What say you, Denialists?

[Imnot Arobot No.10890525]

>The Arctic is warming twice as fast as the rest of the planet,
>and after the hottest June ever recorded on Earth, the region is literally on fire.
https://www.sciencealert.com/unprecedented-wildfires-are-ravaging-the-arctic-and-the-images-from-space-are-astonishing

[Anonymous No.10890526]

https://www.upi.com/Science_News/2019/07/25/Arctic-wildfires-continue-to-burn-releasing-record-amounts-of-CO2/8291564058758/

[Anonymous No.10890534]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2019/08/13/five-takeaways-posts-analysis-warming-climates-united-states/

[Anonymous No.10890541]

>>10890525
>the region is literally on fire
>literally on fire
>literally

[Anonymous No.10890544]

>>10890534
>Warming is very uneven
>Large regions show clear and strong warming signals
>When it comes to the Northeast, the winter season has been transformed
>Some of the fastest-warming regions have very few people living in them.
>Others, though, are highly populated
>These changes are already having major impacts, which vary depending on the location

[Anonymous No.10890556]

>>10890525
humans are adaptable, who cares. we need less undesirables anyway. keeping the weak alive is the reason the west is dying

[Anonymous No.10890568]

>>10890556
>the west is dying
[citation needed]

[Anonymous No.10890577]

>>10890568
>(((citation)))

[Anonymous No.10890584]

>>10890577
>>10890285

[Anonymous No.10890589]

>>10890525 Siberia as well
https://time.com/5641751/arctic-wildfires-heatwaves-alaska-climate-change/

These are the feedback loops people were and are warning about.

[Anonymous No.10890590]

>>10890584
nice blog

[Anonymous No.10890596]

>>10890584
Well, in that case you must be a blithering homosexing ass spelunking hobo, because clear observations made my nobody but myself establishes that as fact

[Anonymous No.10890607]

>>10890596
>you must be
no U

[Anonymous No.10890614]

>>10890568
>i only believe things if a man in a white coat with a magic piece of paper tells it to me
and science isn't a religion ?

[Anonymous No.10890626]

>>10890614
>believe things
science is not a matter of belief, religifag

[Anonymous No.10890628]

>>10890589
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zBH5M9eYCw4

[Anonymous No.10890631]

>>10890626
>what are axioms

[Anonymous No.10890633]

>>10890626
LOL this is even worse, then. You don't just have faith that what you're told is true, you blindly accept it as fact. Because a man in a white coat with a magic piece of paper said it. Do you even know what the scientific method is?

[Anonymous No.10890634]

>>10890631
>what is Philosophy 101

[Anonymous No.10890636]

>>10890633
>You don't just have faith
>you blindly accept it
>Do you even know
no U

[Anonymous No.10890639]

>>10890634
>still can't disprove that axioms are a matter of belief, not proven fact

[Anonymous No.10890640]

>>10890628
>summer of 2019 has seen the worst Arctic wildfires on record,
>and climate scientists predict that it will only get worse in the years to come
https://www.highnorthnews.com/en/wildfires-ravage-arctic

[Anonymous No.10890641]

>>10890636
formulate a sentence autismo nobody knows what you're trying to communicate

[Anonymous No.10890643]

>>10890639
>can't disprove
>not proven fact
not in science, philosophag

[Anonymous No.10890644]

>>10890641
>you're trying
no U

[Anonymous No.10890647]

>>10890614
>>10890633
>a man in a white coat with a magic piece of paper
Why do you superstitious fifteenth-century Peasants infest the /sci/ence board??

[Anonymous No.10890650]

>>10890643
>resorting to a semantics argument
game set match

[Anonymous No.10890653]

GOOD, LET THE WORLD BURN!

[Anonymous No.10890655]

>>10890650
semantics are what distinguish you from the other apes

[Anonymous No.10890659]

>>10890647
fifteenth century peasants had more respect for the scientific method than modern credentialists

[Anonymous No.10890672]

>>10890633
>>10890659
>*the* scientific method
News Flash for the Scientific Illiterati: there are *many* scientific methods,
each of which are used by actual /sci/entists around the world daily.

[Anonymous No.10890677]

>>10890653

[Anonymous No.10890679]

>>10890672
I'm not talking about the methods which involve sacrificing babies to Moloch, I'm talking about THE scientific method. There is only one.

[Anonymous No.10890680]

>>10890655
I have a higher standard for determining what's human and what's not

[Anonymous No.10890688]

>>10890679
>THE scientific method. There is only one.
the Scientific Illiterati: there are *many* left over from the fifteenth century

[Anonymous No.10890689]

>>10890680
>I have a higher standard
...but you can't explain it?

[Anonymous No.10890699]

>>10890689
>please explain to me i have autism
pass

[Anonymous No.10890701]

>>10890699
maybe your semantics just aren't good enough

[Anonymous No.10890707]

>>10890701
>your

[Anonymous No.10890723]

>>10890707
it's spelled 'your' you retard

[Anonymous No.10890727]

>>10890723

[Anonymous No.10890748]

>>10890679
>There is only one.

Come with a hypotheses (i.e., your fantasy of how something works)
Find evidence or create reproducible experiment to prove hypotheses
???
PROFIT

[Anonymous No.10890760]

>>10890688
which method involves simply taking the word of a man in a white coat with a magic piece of paper?

[Anonymous No.10890786]

>>10890525
Nobody denies the climate changes. It has always changed. CO2 being the main cause is funny though. Same with the idea that the world will end in 10 years because of cow farts or whatever the fuck. A bunch of groupthink bullshit peddled by jewy corporations and governments. You're a naïve retard if you buy into the alarmism of it.

Why don't you post actual sources? Trendy leftist corporate media articles are not worth reading.

[Anonymous No.10890787]

>>10890748
You're arguing with an NPC.

[Anonymous No.10890794]

>omg the arctic is literally on fire because evil whites release co2 into the atmosphere!!
>look! Dr. Goldberg says the earth will be under water in 10 years if we dont establish a world government!
Why are here, uneducated faggot?

