/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.10894612]

>This kills the man-made climate change retards

[Anonymous No.10894618]

>>10894612
Very scientific anon, profound. Also correct.

[Anonymous No.10894621]

>>10894612
are you a primary psychopath

[Anonymous No.10894624]

>>10894612
*accounts for less that one percent of CO2 dumped into the atmosphere*

[Anonymous No.10894634]

Nice thread anon! Hahahahaha thanks again for another climate change thread haha. Maybe just a few more before you go to sleep? Haha

[Anonymous No.10894636]

>>10894612
Every year humans emit 29 gigatonnes of co2.
Volcanoes emit 0.3 gigatonnes, just 1% of that.
https://youtu.be/6VUPIX7yEOM?t=2m
https://skepticalscience.com/argument.php
#73
https://skepticalscience.com/volcanoes-and-global-warming-intermediate.htm

[Anonymous No.10894758]

>>10894636
You are just going to trigger a cognitive-dissonance autistic meltdown for OP with those facts, Anon.

[Anonymous No.10895418]

I think anyone who is going into an argument already has their mind made up to the point where I honestly don't know how to correct them. Any ideas?

[Anonymous No.10895421]

>>10895418
Call them a faggot.
It jest werks.

[Anonymous No.10895424]

>>10894636
Deniers never respond to actual data, they will just move on to some other tired talking point or conspiracy theory.

[Anonymous No.10895508]

>>10894612
Being thrown into a volcano kills most people.

[Anonymous No.10896173]

[Anonymous No.10896405]

>>10896173
>Zbigniew Jaworowski
...was a medical expert in radiology, and a well-known climate denialist
who labelled global warming as "The Greatest Scientific Scandal of Our Time"
after seizing upon the idea that the formation of CO2 hydrates (clathrates)
made all ice-core analyses by multiple experts "false".
http://www.mitosyfraudes.org/Calen5/JawoCO2-Eng.html

[Anonymous No.10896490]

>>10896173
Can you tell me why you represent CO2 as a percentage of the atmosphere when the other gases in the atmosphere have no bearing on CO2's effect? If the same amount of CO2 was 100% of the atmosphere the warming effect would essentially be the same, so what is the point of saying CO2 is x percent of the atmosphere?

The 30% figure is also pointless since the issue is not the total amount of CO2, but the change in CO2 from the pre-industrial baseline. That normal amount of CO2 is what keeps the Earth from being a giant ball of ice.

Lastly the little chart is lying. Those CO2 measurements were not chosen arbitrarily, they were chosen because they used proper methodology. Prior to modern standardization of CO2 measurement we did not understand the proper procedure and location necessary for measuring CO2 in the atmosphere. Claiming that flawed measurements represent the pre-industrual concentration showed that the source of your image is untrustworthy.

[Anonymous No.10897545]

>>10896490
[math]\text{hi}[/math]

[Anonymous No.10898845]

>>10894612
>this is your mind on /pol/

[Anonymous No.10898967]

>>10894636
What the fuck does it matter how much CO2 gets pumped into the atmosphere?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Runaway_greenhouse_effect#Venus

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Runaway_greenhouse_effect#Earth

[Anonymous No.10898998]

>>10898967
small changes to the climate can have large effects. The climate is an immense system and human civilization is rather delicate, especially these days

>>10896490
good post

[Anonymous No.10899008]

>>10898967

[Anonymous No.10899015]

>>10898998
>small changes to the climate can have large effects

No fucking way. You mean earth has a functioning climate system? Well good god damn. You learn something new everyday.

How fucking desperate are you fear mongering climate change faggots to scare humanity? Does it make you feel powerful? Valuable?

> The climate is an immense system
God damn right it is, and our pathetic excuse for an understanding of it is comical.

>human civilization is rather delicate
Only a couple thousand or even hundred of us need to make it. The system will continue to function even if we go extinct.

