/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.11180515]

How do we stop climate change, /sci/?

[Anonymous No.11180516]

>How do we stop climate change, /sci/?
By not believing in imaginary concepts

[Anonymous No.11180519]

>>11180516
Right.
The earth is flat too, right champ?

[Anonymous No.11180535]

>>11180519
>one earth
>united gradient

[Anonymous No.11182074]

>>11180516
This is literally false, regardless of the truth proposition of climate change.

[Anonymous No.11183052]

>>11180516
of course YOU would be here

[Anonymous No.11183061]

>>11180515
>USA
>India
>China
These need fixing, in reverse order of course

[Anonymous No.11183065]

>>11180515
You can't. Climate would be changing anyway if humans didn'texist.

[Anonymous No.11183074]

>>11183065
No, anon.
Not at all.
Not on the scale and levels that we are currently witnessing.
>hurr climate changes anyway!11!1
Yes, in thousands of years.
Not in a decade.
Off yourself please.

[Anonymous No.11183075]

-First, eject trump from the presidency
-Second, elect a good guy, Bernie for example
-Third, buy a cycle and use it instead of your car

[Anonymous No.11183081]

>>11183075
How would it stop billions of chinks, pajeets and african niggers from polluting?

[Anonymous No.11183088]

Nuclear Power.

[Anonymous No.11183093]

>>11183075
Imagine unironically thinking this. If that is the case, do everyone a favor and kill yourself.

[Anonymous No.11183117]

>>11183081
The USA is, unfortunately as usual, the main problem

[Anonymous No.11183122]

>>11183081
The USA is, unfortunately as usual, the main problem.

The good news is that the USA can also be the solution, just vote for the good guy this time

[Anonymous No.11183133]

>>11180516
How come you people are too stupid to get that it can't be "changed"? 5000 years ago the Saharan rainforest turned into a desert because the earth made the decision to slightly tilt to the right. 100 years later all that was left was sand.

[Anonymous No.11183136]

>>11183133
anon they're on the same level of flatearthers and moon landing skeptics
the only thing you can do is feel sorry for them, for they are overpowered by ignorance and stupidity.

[Anonymous No.11183137]

We cant, the political, economic and social conditions dont exist to make any meaningful change. People knew about this shit half a century ago. They couldn't change it then, we cant change it now.

Besides its not the important issue now. Its now a case of assessing the extent and time frames of the environmental changes to come. I am sure you have seen some of the scenarios, from merely major lifestyle changes and major demographic shifts, all the way up to a major extinction event which includes humans. Plus every variation in between the two extremes. The time frames are fuzzy as well. The media likes to suggest within generations, but its much more likely to be measured in hundreds to thousands of years.

The smart money is betting on the least worse scenario of course ( any other choice is insane ), so expect to see a slow but steady sell out of coastal property and rising land values in high latitude inland areas. Relatively isolated, high infrastructure, and defensible countries will become very popular. You may have already seen a dramatic upsurge in the foreign acquisition of "holiday" properties in such locations.

[Anonymous No.11183148]

>>11183136
Your analogy doesn't really work since 99.7% of all scientists used to be flat eathers, too. Science is not a democracy. If you're retarded enough to believe climate scientists have the slightest clue of what they are talking about, then you're incapable of understand the geopolitical gravity of their hoax papers. There's barely anyone who questions the existence of climate change. What people question is the self indulging research that's being published by a bunch of hippies, cross referencing eachother. Climate change is natural, it has occured thousands of times before, it turned forests into deserts and vice versa. It's something inherent to our planets orbital pathway. You people need to stop operating on false premise to get people to change their lifestyles.

[Anonymous No.11183149]

You want to save the planet?

https://berniesanders.com/en/issues/green-new-deal/

[Anonymous No.11183159]

>>11183137
>Besides its not the important issue now.
You cannot even being to comprehend how wrong you are.
>Its now a case of assessing the extent and time frames of the environmental changes to come.
5 to 10 years for drastic weather changes.
50 years for apocalyptic scenarios.
100 years for mass extinction.
>b-but you said the same thing 20 years ago
Yes, and guess what?
Species are going extinct, countries all around the globe are being hit with insanely harsh climates.
The 2010-2020 decade has been the hottest in centuries.
Koalas are gone extinct because of the australian bush fires.
And this is only the beginning.
Feel free to cover your eyes by parroting the "we just dont know yet what will happen" while 97% of the scientists all over the world have already predicted and calculated everything that is about to come.
>The media likes to suggest within generations, but its much more likely to be measured in hundreds to thousands of years
Imagine being such a fucking retard.
https://skepticalscience.com/evidence-for-global-warming-intermediate.htm
https://skepticalscience.com/heading-into-new-little-ice-age-intermediate.htm
https://skepticalscience.com/no-warming-in-16-years-advanced.htm

[Anonymous No.11183162]

>>11183159
>5 to 10 years for drastic weather changes.
>50 years for apocalyptic scenarios.
>100 years for mass extinction.

[Anonymous No.11183164]

>>11183148
>>11183148
>99.7% of all scientists used to be flat eathers
Non sequitur.
Science isn't a religion, the more we understand the more we change our views on this planet and the general universe.
>If you're retarded enough to believe climate scientists have the slightest clue of what they are talking about, then you're incapable of understand the geopolitical gravity of their hoax papers.
Oh no, he's retarded.
>What people question is the self indulging research that's being published by a bunch of hippies, cross referencing eachother.
Do you have any facts to back that up?
Because i have plenty to back up the fact that it's not the hippies calling for climate change, but climatologists and scientists all over the world.
>Climate change is natural, it has occured thousands of times before, it turned forests into deserts and vice versa. It's something inherent to our planets orbital pathway. You people need to stop operating on false premise to get people to change their lifestyles.
No, it isn't.
The planet changing its climate over the course of thousands of years is not the same as the planet changing it's climate over 50 years.
You cannot compare the two, because one is influenced by the works of man.
Anthropocene, anon.
I swear this is one of the biggest myths that are parroted around by uneducated hillbillies like you.
>it's always changing!!111
Sure, enjoy eating bugs in 15 years.
>>11183162
>ad hominem
Yep, that's how you concede.
I love winning arguments against drumpftards.

[Anonymous No.11183172]

>>11183164
>The planet changing its climate over the course of thousands of years
It changed over the course of a mere hundred. Try again, hippy. Maybe you should actually take some time and venture into the field instead of spouting the same bullshit ad nauseam, ignoring the very reserach provided by the scientists you choose to overhear. A hundred years to turn a rainforest into a desert, which is why they are currently busy locating dozens of villages in the middle of the Saharan desert. You need to get off your high horse, given how utterly uninformed and -educated you apparently seem to be. None of this is news, either. We've been aware of it since 2014. You people are embarrassing.

[Anonymous No.11183190]

>>11183159

Yeah, try getting a real education since the shit you spew has obviously come directly from your arse.

You alarmist fucks are just as bad as the deniers.

[Anonymous No.11183196]

>>11183164
>>ad hominem

That's rich, coming form the arsehole who starts off calling everyone retards. Go fuck yourself arsewipe.

[Anonymous No.11183211]

>>11180515
We don't. We must leave this planet behind as it crashes and burnd

[Anonymous No.11183344]

>>11183172
No, it didn't.
Provide a source.
>more ad hominems
Heh.
>>11183190
Ad hominem.
>>11183196
More ad hominem.

Damn, you guys sure told me.
Seething magapedes, lmao.

>>11183211
This.
The future is red.
And 54.6 million kilometers apart.

[Anonymous No.11183358]

>>11180515
Climate change isn't real

[Anonymous No.11183462]

>>11180515
stop deforestation, stop burning coal, oil and gas, eat vegan

[Anonymous No.11183509]

>>11183159
>5 to 10 years for drastic weather changes.
Have you seen the news lately? More powerful storm, hurricanes, drought, Australia is already an the road to becoming lifeless. Sweety, the drastic weather changes are already here. In reality, we have 10 years for the apocalypse scenario.

[Anonymous No.11183519]

>>11183075
>-First, eject trump from the presidency

[Anonymous No.11183621]

>>11183519
unironically probably the single most effective thing anyone can do to combat climate change. You can't dispute this.

[Anonymous No.11183636]

>>11183148
incredibly unironically this

[Anonymous No.11183641]

>>11183074
You're kidding right? Even if you stop carbon emission the earth will still continue to heat up for many centuries to come. I think Thunderf00t made a video in this.

[Anonymous No.11183681]

>>11183148
>since 99.7% of all scientists used to be flat eathers, too
very good argument against man made climate change now; you changed my life view

[Anonymous No.11183686]

>>11180515
OH NOO ACTIONS HAVE CONSEQUENCES OOOOH

[Anonymous No.11183687]

>>11183358
>durrr

[Anonymous No.11183699]

>>11183686
No, the bad part is that first worlder's actions will have consequences for those who are completely innocent. Those who got rich off of burning coal and oil will be the least affected by climate change, meanwhile some African with a near-zero carbon footprint will get their homes turned into desert, this is why I support immigration.

[Anonymous No.11184285]

>>11183122
False. Us is largest problem proportionally. By bulk it is by far Asia. Planet doesn't care where emissions come from.

[Anonymous No.11184765]

>>11180515
By investing all necessary money in carbon-capture technologies.
By moving to electric cars, and going for mass transport when needed.
By using renewables and atom for electricity production.
By synthesizing hydrocarbons from captured CO2 using renewables/atom electricity for machines that can't be run on electricity directly.
By eating less meat.
By producing meat in vitro.
By not participating in mindless consumerism(don't replace your devices on whim).

Hey there is plenty anyone can do. Just study, and think what you do.
Don't be a crying zoomer.

[Anonymous No.11184772]

Global warming is a good thing
Global cooling kills

[Anonymous No.11184776]

>>11180515
Nuclear winter
Glass the middle east or north korea +/- china and let the atmospheric dust cool us down

[Anonymous No.11184779]

Hello everyone can I interest you in my thread about mitigating global warming? I think my idea can bring about serious change, please join me for discussion.
>>11184729

[Anonymous No.11184853]

>>11183075
>-Third, buy a cycle and use it instead of your car
Ok. You go first.

[Anonymous No.11184862]

>>11184853
No, I don't know how to ride a bike. You fucking do it.

