there's mass migration from people in economically vulnerable areas to first world nations (already occurring), people from islands vulnerable to SLR forced to migrate, also people in coastal cities worldwide that will either have to spend trillions upon trillions developing infrastructure to prevent SLR-driven tidal forces and flooding, or just migrate inland.

It's not "alarmism," all of these impacts are likely to occur in the coming century(s) depending on the amount of CO2 emitted and the resultant global warming increase.

As for SLR, understating it is a huge mistake, there are many vulnerable coastal cities not only in the US, but all over the world. Look at Bangladesh for example, over 100 million people living in an extremely vulnerable region, imagine that many people forced to migrate elsewhere.

>>8735464
This is why no one takes environmentalism seriously, because its used as some way to push a Marxist agenda. Be fucking rational.

>>8735498
Its rationed aka well masked bread lines but with healthcare. Why is milk cheap in Bangladesh?

>>8735906
>>8735894

well you're both right, i actually know nothing about climate. i don't claim i do.

yet i do know i'm not producing science right now, i'm just quoting facts i happen to know:

>greenhouse effect:
yep, it exists, it's been known for a while

>temperature raises 2 degrees we're all gonna die:
i just say noone knows shit about both the validity of the premise, and the deduction logic. Pure speculation. "Double-blind" if you will :) <-issa joke


Now, above all, about the
> ironic that you mention [cherry-picking]
> cooling-world-story-doesnt-make-todays-climate-scientists-wrong
shit, well, i'm glad you realize that your arguments are:
- No, u!
- you can't prove me wrong!
seriously?? is that the full scope of your scientific power??? :D :D :D

Finally, as a prayer, I ask you to read again what i say. I'm not sayin climate change doesn't exist. but you sound like you interpreted it this way.
I was actually trying to make up my mind in all this shit, but you trolls don't seem open for debate.
As an answer, i get shat on.
Sure, guise, you're brilliant scientists and awesome pedagogues...

>>8735786
democrats believe the election was riggers by drunk ruskis and that men and women are biological are identical.

>>8735151
WHITE GENOCIDE IS REAL

>>8735927
> Europe and Japan are super powers and they were completely destroyed.
They were rebuilt with an immense amount of government involvement. The Marshall plan and the US occupation of Japan were a case study in the ability of government investment in infrastructure projects to build functioning nations out of piles of rubble.

>>8735966
they just had to build infrastructure
europe had tradition of democracy
for ex. weimar germany

>>8735949
The US rations healthcare too, they just do it by price. The rich get whatever they want. The poor get nothing.

>>8735834
lowest IQ is due to the high percentage of blacks and Hispanics.

>>8735972
Not really.

White students academically do better in northern states and have higher IQs.

>>8735969
The Weimar Republic was a brief foray into democracy in between Imperial Germany and Nazi Germany. Its dismantling by Hitler in the early 30s effectively killed that experiment. Germany didn't really have a democratic tradition, for example they only ever elected 2 presidents, and from 1930 to its eventual demise it was effectively ruled via emergency powers by Hindenburg. So Germany had an actual democracy for about 11 years. Not much of a tradition.

Japan similarly had very little experience with democracy, we basically had to build up their democratic institutions from scratch.

>>8735844
Minorities are better off than the majority middle Asians and Jews are the most successful people in America but it doesn't fit the liberal narrative of white privilege which is why the conveniently leave them out of any analysis

>It's the nigs and their welfare!

welfare has destroyed the black family and entrenched poverty in their communities

>Gun control? Can't let those darks get their hands on those weapons.

I don't even understand this the people keeping guns out of minority hands are the left.

>mexicans

yes they depress wages by competing for them good for business owners but bad for all the other people around

>>8735980
> Asians and Jews are the most successful people in America
Indians too.

ps
most hispanics in america aren't illegal, so

>>8735941
>Increased droughts, crop blight / failure (especially in vulnerable poor countries)

most of these will shift to different areas and people will simply will move.

fisheries would unfuck themselves if environmentalists would just let aquaculture exist

>Then there's mass migration from people in economically vulnerable areas to first world nations

this has nothing to do with global warming.

And yes centuries at which point all these problems will be solved

>>8735941
>the migrant crisis wasn't due to handing out shitloads of benefits with zero obligation to everybody who showed up with minimal screening
wew. It is alarmism when you just start throwing the kitchen sink in like that instead of sticking to legitimate science.

But even if you did, the timescale is centuries and it requires not just co2 levels, but also a heretofore unseen level of sensitivity. This isn't a solid basis for policy mandates affecting the entire globe to the tune of hundreds of trillions, which would more surely fuck over vulnerable areas.

>>8735970
the poor get medicaid. You can't contain costs when you force insurance companies to pay for everything. You'd likely have more available healthcare if the government just got rid of the insurance model they are so desperate to transform into a single payer system.

>>8735440
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQph_5eZsGs

Here's a video that gives a pretty good rebuttal to the Dailymail article you're relying on for your claims.

As for the other article you posted, according to the NOAA, there was a cooling trend from 1921 to 1979, for the US, but not global temperatures. So from the looks of it, the news article fucked up and misquoted him.

>>8735990
It was due to America destroying the Middle East.

>>8735993
I believe the record shows that France pulled the final jenga piece that sent it tumbling.

>>8735997
No.
America should take all the refugees.

>>8735991
> the poor get medicaid
Not for much longer.

>>8736007
How about nobody takes any refugees and everybody works on foreign policy that isn't shit instead?

>>8734906
>his BA was in political "science"
oh good

>>8736017
don't worry, he's from the white race, so his IQ is very high

>>8736019
whites also gave us a lot of climate ""science"" so it's not an unblemished record, but he seems like one of the good ones so far I agree.

>>8735939
>He thinks he knows everything about climate science after reading blogs on the internet.

deniers btfo themselves.

>>8734926

>
But more insidious than the obvious detail of putting a lawyer who has actively looked for legal challenges to climate science policy into the EPA, there is the ever so small matter of his statement today contradicting his statement to Congress during his confirmation hearing in which he said that he believed the head of the EPA "has an important role when it comes to regulating carbon dioxide".


I swear you must be retarded to think this statement contradicts anything that has been talked about in the previous or your own post about his believes or whatever your drug ass meant

>>8736036
> whites also gave us a lot of climate ""science""
Nonsense, as our glorious leader said himself climate science is obviously the work of the Chinese.

