How do you falsify climate change?

[Anonymous No.10145788]

It's literally unfalsifiable pseudoscience
>temperature goes up
That's climate change
>temperature goes down
That's climate change
>More rain
That's climate change
>less rain
That's climate change
>girlfriend forces me to get a vasectomy
That's climate change
>Tornado
That's climate change

I could go on forever, 'climate change' is a giant pseudo scientific term that gets thrown around like it means something, but all it means is that the climate changes AND CLIMATE IS A FUCKING COMPLEX MULTI-VARIABLE PROCESS, OF COURSE IT CHANGES.

[Anonymous No.10145807]

>>10145788
Please kill yourself

[Anonymous No.10145814]

>>10145807
No argument retard, seriously 'climate change' is unfalsifiable thus pseudoscience (atleast according Popper)

[Anonymous No.10145829]

>>10145814
I didn't try to make an argument

[Anonymous No.10145844]

Who cares if global warming is real or fake.

Fact remains: It's time to get off this rock.

[Anonymous No.10145848]

>>10145788
>brainlets throw a tantrum everytime this is mentioned
based OP

[Anonymous No.10145850]

>>10145788
Okay since you're obviously dense enough to start your own planet, this will be put simply.

The Earth's climate is a very large, very complex system of interconnected and loose mechanisms. A change in area A will do something else to area B, potentially in a round about way. Like say ice melting in Alaska very indirectly influencing the weather down in California by affecting current circulation.

Get the gist?

[Anonymous No.10145861]

>>10145788
You realize that there are natural carbon sinks and that despite mindless deforestation and destruction of wetlands, they're far from overwhelmed.

You realize technology has existed to control the weather since WW2. Do you think it's any coincidence the nazis studied Antarctica intensely and planned to assert global control by triggering natural disasters, causing flooding, causing endless drought, and eventually put an array of mirrors in space to fry any area that tried to resist? Is it any coincidence that Hitlers plan for a united europe, under one currency, came about anyway? Is it any coincidence the US dollar became the world reserve currency shortly after? Is it any coincidence we had many expeditions to antractica? That we built HAARP? That we put radar installations everywhere capable of focusing intense pulsed radiation on the ionosphere, or metals deployed in the atmosphere (such as barium, strontium and aluminum)? Is it any coincidence that we've nearly expanded NATO right up to the border of the only remaining old world superpower that's showing no overt cooperation with the western agenda? Is it any coincidence we've stationed nuclear armaments in Romania, and we tried to puppet Ukraine and do the same thing there. Is it any coincidence we're surrounding Russia with 30,000+ troops and gaining more influence at their borders? Is it any coincidence it almost seems like something wants to destroy the US from the inside and trigger whatever is left to destroy itself in a conflict with Russia and China? We're being used.

You realize that the climate change religion, which I and others here were raised with and deeply indoctrinated into from early childhood, is part of a broader agenda to rapidly reduce population, herd us into dense supercities, rewrite history, and put us into a state of such brutal control we're unlikely to ever manage to emerge. Everything is about control, and what we're seeing is agenda 21.

[Anonymous No.10145886]

>>10145844
Globale warming is a different term which is a bit more specific and which is falsifiabe;
OP is talking about 'climate change' which is not the same thing.

>>10145850
Yeah, like I said in the last sentence CLIMATE CHANGES EVERY FUCKING DAY. There are no two exact days with the same climate. Do you know what Karl Popper you brainlet? Then you should know his distinction between science and pseudoscience.
My OP has the simple premise stating that according to Popper climate change is pseudoscientific bullshit, see the image. Every fucking low IQ brainlet working for magazines could find a change in climate and then write an article about it. Climate change can explain everything in its field, it's like those new age hippies explaining everything with vibrations, energy and '''quantum'''.
What set of observations over what period of time would be enough to refute the theory?
IT'S FUCKING PSEUDOSCIENCE YOU BRAINLET!

[Anonymous No.10145890]

>butterfly flaps it's wings in Brazil cause tornado in Texas
>mankind creates 38.2 billion tons of CO2 every year, has zero effect anywhere on the Earth

Butterflies are evil, and nothing humans do can ever be wrong.
/thread

[Anonymous No.10145894]

>>10145861
Fuck off trying to derail this thread with non sequitur conspiracy BULLSHIT.

[Anonymous No.10145898]

>>10145886
you're supposed to make the bait interesting.

[Anonymous No.10145902]

>>10145890
>reading comprehension
I'm not retarded I concede that our actions have influence on the climate, but you can't deny that 'climate change' is a pseudoscientific term used by retards.

[Anonymous No.10145909]

>>10145861
Everything you just mentioned as a rational explanation, there's nothing to it. Not to say there aren't global conspiracies, but this is barking up the wrong tree.