[Anonymous No.11184874]

>>11183462
>stop deforestation,
Uncontrolled df, like in the Amazon. Otherwise, controlled df, bc people still need wood for construction, etc
>stop burning coal, oil and gas
impractical, and actually has near zero effect on climate
>eat vegan
also impractical. not everyone would comply

[Anonymous No.11184886]

>>11184765
>By investing all necessary money in carbon-capture technologies.
ridiculous and unneeded
>By moving to electric cars, and going for mass transport when needed.
already happeninng
>By using renewables and atom for electricity production.
look around you
>By synthesizing hydrocarbons from captured CO2 using renewables/atom electricity for machines that can't be run on electricity directly.
retarded, and just NO
>By eating less meat.
good luck telling your average Texan that
>By producing meat in vitro.
energy wasteful and just retarded, too
>By not participating in mindless consumerism(don't replace your devices on whim).
who would define 'mindless'? who would 'enforce'. Sorry, also retarded

[Anonymous No.11184895]

>>11180515
We would have to depoliticize it first, and that will never happen.

[Anonymous No.11184896]

>>11180515
>How do we stop climate change, /sci/?
How do we stop you from repeatedly posting this topic to /sci/ ?

[Anonymous No.11184898]

just look it square in the eye and give it a firm handshake.

[Anonymous No.11184904]

>>11184765
Fuck you! What are YOU going to do?
>>11180515
And you too. Nobody cares about your bullcrap. Go out there and do stuff. There are never real solutions in these threads.

[Anonymous No.11184936]

>>11184886
>look around you
Not everyone live in shithole like US.

>mindless
It's up to you to decide, just don't cry fag.
I am giving simple advice to zoomers who cry that previous gen destroyed climate while buying new shit every time commercial say it to them.

Go back to /pol/
We have too much CO2 in air, and it has to be fixed, Carbon Capture is currently doing better and better each year, and we need to level CO2 somehow. Reforestation might be too land-expensive.
I doubt you have any real insight in cultured meat. Almost all estimates are that it will have positive impact.

>>11184904
Most of what I wrote down that can be done by general public? I eat less meat, I don't replace my PC every 3 year, since I don't need. I use mass transit. Fucking hell, it's simple things, and I benefit financial from it as well.
Also I could end up in cultured meat research, but I am unsure at this moment. I study molecular biophysics right now. Not everyone has to do it anyway, fag. Just do something, and most important don't pretend problem doesn't exist.

[Anonymous No.11185143]

>>11180515
Carbon taxes and carbon tariffs.

[Anonymous No.11185387]

>>11180515
How do you stop something that doesn't exist?

[Anonymous No.11185388]

>>11180519
there is actually science that proves the earth is round there is none that proves humans cause so-called "climate change".

[Anonymous No.11185391]

>>11183075
Yeah bernie will crash the economy with no survivors.

[Anonymous No.11185392]

>>11183699
If you believe in the alarmist nonsense.

[Anonymous No.11185394]

>>11183136
>are overpowered by ignorance and stupidity.
are you talking about the climate change alarmists?

[Anonymous No.11185395]

>>11183122
>just vote for the good guy this time
We will, Trump again.

Either way even if bernie does manage to weasel his way in his "green new deal" nonsense will never pass. The American people would revolt. Heck they did it in france.

[Anonymous No.11185397]

>>11183133
Climate change is natural, the alarmists keep wrongly claiming that humans are causing it yet there is nothing that shows this.

>>11183687
shit chart.

[Anonymous No.11185398]

>>11183621
So-called climate change isn't an issue. Most people outside of the internet don't see it as anything other than alarmism.

[Anonymous No.11185400]

>>11184936
>Go back to /pol/
/pol/ is 4chan and they seem much more informed on this junk science than you are since you believe it as gospel.

>>11185143
>Carbon taxes and carbon tariffs.
haha yeah go and try that see how violent the people get.

[Anonymous No.11185406]

There is no reason (a also a way) to stop it

[Anonymous No.11185414]

>>11185400
>more informed
is not the same as
>believing in pseudoscience just because it's align with what I want

[Anonymous No.11185416]

>>11184874
I hop you are getting paid for spreading this nonsense.

- deforestation means uncontrolled logging and burning forests, actually we would need to plant trees like crazy to save climate
- to stop burning coal, oil and gas is easy, just use renewable energy instead, of course it got the largest impact on climate, that' just physics and chemistry, it's undeniable
- of course you can eat vegan, you don't have to wait until everybody does

[Anonymous No.11185418]

>>11185414
"Climate change alarmism" is pseudoscience.

[Anonymous No.11185426]

>>11185418
You are arguing that there is no man-made climate change? So all the CO2 we add to atmosphere has no effect? Sure bud.

[Anonymous No.11185436]

>>11185397
That's because you keep covering your eyes when faced with evidence. Levels of CO2 have been unnaturally increasing ever since the industrial revolution, we know that CO2 has a warming effect on the planet and we also know that the global temperature are raising too quickly by judging the state of antartica/artica a few decades ago with what it is now. Everything points out to manmade climate change.

[Anonymous No.11185441]

>>11185426
>You are arguing that there is no man-made climate change
There is none, if you showed the larger version of that chart you would see the warming cycles are constant.

[Anonymous No.11185444]

>>11185436
What "evidence" t c02 and warming don't correlate.

[Anonymous No.11185448]

>>11185444
They do m8, ever since the industrial revolution both the CO2 released in the atmosphere and the global temperature have been unnaturally increasing.

[Anonymous No.11185451]

>>11185448
No they don't.

[Anonymous No.11185454]

>>11185441
No, if you know your argument well enough, you would know that warming cycles are correlated with solar activity, which as you can see are declining while temperature is rising.

[Anonymous No.11185456]

>>11180515
we can't stop it. ending the astronomical subsidies given to fossil fuel industries would certainly be a start to slowing it down, though.

[Anonymous No.11185463]

>>11185451
Yes they do

[Anonymous No.11185470]

LFTR

[Anonymous No.11185475]

>>11184936
>fag. Just do something
Idk if it exists but maybe, you are a rare warmer that I could get along with. The politics were created through social finesse and, the problems can be improved this way. Who doesn't like saving money? We can meme quality and stop buying earbuds each month in favor of quality. Legalize California stops. Crack down with the wallet. Promoting backwards compatibility and upgrading, standards in equipment. Cooking instructions with suggestions to eliminate preheating. You catch more flies with honey. There are definitely things people can agree on but I never hear them. I think these could make a difference. You need to show people that this is good. I don't give a fuck if the weather is better.

[Anonymous No.11185484]

>>11185388
>there is actually science that proves the earth is round there is none that proves humans cause so-called "climate change"
>there is none
You're joking, right?

[Anonymous No.11185486]

In reality nothing works, humans are just too flawed to overcome this kind of problem. We don't even want to acknowledge it exists or we'll pretend it's so far down the line that it won't effect us anyone.This is the one that wipes us out but it's not like I actually give a fuck I've already accepted it. It's been real.

[Anonymous No.11185490]

>billionaires who care more about their moment on top of the mountain than the future of mankind
>religious autists who think god made the planet and wouldn't let anything bad happen to it

This is what wipes us out, what a fucking pathetic species. It's not even a problem where we're too late or we don't have the technology. We're just too dumb.

[Anonymous No.11185494]

>>11185426
This makes common sense. How can i still be on team deny and still give a hoot?
>>11185395
Good president. Trump is. It's about money, not climate.
>>11185391
Free money does not compute.
>>11185388
Recognized for based.
>>11185387
Couldn't hurt.
>>11184779
It was a good one
>>11184936
>>11184936
>zoomers.
Fuck MOST of those bozos. The 80s are the green pioneers. That was an abrupt chance from 500 factory HP to the dodge omni and chevy chevette. Inflation was gargantuan and we turned off the A/C. Godzilla came bace and we tighten our belts. The Xers started green because we had a bad feeling, though, the "science" wasn't in yet. You're welcome for the internet btw.
>>11185490
We don't need pussies.

[Anonymous No.11185496]

>>11185400

[Anonymous No.11185500]

>that guy who responds to every post in the thread

2016 was the worst year for the webstie

[Anonymous No.11185501]

>>11185494
>chance from 500 factory HP to the dodge omni and chevy chevette. Inflation was gargantuan and we turned off the A/C. Godzilla came bace a

>chance
*Change
>bace
*Back
Drunk proofreading.

[Svrtdhm. No.11185504]

>>11185501
Don't apologize bitch!
Why are you talking to yourself?
If they can't figure it, they ain't worth it.
A wine bibber and friend of publicans. I speak in parables so those who can comprende do and, those who no comprende don't.

[DDAVID DEUTSCHE, EVERETTIAN FA(...) No.11185555]

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cross-check/the-infinite-optimism-of-physicist-david-deutsch/

>Horgan: Do you think concerns about climate change and other environmental problems are excessive?

>Deutsch: Resource-depletion and overpopulation worries are fundamentally flawed. Climate change worries are fundamentally misdirected. Geoengineering is essential, unavoidable and is being downplayed and delayed because of the “moral hazard” that people will be distracted from reducing carbon dioxide emissions. The latter should be the third most important response, after geoengineering and mitigation of the effects of climate (changed and otherwise) on people.

>Geoengineering is essential, unavoidable and is being downplayed and delayed beecause of the “moral hazard” that people will be distracted from reducing carbon dioxide emissions.

>Geoengineering is essential, unavoidable and is being downplayed and delayed because of the “moral hazard” that people will be distracted from reducing carbon dioxide emissions.

>Geoengineering is esssential, unavoidable and is being dowwnplayed and delayed bercause of the “moral hazard” that people will be distracted from reducing carbon dioxide emissions.

>Geoengineering iis essential, unavoidable and is being downplayed and delayed because of the “moral hazard” that people will be diistracted from reducing carbon dioxide emissions.

THIS IS OUTRAGEOUS WE CAN'T LET HIM GET AWAY WITH THIS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! #metoo

WHY ARE SCIENTISTS SUCH INCELS?!??!?!?!??!?!?!?!??!? THIS IS PATHETIC!!!!!!!!

INB4 HE'S NOT A CLIMATOLOGIST... AS IF THAT IS A REAL FIELD OF STUDY LOLOLOLOL ACADEMICS =/= SCIENCE

AHHAHAHAHA AND ALSO MATHEMATICIANS GIVE INPUT ON *************COMPUTER SCIENCE*************

[Anonymous No.11185567]

>>11185555
>geoengineering
So basically fancy word for carbon capture?