[Anonymous No.10890797]

>>10890786
Way to skirt around the issue

[Anonymous No.10890803]

>>10890760
That would be the superstitious fifteenth-century Peasant method.

[Anonymous No.10890805]

>>10890607
Now you see the flaw in your argument, I hope

[Anonymous No.10890807]

>>10890797
What issue? The planet has experienced global cooling and global warming periods. Even if we assume global war- sorry, climate change is man made, there's nothing we can realistically do about it to fix it besides establishing a totalitarian world government. Its a scam anyways, but keep believing in it because you're a good little citizen who holds all the fashionable opinions.

[Anonymous No.10890813]

>>10890786
>Why don't you spoon-feed me actual sources?
here you go, Floormonkey:
https://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/

[Anonymous No.10890819]

>>10890803
Which is the method used by most people today. The idea that climate change may be due to other phenomenon like sun spots isn't even mentioned in the mainstream, much less debated. All the good little goy swine believe what CNN and Vox tell them to because of "Science!".

[Anonymous No.10890821]

>>10890805
>blithering homosexing ass spelunking hobo
not an argument

[Anonymous No.10890825]

>>10890807
No. I believe it because I have a degree in Earth science and have seen and understood the evidence myself. But keep believing the fat orange clown in the White House.

[Anonymous No.10890828]

>>10890813
>redditor doesnt know what a source is
Your memes are fucking gay too. Even your own shitty "source" admits modern climate trends may not even be manmade. You're such a fucking pseudointellectual, why are you on this board? Take your pop science back to r3ddit and stay there to degenerate in your groupthink idiocy.

[Anonymous No.10890830]

>>10890807
The "issue" is that the planet is in immediate danger of mass extinction and eradication of civilization, probably more of an inevitability.

[Anonymous No.10890833]

>>10890819
>sun spots
see Climate Myth numbers 2, 90, 118, 143, 158
https://skepticalscience.com/argument.php

[Anonymous No.10890837]

>>10890825
>it because I have a degree in Earth science
Cool, you have a worthless meme undergrad degree which doesnt even teach you enough to actually understand the underlying phenomenon behind the hypothesis of manmade climate change.
>ORANGE MAN BAD
As if it weren't already painfully obvious that you are a low IQ Vox subscriber.

[Anonymous No.10890838]

>>10890828
>fucking gay
>shitty "source"
>such a fucking pseudointellectual
>your groupthink idiocy
no U

[Anonymous No.10890841]

>>10890830
>The "issue" is that the planet is in immediate danger of mass extinction and eradication of civilization, probably more of an inevitability
According to AOC. Sorry, but you're part of a doomsday cult. Weak minds fall for that sort of thing.

[Anonymous No.10890850]

>>10890833
Nice pop science website. Blow it out your ass, faggot.

[Anonymous No.10890852]

>>10890838
Are you going to cite bill nye next?

[Anonymous No.10890853]

>10890841
God damnit, this is actually what half of America believes. We're screwed, game over.

[Anonymous No.10890858]

>>10890819
>I know the method used by most people today
No, you do not.

[Anonymous No.10890864]

>>10890852
Are you going to cite anything but your own ill-informed unfounded opinion?

[Anonymous No.10890874]

>>10890858
Oh, so you are saying that the average goy swine who believes in climate change digs into the hundreds or thousands of complex studies regarding global warm- i mean climat change? No, of course not. They're low info, gullible and trusting, like this goy >>10890853

[Anonymous No.10890876]

>>10890864
Sorry for being skeptical of pop science, maybe you would be too if you stopped paying attention to Vox or steven colbert like an NPC.

[Anonymous No.10890894]

>>10890874
>so you are saying «some fiction about the average goy swine»
>>>/pol/catalog

[Anonymous No.10890898]

>>10890876
popsci is garbage, but denialism is worse

[Anonymous No.10890900]

>>10890525
Nice, i would love some warmer climate.

[Anonymous No.10890901]

>>10890894
Your corporate media sensationalist pop science would be more at home in a /pol/ bait thread.

[Anonymous No.10890906]

>>10890841
>a doomsday cult
It's way more credible than Christianity

[Anonymous No.10890910]

>>10890901
«you» seem to know a lot about /pol/ bait threads

[Anonymous No.10890915]

>>10890898
What is "denialism"? Not blindly agreeing with the mainstream narrative for fear of being called names? Good, then I'm a denialist. Fuck you if you believe something because multinational billionaire elitist think tanks and corporations promote it. If you've actually delved into the hard science on both sides of the debate then I can respect you, but most people who talk about global warmi- sorry, climate change, are unironic vox subsribers who support AOC.

[Anonymous No.10890921]

>>10890910
>1 thing = knowing a lot
No wonder you think the world will end in 12 years because of cow farts, you incredible retard.

Also pol is living in your head rent free.

[Anonymous No.10890927]

>>10890906
And judaisme and other organized religions. But you didnt mention those because that would be politically incorrect.

[Anonymous No.10890928]

>>10890915
>the debate
...is a non-existent smoke screen provided by the coal, gas, and
oil companies who call their business "Energy" because it sounds cleaner

[Anonymous No.10890934]

>>10890921
>cow farts
...is a source of methane seized upon by denialists as some sort of triumphal discovery

[Anonymous No.10890935]

>>10890915
This man is right Cigarettes are safe and don't cause cancer.

[Anonymous No.10890943]

>>10890915
>Fuck you if you believe something I don't
understood

[Anonymous No.10890949]

>>10890927
I didn't mention them because I assumed that was your belief system. Religions are all equally wrong.

[Anonymous No.10890952]

>>10890935
You have poor reading comprehension. I believe cigs are bad and can increase chance of health problems but not because it is the maindtream narrative.

I don't believe vaping is healthier though, which is the mainstream narrative. Haven't seen any sources on this.

[Anonymous No.10890957]

>>10890934
Oh wow, cow farts have CH4 in them? Dude, science is EPIC!