The Nazis studied a lot of stuff very intensely for any advantage during the war, including patently retarded shit like occultism and mysticism. The Antarctic would've been a decent hideout if the Nazis weren't entirely locked in the Baltic by the Royal Navy, and they wouldn't have to get past the US fleet in the Atlantic to build a large hideout while in the middle of a huge, unsustainable conflict. The Nazis did a lot of really inefficient things during the war, so a few more crazy things isn't a huge stretch. They barely had enough resources to keep their army going with horses and rifles, let alone start geoengineering projects.

The EU stuff is being met with some resistance but this time it's being done peacefully, for now at least.

The US Dollar became the de facto currency after the war because the rest of the world was either still poor, communist, or bombed to shit. The Dollar had the stability and backing a lot of nations still just don't have.

Expeditions to Antarctica are pretty lightly equipped and most for the sake of exploration. Most equipment down there is for scientific research, mostly into climate sciences and a neutrino catching system.

Those RADAR are Over the Horizon Radars, used for detecting incoming bomber aircraft and ICBMS from over the horizon. They bounce radio waves off the ionosphere, which then bounce back to them. Think of it like using a mirror to look around a corner - that's basically what it is, but with radio instead of visible light.

There's very little metal in the atmosphere - it settles out pretty quickly since it's denser than the air.

Russia and the USSR is the entire reason NATO exists, it makes sense NATO would want their troops close to any potential areas of conflict.

[Anonymous No.10145913]

>>10145898
>bait
I'm legit here, how would you falsify climate change you tard? You can't thus pseudoscience, simple as that.

[Anonymous No.10145915]

>>10145886
>CLIMATE CHANGES EVERY FUCKING DAY
>Climate is the statistics of weather over long periods of time.
Yikes man

[Anonymous No.10145919]

The primary reason Americans don't believe in man-made climate change is because the US recently experienced some of its coldest weather in modern history. American warming doesn't exist so global warming mustn't either. Makes sense if you think about it.

[Anonymous No.10145920]

>>10145788
if someone can give me a genuine testable way to falsify climate change then we can
/thread

[Anonymous No.10145921]

>>10145902
Nah, you're just a contrarian. And you're reacting to the term "climate change" becoming relatively popular in recent years.

[Anonymous No.10145927]

>>10145913
wait 20 years

[Anonymous No.10145936]

>>10145902
>but you can't deny that 'climate change' is a pseudoscientific term used by retards.
Go to any university in the world with a physics department and they will very likely have a class on climate change. Yet you still claim it is pseudoscience, because your daddy happens to wear a red cap.

[Anonymous No.10145944]

>>10145920
If average global temperatures go down

[Anonymous No.10145960]

>>10145909
>The Nazis studied a lot of stuff very intensely for any advantage during the war,
Their antarctic expeditions took place well before the war, or their annexation of poland.

>including patently retarded shit like occultism and mysticism.
And yet the CIA spent decades on similar research, and at the end of it threw out the LSD dosing stuff as though "lol u got us! we're a bunch of goofballs trying to see if esp is real haha gg guyz ;)" while meanwhile working day and nioght shredding and burning documents from their hundreds of subprojects, using all their operation paperclip people. But yes, I'm sure it all came up empty handed and was shown that the rational mind shall prevail, and it was a fruitless endeavor. Likewise with the USSR's research, which claimed very real results.

But all that aside, the real fruits of studying these things came not from the topic, but the people. They studied satanic cults ton learn about brainwashing (ritual trauma programming), which was a major bootstrapping for the better known trauma bonding experiments by Mengele. No, they weren't wasting their time. Nor was the US delusional in trying to develop a Manchurian candidate.

>The Nazis did a lot of really inefficient things during the war,
There was a bit of it, but everything from bunker puncturing rockets fueled by ethanol, to magnetic mines, to massive guns that needed to travel by train, and a formidable air fleet. The means were often crude, and there were a number of failures, but I wouldn't reduce it down so simply.

>let alone start geoengineering projects.
This was for after the war. Infrastructure wasn't in place.

>The EU stuff is being met with some resistance
The EU is the archetypal shadowy cabal.

>The US Dollar became the de facto currency after the war
Mainly because Britain was bankrupt and later did themselves in with their failed invasion of Egypt, goofballing their currency right out of there forever more.[...]

[Anonymous No.10145990]

>>10145788
CLIMATE TARDS BTFO

[Anonymous No.10145998]

>>10145909
>The US Dollar became the de facto currency after the war
And the US had the federal reserve. Stability was only part of it, you cannot deny the convenient power afforded by tying the new EU into the US dollar, and the US going on to become an imperial empire. This is how you control things. You set up key chokepoints, and focus on holding those chokepoints and therefore holding the levers of power they afford.

>The Dollar had the stability and backing a lot of nations still just don't have.
I see you've used the past tense. I'm thinking I agree, that the US dollar is moving closer to being dumped as the world's reserve currency. Which will signal possible collapse in short order.