[Anonymous No.11185600]

There are three main denier arguments:
>patrick moore/[insert oil propagandist here] said this wouldn't happen
>al goore/[insert non-climate scientist here] said this would happen and it hasn't
>look at this wrong prediction by the climate cult! [insert tabloid headline here]

[Anonymous No.11185601]

>>11185555

based

[Anonymous No.11185629]

Kill all boomers
Kill all republicans
Nuke China + India + America if Trump is reelected
Win the impeding war
It's our only option

[Anonymous No.11185640]

>>11185567

there is more to geoeng than carbon capture. stratospheric aerosols, space reflectors etc..

[Anonymous No.11185643]

>>11185629
Stop global warming with nuclear winter.

[Anonymous No.11185760]

>>11185400
>haha yeah go and try that see how violent the people get.
Carbon tariffication will have a paltry effect on income early on that will be vastly outweighed by the benefits of avoiding economic losses due to climate change later on. If the double dividend hypothesis is true (it's still debated and research is pretty much split 50:50 on this), then it could have a positive effect even during the initial investment phase by replacing other less efficient taxes and giving a boost to the economy. If people reject carbon tariffication due to distrust in scientists and policymakers, then that's more of an indictment against the public rather than the policy itself.

[Anonymous No.11185824]

>>11183149

>abandon nuclear power to fight climate change

Crazy Bernie at it again.

[Anonymous No.11185834]

>>11185760

>make ineffective carbon taxes is the only way to implement a heavily regressive carbon tax system

If it's not impacting the ecomy, the taxes are not doing anything to cause change. Full stop.

[Anonymous No.11185836]

>>11183149
YES THE ANSWER TO EVERYTHING IS MORE SOCIALISM YAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAS QUEEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


REGULATE REGULATE REGUALTE TELL ME WHAT TO DO YEEEEEES

[Anonymous No.11185879]

>>11185555
> born Haifa, Israel
Nice try kike

[Anonymous No.11185956]

>>11185836
This but unironically

[Anonymous No.11185958]

Stop change ? To what ? Says who ?
Why did you lefties change Global warming to Climate change ?

[Anonymous No.11186108]

>>11185958
>Why did you lefties change Global warming to Climate change ?
Nice myth
https://skepticalscience.com/climate-change-global-warming.htm

[Anonymous No.11186121]

>>11180515

How do.we concede to climate change?

[Anonymous No.11186136]

>>11185958
Anyone who puts space before punctuation mark is not credible.

[Anonymous No.11186157]

before this thread i believed in a man made global warming, but all the capslock, memes and "no, its not real lalalala" answers convinced me otherwise ;^)

[Anonymous No.11186158]

>>11186108
>global warming became the dominant popular term in June 1988

https://pmm.nasa.gov/education/articles/whats-name-global-warming-vs-climate-change

You had to be there. It is very true that one phrase was used way more than the other, mostly by politicians. Anon is right. You should explain without revising history from a random website. If you have no authority to speak, keep it zipped so you don't make a fool out of your own team.

[Anonymous No.11186180]

>>11186158
>mostly by politicians
See >>11185600
Also, this is /sci/, not /pol/, now fuck off back there.

[Anonymous No.11186185]

>>11186158
>fool out of your own team.
you think its a team thing?

also, why does your "team" never provide any measured data to prove otherwise?

[Anonymous No.11186194]

We kill the sun

[Anonymous No.11186223]

>>11180515
You can't change the nature yet, we don't have the Technology for that, and the damage is already done, we can only change some things in hope things don't get really fucking bad by 2100. Humanity need to adapt to the new climate before we can reach a new level of tech and then we will fix this planet.
>>11185500
not only for this website, also the internet overall.

[Anonymous No.11186247]

>>11186185
>you think its a team thing?
No. I was attempting to communicate on your level. You sabotage your own argument when people know that you don't know what you're talking about and, much worse, they may think that you are being deceptive. And don't assume my "team."
>>11186180
Never been to /pol/. How is it?

[Anonymous No.11186255]

>>11180515
only soiboi's care about the climate be a chad doomer and stop being a whiny bitch

[Anonymous No.11186261]

>>11185484
No he isn't you are a joke, you literally don't have the first clue wtf "climate science" consists of.

>muh correlation between carbon and climate since the industrial revolution

Literally means jack shit, there is also a correlation between climate and the number of cans of chef boyardee ravioli, STOP ALL CANNED RAVIOLI PRODUCTION NAOH AND PROBLEM SOLVED!

The sun is what controls climate you psued mong. Go cry in your cerea over imaginary problems if you want but leave sane rational people the fuck alone with your nonsense. Join those retarded hippies in England with the donkey street theater for retards shit if it makes you feel better so we can laugh at you and we all get something out of it

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g7Ox40Wv1dw..

[Anonymous No.11186267]

>>11186261
*carbon and temperature

[Anonymous No.11186292]

>>11186261
>The sun is what controls climate
Ruh-roh, I'm guessing the kekistani cringefag left this graph out of his presentation, right?

[Anonymous No.11186302]

>>11186292
>kekistani cringefag
>implying I am using Sargoy as a source on climate science and didn't post the video to show the retarded hippies in the climate cult

Oh no no no anon, this is embarrassing

[Anonymous No.11186305]

>>11186261
Yeah because scientist just looked at correlation and said YES THIS IS IT!
Without trying to find mechanism how it works first.
Global Warming deniers lack any knowledge on the topic, all your fucking rebuttals have been tried and tested before you all heard about global warming.

[Anonymous No.11186307]

>>11186292
I will tell you what, one of the greatest minds of the 20th century wrote a book called state of fear, a fiction book so even a donkey brained mook like you should be able to understand it. Read it and allay your fears about your doomsday cult.


The science behind global warming is speculative and incomplete, meaning no concrete conclusions can be drawn regarding human involvement in climate change.

Elites in various fields use either real or artificial crises to maintain the existing social order, misusing the “science” behind global warming.

As a result of potential conflicts of interest, the scientists conducting research on topics related to global warming may subtly change their findings to bring them in line with their funding sources. Since climatology can not incorporate double-blind studies, as are routine in other sciences, and climate scientists set experiment parameters, perform experiments within the parameters they have set, and analyze the resulting data, a phenomenon known as “bias” is offered as the most benign reason for climate science being so inaccurate.

A key concept, delivered from the eccentric Professor Hoffman, suggests, in Hoffman’s words, the existence of a “politico-legal-media” complex, comparable to the “military-industrial complex,” of the Cold War era. Hoffman insists climate science began using more extreme, fear-inducing terms such as “crisis,” “catastrophe,” and, “disaster,” shortly after the fall of the Berlin Wall, in order to maintain a level of fear in citizens, for the purpose of social control, since the specter of Soviet Communism was gone. This “state of fear” gives the book its title.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_Fear

[Anonymous No.11186311]

>>11186302
>implying I watched the video
>implying you use anyone reputable as a source on climate science considering you think solar irradiance is responsible for recent warming

[Anonymous No.11186316]

>>11186307
>The science behind global warming is speculative and incomplete, meaning no concrete conclusions can be drawn regarding human involvement in climate change
So why do the models which taking anthropogenic forcings into account continue to be accurate while denier natural-forcings-only models fail spectacularly?
https://youtu.be/ugwqXKHLrGk

[Anonymous No.11186317]

>>11186292

Even if it were true there is nothing you can do about as the vast majority of the pollution comes from outside of western environment and economic policy. Climate is a chaotic system (chaos theory) and there is no way the human mind could ever come up with the variables to accurately understand/predict it.

The models currently used are based on hypothetical comparing Earth to Venus then using a computer model with a 1 to 1 correlation between carbon and climate which is fucking hilarious. The entire "field" is literally one psued assumption after another, it is the biggest pile of shit I have ever seen disguised as "science". None of the predictions of the computer model have ever been anywhere near correct as any competent computer scientist could easily predict.

GIGO

t. computer scientist with a background in thermodynamics

[Anonymous No.11186319]

>>11186316
*which take

[Anonymous No.11186323]

There are some models, that suggest we could achieve it.

There is possibility, that we could cool it down, but it would get warmer later...

It would require complete, real data to work with.

Maybe we should just start fusion with feedback on superconducting magnetic loop, which would get warmer so fast it will kill us faster than than atmospheric change.

Maybe connecting more than 60 piezoelectric layers to achieve thermal flow capable of having load on sidechain could be enough.

[Anonymous No.11186324]

>>11186317
>Even if it were true there is nothing you can do about as the vast majority of the pollution comes from outside of western environment and economic policy. Climate is a chaotic system (chaos theory) and there is no way the human mind could ever come up with the variables to accurately understand/predict it.
I seriously hope you're getting paid to regurgitate these tired talking points.
>The models currently used are based on hypothetical comparing Earth to Venus then using a computer model with a 1 to 1 correlation between carbon and climate
[citation needed]
>it is the biggest pile of shit I have ever seen disguised as "science".
Ironic coming from a self acclaimed computer """scientist"""

[Anonymous No.11186327]

>>11186305
>Yeah because scientist just looked at correlation and said YES THIS IS IT!
>Without trying to find mechanism how it works first.

Yes that is in fact exactly what they did and built an entire industry around it

[Anonymous No.11186333]

>>11186317
>t. computer scientist
You could've put this at the beginning of your post and saved everyone the effort of reading your tripe

[Anonymous No.11186344]

>>11186311
Bud I will make you look illiterate on literally topic you can conceive of. If you don't understand the esoteric sciences your opinion on most everything "scientific" is a joke, but your level of "knowledge" of how to interpret this reality is a joke. You are only good for crunching numbers not interpretation. I will let you in on a little secret, nothing in the Universe is random so none of it matters, it is all already pre-ordained. even the hack Einstein knew that

"God does not play dice with the universe."

Now if you want to argue with people on forums about pseudo science trying to get them to join your cult, you are more than free too but you will look back at your life and cringe so hard you will have whiplash at some point in the future. But hey do you baby bubba. Until you understand the 7 hermetic principles don't expect anyone take you seriously when you think can predict the future of chaotic systems

[Anonymous No.11186345]

>>11186307
Yeah, and it's just imagination that last 5 years were hottest ever recorded.

>>11186317
West is the biggest consumer.
Why does it matter that we are biggest consumer? Well simply because even high china CO2 emissions is due to us buying shit from them. The west made fancy move to be able to blame China and other less developed countries for CO2 emissions.
To be honest, moving production back to US and EU might be beneficial as we would not emit CO2 from transport, and west has higher standards regards controlling emissions.