I'm all for cleaning up the environment, but i got a pretty big bone to pick with anybody that wants to parade themselves around as having a clue about the earth's climate, how it functions, or how it is going to change in the future. Just shut the fuck up already.

[Anonymous No.10899017]

>>10894612
hey guys I know what to do about this very serious problem
lets have a carbon tax
AND LETS GET SOME MORE CONSUUUUUUUUUMERS!!!!
for muh ecomony!!!!

[Anonymous No.10899021]

>>10896173
Did you pay your carbon tax on that infographic, Anon?

[Anonymous No.10899026]

>>10894612
cuz you know the the nobel prize winning economist says that the carbon tax more than makes up for the MORE CONSUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUMERS

IMFINITE GROF FOREBER

[Anonymous No.10899027]

>>10899008
And? I mean it's a nice graph that'll do a good job completing your intention of scaring weak ignorant people. Good job on that man. But people that hunger for understanding like me will always see the sad pathetic child you are.

[Anonymous No.10899037]

>>10899021
Yes I have it right here

[Anonymous No.10899042]

>>10899017
>>10899026
Hey consumerposter, post some chubby women consumers, that's unironically my fetish

[Anonymous No.10899043]

>>10899015
>No fucking way. You mean earth has a functioning climate system? Well good god damn. You learn something new everyday.
what? I'm saying that something insignificant on a planetary scale has the potential to fuck our shit up
>How fucking desperate are you fear mongering climate change faggots to scare humanity? Does it make you feel powerful? Valuable?
I don't really want people to be scared, just have a healthy concern since, like you keep saying, we don't have a full understanding of the climate or our potential impact on it
>God damn right it is, and our pathetic excuse for an understanding of it is comical.
I feel like you're ranting for no reason, because you haven't actually disagreed with me. I didn't say anything to the contrary
>Only a couple thousand or even hundred of us need to make it. The system will continue to function even if we go extinct.
I don't care about the climate, only our ability to cope with it. Even if humanity survived a total systems collapse, I'd rather not set us back a century or more
>I'm all for cleaning up the environment, but i got a pretty big bone to pick with anybody that wants to parade themselves around as having a clue about the earth's climate, how it functions, or how it is going to change in the future. Just shut the fuck up already.
I didn't do any of this, I just think we should be cautious in flippantly dismissing that we might have an impact on the climate since the stakes are so high

you're a retard looking for a reason to be angry. I'm not some greenpeace faggot, but I'm also not a delusional moron who thinks we're incapable of affecting the world around us. Also
>I'm all for cleaning up the environment
we're not talking about plastic in the oceans bud, we can deal with the earth being a giant landfill, as awful as it'd be. Atmospheric chemistry is a tougher nut to crack than picking up litter on sidewalks

[Anonymous No.10899048]

>>10899042
>unironically my fetish
Is it because they're so good for the ECOMONY?!?!

Cuz they are. We should all be eternally grateful.

[Anonymous No.10899050]

>>10899043
>I feel like you're ranting for no reason
>you're a retard looking for a reason to be angry

Ya i'm just getting carried away with my angst. I don't even remember why i made those posts LOL

[Anonymous No.10899056]

>>10899050
retard confirmed. Enjoy your high blood pressure and early death anon

[Anonymous No.10899062]

>>10899027
>i have no argument

[Anonymous No.10899073]

>>10899062
>post a worthless graph with no argument
>i respond with a worthless post of my own
>y u no argument anon LOL

[Anonymous No.10899079]

>>10899056
I go t the gym 2-4 hours a day doing strength training and cardio. My diet is mostly fish fruits and vegetables. I'll be ok.

You on the other hand got a lot of work on your hands sorting out that spiteful passive aggressive miserable attitude. Good luck with that whiny little bitch.