>>8735870
You meaning training them for new jobs based on modern infrastructure is a bad idea and it would be better for them to use coal, even though even third world countries are abandoning it?

>>8735707
>He believes Shillary is even remotely good
Sheep would be a abetter term to describe you

>>8736228
> You meaning training them for new jobs based on modern infrastructure is a bad idea
Most of them can't be trained for new jobs, nor do they need to be. The only reason their former jobs were eliminated is because of absurd government regulations. Just remove those, and they'll be able to get back to living productive lives without even more government spending to retrain them.

> even third world countries are abandoning it?
False. Coal is the most popular energy source in most of the world, and for good reason. It is a cheap, abundant source of energy.

>>8734976
Hey buddy, this board isn't for politics. Oh, but I assume you would have never thought to go on /pol/ because you think that's just for politics YOU don't like.

>>8735253
No, because Climate Change does not entail Earth turning into Venus, contrary to what alarmists like you say. It will certainly upset many things, but civilization, AND life will go on.

>>8734926
>Americans, do you not care that your new govt is full of blatant liars and incompetents?
no not really. global warming is a hoax, so at least they're telling the truth on SOMETHING

>>8735906
>Perry now knowing what the DoE is comes from the 2012 GOP debates
And that was 4 years ago, it doesn't take 4 years to actually learn what it does

>move minor asteroid to earth-sun l1
>blow it up into dust one way or another
>dust blocks some sunlight
>global warming defeated and global temperatures rapidly drop to natural levels with the ice caps growing steadily

I would say it's very elegant solution and doesn't even require messy high tech-just-around-the-corner crap.

>>8735881
Haha all because this is a science board doesn't mean you people are smart, or even good at science or math faggot. Same shit with /his/ and /lit/, they've got their heads up their elitist assholes

> The new head of the EPA disputes the idea that humans are contributing to rising global temperatures.

He's right.

>>8735976
Because they don't have to deal with niggers constantly aping about

>>8737257
black students and hispanic students do better in northern states as well

also nice environmental explanation you got there

>>8734911
/Thread

>>8737258
Wow. blacks do better when in majority white areas not under the destructive spell of their black peers! Also there's only so much you can change due to environmental effects. You're not going to get a nigger Einstein just by putting De'Sean in a white neighborhood. Furthermore, any population is going to regress towards the mean, so if you have a large selection of blacks, you might get a few smarties, but you sure as hell will also get a shit load of dumb coons too

>>8734978
>who will save us

>>8737245
Apparently he only learned what it did when he was briefed on it after being offered the job. He just learned a few months ago, most of the preceding years were spent in blissful ignorance of what the department he said he would eliminate actually did.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/rick-perry-seeks-to-lead-the-energy-department-an-agency-he-pledged-to-abolish/2017/01/18/19b14494-dd0a-11e6-acdf-14da832ae861_story.html

> “My past statements made over five years ago about abolishing the Department of Energy do not reflect my current thinking,” Perry said in his opening statement to the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. “In fact, after being briefed on so many of the vital functions of the Department of Energy, I regret recommending its elimination.”

>>8737270
>regress to the mean
Which mean?
The mean of the local population or the mean of the entire african continent?

>>8737433
See >>8735897
The story was bogus, made up by the NY Times based on a quote that was never actually said. As usual, it's nothing but a liberal fantasy.

>>8737450
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/rick-perry-confirmation-hearing-233835
He said it in his hearing before a Senate committee. Here's a video, you can watch him say it right there.

>>8737457
> politico
> proof of anything
Pick one and only one.

>>8737474
You think they faked the video?

>>8737474
fucking jesus fuck you are a brainlet. open the link and the very first thing you see is a video of perry saying exactly what you said he didn't say. so either they have amazing video / voice faking techonlogy or you are a fucking inbred. i know which one my money's on.

>>8737476
I wouldn't put it past the MSM these days.

Pollution is a very real problem. Ozone depletion is a very real problem. Global warming is half a degree crackpot hogwash.

>>8734906
In the past, its this kind of disagreement and debate that has helped spur on science and caused it to advance through the ages. The problem is today, the psychology of modern science has changed, its full of pussies who can't handle even the though of dissenting opinion. People are right to question them.

>>8735897
It's funny, this statement
>It's pretty amazing how well received propaganda has been this year, just a nudge and people invent these crazy storylines in their heads.
matches you much better than it does those who you are disagreeing with.

>>8737495
When did a poli sci BA talking about a scientific matter that he has no knowledge of qualify as a debate that "helped spur on science" or "caused it to advance through the ages"?

>>8737502
The NYT just flat out invents a lie and runs it as a story that shitlibs eat up, yet you think it's the people who object to that who are the problem?

>>8737474
>>8737450
>>8737487
>H-he didn't say that!
>Video posted of him saying that
>P-politico......f-fake news..... liberal fantasies..
The delusional right is simply incredible. I would like to see a study done on their brains, not just surveys but some real shit: fMRI, PET, IQ battery, etc.

>>8737495
There's one nuance you forgot. When "disagreement" and "debate" advanced our knowledge in the past, it's because it came from other scientists.

Recall that when the disagreement came from non-scientists (businessmen, politicians, and clergy), it hindered progress (because it resulted in the persecution and murder of scientists).

>>8737506
See >>8737457 where you can watch Perry himself blow you the fuck out.

>>8737521
> psychological
> science
This is what liberals actually believe.

>>8737521
>and clergy
I assume you are talking about Galileo? I mean, he is the meme scientist. The clergy that is claimed to have hindered his science, rather were incredulous to his findings as they did not have sufficient mathematical proof (plus he was a dick and insulted everyone who disagreed with him) In this case, at least, the clergy were not the evil anti-science boogeymen people often make them out to be, but rather people concerned with the ramifications of such a major upheaval in the understanding of the universe; as such they wanted there to be absolutely no chance that Galileo was just spouting heretical nonsense

>>8737474
>>8737487
https://youtu.be/KDCMV3fwuEs?t=43m55s (from 43 min 55 s till 44 min 12 s)

>>8735039
Dumber than a sack of rocks. We're fucking doomed.