>Most equipment down there is for scientific research, mostly into climate sciences and a neutrino catching system.
I'm not going to really go into this given that neither of us are actually allowed to even go there freely.

>Those RADAR are Over the Horizon Radars
Some are, many are not. There are much fewer over the horizon installations at this point. The old Duga radar installation has been decommissioned in Russia, focus is shifting to other forms of deployment. Though they still employ their ELF antennas. The decentralized nature of the new order lends itself even better to controlling the atmosphere.

>There's very little metal in the atmosphere
Nanoparticles deployed by jets as needed, where needed.

You also have the "electron rain", which can be influenced greatly by ELF emissions. Even those from residential powerlines have a small effect, large 700+kV lines even moreso. This can affect weather.

>Russia and the USSR is the entire reason NATO exists
The original stated purpose of NATO was "to keep the Americans in, the Germans down, and the Russians out." And it has done so and thensome. However it was also "promised" to Gorbachev that for the sake of global and geopolitical stability, that NATO would not be extended beyond western Germany.[...]

[Anonymous No.10146001]

>>10145915
Nice gotcha.

>>10145919
This is what happens everytime, climate change gets conflated with global warming. Also I'm not American and I am of the opinion that we're heading for ecological disaster but 'climate change' is just a stupid term.
Global warming is atleast more specific and we could falsify that. But even when you really start digging and take a look how they RETROACTIVELY revised the satalite datasets, which aren't suspicious at all.

>>10145921
It's a pseudoscientific theory.

>>10145936
>red cap
wew, why are Americans always politicizing, fyi I'm leaning left-libertarian.
>there are university departments blablabla
Dude, you know that that isn't an argument right? This is literally a response of authority. I could for example come up with an example which /sci/ would love:
>I'm christian because a lot of smart people are christian
See how stupid you are?

[Anonymous No.10146010]

>>10145944
Again conflating 'global warming' with 'climate change'. Different things

[Anonymous No.10146031]

>>10145998
However it has continued to encroach further and further for obvious reasons. And what of these "areas of potential conflict"? We installed a puppet government in Ukraine. Russia attacked and removed it. We call this "Russian aggression". Yeah? And how about if Russia installed a puppet government in Canada and Mexico? Would our response be unwarranted "American aggression"? Though in the case of the former, China is already working on that and it's getting quick results.

No. What you're saying is how it appears on the surface, if everything was above board and a response rather than pieces moved in a greater plan. There's greater use to all of these things, and we've seen it play out again and again. There are no reactions, only preparations. There is no steady state, only plans in motion. Everything is about control. And right now, even with the mechanisms in place, there are too many people and the global elite either have what they want technology, and therefore no longer need the cattle, or they fear losing control. So population must be reduced. A myth of climate change may be one such mechanism, and I'm becoming steadily convinced that it really is.

I look around, bird population is dropping rapidly. I never see newts anymore. I never see large salamanders. There are far less bees and there are fewer caterpillars, the mullein struggles and the milkweed is dying off. And it's not because of climate change, and it's not because of acidification of the water and soil. It's because of garbage being deployed in the atmosphere and the proliferation of all forms of manmade pollution, including non-ionizing radiation.All the old people are dying with dementia and so forth. Print based media is fading away. They're erasing the truth. I'm apt to act like climate change is real even if it's not, and take care of things, but I'm not going to believe all their shit and accept their manufactured basis for creeping control.

[Anonymous No.10146034]

Since y'all are retarded brainlets seeking for ingroup approval and see an attack on the scientific validity of climate change as an attack of personal identity, I will show you my problem with climate change:
>Climate change makes for shorter winters
http://www.techtimes.com/articles/95188/20151016/winter-will-be-shorter-over-the-next-century-thanks-to-global-warming.htm
>Climate change makes for harsher winters
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/oct/26/global-warming-has-doubled-risk-harsh-winters-eurasia-research-finds
>Climate change means less snow
https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2015/11/snowfalls-are-now-just-a-thing-of-the-past-the-independent.pdf
>Climate change means more snow
http://phys.org/news/2011-03-global-snowstorms-scientists.html
>Climate change causes droughts in California
http://earthsky.org/earth/has-global-warming-worsened-california-drought
>Climate change causes floods in Texas and Oklahoma
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2015/sep/02/global-warming-intensified-the-record-floods-in-texas-and-oklahoma
>Climate change makes wet places wetter and dry places drier…
https://www.ncas.ac.uk/index.php/en/climate-science-highlights/463-wet-regions-getting-wetter-dry-regions-drier-as-planet-warms
>…except when it makes wet places dryer…
http://www.earthday.org/blog/2015/07/15/unusual-drought-thailand-makes-high-vulnerability-climate-change-evident
>…and dry places wetter
http://mashable.com/2015/10/05/south-carolina-floods-global-warming/

[Anonymous No.10146062]

>>10146034
>implying any of this is a bad thing
The earth is overpopulated as is. Famines resulting from failing crops in Africa, the Middle East, and Asia will allow the population problem to virtually solve itself. Most agricultural land in the US will be relatively unaffected compared to elsewhere in the world, so it won't be too unbearable stateside.