[Anonymous No.10899084]

>>10899079
cope. If you had any clue what you were doing you'd know spending 4 hours in the gym is counterproductive, so I don't buy it. High cortisol from anger issues + more cortisol from frequent long-duration exercise = early death

why do you feel the need to talk yourself up to me? I don't care if you eat broccoli anon, you're still a retard

[Anonymous No.10899099]

>>10899084
>why do you feel the need to talk yourself up to me?

Something to do.

> If you had any clue what you were doing you'd know spending 4 hours in the gym is counterproductive

So you're an expert on the human body and it's capabilities now?

Why do you feel the need to defend yourself against me and wish death upon me? Are you an insecure little faggotboy?

[Anonymous No.10899102]

>>10899048
>Is it because they're so good for the ECOMONY?!?!
In an abstract way. Look at the girl in the video. Think of all the oil extracted to fuel subsidized grain and beef production so she can afford (at quite a discount price) to stuff herself so full of grease that she can barely move.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lr63C4uA7Tk

[Anonymous No.10899133]

>>10899099
>Why do you feel the need to defend yourself against me
I didn't do that. You'll notice I didn't say anything about myself in the last post
>and wish death upon me
>"Enjoy your... early death"
I did no such thing :)
>So you're an expert on the human body and it's capabilities now?
no anon, I am just capable of reading studies that compared length of workout with things like muscle gain and levels of stress hormones. Maybe you should spend more time on /fit/ and less getting enraged here. As retarded as they are over there, you'd probably learn something

[Anonymous No.10899135]

>>10899017
>muh (((economy))) indeed

>>10899102
latching onto (((capitalism))) as the solution to everything just because juden peterstein tells you to is where you have failed miserably. consumer culture and all of the sort is jewish propaganda to demoralize and degrade their host populations. stop being a naive goy

[Anonymous No.10899136]

>>10894612
Humans produce more CO2 than volcanos do by orders of magnitude. This kills your retarded thread based on lies refuted years ago.

[Anonymous No.10899137]

>>10894612
>*breaks out massively every 300k years*

[Anonymous No.10899138]

>>10896490
>Can you tell me why you represent CO2 as a percentage of the atmosphere when the other gases in the atmosphere have no bearing on CO2's effect?

There is no reason to do so aside from trying to deceive the uniformed with spooky graphs.

[Anonymous No.10899155]

>>10899133
>trying way too hard to defend against me

Confirmed for weak spiteful passive aggressive whiny little bitch.

[Anonymous No.10899169]

>>10899155
kek ok anon. I can tell you have a healthy appreciation for adjectives

[Anonymous No.10899175]

>>10899169
Eh it's just on behalf of schizophrenia. Most of the time i am pretty much retarded and catatonic.

[Anonymous No.10899178]

>>10899169
Sorry for the conflict. Maybe someday i won't be addicted to it. Fat chance though LOL

[Anonymous No.10900400]

>>10899027
You're a literal retard

[Anonymous No.10901261]

>>10899015
>our pathetic excuse for an understanding of it [climate] is comical
What do you mean by "our", Peasant?

[Anonymous No.10901272]

[Anonymous No.10901464]

>>10899015
How does advocating for action to address a serious threat amount to fearmongering? Are denialists even capable of intellectual honesty? I've never seen it once.

[Anonymous No.10901526]

>>10899027
quality low iq post kek

[Anonymous No.10901538]

>>10901464
Hilary lost.

[Anonymous No.10901549]

>>10894612
Too much smoke and CO2 has cooling effect, not warming effect.

[Anonymous No.10901574]

>>10901549
wow it's almost like a well mixed atmospheric gas and localized smog are two completely different things

[Anonymous No.10903398]

>>10899073

>y-your argument was worthless too

[Anonymous No.10903406]

>>10896173
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OjD0e1d6GgQ

[OP No.10903407]

>>10901272
>volcano average vs fossil fuel peak
Why don't you compare volcano peak to fossil fuel peak? Are you afraid?