>>8737685
>muh meme scientists
thats right moron, they were afraid of an upheaval in the order in which they were the top dogs, so they murdered any scientists who made key discoveries

>>8737710
> shitlibs look down on anyone who disagrees with their dogma
> yet they are surprised when the country turns against them
I'm glad the left is so totally unable to empathize with anyone else, it guarantees that they will never get back into power.

>>8737760

That would imply there will be power to get back once China overtakes America.

We fucking blew it and those bastards in China know it.

>>8737785
> implying China isn't already trying to curry favor with Trump
It's pretty clear who is in control, and it ain't China.

What did you expect from a president who flat out said that he didn't know that healthcare was complicated?

>>8737760
>> shitlibs look down on anyone who disagrees with their dogma
i love how these things always go both ways

>>8737801
No he didn't, he said that Obamacare was complicated and no one knew how complicated it was because it was rammed through Congress without any chance for debate or review. Nancy Pelosi said that people had to pass the bill before they would be allowed to see what was in it. That's the sort of thing that you get from government intervention, a ridiculously overcomplicated system that does nothing but drive up price in an idiotic attempt to enforce some kind of one-size-fits-all bureaucracy from the top down.

>>8737760
Why are you on a science board?

>>8737816
> implying only leftists are welcome on a science board

>>8737820
Right-wingers like yourself demonstrate every day they have little to no interest in science. So it's a little confusing why you would even post here.

>>8737828
The right is the only thing keeping science alive in the face of leftist attempts to subvert it in the name of political correctness. You look at any real scientific discipline, and you'll find a bastion of conservatism holding out against leftists who want to twist it to say what they want it to say.

>>8737842
You sound deranged. Did you hear that on Limbaugh?

>>8737844
No, I've seen it first hand. Go to any public university in the country and you can see it too. The left has been trying to corrupt science into their sock puppet for years now.

>>8737760
> Dumb bitch admits she doesn't know what's going on. The next fucking thing she says is that "the world is going to hell in a handbasket".

This is nothing about "dogma", this is pointing stupidity and contradictions. How can you simultaneously admit that you have no idea what's going on, but so certain that the world is "going to hell"? That's what's dumb about it.

>>8735451
This. They bitch that the Republicans won't implement a carbon tax because even though it drives up the price of everything imaginable, it won't effect them too much in their gated communities.

>>8737828
Do you even know what science is?

Let me make this easier to understand.
Do you know what climate science is? It's not just going out and measuring CO2 levels like a dickhead, its constructing dozens of models which conflict with each other in every possible way.

If you're interested in "science" then you can tell me what the consensus is on human's role in climate change. Is it 10% or 50%? Because when you refer to science, you're just using the reddit-meme version where "science" is "scientific consensus" and it's actually a religious system where we mock those who disagree with the dogma.

>>8737794

>it ain't China

Keep telling yourself that anon, in the meantime China will continue its takeover as the dominant trading partner in the Middle East, Africa and South America.

>>8737895
Y'know considering China has spent the past few decades increasing it's power at a phenomenal rate I don't think we can blame it all on Trump being elected.

>>8737893
>Do you even know what science is?
Do you? Do you understand what the scientific process is, or are you claiming that the Earth sciences don't follow the scientific method, or that the research that is published is invalid with zero evidence? Hilarious.

>It's not just going out and measuring CO2 levels like a dickhead, its constructing dozens of models which conflict with each other in every possible way.
Clearly, you yourself have little to no understanding of the main scientific principles of climate change with this vague conjecture. I doubt you even have the slightest understanding of why climate models are used.

Speaking of mocking though, I find it doubly ironic that you claim that people mock deniers, while at the same time claiming that climate science is a religion. Is that also not a form of mocking? What about using the terms "warmist," something that deniers like yourself love to do, yet get astronomically asshurt when we call you a denier of science, a denier of empirical evidence.

The rest of the crap you wrote is nothing but conjecture again, baseless vague ambiguities with no evidence to back it up.

>If you're interested in "science" then you can tell me what the consensus is on human's role in climate change. Is it 10% or 50%? Because when you refer to science, you're just using the reddit-meme version where "science" is "scientific consensus" and it's actually a religious system where we mock those who disagree with the dogma.
Projection much?
It's quite hilarious that you bring up the old tired religion comparison again, when that's exactly what climate change denial is. No wonder it's linked to young earth Creationism, flat earthism and other anti-scientific garbage.
By the way, I can tell you what the consensus is on human influence on climate. There's an entire subfield of climatology dedicated to understanding that very concept, it's called climate sensitivity.
http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/v5/n1/abs/ngeo1327.html

>>8737893
As for your crap about climate change being based on consensus, not empirical evidence, you are again, flat out wrong. The basis of climate change IS evidence, not consensus. Consensus studies have been done by non-climatologists for the sole reason that climate change deniers have created an "atmosphere" of doubt and misinformation surrounding the science of climate change, to the point where they have manufactured a scientific "debate" to mislead the public as to the actual scientific evidence for human impacts on climate.

The consensus studies that have been done, yes the ones such as Cooks 97% consensus, were done mostly by not sending scientists a questionnaire, or getting them to sign some bullshit petition (see Oregon petition) but instead reviewed samples of the scientific literature in the field of climate science, and looked for papers that made a statement about the human role in climate change. The results were that of papers that made a statement about human role in climate change, 97% of those papers supported the evidence that humans have been driving the current trends. Again, all this shows is that there is agreement within the field of climate science, and such a "debate" doesn't really exist at all among the actual researchers, however that's not to say that everyone in climate science has the same opinions about everything related to climate change, but the vast majority of them do not deny the scientific evidence that has been presented over the past few decades about the role of human activity in driving the current trend.

Go ahead, actually bother to read the consensus study itself and gain a better understanding of it. This isn't the only one too, there are several more you can look up / read such as Powell, 2013, Verheggen et al, 2014, Oreskes, 2004, etc.
http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/8/2/024024

Then read the follow up paper from last year:
http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/11/4/048002

>>8737917

Your picture is ridiculous. There is no scientific way to state what it's stating. There is no control Earth. The actual geologic record shows little connection between CO2 and temperature. The only reason the models supposedly show one is because they're assumed to and various fudge factors are shoved in to make them conform. They have no predictive power because they don't reflect reality. They also only include CO2, water vapour and clouds. They don't include things like the wind, volcanoes, ocean oscillations, El Nino and even the Sun. Yes, the Sun is not in alarmist climate models.

