Global cooling

[Anonymous No.10787436]

>europe-wide historic cold snap this week
>temperatures to reach historic lows
Go on, deniers. Tell me global cooling isn't real.

[Anonymous No.10787441]

>>10787436
How cold we talking?
might it be enough to damage grain crops?

[Anonymous No.10787483]

>>10787436
it's the north pole leaking
the cold is more than offset by the warming of Arctic

[Anonymous No.10787509]

>>10787436
SCIENCE IS SETTLED REEEEEEEE

[Anonymous No.10787513]

>>10787436
almost like the climate is changing

[Anonymous No.10787533]

>>10787513
nice tautology

[Anonymous No.10787548]

>>10787513
the moment they stopped calling it global warming, they also stopped having a shred of legitimacy, because 2 decades before that they called it global cooling and expected another Ice Age any day now
now it's just "climate change", because holy fucking shit, turns out climate is changing and has been for at least as long as this cocksucking planet had oceans and an atmosphere, that a sufficiently large volcanic eruption can swing global mean temperature by 10 degrees and wipe out 90% of all life, like nobody's fucking business, like already happened at least twice, that we are literally STILL living in Ice age and there WILL be time where all ice on earth melts, whether we burn gasoline and LNG or not, but that seems to be flying right past way too many people

[Anonymous No.10787555]

>>10787548
sounds like a cope to me.

[Anonymous No.10787561]

>>10787548
I love how many lies are contained in this post.
They never stopped calling it global warming.
There was no consensus that there was another glacial period coming in the 70’s.
Just because the climate can change for natural reasons does not mean the current trend is not anthropogenic .

[Anonymous No.10787564]

>>10787436
Chemical ice nucleation. ie, geonengineering. ie, chemtrails. ie, the NATO weather warfare scam that's been going on for the last fucking 70 years.

[Anonymous No.10787570]

>>10787548
weird innit how all these records keep getting broken, I guess actually what's happening is that they're not getting broken because that would imply the climate is actually changing!

[Anonymous No.10787571]

>>10787441
>might it be enough to damage grain crops?
Around here the cold spring has damaged a lot of the fruit harvest. Some suffered 100 percent damage, the entire harvest is lost.

On the other hand it means the met dudes harp less on global warning than last years epic summer.

[Anonymous No.10787623]

>>>/pol/

[Anonymous No.10787641]

>>10787561
>They never stopped calling it global warming.
yes, they fucking did
it's now being only called climate change - a faggoty vague term that means nothing, because climate always changes, sometimes over long time, sometimes abruptly, and never considers our position on the fucking matter
>There was no consensus that there was another glacial period coming in the 70’s.
there was never consensus on anthropogenic global warming either
>Just because the climate can change for natural reasons does not mean the current trend is not anthropogenic
we know how much co2 we produce
it's fucking nothing compared to natural processes we have no control over
you are literally crying about a dude pissing into the fucking ocean

[Anonymous No.10787652]

>>10787641
C O
P E

[Anonymous No.10787656]

>>10787561
>They never stopped calling it global warming.

[Anonymous No.10787669]

>>10787548
>2 decades before that they called it global cooling
[citation needed]

>inb4 yellow press bs article

[Anonymous No.10787681]

>Ironically, the change may also have been accelerated by politically-motivatedspin doctors. This is advice from a Republican political consultant who advised President Bush, talking about changing the name for political purposes:

>"It’s time for us to start talking about “climate change” instead of global warming and “conservation” instead of preservation…“Climate change” is less frightening than “global warming”…While global warming has catastrophic connotations attached to it,climate changesuggests a more controllable and less emotional challenge".

Source:Republican Political Consultant Frank Luntz, 2003

[Anonymous No.10787682]

>>10787641
>yes, they fucking did

Prove it. I’ll wait.
https://www.ucsusa.org/global-warming
https://pmm.nasa.gov/education/articles/whats-name-global-warming-vs-climate-change
https://climate.nasa.gov/causes/

>there was never consensus on anthropogenic global warming either

Wrong.
https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/11/4/048002
https://skepticalscience.com/global-warming-scientific-consensus-advanced.htm

>we know how much co2 we produce
it's fucking nothing compared to natural processes we have no control over

Technically true but ignores wider context.
https://skepticalscience.com/human-co2-smaller-than-natural-emissions-intermediate.htm

Everything you have said or could say has been refuted time and time again for years, so the only way you continue to hold this position is faith. Therefore, I have no time for you. Toodles.

