the ice is melting

[Anonymous No.10305480]

>The total mass loss from Antarctica increased from 40±9 Gt/y in the 11-y time period 1979–1990
>to 50±14 Gt/y in 1989–2000, 166±18 Gt/y in 1999–2009, and 252±26 Gt/y in 2009–2017, that is, by a factor 6
Note: "surface mass balance" means the mass of net snowfall
I read this today at PNAS and wondered how any sane person can deny climate change.

[Anonymous No.10305602]

>>10305480
As expected.

[Anonymous No.10306273]

>>10305480
no sane person can

[Anonymous No.10306440]

>>10306273
So up the aerosols until there isn't enough sunlight for food to grow. We can build vertical farms and the third world can't. As for solar power, take all the uranium.
>China is doing this to us already, your children will starve to death

[Anonymous No.10306451]

>>10305480
>how any sane person can deny climate change.
it's all a disgusting ruse to make us leave cleaner air and water for future generations!

[Anonymous No.10306633]

>>10305480

Climate change is undeniable. And thank God for that. If our CO2 doesn't heat up earth, when the next ice age comes we'll all freeze to death.

[Anonymous No.10306682]

The real question is who gives a fuck? Worst case it returns to an Eocene type world climate and some pointless non human species will die off.

[Anonymous No.10306752]

>>10306633
>>10306682

These. Fuck all you whiny climate change screaming pricks. Just shut the fuck up and smoke your pot with your BBC dildo's rammed up your asses.

[Anonymous No.10307038]

I think you guys and most people who discuss climate change have missed the point entirely.

First off, climate is always changing, and even if the recent changes are man-made, how are they bad? Many liars have told us over the years shit like New York being submerged in 2016 and other crazy shit. So far every climatologist over the last 150 years has been a scumbag liar.

Secondly, after proving there are some small arguably insignificant changes, climate retards will point to pollution. WHICH IS NOT THE FUCKING SAME as climate change. This is not an argument in favour of climatefags. Pollution is a real issue, and if you want to solve it you are going to need to stop discussing carbon tax, CO2, gas, oil and start lobbying for the genocide of China, India, and Africa, because that's where roughly 95% of the world's combined pollution comes from. Economic and physical suicide (the most common answer from climatecucks) is not the answer and in fact makes the entire situation worse and harder to solve.

[Anonymous No.10307042]

>>10307038
>>>/x/

[Anonymous No.10307088]

>>10305480
It doesn't suggest it's man-made climate change.
Also
>Records held in the city show the Venice sea level has consistently risen by a total of 26 cm since 1870.
Even if it's man-made, we are inefficient as hell. This city should be below sea level long time ago.

[Anonymous No.10307101]

>>10306451
> implies reducing CO2 levels will somehow clean up air and water from pollution
Brainlet.

[Anonymous No.10307107]

>>10305480
Climate change is an excellent thing, we just need to close the borders.

[Anonymous No.10307129]

>>10307101
You reduce CO2 levels by shutting down coal plants and replacing combustion engines with electric engines. The result is clean air because these don't just emit pure CO2 but all kinds of harmful substances.

[Anonymous No.10307134]

Time to buy some fucking mountain estate boys

[Anonymous No.10307484]

>>10306633
>if I don't become obese now I'll starve to death later

[Anonymous No.10307498]

>>10307088
It actually does since according to the natural cycle of glaciation-deglaciation, the ice caps should be slowly growing right now instead of shrinking rapidly. But it being manmade is proven directly by observing the amount of heat being radiated towards earth from CO2 via radiative spectroscopy. So your false claim is irrelevant anyway.

[Anonymous No.10307783]

>>10307038
>climate is always changing
...except for the past few hundred years.

[Anonymous No.10308028]

>>10306633
There's not going to be an ice age now, but we'd be better off not racing into a hothouse earth atmosphere that will probably cause all sorts of new environmental pressures in short geologic time. Changing pressures by polluting causes extinctions of some species, which only adds to the direct pressures of human activities such as fishing and habitat destruction. This is at least a serious threat and possibly a calamitous one in the long run of energy economies. We need a strong effort to develop and deploy less-destructive energy harvesting methods, i.e. "renewables" to power our world, and reduce other modes of resource consumption to a practical minimum.