>>8737930

Cook's paper was discredited. A number of scientists stepped forward to say his paper mischaracterized their own. When looked into, it was found that when papers were put in the wrong category, they "accidentally" went into the alarmist category over 90% of the time (99%, iirc).

The hilarious thing about Cook's paper, is that it actually found (falsely, as I stated above) that 98% supported the alarmist position. But the authors moved it DOWN to 97%, because that was the original meme number.

tl;dr Nothing you've ever said has come true. Your computer models have all failed. You're wrong and you should stfu already and reformulate your hypothesis. But, you won't do that. Because you're not scientists, you're political activists.

I'm tired of smacking you idiots down. Just FUCK OFF.

>>8737946
>Your picture is ridiculous
So basically, you can't read the paper, you can't interpret the image because you're a brainlet.
>There is no control Earth
It's hilarious how you think you're saying something compelling, but you're really saying nothing.
>The actual geologic record shows little connection between CO2 and temperature.
Are you a geologist? I am, and making such an absolutist statement with no understanding of geochronology of paleoclimatology shows how ignorant you are. You're not smarter than the people who dedicate their lives to studying Earth history. I could go on and on naming countless examples about a recorded connection between CO2 and temperature changes in Earth's past, but let's just name one of the most important ones in Earth history, the Permian-Triassic extinction. CO2 ppm rose to 2000ppm, and the largest mass extinction in Earth history occurred, linked to massive bouts of volcanism (Siberian Traps) over millions of years. 96% of marine species went extinct, and over half of terrestrial species as well. That specific enough for you? That's just one example.
>The only reason the models supposedly show one is because they're assumed to and various fudge factors are shoved in to make them conform
C O N J E C T U R E - look up the word and stop making baseless claims. Back up and provide legitimate sources for the shit you spew or GTFO.
>They have no predictive power because they don't reflect reality.
Wrong, educate yourself on what climate models are and what they do from an actual climatologist:
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2008/11/faq-on-climate-models/

>They don't include things like the wind, volcanoes, ocean oscillations, El Nino and even the Sun. Yes, the Sun is not in alarmist climate models.
It's absolutely astounding how ignorant you are, how little you know, and how arrogant you are about your own ignorance. Climate models of climate sensitivity include ALL OF THOSE THINGS.

>>8737946
Source for previous image (not enough characters in post):
http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/v6/n2/full/nclimate2876.html
Also see:
https://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/wg1/WG1AR5_Chapter05_FINAL.pdf
For evidence of climate change from paleoclimate data Maybe get off your ass and actually bother to read through AR5 and gain some perspective and understanding about what the evidence for climate change is instead of reading climate change denial blogs and other echo chamber garbage.

By the way, you never "smack down" anyone you autistic fuck. You do nothing but provide CONJECTURE and discredit scientific studies without even reading them you fucking brainlet. You say Cook's study was discredited, when it has not been (No, WUWT does not count brainlet, nor do any of your other denier blogs), and worse you completely missed the point I made that CONSENSUS DOES NOT MATTER BECAUSE THERE IS SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE.

>Yes, the Sun is not in alarmist climate models.
https://skepticalscience.com/solar-activity-sunspots-global-warming-advanced.htm
https://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0901/0901.0515v1.pdf
https://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/docs/2009/2009_Benestad_be02100q.pdf
http://www.fel.duke.edu/~scafetta/pdf/Scafetta-easterbrook.pdf

>inb4 MUH SIMPLETON SCIENCE

>>8737946
>Nothing you've ever said has come true. Your computer models have all failed.
False. You are very good at being such an ignorant, lying cunt though, I'll give you that.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tPSIvu0gQ90

>>8737893
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change

Looks like where getting around 90% if you average out all the studies done on it. Which is equal to or stronger than the consensus that GMOS are safe. Plus, there's literally only one scientific organization that denies it out of the hundreds that accept it.

>The last national or international scientific body to drop dissent was the American Association of Petroleum Geologists,[13] which in 2007[14] updated its statement to its current non-committal position.

As for the models, it seems like most models predict that temperatures are rising, along with the sea levels.

https://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/unfccc/cop19/3_gregory13sbsta.pdf
http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/JCLI-D-16-0333.1

>>8737946
>Cook's paper was discredited. A number of scientists stepped forward to say his paper mischaracterized their own.

You forget that a part of the study, was that scientists got to rate their own papers and they pretty much ended up getting the same number. 97%

Plus, you ignored like 6 of the other studies.

The denierfag will never answer but will post the same retarded pseudoscience in the next thread.

>>8737977
The 1995 IPCC report projecting a temperature rise of 0.125°C per decade was surprisingly accurate when compared to the satellite temperature measurements.

Why is it that deniers never look at this?

>>8734906
He could be right.

When is the last time you had an open mind to hear evidence to the contrary of your conclusions straight from the horse's mouth?

>>8734976
>Most of the people who voted for Trump severly lack knowledge of government, science and economics beyond high school.

Wrong. Most people who have graduated and worked in the real world have realised that Marxism is a crock of shit, and that you shouldn't believe somebody just because they have a degree from a university.

Most university degrees are worthless. Meaning if it's not Math, Chemistry, Physics, or Economics, you can go fuck yourself.

t. Math major

>>8737895
said the marxist who buries his head in the sand any time anyone with contrary evidence approaches him

>>8737527
>there is no science to the human mind!
You've taken a lot of memeing haven't you
Why don't you go will yourself out of your depression

>>8737917
I'm saying that earth scientists don't follow the scientific method. They have failed numerous times to disclose conflicts of interest, and they engage in "p-hacking" and other unethical behaviors to secure funding for worthless "science".

Ask any geologist and they will tell you that climate change is a natural phenomenon for any planet, including Earth, and ask any Chemist about what happens to all those "green house gases" in the atmosphere, and they will tell you that they react with other gases in the atmosphere and become inert.

Literally nothing is happening, it's all a big lie, but you won't believe that because it doesn't give anyone a reason to listen to you, someone with a genderqueer studies degree.

>>8738085
>They have failed numerous times to disclose conflicts of interest, and they engage in "p-hacking" and other unethical behaviors to secure funding for worthless "science".
[Citation needed]
Look what we have here, more useless conjecture and vague statements with no basis in reality, almost as if they're made up from thin air, or from parroting bullshit you read on some climate denial blog and took it at face value.