It's also what AOC's doomsday cult followers believe.

[Anonymous No.10890961]

>>10890949
>I didn't mention them because I assumed that was your belief system.
Well you're pretty prejudice. You must be far right.

[Anonymous No.10890962]

I literally don't care. I want the world to end.

I hope the icecaps melt and everyone dies.

[Anonymous No.10890963]

>>10890928
Lol

>>10890943
Are you esl or do you just not read books?

[Anonymous No.10890970]

>>10890962
>I hope the icecaps melt and everyone dies.
This will happen but not cuz of muh co2 or muh cow farts

[Anonymous No.10890972]

>>10890957
>I know what AOC's doomsday cult followers believe
No, you do not.

[Anonymous No.10890978]

>>10890972
Yes I do, they believe the world will end in 12 years because bad white people are putting co2 into the atmosphere and are eating too much meat and not enough soyy. They also believe socialism would work because they are mostly children.

[Anonymous No.10890979]

>>10890961
No, just statistically minded. Brohammy said AOC which means he's in the US, which means he's probably Christian, and implied his opposition to AOC and global warming, which means he's probably right wing which is a demographic comprised of mostly Christians. Git gud, anon

[Anonymous No.10890985]

>>10890978
We should honestly accelerate white genocide.

[Anonymous No.10890986]

>>10890970
see Climate Myth numbers 30, 34, 42, 47, 59, 94, 101, 140, 146, 167, 181
https://skepticalscience.com/argument.php

[Anonymous No.10890987]

>>10890978
>Yes I do, because Fox News says what they believe

[Anonymous No.10890994]

>>10890979
>which means he's in the US, which means he's probably Christian
Both wrong.
>and implied his opposition to AOC and global warming, which means he's probably right wing which is a demographic comprised of mostly Christians
Also totally wrong and you're not even statistically accurate. You are just prejudice, as I said. AOC is a far left judtice dem, many "left wingers" also agree shes a buffoon.

You probably did badly in stats and are a millenial who reads corporate media. It isnt 2001 anymore, you are stuck in the past. Being skeptical of the mainstream neo-liberal narrative is analogous to being skeptical of the Bush neo-cons when you were still young and hip. The paradigm has shifted and in your prejudice it left you behind.

[Anonymous No.10891000]

>>10890986
>pop science chart
2/10

Gotta laugh at the ironic site name though.

[Anonymous No.10891004]

>>10890525

So in 10 years when there is record breaking cold are you going to say THAT too proves man made climate change?

[Anonymous No.10891006]

>>10890987
I don't watch any corporate media, unlike you. I've communicated with her followers and read her proposals and heard her low iq followers talk. It's absolutely what she believes, she mentions it at her events and her fans start screaming. It isn't up fkr debate.

[Anonymous No.10891013]

>>10890985
Why? "White" people are the only one's stopping the West from becoming another 3rd world shithole.

[Anonymous No.10891014]

>>10891000
it's a sincere effort to condense scientific information for the general population
https://skepticalscience.com/about.shtml

[Anonymous No.10891016]

>>10891014
It's a joke and you fell for it because you're a moron who watches colbert.

[Anonymous No.10891021]

>>10891006
>I read her proposals and heard her low iq followers talk, so I know what they believe

[Anonymous No.10891022]

>>10890994
You can look up the statistics if you'd like, but I think the point of this is more to distract from the rest of this thread and to attempt to demonize me and thereby whatever demographic you think I represent

[Anonymous No.10891025]

>>10891016
>you're a moron
no U

[Anonymous No.10891038]

>>10891022
I'm not demonizing you, just humiliating you by exposing your prejudice and educating you on how out of touch youve become.

[Anonymous No.10891040]

>>10891004
They already did that. In 2009 they said man made climate change was reason for the record colds and that we will enter a new ice age.

[Anonymous No.10891043]

>>10891021
Correct. Her followers believe the world will end in 12 years because of cow farts and co2.

[Anonymous No.10891053]

>>10891040
see Climate Myths numbers 55 and 151
https://skepticalscience.com/argument.php

[Anonymous No.10891060]

>>10891038
Well, you're wrong on all accounts and you chose to "humiliate" me for making assumptions by making a bunch of assumptions. I don't think you've quite earned a gold star.

[Anonymous No.10891073]

>>10891053
Thanks for backing up his valid point, shill.

[Anonymous No.10891084]

>>10891060
>Well, you're wrong on all accounts
Saying this is merely a coping mechanism. I am accurate in saying you are out of touch and living in the past. You are the mainstream now.

[Anonymous No.10891087]

>>10891043
It looks like she was engaging in some kind of hyperbole:
>"Millennials and Gen Z and all these folks that come after us are looking up,
>and we're like, 'The world is going to end in 12 years if we don't address
>climate change, and your biggest issue is how are we gonna pay for it?' " she said.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2019/01/22/ocasio-cortez-climate-change-alarm/2642481002/

[Anonymous No.10891088]

>>10891004
>present day
>actually 100 years ago
Nice graph retard.

[Anonymous No.10891092]

>>10891073
>backing up his valid point
zero-for-two

[Anonymous No.10891097]

>>10891087
Yes, I can see why you might think that. It can be difficult to tell if she's joking or not. She is a parody of herself.

[Anonymous No.10891101]

>>10891092
Libcucks fucking BTFO

[Anonymous No.10891102]

>>10891053
Do you have literal retard reading comprehension? It's not me who is using the 2009 cold as an argument against global warming, it's climate "scientists" who used the 2009 cold as an argument against global warming, they claimed we're about to hit an ice age back then. Now it's the very same climate "scientists" that say we're about to enter some desert armaggedon, the very same who claimed we will enter an ice age just a decade ago.

Your prophets are flip flopping and making shit up on the fly whenever some climate extreme supports their narrative.

[Anonymous No.10891106]

>>10891084
Nope, you're wrong about that one too. Try projecting less next time.

[Anonymous No.10891113]

>>10891102
Is the reason you put scientists in quotes because you actually mean journalists and politicians?