[Anonymous No.10308047]

>>10308028
bu, but, but
I wanna heli-ski!!

[Anonymous No.10308058]

>>10308047
>no worries, bud. you can. as long as "you pay for your pollution"
oh goody. I was worried there for a second.

[Anonymous No.10308063]

>>10308028
>There's not going to be an ice age now
>thinking the CO2 is gonna prevent the next ice age

lol

[Anonymous No.10308081]

>>10308063
We're heading in the trajectory, slowly, of being more like Venus. An ice age practically should happen at lower GHG concentrations or high albedo, which because ice is reflective is a positive feedback reinforcing the low-temperature state. Currently we are headed toward a high-GHG atmosphere. It would take some "sinking" of the extra GHGs through biological processes, or reductions in aerosols, to offset the ones we add, to reduce surface temperatures.

[Anonymous No.10308103]

>>10307129
>replacing combustion engines with electric engines
Which will solve nothing because majority of electricity is produced where? In coal-based plants.

Also how come coal plants are still up and running nicely even with carbon tax?
Oh right, because tax money doesn't go to funding green techologies so it's still cheaper to just use fossil fuels. Fossil fuels are also more reliable compared to wind/solar energy.
And carbon tax is paid by customers, not energy providers. So nothing is going to change, except for our electricity bills.


Not to mention engineerfags are already working on next-gen coal plants with 0 pollutants and CO2 release to atmo. I wonder what will be the next excuse to not use fossil fuels and keep CO2 tax running.

[Anonymous No.10308122]

>>10308103
>Which will solve nothing because majority of electricity is produced where? In coal-based plants.
This is false, electricity is not only produced in coal plants.

>Also how come coal plants are still up and running nicely even with carbon tax?
What carbon tax?

>Oh right, because tax money doesn't go to funding green techologies so it's still cheaper to just use fossil fuels.
So how are green technologies currently being used?

>Fossil fuels are also more reliable compared to wind/solar energy.
What about nuclear?

>And carbon tax is paid by customers, not energy providers. So nothing is going to change, except for our electricity bills.
The change is that less emissions will occur because they are more expensive.

>Not to mention engineerfags are already working on next-gen coal plants with 0 pollutants and CO2 release to atmo.
Great, come back when they exist.

Your post is full of misrepresentations and fallacies. Why are you here?

[Anonymous No.10308141]

>>10308103
>Not to mention engineerfags are already working on next-gen coal plants with 0 pollutants and CO2 release to atmo. I wonder what will be the next excuse to not use fossil fuels and keep CO2 tax running.
Actual engineers will recognize that this is literally impossible to do.CO2 is an exceptionally simple and stable compound, so you aren't getting rid of large amounts of it without an energy input to react and sequester it as a solid.

[Anonymous No.10308146]

>>10308103
actually where I live wind is actually out-competing fossil fuels.

[Anonymous No.10308208]

>>10305480
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vj1G9gqhkYA

[Anonymous No.10309128]

>>10308141
if only it were possible to engineer some sort of bio-organism that could somehow convert carbon dioxide into other compounds. if could could the energy for the reaction(s) passively from solar energy as part of the reaction catalysts and thus not need to pump energy into it ourselves.
oh, hang on -

[Anonymous No.10309291]

>>10308146
meanwhile wind and solar are out-competing fossil fuels almost everywhere

[Anonymous No.10310625]

The only thing worse than climate change deniers are the people who think we can survive in a changed climate. It is the peak of human degeneracy, the presumption that man can survive without the nature that supports him. Like an invalid who cannot work that demands welfare be ended, our species has subscribed to the suicidal ideal that we can, and should survive without our benefactors. The food chain is falling apart, and without it to support our spoiled selves, we will fall and we will all die.

[Anonymous No.10311624]

[Anonymous No.10311676]

>>10305480
Can we build cities underwater now

[Anonymous No.10311698]

>(((Antarctica)))

[Anonymous No.10312438]

>>10311676
>Can we build cities underwater now
we will have to

[Anonymous No.10312624]

>>10312438
no

http://notrickszone.com/2019/01/17/new-science-89-of-the-globes-islands-and-100-of-large-islands-have-stable-or-growing-coasts/