>>11186327
Nope, they didn't

[Anonymous No.11186346]

>>11180515
The US isn't the problem for one thing. The stuff we do is completely trumped by the fact that China and India dump waste in the ocean and have very weak environmental standards.

Also. people are completely overreacting about the urgency of the problem. A change in the environment because of emissions and waste would likely not occur in my or even my children's lifetime. There's plenty of time to work on solving this minor issue as it stands. There's no need for people to blow it out of proportion like they have been.

[Anonymous No.11186348]

>>11186344
Back to >>>/x/ with you

[Anonymous No.11186357]

>>11186324
>>The models currently used are based on hypothetical comparing Earth to Venus then using a computer model with a 1 to 1 correlation between carbon and climate
>[citation needed]


HAHAHAH as I said you don't even have the first clue wtf the "science" or psudeo science even is its origins. Please kys anon

https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2475/nasa-climate-modeling-suggests-venus-may-have-been-habitable/

[Anonymous No.11186359]

>>11186247
>"dont make fool of your team"
>you think its a team thing?
>"no."
not sure what is the purpose of this conversation anyway .. can you contribute anything useful to the debate (without being an asshat)?

Question:
>know someone I really respect (phd engineer and a good one)
>he questions the temperature measurement methods and evaliution of mean temperature
>ask him whether he really thinks that so many people working on such topic really did not consider this critically
>says yes
>I question his main sources for his phd thesis and why should anyone believe it and why does he believe his sources
>him: I put a lot of time and effort into this, thus its valueable
>me: your work considers mainly CFD about porous media; validation is difficult and even much less people are working on this topic than climate science
>conversation gets difficult and personal

can someone spoonfeed me on their measurement methods and why should it be looked on sceptically?

People believe in vaccine, ozone hole, quantum mechanics (without understanding it thoroughly); why the fuck do they have such trouble on believe in this topic (with access to the data)?

[Anonymous No.11186362]

>>11186305
actual anthropogenic climate change
>government hands out land to yokels
>slash and burning, massive loss of topsoil, constant over grazing effectively doubles land turned into farmland
>natural prairie condensation lowers massively
>prairie drought season cycle starts
>lack of prairie land causes temps to rise well over 10 degrees normal dry season
>eroded topsoil ends up causing dust storms
>massive restructure of cultivation techniques
>next drought cycle no dust bowl
scientists given millions of dollars
>measure co2 rises
>temp raises 1 degree plus or minus 2 degree error

[Anonymous No.11186363]

>>11186327
Here fag:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sTvqIijqvTg

Simple explanation for how it works, you could also go to library and read a fucking book first, if you want to be smart ass.

[Anonymous No.11186367]

>>11186327
>>11186333
OK WE ARE ALL GONNA DIE RAHHHH EVRYONE PEE THEIR PANTS AOC IS RIGHT WE ARE DEAD IN 12 YEARS!!!!!


I will just keep laughing my ass off at you morons in the meantime. Enjoy your fear porn kiddo

[Anonymous No.11186369]

>>11186348
you first
>>>/lgbt/

[Anonymous No.11186376]

>>11186362
don't forget urban heat island effect

[Anonymous No.11186377]

>>11186357
I don't know if you've actually read the contents of the article you just linked but it doesn't support your point at all.

[Anonymous No.11186381]

>>11186367
there are actual things that need to change or be fixed, but all the money to "fight climate change" goes into an academics pocket who does nothing but sit on their ass and aggregate data and contribute absolutely nothing to the world

[Anonymous No.11186382]

>>11186359
>People believe in vaccine, ozone hole, quantum mechanics (without understanding it thoroughly); why the fuck do they have such trouble on believe in this topic (with access to the data)?
Because the oil industry has a vested interest in spreading FUD propaganda (which gets lapped up by mainly right-wing pundits due to their ties with the industry)

[Anonymous No.11186384]

>>11186376
literally black t shirt vs white t shirt

[Anonymous No.11186385]

>>11186367
>OK WE ARE ALL GONNA DIE RAHHHH EVRYONE PEE THEIR PANTS AOC IS RIGHT WE ARE DEAD IN 12 YEARS!!!!!
Who are you quoting? AOC is not a climate scientist and her claim wasn't based on any actual climate data, why would I believe her?

[Anonymous No.11186386]

>>11186362
1 degree average is fucking massive for global temperature. And you are comparing local vs global changes. Do you have any scientific background or just read article on STOPECOTERRORISTS DOT COM and you feel like an expert.

[Anonymous No.11186387]

>>11186333
>>11186327

me: Been an actual scientist in the field for over 20 years. Worked for actual rocket scientist KC Adiga in nano particle fir suppression research at Georgia Tech Advanced technology Center with grants from DARPA

you: incel NEET undergrad that has no idea wtf you are talking about

hmmm you got me anon. I cry now. I am gonna cut down four acres of forest this weekend to stop my pain

[Anonymous No.11186391]

>>11186386
>appeals to authority and accuses someone of confirmation bias in the same sentence
you are a worthless person

[Anonymous No.11186392]

>>11186387
Yeah, stop LARPing

[Anonymous No.11186395]

>>11186385
her claim was based on that rentseeking organization that publishes inconclusive horse shit every 5 years and then demands millions of dollars

[Anonymous No.11186396]

>>11186391
Scientific background is not appeal to authority, you absolute dumb fuck. You need to have background in since to understand mechanics of
phenomenon.

[Anonymous No.11186397]

>>11186392
Literally my ex-boss who my Dad who is retired still works with at NanoMist. Sorry kiddo not a LARP unfortunately
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Kayyani_Adiga

[Anonymous No.11186398]

>>11186395
>her claim was based on
Show me the data she was referencing. The exact studies.

[Anonymous No.11186399]

you can't, it's a natural process

[Anonymous No.11186400]

>>11186392
Want pics of us together in India or Atlanta?

[Anonymous No.11186408]

>>11186397
I seriously hope you're joking and you didn't just deliberately doxx your family

[Anonymous No.11186413]

>>11186400
>like it proves anything
your dad is climate change denial as well?

[Anonymous No.11186417]

I'm doing a project on this topic.

https://www.climatelevels.org/?pid=2degreesinstitute&theme=grid-light

Is this a reputable source?

[Anonymous No.11186424]

>>11186417
You have data sources in each graph, check them not site like this.

[Anonymous No.11186427]

>>11186408
That is Dr KC Adiga, his work is well known and accessible on the web. My name and my father's name are in the company charter not hard to find for anyone, again easily accessible on the web this shit isn't a secret as we have investors, which if you weren't a silly NEET child with no business knowledge and experience you would know all this needs to be publicly accessible for investors. Minor in biz kiddo and they will teach you this shit in accounting 101. Why in the world would I give a fuck about a bunch of donkeys on a forum for incel hacks know information that is publicly available anyway?

[Anonymous No.11186431]

>>11186413
He is not a retarded consumer of fear porn either, yes.

[Anonymous No.11186436]

>>11186427
Doxxing doesn't just mean your information is publicly available, dumbass.

[Anonymous No.11186440]

We can't, it's not human nature to make decisions that benefit us so indirectly and far ahead. We are simply too stupid.

[Anonymous No.11186446]

>>11186436
>Doxxing doesn't just mean your information is publicly available, dumbass.

Anon sorry but you are no half as bright as you think you are. Here you can even have a pic of what two actual accomplished scientist gigachad's who have accomplished what you incels only dream about in an illustrious carer looks like for you to try and aspire too.

[Anonymous No.11186452]

>>11186427
Cool, some Indian dude barely notable and his son who is LARPing on web are climate change denials. Guess NASA, ESA, IPCC, JAXA and many more notable institutions are wrong.

>>11186446
None of those look similar to pajeet you posted.
>140x140
Ohhhh, you LARPing mother-fucker, you could at least download full resolution.

[Anonymous No.11186455]

>>11186452
Ahhh I get it, your dad isn't even the notable pajeet, soz mate I thought you are more valuable.

[Anonymous No.11186458]

>>11186452
>Cool, some Indian dude barely notable and his son who

This is the quality of this board and why you should never care what the morons here say about anything anons. This board is mostly wet brained retards

[Anonymous No.11186462]

>>11186458
Yeah, like you. Sure the dude you posted has some citation in recognition, but who cares, you are LARPing not even as him but as his worker.
No serious scientist in related field denies climate change, that's about your credibility.

[Anonymous No.11186464]

>>11186387
so, you think you are the only one here having academic degree here and thus only your opinion matters? I know that kind of people and they are beyond your degree (professors) and deny man made global warming without having any clue on this topic.
their "facts" are:
>too many variables
>the models now are too simple
>green lobby hoax

none of them works in this field. so, despite your spectacular being as computer scientist, can you dispute any of the papers that prove otherwise?

[Anonymous No.11186471]

We are doomed.
Just look at this thread and how fucking seething and angry everyone is, while giving no input on how to stop it.
We can't and we won't.
Don't have children.
Spare them the apocalypse that will come in 50 years.

[Anonymous No.11186472]

>>11186464
I am gonna be slaying pussy while you psueds are crying about climate change with stinky feminists lecturing you about the male gaze when you actually go outside to join them in their cult gatherings. Have fun little niggle se on judgment day and you can say I told you so if you want

[Anonymous No.11186479]

>>11186471
>Don't have children.
>Spare them the apocalypse that will come in 50 years.

Who are you gonna drink a beer with when it happens anon? Party pooper
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_3eC35LoF4U

[Anonymous No.11186481]

>>11186472
the ultimative fact against global warming

[Anonymous No.11186484]

>>11186359
>asshat
This particular contribution was that it is not myth that the buzzwords "global warming" changed to "climate change," as viewed from the average Joe, watching CNN since 1980. I made one serious contributions elsewhere itt and yes, this conversation is going nowhere.

[Anonymous No.11186485]

>>11186472
>fat nibba from picture
>slaying pussy
Well I hope your science LARPing pays well...