>Ask any geologist and they will tell you that climate change is a natural phenomenon for any planet.
I have, I am one, and there is nearly unanimous agreement among every geologist I know about anthropogenic impact on the Earth's climate. You're once again talking our your ass and failing to address a single point I've made thus far.

By the way, geology is not climate science, and there are multiple disciplines and fields of geology itself that have nothing to do with the Earth's atmosphere. I study mineralogy and petrology, the study of minerals and rocks, how they form, crystallography of minerals, chemical compositions, etc. Geologists are not experts in climate science, and I don't consider myself an expert by any means but I do have some educational history in oceanography, atmospheric chemistry, geochemistry and paleoclimatology from courses I've taken in the past.

>and ask any Chemist about what happens to all those "green house gases" in the atmosphere, and they will tell you that they react with other gases in the atmosphere and become inert.
It's becoming quite clear to me that I'm talking to a complete imbicile without the slightest education or training in atmospheric chemistry. You don't even have an elementary level of understanding about what CO2's role as a greenhouse gas is. I suggest educating yourself instead of continuing to be such an ignoramus. Your mindless ramblings are more suited to >>>/pol/ where the echo chamber will agree with whatever nonsense you spout off.

>>8737977
>Video at the end shows contrarian predictions and models to be utter failures compared to more the accurate standard models.

pretty much confirms that the more standard, mainstream view better explains the data than the "skeptic" view.

>>8738085
Since I feel like being kind, and even though I know you won't venture out from any sources that don't confirm your retarded biases, I'll still link some sources of information for you to utilize to stop being such an imbecile:
First off, it's clear you have a very juvenile understanding of what the greenhouse itself is, as well as CO2's role in the Earth's temperature record, let's start out with a very basic resource since you need to be talked to like a child:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dioxide_in_Earth%27s_atmosphere
http://cdiac.ornl.gov/pns/faq.html
A more advanced discussion of the role of greenhouse gasses in the Earth's climate can be seen in AR5:
https://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/wg1/WG1AR5_Chapter06_FINAL.pdf

Other primary sources of data and information to examine:
https://www.acs.org/content/acs/en/climatescience/atmosphericwarming/climatsensitivity.html
https://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/wg1/WG1AR5_Chapter08_FINAL.pdf
https://scripps.ucsd.edu/programs/keelingcurve/wp-content/plugins/sio-bluemoon/graphs/mlo_full_record.png
https://www.climate.gov/news-features/climate-qa/which-emits-more-carbon-dioxide-volcanoes-or-human-activities
https://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs/
https://crudata.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/temperature/#datdow
https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/monitoring-references/faq/
https://www.climate-lab-book.ac.uk/comparing-cmip5-observations/
http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/co2/ice_core_co2.html
https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/global-warming/last-2000-years

>it's all a big lie, but you won't believe that because it doesn't give anyone a reason to listen to you, someone with a genderqueer studies degree.
How do you expect anyone to take you seriously when you shitpost like this? Again, please return to >>>/pol/ where baseless conjecture and hyperbole is taken seriously, you're on a science oriented board where facts and evidence are expected when you make wild accusations and baseless claims.

>>8738085
>Ask any geologist and they will tell you that climate change is a natural phenomenon for any planet, including Earth
No climate scientist has ever denied that climate change can have natural, non-anthropogenic causes. The question is not whether all climate change is only anthropogenic, but whether current climate change is anthropogenic.

>could exit the atmosphere through chemistry
Again, never been denied. The problem with anthropogenic greenhouse gases is that we're putting more into the system than it has been recently asked to cope with, not that we're doing something completely novel to it.

>>8738155
That's the great irony. The best that the skeptics have to offer is a crock of shit, and when they're wrong they never get called out on, but when the slightest error is made by any real climatologist the entire science is fraudulent and it's all lies and deception. Yet every single time guys like Christy, Spencer or Lindzen are wrong (such as Lindzen's cloud feedback hypothesis) they still get praise lapped onto their failed ideas because they are contrary to the mainstream scientific assessments.

>>8738128
Speaking of blogs and conflicts of interests

http://www.watoday.com.au/environment/climate-change/scientist-denies-he-is-mouthpiece-of-us-climatesceptic-think-tank-20120215-1t6yi.html

>Other cash recipients include Anthony Watts, the leading US climate sceptic blogger, who is to receive $US90,000 for his work this year.

>people actually get their science from this guy.

>>8734906
The new head of the EPA just got his first paycheck and realized which corporate sector was paying him the most.
>big oil needs climate change to be a lie more than anyone else on the planet

>>8734911
We can't, and moreover I resent the implication that we would've been able to in the first place.

>>8738176
I could rant and rave for an entire thread about all the money that's thrown around propping up climate change denial, but I'll save that for another discussion.

Watts is a complete joke though, I don't see how anyone can take the guy seriously, he has no credibility, he has no scientific education and believes himself comparable to actual climatologists with PhDs.

>>8738180
The thing is all the fossil fuel firms love to parade around with PR that they accept climate change, and that they want action to be taken, but it's just that, PR. They still fund climate change denial through back-channels and anonymous donations to entities like Donor's Trust which donates money on an individual's behalf to the organization of their choosing. Organizations like Heartland still make millions from these anonymous donor organizations every year and continue to spread climate change denial misinformation and propaganda.

>>8735368
the scary thing is that Rick Perry is actually one of the better cabinet picks IMO, for three reasons:
1. he admits that he doesn't know enough about his department
2. he's been amenable to the concerns of actual experts, at least in his words
3. uh, forgot this last one, gimme a minute

>>8738195
>uh, forgot this last one, gimme a minute

>>8738085
Ok. I am an actual geologist. Do you actually want a debate?

I'm pretty certain you have no idea what p-hacking actually is. What p-hacking does is you put too many variables into an experiment, plot out as many as you can, and try and find two variables that have statistical relationships.

That is very bad science but the problem is that it only works once. When repeated experiments are done statistical relationships begin to break down unless they're actually meaningful.

Nobody would suggest that lemons imported into the United States prevent car accidents but this is a good visual example of p-hacking. It gets exposed for the fraud it is pretty quickly. The problem with p-hacking in recent years is the inability of many scientists to perform repeated experiments to check the validity of results published in every journal. It happens mostly in medical research.