[Anonymous No.10903414]

>>10901549
one is local, the other global.
Like your 300 lbs couchpig mom vs your dad who's still out buying cigs

[Anonymous No.10903419]

>>10903407
it's 1:100 no matter what, idiot

[OP No.10903426]

>muh ice
https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn18949-the-history-of-ice-on-earth/

There is no reason to even care about the glaciers. Ice covers the entire earth all the time on cycles far outside our control. Glaciers also melt outside of our control. So why the fuck does it matter if we cause the glaciers to melt inside our control for the betterment of humanity? Do you retards honestly think the world is going to end if the sea rises back up 3m? With the current technology (and especially future technology) it's basically impossible for a species to go extinct. All we need is genetic data and we can probably bring them back at some point in the future. Worse case scenario half of all life magically gets wiped out, we still survive because we can keep growing potatoes and farming whatever we want. And maybe then people will worry about restoring the climate using other processes such as aerosols. Destroy the economy now for no reason is just liberal dogmatic retardation.

[OP No.10903431]

>>10903419
>compare the average fossil fuel CO2 production to the average volcano CO2 production
>it's 0
lmao you're an absolute brianlet

[Anonymous No.10903453]

>>10903407
>In fact, even if we include the rare, very large volcanic eruptions, like 1980's Mount St. Helens or 1991's Mount Pinatubo eruption, they only emitted 10 and 50 million tons of CO2 each, respectively. It would take three Mount St. Helens and one Mount Pinatubo eruption every day to equal the amount that humanity is presently emitting.
not going to help your case in the least

[Anonymous No.10903457]

>>10903426
jesus christ this is the dumbest argument i've ever heard, you could use this retarded fucking logic to justify nuking the entire planet for fun.

[OP No.10903459]

>>10903453
Not talking about these baby dick eruptions in recorded history. How about you talk about the ones that literally caused the world to freeze over.

[Anonymous No.10903461]

>>10903459
So you're betting on a one in a 100 million years geologic event to save us from the ecological damage we've caused in under 200? does this math make sense to you?

[OP No.10903465]

>>10903457
>let's nuke the planet just like nature does in it's usual cycles
fuck off retard. If you're not even going to try just go to back and dock at reddit HQ to get some more responses programmed into you. I'm not saying we should intentionally melt the glaciers. I'm saying there's no proof that we're causing it and even if we were it's not worth stopping industrialization now to potentially stop something that could happen on it's own naturally. What if it's happening due to a currently unstoppable natural event? We wouldn't fucking know because everyone's sperging out about 'muh greenhouse'. We have a much better chance of surviving and natural events if we have the technology, from our industry, to change it. The fact is, most greenhouse shills are just looking for another fat government grant.

[Anonymous No.10903475]

>>10903465
>no proof
how about basic physics?
>happen on it's own naturally
not anytime soon without human emissions the current inter glacial would continue for another 10-20k years after which the earth would slowly go into another glacial cycle, there's absolutely nothing natural about what we've done to the planet. As for your retarded ancap screeching, if the private sector would take responsibility then government action would be irrelevant, however they're only continuing to make the problem worse.

[OP No.10903478]

>>10903461
What damage have we caused? Oh no the last years were a bit warmer, must be CO2. Let's not look for any other possible cause. Let's ignore that there are temperature fluctuations all the time on both the macro and micro scale. Let's forget we just came out of an ice age and the current system is expected to warm up.

[Anonymous No.10903491]

>>10903478
your graph clearly shows we're on track for 5 million years worth of climate change compressed into less than 100 it's utterly impossible for nature to adapt to that timescale. Not to mention all of human agriculture is entirely dependent on that flat line from 0 to 10

[Anonymous No.10903506]

>>10903491

relax, the changing climate will kill him too regardless of whatever denialist shitposts he makes.

[OP No.10903508]

>>10903491
Holy fuck you're so delusional. Look at any right part of the graph, see those spikes? They happen very quickly and completely naturally. They're also followed by a drop, because guess what? The earth corrects itself. If it didn't we wouldn't be hear because the earth would either be a permanent lava pit or an ice hole.