[Anonymous No.10787686]

>>10787656
Since all scientific sources continue to refer to global warming and the term “global warming” is still used in research papers, it’s apparent you’re ignorant or perhaps lying. Doesn’t really matter which.

[Anonymous No.10787694]

>>10787682
>it's fucking nothing compared to natural processes we have no control over

Vegetation & Land: 439-450= -11
Ocean: 332-338= -6
-11 + -6 = -17
Humans: +29

Humans are the only contributing factor, you lying shitstain retard

[Anonymous No.10787695]

>>10787623
>Anyone disagreeing with MY world view MUST leave.
Warmers in a nut shell.

[Anonymous No.10787704]

>>10787694
I think you replied to the wrong guy...
I was only quoting him.

[Anonymous No.10787718]

>>10787695
Yes that's right, not every world view can be correct you know. Strange, for a dumb conservitard you sure have some post modern ideas.

[Anonymous No.10787720]

>>10787704
sorry, the green text was wrong in your reply.
deleted & reposting

[Anonymous No.10787721]

>>10787694
>random fuckass volcano +10,000

[Anonymous No.10787722]

>>10787695
Denial of AGW is an unambiguously political stance that has zero foundation in actual science (or math), which is why it belongs on /pol/.

[Anonymous No.10787724]

>>10787721
Humans produce more CO2 than volcanos do annually.

[Anonymous No.10787726]

>>10787641
Vegetation & Land: 439-450= -11
Ocean: 332-338= -6
-11 + -6 = -17
Humans: +29

Humans are the only contributing factor, you lying shitstain retard

[Anonymous No.10787727]

>>10787721
>According to the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the world'svolcanoes, both on land and undersea, generate about 200 million tons of carbon dioxide (CO2) annually, while our automotive and industrial activities cause some 24 billion tons of CO2 emissions every year worldwide

[Anonymous No.10787729]

>>10787724
you are fucking retard, one volcanic eruption can throw up more co2 than all of humanity did in the last 250 years

[Anonymous No.10787732]

>>10787721
volcanoes
put out only 0.3 Gt/year, just 1% of what people do

[Anonymous No.10787735]

>>10787729
interesting. What else can you pull out of your ass?

[Anonymous No.10787738]

>>10787727
>>10787732

one explosion in russia produced 100,000 gigatonnes
yes, hundred thousand billion tonnes
ONE
and it doesn't fucking matter that it was millions of years ago, it can happen again and there is fuckall you can do about it
and everything between us and that kind of shit is more, so these arguments are completely fucking void

[Anonymous No.10787743]

>>10787738
>>10787735

[Anonymous No.10787746]

>>10787738
>millions of years ago
but Russia didn't exist then

[Anonymous No.10787748]

>>10787743
are you seriously arguing about co2 produced by volcanic eruptions without knowing the one that caused permian-triassic extinction?
go fuck yourself with a chainsaw

[Anonymous No.10787749]

>>10787729
What volcano do you think is going to erupt that’ll release hundreds of billions of tons of CO2?

[Anonymous No.10787750]

>>10787748
no relevance today
are you retarded?

[Anonymous No.10787751]

>>10787748
If a volcano that large erupts, we have bigger problems than global warming. Until one does, this is an irrelevant factoid. A volcanic eruption comparable in scale to the Siberian traps has literally never occurred otherwise.

[Anonymous No.10787753]

>>10787750
probably his pokemon or something,
he's about 12y old

[Anonymous No.10787762]

>>10787749
probably his pokemon or something,
he's about 12y old

[Anonymous No.10787764]

>>10787751
I think he is a Siberian trap.