Climate change is well outside the range of p-hacking. It has been repeatedly proven. As for 'green house gases' becoming inert and that's just stupid. The residence time of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is between decades and centuries. You would know this if you ever talked with a real geologist. However I doubt you even know what residence time means enough for you to ask.

>>8734906
It's perfectly healthy to take a skeptical attitude on a topic where there is still debate or at the least an absence of being able to exercise the scientific method to prove something...

...oh you're talking about someone disputing man-made global warming? BURN THE HERETIC!!!!

>>8738210
Debate amongst political pundits regarding a matter of science is not debate.

>>8738210
There's legitimate scientific skepticism, and then there's scientific denial. The vast majority of climate change "skeptics" fall in the denial category, and many of them are industry-funded / connected. In fact, when you hear of a climate change "skeptic," usually the most basic level of research will lead to connections between them, their work and the fossil fuel industry, either through direct funding, or through connections to libertarian / conservative "think tanks" that deny climate science.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wXA777yUndQ

>>8735648
>> Trump bragged about how corrupt he was
>Never happened.
he literally bragged about how he'd donate money to politicians and then he'd be able to call in political favors from them later on, and he admitted that was a corrupt and broken system.
>http://www.nationalreview.com/article/430266/donald-trump-bribes-politicians-and-boasts-about-it
inb4 LIBRUL MEMEDIA, it's the National Review

>>8735648
>So he says some dumb things sometimes. Who cares?
the problem is that he says dumb shit constantly. he has no actual policy knowledge of anything, and he literally believes that he doesn't need intelligence briefings because he's already intelligent

>>8735959
>expresses ignorant opinion
>gets yelled at by people who actually know a little about the topic at hand
>gets pooper peeved
play stupid games, win stupid prizes

>>8737250
>can't modulate effects
>requires constant maintenance
>doesn't do shit about ocean acidification
Sounds Like An Elaborate Excuse To Blow Shit Up In Space But Okay

>>8737946
>The actual geologic record shows little connection between CO2 and temperature.
literally false
t. paleofag

>>8738085
>ask any Chemist about what happens to all those "green house gases" in the atmosphere, and they will tell you that they react with other gases in the atmosphere and become inert
the three most abundant and important greenhouse gases in the atmosphere are water vapor, carbon dioxide, and methane. the concentration of water vapor is pretty much constant (slight dependence on temperature) because atmospheric water is in near-equilibrium with the oceans. but no, water doesn't react with other gases in the atmosphere.
carbon dioxide doesn't undergo any significant atmospheric reactions either.
but methane, methane DOES react with other gases in the atmosphere; it decomposes when combined with oxygen. what does it produce? water...AND CARBON DIOXIDE. it doesn't magically go away; it just gets converted into a DIFFERENT greenhouse gas.

>>8738206
>What p-hacking does is you put too many variables into an experiment, plot out as many as you can, and try and find two variables that have statistical relationships.
related concept with a funny name: kitchen sink regression

>>8738231
>he literally bragged about how he'd donate money to politicians and then he'd be able to call in political favors
The difference is that he's signing the front of checks, while shillary signs the back. So what if he buys politicians? That's just good business. It's the politician who is taking the bribe who is going against what they are supposed to be doing.

> global warming
If it's a problem, we can use geoengineering to solve it as long as we haven't completely fucked up our own economies with more taxes and government regulations.
And if it isn't really a problem, then we shouldn't let a bunch of conmen trick the country into fucking up the economy with more taxes and government regulations.
Either way, this ridiculous obsession with controlling CO2 does no one any good. You can't have modern society without producing CO2.

oh nooooooooooo he doesn't fully agree with the orthodoxy

>>8735844
Spot the freshman.

>>8737816
I don't know, why the fuck is a blatantly political thread on a science board?

>>8737720
No dumbfuck, they were afraid of an upheaval that might make a bunch of dumbfuck peasants freak the fuck out and thus wanted to be sure the science was well-supported by mathematical evidence, which Galileo's science wasn't. Furthermore, asshole, Galileo wasn't killed, nor was he put on house-arrest (where he was still permitted to continue his experiments) because of his findings. He was arrested because he made a Juvenile book where he basically called the Pope (who prior to this was quite friendly with Galileo) a simpleton (Simplicio). You have a view of the Church warped by hundreds of years of Protestant and Enlightenment propaganda

>>8734923
>why aren't scientists making determinations
...bcoz anti-intellectual urban redneck trailer-park 'Murikans distrust what they don't understand, and they don't understand science

>restoring natural levels of CO2 on Earth
>bad

>>8735844
>That's because America has effectively allowed itself to become a caste system, with minorities at the bottom, the majority in the middle, and the rich on top.

what the fuck do you think a democracy is, you marxist fuck? it's not anyone's fault that you're too stupid to get ahead in life, when america is THE only place left where you can actually go from being poor when you're born, to rich when you're old, all through your own work.

>>8738292
>So what if he buys politicians? That's just good business.
so you think that there's nothing wrong with explicitly bribing politicians?
but yeah, you're SO concerned about corruption in politics. sounds about right :^)

Man-Made Climate Change is false.

Anyone who believes it is using it as a political plot device to further their own agenda.

>>8738161
those are all from agencies and organisations who have a conflict of interest to promote belief in mad made climate change.

show me the same number of sources by verifiable independent organisations with no conflict of interest and then we can talk.

there are copious other organisations who have came out and said that it's false, or inconclusive.

>>8738543
no, we just don't like you or believe you

>>8738540

>>8738558
These companies have a conflict of interest to DENY climate-change. Yet, they publicly acknowledge it.

http://www.bp.com/en_us/bp-us/media-room/press-releases/bp-the-colville-reservation-tribes-and-finite-carbon-reach-milestone.html
>As a leading global energy company, BP believes that climate change is an important long-term issue that requires action by governments, companies and consumers. BP is committed to working with industry partners and doing its part in reducing greenhouse gas emissions, while still providing the energy the world needs.

https://www.chevron.com/corporate-responsibility/climate-change
>Chevron [...] recognizes that the use of fossil fuels to meet the world’s energy needs contributes to the rising concentration of greenhouse gases (GHGs) in Earth’s atmosphere. GHGs contribute to increases in global temperatures

http://news.exxonmobil.com/press-release/exxonmobil-releases-reports-shareholders-managing-climate-risk
>It is equally essential that society manages the risk of climate change by increasing energy efficiency and by investing in research into technologies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

http://www.shell.com/sustainability/environment/climate-change.html
>But in order to prosper while tackling climate change, society needs to provide much more energy for a growing global population while finding ways to emit much less CO2.