>>10903506
>I care so much about the climate
>let's laugh at people dying
>hahaha

wow so glad you're the voice of reason. I'm sure all your programmed opinions will be insightful and full of vigor.

[OP No.10903510]

>>10903491
Holy fuck you're so delusional. Look at any right part of the graph, see those spikes? They happen very quickly and completely naturally. They're also followed by a drop, because guess what? The earth corrects itself. If it didn't we wouldn't be here because the earth would either be a permanent lava pit or an ice hole.

>>10903506
>I care so much about the climate
>let's laugh at people dying
>hahaha

wow so glad you're the voice of reason. I'm sure all your programmed opinions will be insightful and full of vigor.

[Anonymous No.10903511]

>>10903508
those spikes are all occurring over a period of 5-10k years you fucking idiot.

[Anonymous No.10903515]

>>10903465

[Anonymous No.10903520]

>>10903510
please explain to me how the earth is going to magically self correct humans emitting 30+ billion tons of greenhouse gasses every year.

[Anonymous No.10903531]

>>10903511
Maybe someone who isn't as lazy as me should graph the derivative to demonstrate the rate of change of CO2 throughout history.

[OP No.10903539]

>>10903520
>muh ice caps melt
>fresh water absorbs CO2

That's just one example. You can do your own research and realize that there are many other natural ways with which the earth corrects the temperature. Some of them might be too slow to matter but they can be artificially initiated. There are also artificial options such as aerosols. The possibilities available to reduce the temperature is endless and only possible because we have factories which produce CO2. Feel free to go live in a cave with your 1 solar panel that can run a light bulb for 50% of the day.

The reality is that all "renewable" sources of energy are complete shit and are actually worse for the environment (and actually have immediate negative results) because they require fuck tons cleared land and dead trees, fuck tons of batteries to store power for when it's not needed/isn't produced, and fuck tons of dead birds. The best option is nuclear but that won't happen because of all the reddit fags afraid of muh meltdown despite the fact there are plenty of fail safe methods available that make meltdowns impossible.

[Anonymous No.10903546]

>>10903539
>The ice caps will save us when they melt
What a fucking moron. "Order of magnitude" is a foreign concept to you isn't it?

[Anonymous No.10903550]

>>10903539
so much hand waving it sounds like a quadcopter

[Anonymous No.10903555]

>>10903539
nuclear only works in a socialized grid, I would be all for the US doing away with private power companies and adopting publicly owned nuclear based grid.

[OP No.10903559]

>>10903515
Makes sense to me.

[Anonymous No.10903564]

>>10903559
the fact you left the right side alone makes this so much better

[OP No.10903565]

>>10903546
>>10903550
Why do you retards always return out of the reading loop every time you see something you have a preprogrammed response to? Very poor programming. You should at least read the whole thing before spouting off your responses.

[OP No.10903568]

>>10903564
Yeah, because which one makes more sense :)? A bunch of parasites known for their shitty practices and fucking the numbers just to get more funding or some rich fucks who have all the money they could ever need throwing it away for a little bit more?

[Anonymous No.10903590]

>>10903565
Fuck sorry forgot image

[Anonymous No.10903593]

>>10903568
>little bit
The U.S. spends $26 billion annually subsidizing fossil fuels.

[OP No.10903594]

>>10903590
>actually watching that clown
The only funny thing about him is how much of a hard on he has for trump.