[Anonymous No.11186487]

>>11186485

Not even the Atlanteans could stop the inevitable with their tech and knowledge. Surf the kali yuga and don't sweat it little niggle, let God sort it out

[Anonymous No.11186491]

>>11186396
>millions of species extinction
>fish stocks crashing
>retards in brazil chopping down the rainforest
>GIVE US MONEY TO LOOK AT THE TEMPERATURE OR ELSE YOU HATE THE ENVIRONMENT AND YOU WILL DIE, YOU HAVE TO HAVE HIGH IQ TO UNDERSTAND CONJECTURAL DATA, ITS LIKE RICK AND MORTY YOU HAVE TO LOVE SCIENCE TO UNDERSTAND WHY TREERINGS DONT EVEN MATCH ICE CORE SAMPLES, NOAA REWRITING TEMPERATURE RECORDS IN 1930 DESPITE BEING A RECORD BREAKING DROUGHT YEAR, YOU NEED TO PAY MY RENT OR YOULL DIE

>>11186398
she never read any study, she read a clickbait AP news article incorrectly referencing an IPCC paper from the same way the news blatantly made up shit in reference to prior 2009 and 2013 IPCC studies that was also another "we dont quite know after a decade coasting on your money, give us more money again to find out"

[Anonymous No.11186492]

>>11186485
Fat, rofl, I slalyed more pussy by the time I was 25 than you will your whole life little dude. Come on now with the malicious cope, it just makes you look petty

[Anonymous No.11186497]

>>11186484
50% seems to be assumptions and insults; thanks for your very useful contribution, mate.

[Anonymous No.11186499]

>>11186492
good for (you) =)

[Anonymous No.11186501]

>>11185388
>>11186316

[Anonymous No.11186505]

>>11186497
>We solved global warming hoax remedies in a 4chinz thread

>we did it reditt!

[Anonymous No.11186508]

>>11186497
There have been zero assumptions or insults. I only suggest how you can be a more effective you. You may be confusing me with another. I spoke about consumer demand and its power to a greater impact than any legislation. It's a mile up there somewhere. I am correcting an attempt to correct Anon when, Anon was right and could benefit from explanation, rather than, "Nice myth."

[Anonymous No.11186513]

Oh damn btw I didn't mean to link that Sargoy vid it was th wrong one to watch the retarded hippies I meant to post this one, sorry anons

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fFkN5H4CCY0

[Anonymous No.11186532]

THE SKY IS FALLING

[Anonymous No.11186533]

also

PSS I will stop joking about the anons who are genuinely afraid about the climate in this thread. I will tell you another secret, the people you vote for don't make any real policy the "deep state" does. The bankers and Military Industrial Complex do. If this was a real threat the military would be on high alert from a clear and present danger and would solve this on their own with their own black budget funding.

If there was a real climate threat the real actual people that run this world wouldn't give a shit about what the retarded masses of voters think about it. They would just solve it so stop worrying about pointless shit

[Anonymous No.11186538]

>>11186533
*t. ex-DARPA secret clearance

[Anonymous No.11186544]

>>11186538
state department fucks are delusional paranoid assholes
why else would you invade vietnam on a lie to "fight 'global' communism from spreading"?

[Anonymous No.11186553]

>>11186544
Vietnam was about making money like all wars anon. State department doesn't do dick when it comes to this kind of policy. No elected officials make this kind of military policy. Hell not even safety policy like the secret service. Any kind of policy regarding shit that matters is done by people that are not elected.

I assure you if there was any kind of threat from the climate the military wouldn't give two shits about who is in office or what they think about it. They aren't required too if the rules of engagement are met. They are completely autonomous on the kind of security threat climate would fall under. Hell anon submarine captains are cleared to launch nukes without orders you think the military wouldn't care about climate? Climate is no different than any other kind of threat.

[Anonymous No.11186575]

>>11186553
>making money
unless youre talking about CIA running drugs through the golden triangle no one "made" money from vietnam
(((defense companies))) run larger receipts on contracts not related to standard procurement but R&D and speculative future contracts
also
> Military
>literally throws all matter shit and oil/petrochemicals into the Ocean because "its SOO big"
>caring about the environment

[Anonymous No.11186578]

>>11186575
>no one "made" money from vietnam
Lol anon wtf you on about? War is the biggest business there is and yes Air America running drugs was quite profitable for the CIA as well

[Anonymous No.11186583]

>>11183075
>all the literal retards fighting over your bait
You should have to pass a test to use this board.

[Anonymous No.11186599]

>>11186578
instability destroys otherwise easily fulfilled contracts, you cant setup pipelines, drill wells and build when shots are going off, most of the privates contracts in Iraq and afghanistan that arent low margin equipment are complete fucking shitshows of grift that doesnt deliver on anything not unlike most academics and "scientists"

[Anonymous No.11186616]

>>11186599
lol if you say so anon, you are looking at things from a very shallow perspective about things you don't fully understand so you will likely just balk at explanations beyond your current level of understanding. Everything that happens in global politics has already been planned centuries ago


https://www.globalresearch.ca/we-re-going-to-take-out-7-countries-in-5-years-iraq-syria-lebanon-libya-somalia-sudan-iran/5166

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FNt7s_Wed_4

[Anonymous No.11186630]

>>11180516
based and redpilled

[Anonymous No.11186632]

>>11183462
>eat vegan so we can eat luxurious meats and meals, goy.

[Anonymous No.11186644]

>>11186616
youre not generating more income or even temporarily bumping GDP from war or any armed conflict, the only people able to make money are are companies that are busy making death and they are more people doing literally everything else other than fulfilling defense contracts, Iraq and afghanistan are conflicts that dont affect other american industry

[Anonymous No.11186652]

>>11186553
I will explain this a little further for those interested. You have to understand how the military works. They are required to keep the military operational at all times to respond to any threat. This gives them a wide range of powers the average normie would never even imagine. The military doesn't care if it is a terrorist threat, a natural disaster, climate etc it doesn't matter, they care what the threat is, their purview is to keep the military operational in tip top shape no matter what and can enact jurisdiction over anything that interferes with their mandate.

Say a tornado is gonna hit a nuke silo, the military wouldn't do shit about the civilians but they would do whatever they want, whatever they deem necessary for their personnel and equipment. The military would view a climate threat along the same lines as a nuclear bomb. During the cold war the military was authorized to launch nukes without the president's authorization which I mentioned with sub captains but also the army if they knew the Soviets had launched they could launch under the rules of engagement knowing they possibly may not be able to even get an order from the President to do so. Politicians can only direct the military to do things from a very mundane level, they have zero say over the policy of what the military deems necessary to meet any kind of threat which as I mentioned numerous times climate obviously falls under.

[Anonymous No.11186674]

>>11186247
>I did not have sexual relations with that imageboard

[Anonymous No.11186702]

>>11186644
https://www.globalresearch.ca/apocalypse-now-war-is-profitable/5692980

[Anonymous No.11186715]

It is important to note that such a system will fluctuate with time scales ranging from seconds to millennia, even in the absence of an explicit forcing other than a steady sun. Much of the popular literature (on both sides of the climate debate) assumes that all changes must be driven by some external factor. Of course, the climate system is driven by the sun, but even if the solar forcing were constant, the climate would still vary. This is actually something that all of you have long known – even if you don’t realize it. After all, you have no difficulty recognizing that the steady stroking of a violin string by a bow causes the string to vibrate and generate sound waves. In a similar way, the atmosphere–ocean system responds to steady forcing with its own modes of variation (which, admittedly, are often more complex than the modes of a violin string). Moreover, given the massive nature of the oceans, such variations can involve timescales of millennia rather than milliseconds. El Niño is a relatively short example, involving years, but most of these internal time variations are too long to even be identified in our relatively short instrumental record. Nature has numerous examples of autonomous variability, including the approximately 11-year sunspot cycle and the reversals of the Earth’s magnetic field every couple of hundred thousand years or so. In this respect, the climate system is no different from other natural systems.

Of course, such systems also do respond to external forcing, but such a forcing is not needed for them to exhibit variability. While the above is totally uncontroversial, please think about it for a moment. Consider the massive heterogeneity and complexity of the system, and the variety of mechanisms of variability as we consider the current narrative that is commonly presented as ‘settled science.’

[Anonymous No.11186717]

The popular narrative and its political origins

Now here is the currently popular narrative concerning this system. The climate, a complex multifactor system, can be summarized in just one variable, the globally averaged temperature change, and is primarily controlled by the 1-2% perturbation in the energy budget due to a single variable – carbon dioxide – among many variables of comparable importance.

This is an extraordinary pair of claims based on reasoning that borders on magical thinking. It is, however, the narrative that has been widely accepted, even among many sceptics. This acceptance is a strong indicator of the problem Snow identified.

Many politicians and learned societies go even further: They endorse carbon dioxide as the controlling variable, and although mankind’s CO2 contributions are small compared to the much larger but uncertain natural exchanges with both the oceans and the biosphere, they are confident that they know precisely what policies to implement in order to control carbon dioxide levels.

While several scientists have put forward this view over the past 200 years, it was, until the 1980s, generally dismissed. When, in 1988, the NASA scientist, James Hansen, testified to the US Senate that the summer’s warmth reflected increased CO2, even Science magazine reported that the climate science community was sceptical. The establishment of this extreme position as dogma during the present period is due to political actors and others seeking to exploit the opportunities that abound in the multi-trillion-dollar energy sector. One example was Maurice Strong, a global bureaucrat and wheeler-dealer (who spent his final years in China apparently trying to avoid prosecution for his role in the UN’s Oil for Food program scandals). Strong is frequently credited with initiating the global warming movement in the early 1980s and he subsequently helped to engineer the Rio Conference that produced the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change

[Anonymous No.11186718]

>>11186702
>literally just boomer rambling

[Anonymous No.11186719]

This was the agreement that endorsed the CO2-climate narrative, and initiated the series of international meetings (that continue to the present) to plan the control of climate. However, others like the Swedish Prime Minister, Olaf Palme, and his friend and science advisor, Bert Bolin, who was the first chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), had also begun exploiting this issue as early as the 1970s. Their motivation was to overcome the resistance to nuclear energy by demonizing coal.

Political enthusiasm has only increased since then as political ideology has come to play a major role. A few years ago, Christiana Figueres, then executive secretary of UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, said that mankind was, for the first time in history, setting itself the task of intentionally changing the economic system.2

Ms. Figueres is not alone in believing this. Pope Francis’ closest adviser castigated conservative climate change skeptics in the United States, blaming capitalism for their views. Speaking with journalists, Cardinal Oscar Rodríguez Maradiaga criticized ‘movements’ in the United States that had preemptively come out in opposition to Francis’s planned encyclical on climate change. ‘The ideology surrounding environmental issues is too tied to a capitalism that doesn’t want to stop ruining the environment because they don’t want to give up their profits’, he said.