>>8738370
Economic models that factor in the impacts of climate change show that mitigation is more economical. Of course that depends on putting faith in science... god forbid.

>>8738663
But that requires us to act NOW. When we could just wait until it happens and act THEN.
Who cares if billions of people are affected in the future, by mitigating it millions of voters will be affected now.

>>8738563
found the anti-intellectual urban redneck trailer-park 'Murikan

>>8738292
Do you even see the hypocrisy in that? "Its ok if he buys politicians because he's upfront about it!"

>>8738554
Ooh, what agenda? Renewables? Green tech? How about this...even if Climate Change is fucking false, why even go against the idea of more widespread renewable tech other than coal and natural gas? Its a hell of a lot less invasive than digging and extracting coal and natural gas. In b4 you bring up the tired "wind energy kills birds!11!!" bullshit. Even if it did, you don't really care about the birds. Be fucking honest with yourself.

>>8738807
I think the idea is rather
>It's OK if he buys politicians because they shouldn't be corrupt in the first place
>So it's THEIR fault that they accept his money
Which is still a pretty stupid viewpoint.

>>8734906
Science can't be wrong, if only the lefties would bother to do their own research, they'd know that global warming is bullshit.

Wtf? Why does sci all of a sudden hate trump? You guys are fucking cucks.

>>8738826
Is this bait?

>>8738807
>>8738815
No dumbass, the point is that it's fine if a businessman does it because that's what a businessman is supposed to do. They have one and only one obligation: To try to make as much money as possible. If that means buying politicians, then that is what they SHOULD do. An elected politician, however, is supposed to serve the people. So when shillary takes millions from foreign governments when she's supposed to be serving the American people, that's unacceptable. But when Trump as a businessman tries to buy politicians, that's just good business.

>>8738847
I think I (>>8738815) interpreted you correctly?

>it's fine if a businessman does it because that's what a businessman is supposed to do
I disagree. It's not fine if a business breaks the law if it gets away with it. In fact, that shows that your business is shit to begin with, otherwise you could do well without.
They will do it because they only care about profit. But it's not OK.

>>8738844
Here's an MIT climate scientist for you, you tell me if it's bait: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OwqIy8Ikv-c

>>8738850
See >>8737930

>>8738850
I've not watched the video, only read the script in the description. He doesn't dispute global warming. He only says that he is skeptic of the role of humans in it.

>>8738923
"Skeptic" is a polite way to call bullshit.

>>8738928
Then let me rephrase that in words you can understand. He doesn't say global warming is bullshit. He says that the claim that humans are a driving factor in it is bullshit.

And yet that doesn't invalidate all of the research which shows that he is wrong.

>>8738941
So what, Big Oil can buy entire Unis like PragerU now, is that what you're saying?

>>8738246
Found this one on the wikipedia article on Data Dredging which includes P-hacking and Kitchen Sink Regression

A single scientist can have their own pet theories they are trying to maintain or could be influenced by bribes or greed. The word of a single scientist on either side of a debate are worthless.

Instead look at institutions of scientists. This smooths out the bias of any single scientist. So instead of posting the opinion of a lone scientist who's motivations may not be ethical name one institution ONE SINGLE SCIENTIFIC INSTITUTION that disputes man is causing climate change.

>>8738988
>ONE SINGLE SCIENTIFIC INSTITUTION
Doesn't Prager University count?
>inb4 it doesn't, and here are reasons I literally just made up

>>8738847
>it's okay if a guy's a criminal who thinks he's above the law
>so long as he gets away with it and makes money
this is literally what the GOP has devolved to, the party of thieves

>>8738946
>>8738993
>entire Unis like PragerU
if you'd spent literally five seconds on Google, you'd know that there is no Prager University. it's a conservative talk radio host's website where he posts five minute videos of his opinions.

pic related, it's (You)

>>8738993
>In 2009, Prager started a website, "Prager University", offering five-minute videos on various subjects such as the Ten Commandments, the minimum wage, the Middle East, Global warming, and happiness with a conservative perspective.

T O P K E K

Are you seriously stupid enough to believe that some retard's industry-funded propaganda is equivalent to the national academies of sciences and numerous independent science organizations worldwide?

>>8735648
Trump has started funding saudis again

>>8738662
Fucking cuck

>>8739410
Compelling argument.

>>8738946
>entire Unis like PragerU
i hope this isn't bait
like i hope you actually meant this

>>8735992
>As for the other article you posted, according to the NOAA, there was a cooling trend from 1921 to 1979, for the US, but not global temperatures. So from the looks of it, the news article fucked up and misquoted him.

There was a GLOBAL cooling trend. From about 1945 to 1975 despite, desperate attempts to rewrite history by cherry picking citations.

>nb4 hurr durr paper says most citations were about Global Warming.
Sorry buddy, those are cherry picked to yeild a pre-determined conclusion.

285 PEER REVIEWED GLOBAL COOLI|NG REFERENCES RIGHT HERE!
http://notrickszone.com/285-papers-70s-cooling-1/#sthash.PJoHxopP.dpbs
http://notrickszone.com/285-papers-70s-cooling-2/#sthash.lRcCIvlK.dpbs
http://notrickszone.com/285-papers-70s-cooling-3/#sthash.Tw3Ix8qy.dpbs

Kosiba, A. "The problem of climate cooling after 1939 (in Polnisch)." Czas. geogr 33 (1962): 63.

Fletcher, Joseph O. "Polar ice and the global climate machine." Bull. Atomic Scientists (1970): 40-47.
"... the cooling effect of the 1950s and 1960s shows that some other factor is more than countering the warming effect of CO2.... Man's contribution to the atmospheric dust load is increasing at an exponential rate.

Rasool, S. Ichtiaque, and Stephen H. Schneider. "Atmospheric carbon dioxide and aerosols: Effects of large increases on global climate." Science 173.3992 (1971): 138-141.
" An increase by only a factor of 4 in global aerosol background... is believed to be sufficient to trigger an ice age.”