[Anonymous No.10891114]

Wild fires???? Wild frickin fires? This is unacceptable. We must put them out. They are LITTERALLY gonna destroy peoples homes, and like we frickin started it so unless we put a stop to it, it will destroy nature. MAN STARTED IT. MAN CAN STOP THE PROBLEM. How? we need to douse them with bajillions of tons of diammonium phosphate and corrosion inhibitors. epic science! people's frickin houses are going to burn down. man > nature. forest fires are like fucking unnatural too. They never happened before freakin humans ruined everything. Like I always tell my bros, 1 lives lost is too many lost. I wanted to shoutout, thank you, thank you good firing fighting sirs for putting up the good fight because without you like, wildfires would spread to the suburbs (suburbia represent), and guess fucking what? they would all catch fire. woooosshhhhhh. burn to a crisp. I FUCKING HATE FOREST FIRES. they must be stopped. they must. they remind me of the hell I don't believe in.

[Anonymous No.10891116]

>>10891102
No scientist has ever made that claim. You're probably confusing something you heard about global cooling.

[Anonymous No.10891122]

>>10891106
Your opinion is irrelevant. The idea that only right wing christards are against far leftism and are skeptical of climate alarmism is incorrect. It would have been accurate 20 years ago though, when you were still young and hip. Most of the hippy leftists of that era sold out though.

[Anonymous No.10891130]

>>10891122
I never made that assertion, my boy. Like I said try projecting less next time.

[Anonymous No.10891133]

>>10891114
This, also I apolohise on behalf of white people for the mass extinctions and climate catastrophes which scientific theories have LITERALLY PROVEN are going to happen.

[Anonymous No.10891136]

>>10891102
see Climate Myth number 14
https://skepticalscience.com/argument.php

[Anonymous No.10891142]

>>10891130
>I never made that assertion
Correct, you were just prejudice on that basis. Armchair psychology and pop science? You are a pseudointellectual, my boy (or girl, i can tell youre female).

[Anonymous No.10891152]

>>10891101
• Skeptical Science is not backing him up
• his point is invalid
zero-for-two

[Anonymous No.10891164]

>>10891142
Wew, lad. Wrong on all counts again. When I say less projection don't double down instead. That's just going to be embarrassing for you.

[Anonymous No.10891165]

>>10891152
>Skeptical Science is not backing him up
Irrelevant
>his point is invalid
Your opinion is irrelevant.

[Anonymous No.10891169]

>>10891164
Oh sorry, you just sound like a massive pussy who isn't in hard stem, so you were statistically likely to be female. I guess you're just a low t soyy boy.

[Anonymous No.10891172]

>>10891116
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_climate_change_science
>For the century ahead, however, a survey of the scientific literature from 1965 to 1979 found 7 articles predicting cooling and 44 predicting warming

This shit has been going on forever, "climate scientists" have claimed both and whatever hypothesis supports the current narrative is the one that will be used to propagate.

>>10891136
Kek, is this an image board A.I.? Is it just going through buzzwords and posts the relevant "argument.php"?

[Anonymous No.10891181]

vast majority of "global warming" is from natural sources of methane, such as some species of ocean floor microbes that release it
t. climatologist

[Anonymous No.10891185]

>>10891169
Again you couldn't be farther off. The soi boi meme in particular outs this tantrum as baseless projection. Are you just collecting (you)s now?

[Anonymous No.10891196]

>>10891172
>from 1965 to 1979
scientists have learned a lot in the past forty years
>7 articles predicting cooling and 44 predicting warming
86% predicting warming -- forty years ago

[Anonymous No.10891206]

>>10891172
>from 1965 to 1979
Oh, you mean when the oil companies were spending the most on climate research? Do you have anything more recent than half a century?

[Anonymous No.10891209]

>>10891181
see Climate Myths numbers 56, 78, 177
https://skepticalscience.com/argument.php

[Anonymous No.10891218]

>>10891181
The deniers are evolving

[Anonymous No.10891225]

>>10891209
>>10891218

[Anonymous No.10891230]

>>10891225
I know you're just being contrarian for the memes, at least, I hope you are, but it's not funny. This issue is literally about the future of humanity.

[Anonymous No.10891247]

typical climate thread, rational people are posting arguments with facts and sources while deniercucks autistically screech because even they don't believe the bullshit they've been fed glad to see some things never change

[Anonymous No.10891253]

>>10891196
Climate scientists have learned absolutely nothing because they still can't accurately predict fucking anything just like 40 years ago. They're a bunch of shills that get paid to make up shit to rake in tree hugger bux and they've finally succeeded in their main gig with the Co2 tax.

>>10891206
Oil companies? It's climate nostradamus that's forcing me to pay taxes for some glorified hydromancy that's not beyond hypothetical stage, not oil companies. Not only is it my own choice if i want to buy oil or not, but if i buy oil at least i get from A to B. What do i get from climate faggots? Jackshit. And in 30 years when even the lowest IQ cucks like you have finally realized that humans didn't do shit to climate, the people who enriched themselves with Co2 taxes will be long dead or gone and they won't be held accountable, neither will the subhumans in India, China and Africa who recieve a chunk of that money for "development" purposes but will keep blasting Co2 anyways. How fucking convenient, might as well call it climate communism because of how amazingly similar this type of wealth distribution is.

[Anonymous No.10891274]

>>10891253
>can't predict anything
models are looking spot on, where's your source for this?

[Anonymous No.10891312]

>>10891274
Alright, today i will publish a dozen predictions that the climate will increase or decrease somewhere around 0°c-3°c in the next 30 years, and in the future i will pull out the one that overlaps the most with the actual change. Look i'm a scientist now!

[Anonymous No.10891339]

>>10891312
>this is what denialtards actually believe
Well enjoy yourself.

[Anonymous No.10891343]

>>10890525
ohmegawd
ohnooooooes
we need the "optimal" carbon tax right now or this might affect our ecomonic/population growf and reduce our consumerism ohno no nooooes.