This past August, a paper appeared in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Littered with ‘could bes’ and ‘might bes’, it conclude that ‘Collective human action’ is required to ‘steer the Earth System away from a potential threshold’ and keep it habitable.

[Anonymous No.11186720]

The authors said that this would involve ‘stewardship of the entire Earth System – biosphere, climate, and societies’, and that it might involve ‘decarbonization of the global economy, enhancement of biosphere carbon sinks, behavioral changes, technological innovations, new governance arrangements, and transformed social values’.

Remember, in a world that buys into the incoherent ‘precautionary principle,’ even the mere claim of remote possibility justifies extreme action.

Presumably, the power these people desperately seek includes the power to roll back the status and welfare that the ordinary person has acquired and continues to acquire through the fossil fuel generated industrial revolution and return them to their presumably more appropriate status as serfs. Many more among the world’s poorest will be forbidden the opportunity to improve their condition.

Nevertheless, when these claims are presented to the leaders of our societies, along with the bogus claim that 97% of scientists agree, our leaders are afraid to differ, and proceed, lemming-like, to plan for the suicide of industrial society. Again, nothing better illustrates the problem that Snow identified.

Interestingly, however, ‘ordinary’ people (as opposed to our ‘educated’ elites) tend to see through the nonsense being presented. What is it about our elites that makes them so vulnerable, and what is it about many of our scientists that leads them to promote such foolishness? The answers cannot be very flattering to either.

>>11186718
military anon posted a based website cringe lord

.https://www.globalresearch.ca/global-warming-for-the-two-cultures/5690130

[Anonymous No.11186759]

>>11186720
ty anon, good excerpts. As I said in the beginning of my posting in this thread you have to know the real history of the CO2 narrative it is absolutely absurd as any computer scientist that builds models of non linear equations will tell you. Any real information/computer scientist knows this computer model is as useful as shit on a stick.

Also I mentioned this was put forth by NASA based on their claims that CO2 was possibly what caused Venus to have the atmosphere it does. One psued magical variable after another in a model that is comparable to Popsicle sticks for a bridge.

Some anon made a joke above about a computer scientist weighing in on climate science which only showed how ignorant he is. This entire charade is based on a nonsensical computer model. Any reputable CS would see this model and look at the creator like they are retarded. Whoever made it was not a legitimate mathematician/information scientist because they would see right through it instantly and would never build something so laughable to begin with.

Some retard who barely knew how to program hello world had to make it in logo writer

[Anonymous No.11186789]

>>11180515
we dont see >>11185406
just close borders and shoot migrating swarms of niggers on sight

[Anonymous No.11186797]

>>11186759
NOAA is went about rewriting temperature records just to align with CO2 theory

[Anonymous No.11186818]

>>11186717
>Many politicians and learned societies go even further: They endorse carbon dioxide as the controlling variable, and although mankind’s CO2 contributions are small compared to the much larger but uncertain natural exchanges with both the oceans and the biosphere, they are confident that they know precisely what policies to implement in order to control carbon dioxide levels.
>Now here is the currently popular narrative concerning this system. The climate, a complex multifactor system, can be summarized in just one variable, the globally averaged temperature change, and is primarily controlled by the 1-2% perturbation in the energy budget due to a single variable – carbon dioxide – among many variables of comparable importance.
Are you a mutt or something? It´s like you don´t understand the concept of equilibrium so you instead ramble about politics.

[Anonymous No.11186822]

>>11186462
cope

[Anonymous No.11186826]

>>11186818
What about "equilibrium" you disgusting slob?

[Anonymous No.11186840]

>>11186797
Indeed anon

>>11186818
I am pretty sure my credentials and information I provided in this thread speak for themselves so though your attempts to appear like you know what you are talking about and I don't are cute desu ultimately you are cringe lord status and brain damaged if you can't understand what politics has to do with everything after I laid it all out for you

[Anonymous No.11186849]

>>11186818
sorry this was for this fag not you

>>11186702

[Anonymous No.11186858]

>>11186840
>I am pretty sure my credentials and information I provided in this thread speak for themselves
Yes, they say you are deranged subhuman unqualified to speak about the topic. I could start with the most obvious insult of common sense.

You say
>mankind’s CO2 contributions are small compared to the much larger but uncertain natural exchanges with both the oceans and the biosphere
While the concentration of CO2 jumped from 250-300ppm (levels that have been stable for hundreds of thousand years) to 400ppm. Can you explain what mysterious increase through "natural exchanges" better than the current anthropocentric theory?

[Anonymous No.11186861]

>>11186858
literal autist alarmist incapable of accepting the facts, log off Greta, HOW DARE YOU

[Anonymous No.11186871]

>>11186861
>incapable of accepting the facts
I understand that American diet doesn´t form the brightest brains, but at least try ffs.

You say you have a better theory for rapid increase in concentration of CO2 than burning of fossil fuel. You say that theory has something to do with exchanges in biosphere and hydrospere. Let´s hear it, so we can laugh.

[Anonymous No.11186882]

>>11186871
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CLxpgRqxtEA

[Anonymous No.11186895]

>>11183061

[Anonymous No.11186899]

>>11186882

[Anonymous No.11186901]

>>11183148
>99.7% scientist used to be flat eathers
XDDDDDDDDDDDD
Fucking state of burger education.
No, almost no scientist used to be flat earther,
almost everyone who had anything to do with scientific reasoning before dark ages knew that earth is not flat.
During middle ages scholars were probably not believing in flat earth as well.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myth_of_the_flat_Earth

>>11186797
Any source for that besides "realclimatescience"?

[Anonymous No.11186914]

>>11186871
>.08 temperature change is only CO2 related
temperature should be scorching in 5 years from the massive release of Methane from permafrost melt recently, if your bullshit greenhouse thoery were coherent

[Anonymous No.11186923]

>>11186914
Why are you trying to wiggle yourself out of the question? Did you lose faith in the wall of bullshit you wrote? Pathetic.

[Anonymous No.11186945]

>>11186324
>I seriously hope you're getting paid to regurgitate these tired talking points

This is what someone says when they know you have them dead to rights and they have no counter argument. If it is so "tired, you should have an equally "tired" prepared response loaded and ready to go to "debunk" it so where is it anon?

[Anonymous No.11186946]

>>11186923
different anon
CO2 is less credible as a theory than the loonys trying to prove ether is a genuine concept

[wtf is wrong with you No.11186950]

>>11184886
are you supposed to be crowder's vile henchman? cause great job; fucking denying all possible solutions instead of actually contributing to the solutions. And then running the fuck away from all of the problems you as an individual have caused. You're the sorriest excuse for a human being i have ever seen on this thread and a fucking coward at that.

[Anonymous No.11186959]

>>11186950
My solution is to take a dump on your mom's porch don't say I didn't do my part

[wtf is wrong with you No.11186977]

>>11186632
"Luxurious meats"
What difference does that make? It's all meat, regardless of the animal source; it's fucking cancer and you'll die a miserable death just like the rest of America will.

[Anonymous No.11187347]

>>11186945
Enjoy, dumbass:
https://skepticalscience.com/argument.php

[Anonymous No.11187354]

>>11186471
>input on how to stop it

[Anonymous No.11187496]

>>11187347
cope

[Anonymous No.11187502]

>>11186946
aether is genuine

[Anonymous No.11187520]

>>11187496
Not an argument.

[Anonymous No.11187526]

>>11187520
seeth

[Anonymous No.11187542]

>>11187526
?

[Anonymous No.11187544]

>>11180515
My bosses have launched a multibillion dollar foundation to fight climate change. Just to give you guys a sense of who we are. We have top researchers and scientists from MIT, Princeton etc. We're the real deal.

[Anonymous No.11187578]

>>11187544

No LFTR? No real deal.

[Anonymous No.11187588]

>>11187578
Idk, I'm not as fixated on climate as they are. (For the record we're in quantitative finance so it's not like they know anything about climate science either - they just have money.) I just donate a bit of my bonus to their foundation if I feel like it. But they are big on nuclear.

[Anonymous No.11187761]

>>11180515
>How do we stop climate change, /sci/?

By finding TRUE SOURCES of pollutions,

[Anonymous No.11187770]

>>11180515
>How do we stop climate change, /sci/?
Geo-Engineering.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mc_4Z1oiXhY
Reminder that global warming is not a real problem, it's easily fixed and only really concerns the third world anyway.

[Anonymous No.11187775]

>>11187761
>climate change
ganges lmao, like local pollution has anything to do with this
>china industrial
China has smaller per capita emissions tha US and EU, also they produce most of the shit you buy, so you are pretty much responsible for this as well.
>africa
per capita they almost don't produce greenhouse gases, but sure, we should stop sending them help so they could finally start dying off

[Anonymous No.11187777]

>>11187502
and CO2 turns the planet into an oven and vaccinations cause autism

[Anonymous No.11187778]

>>11187761
>This right there is the problem
Well, yea it is. Chinese industry is also targeted however.

Don't understand why do american subhumans constantly try to shift the blame.

[Anonymous No.11187780]

>>11187761
>pollution
they dont want do anything, they want you to pay taxes for simply existing

[Anonymous No.11187781]

>>11187778
The plastics in the oceans has been proven to be the Chinese

[Anonymous No.11187787]

>>11187775
>>11187761
>ganges lmao, like local pollution has anything to do with this

[Anonymous No.11187792]

>>11187781
Plastics in the ocean don't cause climate change. And China is ceasing to import plastic waste, so it's going to decrease soon.

[Anonymous No.11187800]

>>11187792
It's destroying our oceans if we're just talking about climate change then that's a whole other can of worms they're responsible for... No regulations and dumping ozone depleting chemicals into atmosphere such as CFC-11

[Anonymous No.11187811]

>>11187777
the aether is 100% proven fact, not up for debate anon and yes vaccines have frequently caused autism even the inserts in the vaccines themselves say so. Perhaps you have a touch of the tism

[Anonymous No.11187815]

>>11187800
Yes, we are talking about climate change. If you are worried about oceans your primary target should be the global trade with plastic waste, since it's not really the polluting countries that are "responsible", it's the countries that are sources of pollution which abuse the poor countries as a proxy to throw waste into the ocean.