[Anonymous No.10787779]

>>10787718
>>10787722
>More opinions grunted out.
Warmers remain in their nut shell.

[Anonymous No.10787785]

>brest

lol

[Anonymous No.10787792]

If you're a denialist in 2019 you're a nutjob. Simple as. No ifs and buts.

[Anonymous No.10787804]

Why are people so invested in denying climate change?
I understand the ulterior motives of coal and oil billionaires and conservashit politicians, but what drives normal people to also become so emotionally invested in this topic?

[Anonymous No.10787811]

>>10787738
So you're saying that pouring massive amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere can lead to devastating mass extinctions? Big if true.

>>10787804
They've internalized climate denial as part of their political identity, which conveniently puts it outside the reach of evidence-based thinking and rationality. It's as much an article of faith for them as their stance on abortion or Jesus.

[Anonymous No.10787845]

>>10787804
>normal people
kek, amerifats are not normal, you have no idea how nuts you looked even before 2016, and now you've just fallen off the cliff

[Anonymous No.10787853]

>>10787571
It's because early spring was way too warm and everything flowered way early. This winter was actually so mild that a fig tree (in central europe, no protection what so ever) set its spring crop which is something I've never seen happen before.

[Anonymous No.10787858]

>>10787686
Are the goalposts over here..? Or maybe they're over here..? Who knows! Every day is an adventure when you talk with Warmers.

[Anonymous No.10787860]

>>10787682

[Anonymous No.10787869]

>>10787860
What do you think that graph says?

[Anonymous No.10787872]

>>10787858
This thread devolved into the autistic screeching phase fairly quickly. You would think at this point someone would realize they don't have a rational position when you can't actually defend it yourself and have to resort to crying and name calling, but that's kind of the point you clearly aren't rational.

[Anonymous No.10787875]

>>10787869
Oh I'm agreeing with you, it's just a nice graph to have.

[Anonymous No.10787880]

>>10787875
Cool. It looked like something that could be misinterpreted pretty easy.

[Anonymous No.10787886]

>>10787880
I guess expecting someone like >>10787858 to know what a - sign means is kind of a lot.

[Anonymous No.10787891]

>>10787513
>person: I think team A will win
>other person: I think team B will win
>you: I think the game will have a winner

come on, mike, get your head in the game

[Anonymous No.10787896]

It's called "climate catastrophe" the climate is in chaos, heat waves and cold snaps every other week. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that something's fucky.

[Anonymous No.10787901]

>>10787886
Unfortunately. These threads drive me more nuts than other denier threads because global warming and global cooling are both parts of climate change, the magnitude of the cooling is just miniscule compared to the warming.

[Anonymous No.10787914]

>>10787896
this :(

[Anonymous No.10787919]

>>10787886
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem
>>10787896
>the climate is in chaos, heat waves and cold snaps every other week.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias
>>10787901
>global warming and global cooling are both parts of climate change
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_even_wrong

[Anonymous No.10787931]

>>10787919
An ad hominem doesn't apply as you don't even have an argument. There's no logical fallacy in laughing at a retard.

[Anonymous No.10787956]

>>10787931
>the rules don't apply because I said so
Let me guess, you're not used to people who disagree with you being able to respond and defend themselves?

[Anonymous No.10788004]

>>10787956
Make an actual argument then clearly state your position, and it's evidence and I'll tear it apart then call you a retard again.

[Anonymous No.10788020]

>>10787956
Calling a retard like you stupid, is appropriate in this context, you stupid motherfucker.

[Anonymous No.10788034]

>>10788004
>>10788020
Is everything all right? Are you quite well?

[Anonymous No.10788053]

>>10788034
>still no argument
Based retard

[Anonymous No.10788058]

>>10787919
>Imagine being this retarded
What does the blue represent in this graph, moron? Global cooling is primarily driven by global dimming. Both are diminishing in magnitude which has the effect of bolstering warming.

[Anonymous No.10788072]

>>10788058
>no "global dimming" mentioned
>blue represents clouds
wew
>chemtrails
WEW

[Anonymous No.10788084]

>>10788072
Are you feeling okay? The blue very obviously represents cooling. The categories that provide a cooling effect are very obviously tied to dimming effects.