[Anonymous No.10891346]

>>10891312
Not even close to the image so once again where is your source? Surely you aren't just talking out of your ass right?

[Anonymous No.10891398]

>>10891339
Believe? That's how predictions work. Someone will always be right if there are enough predictions made.

>>10891346
Of course i am pulling shit out of my ass, that's the whole point, how else would i do a realistic impersonation of a climate scientist?

[Anonymous No.10891406]

>>10891398
once again no source or anything else supporting your nonsense just like every denier cuck. Do you ever get tired of regurgitating lies?

[Anonymous No.10891410]

>>10891406
Kek, i literally just admitted i am pulling shit out of my ass the same way climate scientists do, are you stupid?

[Anonymous No.10891415]

>>10891410
glad we can agree you're a waste of oxygen.

[Anonymous No.10891435]

>>10891415
Cool. But since we're at the topic of sources, how about you drop a source of a climate model that can accurately predict every single day from now on everywhere on earth? You know how weather forecasts can be, since climate scientists are so very accurate their model surely can help me out to tell me what exact climate i can expect tomorrow in my area? What exact temperature at what exact hour? Exact amount of humidity too. Also exact amount of rainfall and wind intensity. Every single aspect please and only accurate numbers.

[Anonymous No.10891443]

>>10891435
>asks for climate model to predict weather
I already knew you were a complete fucking retard but could you turn it down just a little?

[Anonymous No.10891479]

>>10891443
Yes? How can you accurately predict the climate if you can't predict every single aspect of it? Weather is a part of climate isn't it? At least temperature? You'd think they can at least accurately predict the temperature, the same value they use in every meme graph.

[Anonymous No.10891489]

>>10891479
>How can you predict the distribution of many coin flips if you can't even predict one coin flip?
I honestly can't tell if you're retarded or trolling.

[Anonymous No.10891490]

>>10891443
at least he knows the climate and weather models are more or less the same models...
>>10891479
you're a fucking idiot. that is all

[Anonymous No.10891497]

>>10891479
Why do you post about scientific topics you have not even a basic understanding of?

https://skepticalscience.com/weather-forecasts-vs-climate-models-predictions-intermediate.htm

[Anonymous No.10891500]

>>10891497
if he had a basic understanding of climate science he wouldn't be a denier-cuck.

[Anonymous No.10891503]

>>10891497
>skepticalscience
I wish people would stop posting links to this, not because its innacurate, but because the guy who runs the site is a massive faggot

[Anonymous No.10891526]

>>10891503
Did he fuck your ass?

[Anonymous No.10891530]

>>10891526
no but he fucked yours
he made you his little bitch
that's why you always shill his site

[Anonymous No.10891532]

>>10890541
>>the region is literally on fire

[Anonymous No.10891537]

>>10891489
Are you the retarded one is my question. If you can't predict even a single coin flip of all the future coin flips correctly then your prediction model is not exact, because exact means 100% probability. What else do you think do words like exact or accurate mean?

[Anonymous No.10891540]

>>10891530
Do you have a better option?

[Anonymous No.10891556]

>>10891537
you're not smart enough to understand the concept of "models".

[Anonymous No.10891557]

>>10891537
>If you can't predict even a single coin flip of all the future coin flips correctly then your prediction model is not exact
No empirical predictions are exact, so your argument is just a pointless red herring. As usual, retarded deniers have nothing but fallacious reasoning and misrepresentations.

[Anonymous No.10891565]

>>10891540
It might be better to just paraphrase or know your shit well enough to go directly to the original sources
its a shame the defacto internet compendium for persuading denialtards has to be run by such a massive twat.

[Anonymous No.10891580]

>>10891565
Anyone you would be arguing with is not capable of the mental faculties for reading the original sources.

[Anonymous No.10891590]

>>10891580
I hate nerds

[Anonymous No.10891607]

>>10891590
But you love getting fucked in the ass

[Anonymous No.10891631]

>>10891556
I surely understand the concept of models which is why i know that no climate model is exact, therefore none of my previous statements have ever been incorrect, because that's all i've been claiming.

>>10891557
My only argument was that climate models are not exact. Where is the fallacy? Either something is exact or it is not.

Fuck man, why does it take 5 posts to make you understand that my whole point is that climate science is not exact. Man it's hard to discuss things with low IQ subhumans.

[Anonymous No.10891642]

>>10891631
models are not exact. that's why they are fucking MODELS.

Which concept are you having trouble understanding here:
EXACT
or
MODELS

You are fucking retarded. I fucking hate you.

[Anonymous No.10891660]

>>10891642
Exactly. Climate models, just like all models, are not exact. That's what i've been telling you. Thank god you got it now.

[Anonymous No.10891665]

>>10891660
> Climate models, just like all models, are not exact.

So?

[Anonymous No.10891698]

>>10891660

[Anonymous No.10891709]

Could have spread clean cheap nuclear fission to the entire world. We don't because nuclear proliferation would undo the nuclear imperialism of the cold war. Peace would break out across the world. As no cou try can be attacked for fear of effective retaliation.

[Anonymous No.10891712]

>>10891665
It means climate models just like the rest of climate sciences are near useless, they're on the same level as a casino. What kind of probabilities do climate models even have? If it's below the probability of your IQ being below average you might as well kill yourself now for shilling this garbage.

[Anonymous No.10891716]

>>10891712
Models are used to test structures in engineering as well (among many many other applications). Why aren't you crusading against those types of models as well? They're not exact either.

[Anonymous No.10891717]

>>10891712
>What kind of probabilities do climate models even have?
Oh so you haven’t checked out any of the models yourself but claim to be an authority on their accuracy. Interesting.

[Anonymous No.10891718]

>>10891712
>It's not perfect so it's garbage.
You do realize you are on a board for science and math right now correct?

[Anonymous No.10891743]

>>10891717
I've seen the models graphs to know they're not 100%, i'm not going to waste my time to look up some casino climate models, now you can choose to tell me the probabilities, or you don't.