[Anonymous No.10903598]

>>10903594
>i have no argument

[OP No.10903604]

>>10903598
>posting an image of a clown is an argument
kys. You don't need an argument to laugh at retards such as yourself

[Anonymous No.10903611]

>>10903604
>seething

[OP No.10903612]

>>10903593
Chump change.
"The Small Business Administration estimates that compliance with such regulations costs the U.S. economy more than $1.75 trillion per year -- about 12%-14% of GDP"
https://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybell/2011/08/23/the-alarming-cost-of-climate-change-hysteria/#619e3b507ebb

[OP No.10903616]

>>10903611
lmao keep bumping sweetie. Maybe you'll attract someone with a functioning brain :)

[Anonymous No.10903619]

>>10903612
I'd take it

[Anonymous No.10903627]

>>10894612
Hey OP. You need to learn about carbon fractionation. Here's a link to help
https://www.encyclopedia.com/science/dictionaries-thesauruses-pictures-and-press-releases/isotope-fractionation
What we're most interested in studying climate change is carbon isotope fractionation. Plants prefer Carbon-12 to Carbon-13 because it's lighter and simpler to use. This causes plants to have a lower reservoir of C-13. When plants die this lowered amount of C-13 can be buried and removed from the carbon cycle.

When carbon is released into the atmosphere we can track its source by the amount of C-13 present. Volcanoes do not give a rats ass about the difference between C-12 and C-13. The percentage of C-13 released by a volcano is very similar to the percentage in the atmosphere already. So if the percentage of C-13 in the atmosphere falls we know the source is from burning plants. Not volcanoes.

And guess what
https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/outreach/isotopes/c13tellsus.html

Since we know that coal and oil come from ancient plants we can conclude that the modern rise of CO2 in the atmosphere is by humans burning coal and oil.

THERE
IS
NO
DEBATE

[Anonymous No.10903629]

>>10903616
>functioning brain
thanks, brutal honest self-analysis from you there, kudos

[Anonymous No.10903674]

>>10903568
The virtually entire scientific community is a bunch of parasites known for shitty practices? news to me. While corporations will do anything to maintain profits. Just look at big tobacco's suppression of science in the 80s. Fun fact many of the same organizations which tried to deny the science showing just how harmful tobacco is are involved in denial of AGW.

[Anonymous No.10903684]

>>10903568
Even oil companies agree with climate change.
https://corporate.exxonmobil.com/energy-and-environment/environmental-protection/climate-change
https://bpes.bp.com/collection/climate-change
https://www.shell.com/sustainability/environment/climate-change.html

So who exactly is on your side?

[OP No.10903685]

>>10903674
Would it shock you to know I'm not even surprised you don't know?

https://www.thelancet.com/pdfs/journals/lancet/PIIS0140-6736%2815%2960696-1.pdf
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/201218
http://statweb.stanford.edu/~tibs/sta306bfiles/ioan.pdf

[Anonymous No.10903708]

>>10903685
>opinion piece with 0 citations

>Clinical trials funded by big pharma exaggerate results to sell drugs, big surprise.

>paper you read the title of and weren't smart enough to realize what it was actually about

>What Ioannidis really says is much less ominous: he argues that it should take rather a lot of good quality and convergent scientific evidence before we can be reasonably sure of a “scientific fact,” and he presents good (scientific!) evidence that a lot of so-called conclusions are premature, not as ready for prime time as we would hope.2 Any supposedly large treatment effect in medical research is probably exaggerated, and “when additional trials are performed, the effect sizes become typically much smaller,” so “well-validated large effects are uncommon.”3 Extremely uncommon, in fact.

in fact climate science has massive amounts of good quality and convergent scientific evidence so this paper is practically an endorsement AGW.

[OP No.10903729]

>>10903708
>a few decades of transient data on a system which has lasted millions of year is good quality convergent scientific evidence
no
>a paper about how medical research is mostly false is an endorsement of AGW
you're retarded

[Anonymous No.10903740]

>>10903729
AGW was first predicted back in 1896 and has gathered mountains of evidence based in physics, empirical observations and measurements. Also backed by millions of years in geologic and ice core data. It's incredibly rigorous work, which is exactly what your paper is saying medical science should emulate.

[Anonymous No.10903754]

>>10903740

[Anonymous No.10905285]

>>10894624
Nuh uh.
Those are words of trickery.