I say obvious, but then again you are just a frogposter.

[Anonymous No.10788146]

>>10788084
>the chemtrails are stealing my sunlight

[Anonymous No.10788158]

>>10788072
>>10788146
this made my day s, a dumbass who doesn't know what a contrail is.

[Anonymous No.10788175]

>>10788158
fwiw you're both right, certain chemtrails really are designed to increase cloud cover

[Anonymous No.10788207]

>>10787931
>An ad hominem doesn't apply as you don't even have an argument.
1: declare someone does not have an argument
2: attack by ad hominem
3: declare this is not ad hominem because of 1.

Do you see how ridiculous this is?

[Anonymous No.10788255]

>>10788207
You COULD resolve all this by doing this >>10788004
Or you could keep doing what you're doing and I can keep calling you a retard.

[Anonymous No.10788268]

>>10787548
Cope harder, please.

[Anonymous No.10788277]

>>10788255
>still tantruming that nobody's listening to him even though mom said he was in charge

[Anonymous No.10788297]

>>10788255
It was a simple yes/no question and you decided to worm yourself out of it. Not impressed.

[Anonymous No.10788432]

>>10788146
Are you illiterate? It says contrails.

[Anonymous No.10788526]

>>10788297
No I don't see how making fun of some retard who can't even post an argument is ridiculous. Though It is kind of ridiculous that you can't. Probably should tell you something about your beliefs.

[Anonymous No.10788559]

Best way to deal with troll threads like this is to overtake them to discuss interesting developments in climate action.
Did anyone read the recent paper that claims that planting a trillion trees is feasible?
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/jul/04/planting-billions-trees-best-tackle-climate-crisis-scientists-canopy-emissions

[Anonymous No.10788567]

>>10788526
It is disturbing to see warmers build their position on sheer contempt. In real sciences one has to address the issues, not attack the opponent as retard as the first or even last option.

[Anonymous No.10788569]

>>10788526
>thinks Ad hominem is about being polite

[Anonymous No.10788582]

>>10788559
>Did anyone read the recent paper that claims that planting a trillion trees is feasible?
I read it. And there are many aspects I find strange. First of all the tropic are usually rain forests and are thus already covered in trees. The text suggests we can plant trees there as if there were none earlier. Secondly in many of the drier areas water is already hard to get, how to do this when we cannot even provide drinking water to humans? Also, what about diversity in nature? Covering everything in trees will eliminate the prairies, the savannas and more. Finally, trees do not grown forever, at one point they fall and rot, releasing CO2 or, if in water, methane. A lot more work has to be done.

Meanwhile iron salting of barren seas is not permitted.

[Anonymous No.10788587]

What??? Temperatures fluctuate??? That means that climate change is fake, because it was getting hotter last month but now it's getting colder!!! SCIENCE DEBUNKED.

[Anonymous No.10788591]

>>10788567
You're not even an opponent, you're a delusional retard fed with so much propaganda you're incapable of critical thinking or rational thought.

[Anonymous No.10789574]

>1 week, all-time record highs
>next week, all-time record lows
>climate change deniers: "This is normal!"

[Anonymous No.10790007]

>>10788591
>Point out contempt
>Be called delusional
Please.

[Anonymous No.10790040]

>>10788591

Jesus i hope this is supposed to be ironic

[Anonymous No.10790055]

>>10789574
>all interesting weather is caused by global warming
>therefore all interesting weather is evidence of global warming
Fortunately that's not how science works. You've got to make specific, falsifiable predictions. Otherwise your alpha- and p-vaues become astronomical after Bonferroni correction.

Pic related, it's a snowstorm in Arabia... in 1979.

[Anonymous No.10790351]

>>10788567
What issues were not addressed?

[Anonymous No.10790354]

>>10790055
The only ones saying weather is evidence of anything are the deniers. Global warming is already proven, we are just seeing the results.

[Anonymous No.10790946]

>>10790354
>Global warming is already proven,
How do you prove something in science? See >>10790055 again.