>>10891716
Because engineers aren't the ones coming for my tax money based on a probabilities. I pay them taxes for structures they've actually delivered, not for models of possible structures that might be or not be build thirty years in the future.

[Anonymous No.10891750]

>>10891743
>I pay them taxes for structures they've actually delivered, not for models of possible structures that might be or not be build thirty years in the future.
Can't tell if unbelievably stupid or hasn't payed taxes in years.

[Anonymous No.10891767]

>>10891750
I don't know about you but i live in a place where hired companies who build things for the state need to deliver or get fucked. If that's not the case in your country, you get ripped off, in that case i would speak out against those engineers and also the politicians who support these kind of engineers just like i do against climate scientists.

[Anonymous No.10891770]

>>10891767
>I'm stupid.
Say no more friend.

[Anonymous No.10891773]

>>10891770
So you like paying for shit that's not delivered in the end? Why aren't you sitting in a casino now? What a good consumer pig.

[Anonymous No.10891778]

>>10891773
>I'm also kindof an asshole.
We don't need your life story pal.

[Anonymous No.10891784]

>>10891778
You can insult me, but you know i'm right. The climate industry is ripping you off and you defend them to top it off. What a sad existence.

[Anonymous No.10891787]

>>10891784
You know there are also industries that profit off of climate denial right?

[Anonymous No.10891819]

>>10891784
>The climate industry
>The
>climate
>industry

[Anonymous No.10891884]

>>10891787
When did i say i am against them making profit? I am not, the climate industry can make as much profit as they want, so can the oil industry, in fact i encourage their competition because competition is good for the economy, however the climate industry is the one that's forcefully trying to get into my pocket through arbitrary Co2 taxes

>>10891819
Yes. A pretty big one even at this point.

[Anonymous No.10891895]

>It's snowing early this year!
Climate is not weather.
>It's hotter than usual this summer
Climate is weather. Now enact all of these solutions that don't actually do any good by our own estimates.

The only thing being denied are the shitty arguments and shittier policy proposals.

[Anonymous No.10891901]

>>10891819
Are you denying that people make feel good products, like electric cars that are charged by coal power plants, for subsidies?

[Anonymous No.10891908]

>>10890525
Who cares, most policies to "fix it" are fucking retarded. I rather debate with someone who doesn't believe because I can atleast reason with them instead of hippies who think signing papers and singing kumbaya does anything. If we are serious we switch the grid over to gen 4 nuclear, curb the population in places like Africa and encourage a less consumerist lifestyle.

[Anonymous No.10891910]

>>10891884
You can insult me, but you know i'm right. The fossil fuel industry is ripping you off and you defend them to top it off. What a sad existence.

[Anonymous No.10892191]

>>10890653
i don't want to set the world on fiiiiiiiire
i just want to start a flame in your heart

[Anonymous No.10892193]

>>10890680
the fuck happened here

[Anonymous No.10892229]

>>10891716
Because when the structure models fail, the consequences would be disastrous for many people. However, when climate models fail, they would just be written off as part of the research process. As long as funding is secured, the scientists won't experience any repercussions.

[Anonymous No.10892275]

>>10892193
Hot chocolate

[Anonymous No.10892279]

>>10891884
This guy is right

>>10891910
You're immature and not a rational thinker, which is no doubt why you passionately defend pop-science alarmism pushed by billionaires, corporations and governments.

[Anonymous No.10892286]

>>10891642
The ideas that massive centralizations of power should be instituted and people should pay hard-earned money and governments should start strangulating economies based on some flimsy models is fucking retarded and you should stop using this board if you believe that.

>>10891712
>If it's below the probability of your IQ being below average you might as well kill yourself now for shilling this garbage.
Lel

[Anonymous No.10892619]

>>10892286
>The ideas that massive centralizations of power should be instituted and people should pay hard-earned money
Taxes already exist. I guess you're not old enough to know that.

>and governments should start strangulating economies based on some flimsy models
The irony is that you're the one trying to damage the economy by letting global warming go unmitigated, based on nothing at all. Let's all ignore the massive amounts of scientific research and economics that tell us a carbon tax is necessary and trust this shitposting anon who can't even come up with a coherent argument.

[Anonymous No.10892628]

>>10892229
>Because when the structure models fail, the consequences would be disastrous for many people.
How does that answer the question? Do you trust imperfect engineering models or not?

>they would just be written off as part of the research process.
LOL you just argued their failure would mean the destruction of the economy.

[Anonymous No.10892630]

>>10891895
t. doesn't understand how averages work

[Anonymous No.10892638]

>>10891884
>blames carbon taxes on clean energy instead of the industry causing global warming and killing millions of people a year via air pollution
LOL you can't make this shit up.

[Anonymous No.10892649]

>>10890534
>asphalt and concrete leads to huge increases in temperature in urban areas
>”must be global warming guise!!!”

[Anonymous No.10892660]

>>10892649
>yet another long debunked denier meme
https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2012JD018509

Can you answer my question here >>10891497

[Anonymous No.10892778]

>>10890807
1.) there is no climate change <---
2.) there is climate change but it's not human-made <---
3.) human-made climate change is real but it only hits the shithole countries anyway, it's actually good for us
4.) it's real but we're fucked <--- anyway with all these assholes around, nothing you can do
5.) geo-engineering will fix it soon, no need to change anything now
6.) ok, geo-engineering made it worse but now we learned and can stop it(it's too late)
7.) fucking leftists destroyed the world, as expected

Is /sci/ seeing this? This is a very unique form of /pol/ stupidity. It's a type of cognitive dissonance only seen in the hardiest of mongs. Wow.

[Anonymous No.10892792]

>>10891114
Get a job. Get friends. Leave the house and actually try to hold a conversation with mom.

[Anonymous No.10892865]

>>10891901
EVs in coal based grids like West Virginia still produce less CO2 than an ICE. And in grids that utilize nuclear or renewables they're much much much better.