See for example
>https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/may/10/nearly-all-the-worlds-countries-sign-plastic-waste-deal-except-us
if you want to see who is truly responsible

[Anonymous No.11187818]

>>11187792
We're Murica we ain't changing shit, you commies can suck down our CO2 fumes til you gag oral creampie style, FUCK YAH

[Anonymous No.11187819]

>>11187818
Thank you for sincerity. It's unironically much better than lying, whining and wiggling.

[Anonymous No.11187824]

>>11187819
Suck it pinko, better dead than red, FUCK YAH

[Anonymous No.11187826]

>>11187815
>its everyone elses fault except the people dumping it into waterways

[Anonymous No.11187831]

>>11187815
It's literally been traced back to China now
Also way to not respond to my post about China dumping tons of banned ozone depleting chemicals into the atmosphere.
Do you get immediate notification about your social credit score increasing when you make these ridiculous posts?

[Anonymous No.11187843]

>>11187831
>It's literally been traced back to China now
Yes, and China has been world's top importer of plastic waste for decades.
>Also way to not respond to my post about China dumping tons of banned ozone depleting chemicals into the atmosphere.
Sure, that's not cool and they should get sanctioned. But it's low priority problem.

[Anonymous No.11187845]

>>11187843
Their dumping of plastic waste on all their fishing vessels and shipping boats has little to nothing to do with them importing plastic.
Low priority problem compared to all the other shit they're doing to fuck the environment?

[Anonymous No.11187851]

>>11187845
>Their dumping of plastic waste on all their fishing vessels and shipping boats has little to nothing to do with them importing plastic.
You give them your trash, they put it on a barge and throw it to the sea. That's how the bussiness works.

>Low priority problem compared to all the other shit they're doing to fuck the environment?
Low priority compared to the other problems with enviroment. It's not like chinks are exceptional in any other way than their population.

[Anonymous No.11187856]

>>11187843
>>11187851
fuck them dinks Murica fuck yah

[Anonymous No.11187858]

>>11187851
It's literally their own plastic waste. Unless they just happen to be only throwing out the plastic waste from China towns around America
Yes. They are. Not regulating or enforcing banned chemicals and other pollutants that are highly destructive usually just to save a minimal cost at the expense of the environment is pretty par for the course there.

[Anonymous No.11187862]

>>11187851
>Paying a country to recycle your garbage
>They throw it in the ocean
>That's the business
Yeah, no.

[Anonymous No.11187870]

>>11187862
>hehe, we didn't know that they gonna throw it to the ocean like they always do
Stop playing dumb.

[Anonymous No.11187887]

>>11187858
>Unless they just happen to be only throwing out the plastic waste from China towns around America
Plastic waste thrown to the ocean does most often come from coastal population, in this regard Chinese coastal population isn't really exceptional. However when containers from imported waste arrive, they arrive in port, so the cheapest way to get rid of them is thrown to the ocean. So yes, the imported waste has much higher rate of ending up in ocean than the domestic waste.

[Anonymous No.11188920]

By staying away from TV and school.
War on drugs, mass shooters, pandemics, trans-this-and-thats, this-and-that-phobias, lottotolerances etc all can be solved this way also.
Just homeschool, sheep.
>Prep not rap.

[Anonymous No.11188970]

>>11186292
Zoom out libtard. Leftards use the same trick when misrepresenting misuse of guns.

[Anonymous No.11189012]

>>11188970
What would zooming out prove? We're talking about current anomalous warming which clearly cannot be explained by solar activity.

[Anonymous No.11189017]

>European imperialism
>greenhouse effect
err
>ozone layer
err
>global warming
err
>climate change
err
>911
>gender identity
>mass migrations
>world pandemics
>world media
>liberal churches
>asteroids
>Tic-Tac UFO, err, UAP
Yep, just lucky governments.

[Anonymous No.11189057]

>>11189012
That chart
>clearly
proved at most one is inept at interpreting charts.
Whoever posted it hoped we wouldn't check the same phenomenon on a much wider range.
Nobody knows how the atmosphere behaves on a large enough scale due to the ridiculously small sample we are able to compile even with paleoclimatology, exoplanetology, and other fancy fuckallologies.
It's just as impossible to assess as the sum of iterations of bioengineered synthetics post chemical revolution let alone its impact at whatsoeever levels to life as we know it so far (never mind extraterrestrial one if any is ever found or acknowledged).
Because democracy is incompatible with scientific consensus the bovine Global Warming narrative has only sociological and geopolitical nature thus never scientific one. Possibly indefinitely as the permutations of exponentially emerging variables are excessive to any computation de facto not only temporarily.

[Anonymous No.11189310]

>>11180515
Stip farting.

[Anonymous No.11189319]

>>11189057
Meanwhile climate scientists are making accurate meaningful predictions, while you're eating bullshit fed to you by malicious politicians with an agenda. Shut the fuck up if you're so clearly utterly ignorant of the topic.

We know how GHG concentrations effect the rate at which thermal energy is lost to space, we can observe exactly how much it's changed. We know exactly what is causing current warming, and how to prevent it. Never mistake your own ignorance for reality.

[Anonymous No.11189432]

>>11189319
>physics
>reality
Science isn't the discipline concerned with reality.
Go play with your big toy big boy.
>let philosophy and its branches such as epistemology, hermeneutics, ontology, phenomenology and yes STEM faggot, existentialism, concern themselves with reality.
Also, take your meds, your hormonal imbalance is showing bitch.

[Anonymous No.11189439]

ethnically cleanse africa and asia (minus japan and korea)

pollution will fall a lot with 76% less people

[Anonymous No.11189484]

>>11189310
A good meme is born.
>STIP FARTING
The new
>HAVE SEX

[Anonymous No.11189505]

>>11189432
Ok thanks for admitting mental masturbation and navel gazing is the only thing you're capable of.
Meanwhile the rest of us will be producing meaningful results which can change the world.

[Anonymous No.11189511]

>>11189505
>philosophy
>mental masturbation
Did you cry when Huhlolly Clitoris lost?
Trumpet will win again you know.

[Anonymous No.11189516]

>>11189432
the war on empiricism continues to the surprise of no one
>The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.

[Anonymous No.11189637]

>>11189516
Which gender identity study taught you philosophy?
Your remarks get worse by every attempt.
Any actually minimally intellectually literate here care to continue to educate this obnoxious lefttard ?
She/he/it/shoy fails to accept its obvious ineptitude at proper reasoning.

[Anonymous No.11189990]

>>11189432
Back to /x/ and /pol/ you stupid retard

[Anonymous No.11189997]

>>11189057
Go back to your flat earth thread >>11189499

[Anonymous No.11190186]

>>11189505
change your diaper first cringe lord you will be working some shit job for some corporation producing pollution making shit wages the rest of your life don't kid yourself, I like the moxxy though, jas the gews bait war now

[Anonymous No.11190212]

>>11190186
Jewgle

Universal holonomic quantum gates over geometric spin qubits with polarised microwaves

it wont let me post the link says it is spam

[Anonymous No.11190354]

>>11189432
Yes, I always preferred to only imagine what is real instead of testing it.

[Anonymous No.11190939]

>>11180515
Switch to nuclear energy

[Anonymous No.11191283]

>>11180516
Based

[Anonymous No.11191305]

Microplastics are a serious issue. We currently eat a credit card amount of microplastics a week. It's going to be like 10 credit cards in 50 years.~

[Anonymous No.11191864]

>>11191305
that's alot of credit cards

[Anonymous No.11192007]

>>11191305
I wish I were a credit card

[Anonymous No.11192021]

>>11180515
raise taxes

[Anonymous No.11192054]

Did the second Iraq war and the second afghanistan war help or hurt climate change?

On one hand the wars were big and required lots of oil and did have a GDP effect. On the other hand it killed a lot of people if we include the Iraq civil war, then ISIS. So did all these deaths help the climate?

[Anonymous No.11192058]

>>11192054
We need a nuclear winter to stop global warming

[Anonymous No.11192061]

>>11192058
Patrolling the Mojave makes you wish for a nuclear winter.

[Anonymous No.11192100]

>>11183122

[Anonymous No.11192200]

>>11180515
FRACKING

[Anonymous No.11192217]

>>11187787
This is complete bullshit, actually. If you read the paper they aren't saying that 95% of ocean plastic comes from 10 rivers, they're saying that of all the ocean plastic that comes from rivers, 95% of it comes from 10 of them. Most ocean plastic actually comes from marine industry

[Anonymous No.11192228]

>>11180515
>Dump iron into ocean. Algae grows. Captures carbon
>Shoot water vapour or small amount of sulphur into the air. Forcing change reflects more sunlight away from the Earth

Geoengineering projects like one of these would be trivial to do, cost basically nothing, and would actually work. So of course no environmentalists support geoengineering

[Anonymous No.11192280]

we all must die

[Anonymous No.11192430]

>>11180515
Build a bubble around the earth and regulate everything into the current homeostasis

[Anonymous No.11192438]

You stop climate change by snapping out of your stupid chicken little delusions and realizing the world isn't ending because of more carbon dioxide in the air

[Anonymous No.11192440]

>>11180515
Eat the bugs

[Anonymous No.11192611]

>>11180515
Stopping it from happening is no longer on the menu. But we can stop making it worse... and then maybe someday we can think about beginning to be carbon negative, sequestering more carbon than we release.

Basically the problem is capitalist markets don't know how to value anything unless its in short supply.

Ample breathable air, a livable climate, being able to go outside without getting sunburned... these will sort themselves out eventually once enough people start feeling it, to make more "expensive" alternatives seem attractive. Its just waiting the 5 or 10 or 20 generations for the market to adjust, thats the painful part.

If you dont want to wait that long, blame capitalism. It doesnt really care if the atmosphere is to your liking.

[Anonymous No.11192687]

>>11180515
put solar on your roof, save money, save climate

[Anonymous No.11192768]

>>11192438
>>11192440
Hi shill

[Anonymous No.11192920]

>>11192687
I hope this house is inhabbited by 30 people. Else this is a massive waste of resources!

[Anonymous No.11193829]

imagine being dumb enough to think climate change is real based on magical variables and pseudo science and shit tier computer models and having the stones to claim you are a scientist.