Lamb, Hubert H. The current trend of world climate: A report on the early 1970's and a perspective. Climatic Research Unit, School of Environmental Sciences, University of East Anglia, 1974. "Much has been written about the global cooling... has been overstressed as regards to its practical implications... There are solid grounds for regarding this as a dangerous misconception."

>nb4 hurr durr don't bother us with actual evidence and papers.
Acknowledge the scientific consenus of global cooling.

>>8740664
>>8735992
>As for the other article you posted, according to the NOAA, there was a cooling trend from 1921 to 1979, for the US, but not global temperatures. So from the looks of it, the news article fucked up and misquoted him.

NEEDS, ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION. "LAWRENCE UVERMORE LABORATORY." (1972). "Global cooling of natural origin could exceed in magnitude changes experienced in historical times.

Potter, Gerald L., et al. "Possible climatic impact of tropical deforestation." (1975): 697-698.

Kukla, George J., and Robert K. Matthews. "When will the present interglacial end?." Science 178.4057 (1972): 190-202.

Gribbin, John. "Cause and effects of global cooling." Nature 254 (1975): 14.


Lamb, H. H. "Changes of climate." Wright & Moseley (1975): 169-188.

Fletcher, Joseph O. MANAGING CLIMATE RESOURCES. No. RAND-P-4000. RAND CORP SANTA MONICA CA, 1969. "We may already be inadvertantly influencing global climate. ... a weakening circulation, southward shifts of ice boundary..."

Braslau, Norman, and J. V. Dave. "Effect of aerosols on the transfer of solar energy through realistic model atmospheres. Part I: Non-absorbing aerosols." Journal of applied meteorology 12.4 (1973): 601-615.

Bray, J. R. "Climatic change and atmospheric pollution." Proceedings (New Zealand Ecological Society). New Zealand Ecological Society (Inc.), 1971. Increased atmospheric carbon dioxide content was concluded to have Had An Ambiguous Climatic Influence and may be less important than sometimes considered. Several studies have suggested increased turbidity has produced a recent global cooling trend.

Carter, L. J. 1970. The global environment: M.I.T. study looks for danger signs. Science 169: 660-662. Increased turbidity causes gobal cooling.

Lamb, H. H. 1969. Activite volcanique et climat. Revue de Geographie Physique et de Geologie Dynamique 11: 363-380.

>>8740668
>>8740664
>>8735992
>>As for the other article you posted, according to the NOAA, there was a cooling trend from 1921 to 1979, for the US, but not global temperatures. So from the looks of it, the news article fucked up and misquoted him.

Bryson 1974. A perspective on Climate Change. Science. 184:753-760. The "debunking" paper falsely classifies this as "neutral." Bryson thought anthropogenic aerosols were causing global cooling.

Byerknes, J., 1958: "Related Fluctuations of Trade Winds and Northern Climates," Geophysics Helsinki, Vol.6 , No. 3-4. 169-177

Budyko, Mikhail I. "The future climate." Eos, Transactions American Geophysical Union 53.10 (1972): 868-874.

>>8735992
a very unimpressive video. Aerosols, heat in oceans, blah, blah, ad hoc "explanations" after the utter failure of their models.

Its the usual unfalsifiability; heads we win, tails we lose.
But replacing good ocean buoy Sea Surface Temperature data with BAD ship intake data? That is unforgivable. Karl, caved to political pressure, no doubt about it.

Did you say, hurr, durr, conspiracy nut? Yeah, scientists never conspire. Certainly not for politics or to keep their job. They certainly would never fudge things.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-4192182/World-leaders-duped-manipulated-global-warming-data.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4216180/How-trust-global-warming-scientists-asks-David-Rose.html
https://judithcurry.com/2017/02/04/climate-scientists-versus-climate-data/
https://judithcurry.com/2017/02/06/response-to-critiques-climate-scientists-versus-climate-data/
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/environment/globalwarming/11395516/The-fiddling-with-temperature-data-is-the-biggest-science-scandal-ever.html
http://notrickszone.com/2012/03/01/data-tamperin-giss-caught-red-handed-manipulaing-data-to-produce-arctic-climate-history-revision/#sthash.VTPwJsKh.dpbs
http://notrickszone.com/2013/12/22/veteran-meteorologist-joe-bastardi-on-nasa-november-temperature-a-fraudulent-report-tampering-with-data/#sthash.P3HW7lW2.dpbs
https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2015/01/20/massive-tampering-with-temperatures-in-south-america/
https://climatism.wordpress.com/2016/04/26/nasa-doubling-sea-level-rise-by-data-tampering/
https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=de&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.achgut.com%2Fartikel%2Fsind_die_klimadaten_manipuliert

>nb4 Only peer reviewed counts. Yeah, that's like asking the police to investigate the police.

>>8740664
>>8740668
>>8740676
>>8740692
just as the wise sage >>8735886 predicted!

>>8740664
>claims a global trend, posts graph of northern hemisphere temps
>graph with made-up trendline literally just drawn on it, no regression or anything
>posts links to lists of papers allegedly proving global cooling
>papers are mutually contradictory, most of them don't even claim that there is a global cooling trend
>some of the papers literally just say that milankovitch-driven glacial cycles are a thing in icehouse conditions
>at least one literally states that current temperatures are abnormally warm compared to the last few 100 kyr, and that due to feedback effects we need to be careful about the balance of the climate
>http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0033589472900476
>literally the opposite of what the list is claiming
just another day on /sci/ with illiterate deniers funposting all over the board.

>>8740676
holy fuck, are you incapable of using MSPaint? I knew deniers were stupid and unlettered, but this is a whole new low.
>argument literally copied and pasted directly from /pol/ thread 11/22/16
it's obvious that you haven't actually read any of the papers you're citing, and the fact that Bjerknes (you misspelled his name) isn't actually available online is kind of a dead giveaway. you're just copying and pasting lists of papers that someone else told you prove your claims. because like 90% of deniers on the internet, you've never had an original thought on the topic because you're too ignorant and empty-headed to form your own ideas.

>>8740692
>Did you say, hurr, durr, conspiracy nut? Yeah, scientists never conspire. Certainly not for politics or to keep their job. They certainly would never fudge things.
>posts a bunch of denier blog links claiming that there's A CONSPURRCY

>>8740664
>>8740668
>>8740676
Just posting this right before the thread dies to point out what a retard you are.