[Anonymous No.10146068]

>Climate change causes more hurricanes
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/07/070730-hurricane-warming.html
>Climate change causes less hurricanes
http://arstechnica.com/science/2015/05/global-warming-means-fewer-but-more-powerful-hurricanes/
>Climate change causes more rain (but less water)
http://www.livescience.com/496-irony-global-warming-rain-water.html
>Climate change causes less rain
http://www.nature.com/news/2004/040401/full/news040329-10.html
>Climate change decreases the spread of malaria
http://www.nature.com/news/global-warming-wilts-malaria-1.9695
>Climate change increases the spread of malaria
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/climate-change-increasing-malaria-risk-disease-spreads-higher-altitudes-1439262
>Climate change makes San Francisco foggier
http://www.sfgate.com/science/article/Get-ready-for-even-foggier-summers-3226235.php
>Climate change makes San Francisco less foggy
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/earthnews/7243579/Fog-over-San-Francisco-thins-by-a-third-due-to-climate-change.html
>Climate change causes duller autumn leaves
http://www.livescience.com/39820-climate-change-fall-leaves.html
>Climate changes causes more colourful autumn leaves
http://www.theguardian.com/science/2004/nov/18/thisweekssciencequestions1
>Climate change makes for less salty seas
http://www.livescience.com/3883-global-warming-sea-salty.html
>Climate change makes for saltier seas
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2008/oct/27/climate-change-water

[Anonymous No.10146072]

>>10146034
>Using media and newspapers as sources
>Instead of looking at what the actual scientific articles say
The media and sites like that are fucking shit when it comes to reporting any science

[Anonymous No.10146074]

>Climate change causes Antarctica to lose land ice
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/oct/12/antarctic-ice-melting-so-fast-whole-continent-may-be-at-risk-by-2100
>Climate change causes Antarctica to gain land ice
http://www.wired.com/2015/11/antarcticas-ice-gains-dont-mean-global-warming-is-over/
>Climate change makes the earth hotter…
http://www.windows2universe.org/earth/climate/ipcc_feb2007.html
>…unless the earth isn’t getting hotter…
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/12/04/the-robust-pause-resists-a-robust-el-nio-still-no-global-warming-at-all-for-18-years-9-months/
>…in which case climate change can explain that, too.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3155568/Have-seas-HIDING-true-scale-climate-change-Nasa-report-claims-global-warming-pause-never-happened.html
Karl Popper famously said, “A theory that explains everything explains nothing.” So what do you make of the theory that catastrophic manmade CO2-driven “climate change” can account for harsher winters and lighter winters, more snow and less snow, droughts and floods, more hurricanes and less hurricanes, more rain and less rain, more malaria and less malaria, saltier seas and less salty seas, Antarctica ice melting and Antarctic ice gaining and dozens of other contradictions? Popper gave a name to “theories” like this: pseudoscience.
http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/popper_falsification.html

[Anonymous No.10146086]

>>10146062
>Famines resulting from failing crops in Africa
I thought GMOs were supposed to fix all that? Wait, they're s cam and a failure. And did I mention rats fed GMOs for 3 generations became sterile?

[Anonymous No.10146105]

>>10145788
>falsify

Popper's philosophical garbage is pseudoscience. gb2 the >>>/trash/

[Anonymous No.10146154]

>>10145814
>>10145886
>>10146074

Kill yourself. Literally go kill yourself.

[Anonymous No.10146170]

>>10146031
And why do you think those populations are dropping? Could it be because far off ramifications of someone's actions are affecting the environment?

Who is 'they'? Just be clear, there's no reason to be secretive here.

Old people die of dementia because guess what - old people die because they're old.

Print based media is dying in wake of online media - which allows for decentralized and harder to control media.

[Anonymous No.10146284]

>>10145788
Every time the denialists try to make a prediction about future temperatures, they always get it wrong.

[Anonymous No.10146308]

>>10146284
“I expect there will soon be a revised TLT product from RSS which shows enhanced warming, too.

Here’s what I’m predicting:

1) neither John Christy nor I will be asked to review the paper

2) it will quickly sail through peer review (our UAH V6 paper is still not in print nearly 1 year after submission)

3) it will have many authors, including climate model people and the usual model pundits (e.g. Santer), which will supposedly lend legitimacy to the new data adjustments.

Let’s see how many of my 3 predictions come true.

-Roy W. Spencer”