[Anonymous No.10893020]

>>10892286
>The ideas that massive centralizations of power should be instituted and people should pay hard-earned money and governments should start strangulating economies based on some flimsy models is fucking retarded and you should stop using this board if you believe that.
>I can't believe my insurance company charges me so much just for riding a motorcycle even though they can't tell which exact motorcycle trip will kill me.

[Anonymous No.10893031]

Debunk this >>10893015

[Anonymous No.10893071]

>>10892660
I’m not reading your shill study faggot

[Anonymous No.10893118]

>>10890525
Extreme Wildfire Fraud In The National Climate Assessment

https://iowaclimate.org/2019/02/15/extreme-wildfire-fraud-in-the-national-climate-assessment/

[Anonymous No.10893121]

>>10890525
>>The Arctic is warming twice as fast as the rest of the planet,
yeah but how is the south arctic warming??

[Anonymous No.10893159]

>>10890525
''This study investigates the role of the eleven-year solar cycle on the Arctic climate during 1979–2016. It reveals that during those years, when the winter solar sunspot number (SSN) falls below 1.35 standard deviations (or mean value), the Arctic warming extends from the lower troposphere to high up in the upper stratosphere and vice versa when SSN is above. The warming in the atmospheric column reflects an easterly zonal wind anomaly consistent with warm air and positive geopotential height anomalies for years with minimum SSN and vice versa for the maximum. Despite the inherent limitations of statistical techniques, three different methods – Compositing, Multiple Linear Regression and Correlation – all point to a similar modulating influence of the sun on winter Arctic climate via the pathway of Arctic Oscillation. Presenting schematics, it discusses the mechanisms of how solar cycle variability influences the Arctic climate involving the stratospheric route. Compositing also detects an opposite solar signature on Eurasian snow-cover, which is a cooling during Minimum years, while warming in maximum. It is hypothesized that the reduction of ice in the Arctic and a growth in Eurasia, in recent winters, may in part, be a result of the current weaker solar cycle.''

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5861038/

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/07/18/remarkable-correlation-of-arctic-sea-ice-to-solar-cycle-length/

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29535297

[Anonymous No.10893172]

>>10890525

Scientists on climate change:

"THE SCIENCE IS SOLID!!! MUH 97%!!!"

Scientists on racial differences in IQ scores:

"DAT'S RACISS! DELET THIS!!!!"

[Anonymous No.10893247]

>>10890525
We're pretty fine.
Also antartica has been 1 degree below normal for the last 2-3 years.
What do you say warmists?

[Anonymous No.10893300]

>>10891247
>deniercucks autistically screech
/thread/

[Anonymous No.10893304]

>>10893247
>What do you say «global» warmists?
Lrn2global fgt pls

[Anonymous No.10893646]

>>10890525
Zoom out

[Anonymous No.10893664]

>>10893159
From that first article you linked:
>Studies suggest that 50–60% of that ice loss is likely caused by externally forced anthropogenic emissions with the rest caused by natural climate variability.

[Anonymous No.10894837]

>>10893664
That's from the introduction, has nothing to do with the conclusion of the study

[Anonymous No.10894983]

>>10893172
found the redditard

[Anonymous No.10895097]

>>10890556

It'll be funny when the climate change guts the west's biosphere and your loved ones don't 'adapt' (stop needing water)

[Anonymous No.10895106]

I would be more believing of climate change if I didn't get my face shoved in constant bullshit articles like

>Climate refugees fleeing their islands because of rising sea levels

Despite the fact there has been pretty much 0 measurable rise in sea levels.

[Anonymous No.10895134]

>>10893172

Why do 56%ers always change try change the topic of any science thread to IQ

[Anonymous No.10895212]

>>10895134
IQ is inherently linked to climate change. Billions of consumers in this world can't even feed themselves, if the west stopped sending food aid there would be a population crash of billions.

[Anonymous No.10895217]

>>10895097
>loved ones
HAHAHAHAHA LOOK AT THIS NORMIE

[Anonymous No.10895228]

>>10890556
Yes, more black people who adapted to hot climates. Let's laugh at all the whities

[Anonymous No.10895240]

>>10890760
Its called religion

[Anonymous No.10895248]

>>10895228
Climate change will render Africa uninhabitable and Russians won't let niggers into the new Siberian paradise.

[Anonymous No.10895293]

>>10893071
Buttblasted deniertard.

[Anonymous No.10895308]

>>10893118
>durr forest management was insufficient in the 1930s therefore global warming ain't real hurr
Use your brain for one second you fucking moron.

[Anonymous No.10895311]

>>10894837
> It is hypothesized that the reduction of ice in the Arctic and a growth in Eurasia, in recent winters, may in part, be a result of the current weaker solar cycle.''
So what is your point?

[Anonymous No.10895773]

>>10890525

The problem with Man Made Climate Change is that it assumes mankind's technology will not change. We are already at the beginning of the end of the fossil fuel age. Nuclear and renewable energy sources are the future, same with electric vehecles.

You guys are STRONG believers in a Malthusian energy. But just like the belief was with food production, they completely ignored human ingenuity and change.

Malthusianism is the idea that population growth is potentially exponential while the growth of the food supply is linear.

[Anonymous No.10895807]

>>10890525
The CONSUUUUUUUMERS are basically going to conjure up whatever kind of delusion is the most convenient excuse and go on as usual.
Whether it be fusion, or mars colonization, carbon taxes, or electric cars - it's all basically a new religion they need to believe in to convince them selves that what they do is good and rational.

[Anonymous No.10896043]

>>10895773
>The problem with Man Made Climate Change is that it assumes mankind's technology will not change.
Nothing about AGW assumes that.

>We are already at the beginning of the end of the fossil fuel age. Nuclear and renewable energy sources are the future, same with electric vehecles.
Great so I assume you support replacing fossil fuels. Please explain how you are going to do that.

>You guys are STRONG believers in a Malthusian energy.
What an idiotic comparison. The issue is not running out of energy, the issue is that the method of energy most economically incentivized has far reaching negative externalities. Increased food production was always economically incentivized by demand, avoiding global warming is not.

[Anonymous No.10896146]

>>10896043
>>The problem with Man Made Climate Change is that it assumes mankind's technology will not change.
>Nothing about AGW assumes that.

EVERYTHING you want to do WILL happen on its own, there is ZERO reason for economic suicide, when the economic market on its own is ending the fossil fuel age.

People are doing absolutely stupid things like passing up plane flight to take a train in some idiotis idea that this will "save" the world.

The scientist identified an actual problem, BUT doing NOTHING is the solution.

This is like the VERY real worry people had near the end of the 19th century about the horse manure crisis .

The "solution" to man made climate change is to do NOTHING!!!

If people REALLY cared about this problem they would be doing everything they could to stop the African population bomb.

https://www.historic-uk.com/HistoryUK/HistoryofBritain/Great-Horse-Manure-Crisis-of-1894/

[Anonymous No.10896167]

>>10896146
This CONSUUUUUUMER convenient religious excuse happens to be "economics". He believes "the market" will solve ALL problems.

[Anonymous No.10896176]

>>10896146
>EVERYTHING you want to do WILL happen on its own, there is ZERO reason for economic suicide, when the economic market on its own is ending the fossil fuel age.
Timing matters you fucking moron. Every day spent not mitigating global warming is more damage in the future. The only one advocating harming the economy is you, by demanding that nothing be done. If you actually cared about the economy instead of your political dogma you would listen to economists, who have found that a carbon tax is the optimal choice.

>This is like the VERY real worry people had near the end of the 19th century about the horse manure crisis .
It's more like you're standing in a pile of horse manure but you refuse to pick up a shovel because eventually technology is going to replace the horse. By your logic being proactive is never a solution, no matter how much shit you're covered in.

[Anonymous No.10896181]

>>10895308
That's not what the article says. Maybe learn to read.

"Burn acreage was very carefully tracked and reported during the 1930s. People split the atom and built the Golden Gate Bridge during the 1930s. It is not surprising that they also knew how to do the basic mathematics which climate scientists seem to be incapable of."

[Anonymous No.10896193]

>>10896176
>a carbon tax is the optimal choice
I love how right wing governments are being elected all over the world due to this kind of rhetoric...
I guess you people never really factored in just how truly unpopular the concept of taxing people's mobility (and really, just about everything else as well) would be, huh?

[Anonymous No.10896210]

>>10890915
>>10890876
You haven't said anything substantial in your troll comments. You are a good example of a typical pseudosceptic who tries to rebut a claim of climate change by throwing insults to other person and meaningless terms, and actually not contributing anything valuable to the discussion. You are a disappointment

[Anonymous No.10896224]

>>10896181
OK so what is the article saying? It's obvious intent is to downplay the recent increase in wildfire burn acreage by comparing it to burn acreage in the 1930s. This is a pointless comparison since forest management was not the same in the 1930s. It turns out that this is born out in the data itself. That chart was created by combining two different data sets, pre 1968 and post 1968.

https://www.andthentheresphysics.wordpress.com/2015/10/30/the-mysterious-wildfire-chart/

[Anonymous No.10896241]

>>10896193
>Trump got elected, therefore any policy which Trump is against is wrong
Truly this is a masterpiece of logical analysis. Never mind that polling shows Americans largely support a carbon tax, THIS was the reason Trump got elected.

[Anonymous No.10896253]

>>10896241
not just talking about the us
there's now italy, among many other eu countries, and recently australia too. i think canada will be shifting to the right next election as well

[Anonymous No.10896257]

>>10896241
>Americans largely support a carbon tax
So they support more expensive travel, goods, and services? Interesting.

[Anonymous No.10896280]

>>10896253
Europe supports a carbon tax even more than the US. You have no argument.

>>10896257
So you support environmental and economic destruction? Interesting.

[Anonymous No.10896297]

>>10896280
Ahh yes, and we can't forget the kind of slimy nastiness the carbon tax shills exude all over the net, either. Maybe this form of rhetoric really just turns peoples stomachs and they instinctively feel that maybe climate change isn't so bad if these are the types of people who are against it.

[Anonymous No.10896302]

>>10890525
Who's holding the vote on the weather?

[Anonymous No.10896325]

>>10896297
LOL look at your own rhetoric, retard. You're trying to turn a sensible, well supported policy position into the boogeyman.

[Anonymous No.10896344]

>>10890568
>[citation needed]
How about you actually step outside of your moms basement and observe the world around. How about you start reading local, state, national and international news.
Idiot summerfag.

[Anonymous No.10896853]

>>10896241
>Americans largely support a carbon tax

Yeah that's some bull fucking shit. France just about burnt their country to the ground over something similar and they are a lot more eager to be taxed than amerifats.

[Anonymous No.10896972]

>>10896176
>a carbon tax

Did not France do this leading to riots for weeks?

There is ZERO need to worry about this problem, it literally will go away on its own.

If you REALLY care about climate change then you should be doing everything you can to stop the African population bomb.
THIS should be your number one concern the added THREE BILLION more people (pretty much ALL the population growth this century is in Africa)

[Anonymous No.10897482]

>>10896344
>who cares
some butthurt keyboard warrior seems to care very deeply

[Anonymous No.10897492]

>>10893071
L0L

[Anonymous No.10897500]

>>10893121
>yeah but
>yahbut
>yahbut nobut
>yahbut nobut yahbut nobut
>yahbut nobut yahbut nobut yahbut nobut yahbut nobut
found the yahbut rabbit

[Anonymous No.10898242]

>>10890525
OP's pick is weather, mine is a sign of a global trend.
Durrrrr

[Anonymous No.10898250]

>>10896146
Brown pypo good
White pypo bad.
You raycist.

[Anonymous No.10898257]

>>10890556
/thread
also, the planet would be better off if we let natural fires run there course.
retard practices like fire prevention just store up fuel and waste societies resources in the process, all while effectively stoking the fuels for the next big fire

[Anonymous No.10899258]

somebody just launch the icbms already, tired of taking the slow way out