GTFO my board psueds REEEEEEEEEE

[Anonymous No.11193851]

>>11180515
OP please, I found the answer

[Anonymous No.11193869]

>>11185406
>arctic will be fine
Hahahahaha, no.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UypXiIkPmdU
In before some moron thinks this isn't climate related.
http://dictionary.sensagent.com/Post-glacial%20rebound/en-en/

[Anonymous No.11193878]

>>11193869
not climate related >>>/x/

[Anonymous No.11193882]

>>11192611
>we can stop it
>okay we can't stop it but we can mitigate it
You are here
>okay, we're still increasing co2 output but renewable tech will fix that soon enough
>okay, energy demand is rising faster than the installation of renewables has added supply and co2 emissions are still rising
>holy shit we really are fucked aren't we?

[Anonymous No.11193885]

>>11192007
You can be anything you want to be if you're willing to work for it

[Anonymous No.11193894]

>>11192228
>So of course no environmentalists support geoengineering
Mostly because they are afraid of fucking all shit up. However, given that the choices are certain collapse and probably collapse…

[Anonymous No.11194046]

Put woody biomass underneath solar panels and convert the biomass to charcoal. Carbon stays locked up in charcoal for around a thousand years which is longer than the average atmospheric residency of carbon. The solar panels offset more carbon in the form of emissions than the biomass sequesters in the form of charcoal so you really just want to use the waste light to grow the biomass.

[Anonymous No.11194113]

We can’t stop climate change but we can suppress it.But don’t get too anxious global warming won’t kill us in a few decades.

[Anonymous No.11194190]

>>11194113
>doesn't understand how changing weather patters affect food production

[Anonymous No.11194228]

nuclear fusion

[Anonymous No.11194314]

>>11180515
Who says I want to?

[Anonymous No.11194535]

>>11180515
Nuke Israel, kick out minorities, and use arid regions as dumping grounds for currently necessary non-recyclables. Shift to renewables as much as possible and wean the public off excessive consumption in all regards. Fucking easy

[Anonymous No.11194996]

I wonder how much individuals could affect the worlds carbon output.
If it suddenly became trendy to have dated mobile phones rather then the current year model, if fixing viable appliances was more popular than replacing them, and if your peers looked down on you for buying shit you didn't need or using power that wasnt necessary, How much of a signal would that send to atmospheric carbon?
It will never happen, people like shiny new things. And even if it did the shift would be labeled as irresponsible and unpatriotic to the economy and country, wars would probably break out as the 3rd worlds exports plummet.
Makes me question what is the worlds subsistence carbon footprint.

[Anonymous No.11195239]

>>11180515
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=maxCyt8GH-4
You don’t.

[Anonymous No.11195638]

>>11183687
Won the fuck gets to determine what an ‘temporal anomaly’ is. Why not just measure the fucking temperature? Also I like how they use speculative projections at the end to make it seem more severe. As if every climate change projection we’ve made hasn’t been completely and utterly wrong before.

[Anonymous No.11195639]

>>11184896
It’s always going to be on here, it’s the number one scientific topic people want to discuss.

[Anonymous No.11195642]

>>11185426
Correct me if I’m wrong, but Co2 isn’t even a powerful greenhouse gas, and only makes up a handful of percent of the amount of greenhouse gasses, let alone gasses in the entire atmosphere. Why are so certain it’s the greenhouse effect as opposed to anything else?

[Anonymous No.11195646]

>>11185463
Bye look this hair graph again. Except it’s older and made with studies and projections we know were dead wrong.

[Anonymous No.11195649]

>>11185629
At that point why not just do nothing and accept the world getting marginally warming and have that juts kill off unsustainable human populations until the problem solves itself.

[Anonymous No.11195652]

>>11180515
Any attempt we make to fix something as important and huge as the climate would only result in a Jurassic park scenario where we try so hard to ply a god but that ends up being are doom and far worse than what the original problem was.

[Anonymous No.11195656]

>>11186316
Who makes these shit ass info graphs?
We don’t even know to what extent carbon emissions are effecting the climate, if it’s important at all. And this fucker is pretending like we can accurately guess what it would be like if there where none of that.

My god science is filled with os much quackery.

[Anonymous No.11195661]

>>11186464
>green lobby “hoax”
The idea is not that there is some conspiracy of environmentalists tripping to buy silence, that’s obviously retarded. The idea instead comes from the basic understanding of all sciences as also being social groups, and therefore can become victim to assumptions or groupthink.

If you go into climate science you will most likely already believe in anthropogenic climate change. And once you get in they will grill that in your head and if you doubt it, if you do t believe in it, or even just question the existing narrative, your chances of getting in to the field drastic go down.
Plus even if you got in and you question the science, which is very unlikely already but, then you would be shamed for doing something that’s seen as useless and retreading established science. And if you do decide to go through with it and you think you could find something that disproves the established narrative, then you have to wonder what happens to your friends, your career, your field and you.
You. Could made a pariah and laughed out of a job, mocked by the various leading political parties that made climate change a wedge issue, be berated and mocked as a climate change denier. And if you d prove you are right and that climate science is wrong then everyone else in your field is ruined forever as lazy an d corrupt people.

[Anonymous No.11195669]

>>11194190
>doesn’t understand that Co2 has a greening effect and will increase the growth rate of plants as well as make previously to cold areas arable

[Anonymous No.11195674]

>>11195638
>As if every climate change projection we’ve made hasn’t been completely and utterly wrong before.
It hasn't though.
https://youtu.be/ugwqXKHLrGk

[Anonymous No.11195677]

>>11195656
>Who makes these shit ass info graphs
The IPCC you stupid fuck.
>We don’t even know to what extent carbon emissions are effecting the climate, if it’s important at all
We do though, try to keep up.
https://skepticalscience.com/argument.php

[Anonymous No.11195679]

>>11195661
So why have all the projections made by AGW deniers failed spectacularly when compared to observed temperatures?

[Anonymous No.11195684]

>>11195677
There is a shit ton of disagreements within climate science about how much we’re effecting the climate. Some think it’s barely, others think we’ll all die in 12 years, others think that things can go bad in 20. There is no consensus.

[Anonymous No.11195685]

>>11195677
The IPCC was a shit show funded and bribed by interests of all fucking sorts dude. The UN can’t do fucking anything. Plus how does that contradict what I said, study is fucking stupid.

[Anonymous No.11195686]

>>11195674
Yes it has.
The is still snow on Kilimanjaro
The oceans haven’t even been rising to any important extent.
We are not going to all die in 12 years.
Your studies are shit and most of them are wrong. Stop pretending that just because it was made by acemdeics it can’t be wrong.

[Anonymous No.11195935]

>>11195684
>Some think it’s barely
Who thinks that and what scientific data are they working off?
>others think we’ll all die in 12 years, others think that things can go bad in 20
Who thinks that and what data are they working off?
>There is no consensus.
Yes, there is.

[Anonymous No.11195939]

>>11195685
>IPCC was bribed
Source showing that this is true and that they faked their data?
>study is fucking stupid
What parts of it do you think are inaccurate?

[Anonymous No.11195940]

>>11195686
Did you even watch the video? Sensationalist headlines and claims made without scientific data to back them up not coming to fruition are not a valid argument against climate science. If you want to pick specific predictions made by climate scientists in the past based on actual climate data that have failed, by all means go ahead.

[Anonymous No.11196015]

>>11195939
What does temporal outlier even mean. That's literally subjective. And does it even exclude other things that raise temperature, like volcanic activity, random change or any unknown variable.

[Anonymous No.11196020]

>>11195935
Where the fuck have you been? AOC, major publications Greta Thunberg, all say that the world is bound to end in 12 years. I don’t what fucking study they have, because I’m not an autist, but you have to be a retard to not know about that.

John Stossel isn’t a scientist, but he invented many actual climate scientists on his show he disagree with the “consensus” that doesn’t exist. If you look John Stossel climate change you can the people he interviews and learn their studies.

you are ignorant and perceive an consensus when there objectively isn’t one

[Anonymous No.11196025]

>>11195940
No I’m not watching your fucking video, I’ve heard you’re dumb ass statements. Just because now I guy with a degree it regurgitating the same bullshit doesn’t mean I have to listen to it again.

[Anonymous No.11196071]

>>11196015
>What does temporal outlier even mean
An outlier relating to time
>And does it even exclude other things that raise temperature, like volcanic activity,
No, the graph even says "both natural and anthropogenic forcings"

[Anonymous No.11196077]

>>11196020
>AOC, major publications Greta Thunberg, all say that the world is bound to end in 12 years.
No, only AOC and some fringe news sitws said that and those statements weren't based on scientific data, nor were they made by climate scientists.
>I don’t what fucking study they have, because I’m not an autist
So basically you don't know what the fuck you're talking about?
>John Stossel isn’t a scientist, but he invented many actual climate scientists on his show he disagree with the “consensus” that doesn’t exist
I'm going to assume you meant "invited". Please link some examples of these climate scientists and the research they're basing their statements off.
>you are ignorant
Says the person hand-waving actual knowledge of the relevant data as being "autistic".

[Anonymous No.11196078]

>>11196025
>I’m not watching your fucking video
You're the exact type of ignorant person who would benefit from watching it, considering you base your views on climate science off non-scientific statements.
>Just because now I guy with a degree it regurgitating the same bullshit doesn’t mean I have to listen to it again
All the statements he makes in the video are sourced with actual scientific data.

[Anonymous No.11196079]

>>11196077
I gave you the fucking place to find the names of these people. For such a science minded person, you are ridiculously opposed to research.

[Anonymous No.11196083]

To any other anons observing this thread: let this be a record of what happens when you challenge so called global warming "skeptics" on their claims. They're not actually interested in scientific data, just meaningless political discourse.

[Anonymous No.11196084]

>>11196078
I’ve already expressed why I doubt the data. If you see a guy who doesn’t believe that Oswald killed JFK, you’re not going to convince him that he did through giving him the official story of what happened.

And I would of actually watched your video, but I’m in public and can’t.

[Anonymous No.11196086]

>>11196079
>source my argument for me
No.

[Anonymous No.11196087]

>>11196084
>I’ve already expressed why I doubt the data.
You said that you doubt the data because some predictions that WEREN'T based on scientific data didn't come true. Do you see why this makes you look stupid?
>If you see a guy who doesn’t believe that Oswald killed JFK, you’re not going to convince him that he did through giving him the official story of what happened.
Except this isn't just hearsay. There's literal scientific data backing up the case for AGW. Lots of it.

[Anonymous No.11196098]

>>11196086
What the fuck is the point of having a discussion if you refuse to look into anything. We’re not in debate class autist we’re just shit talking on the internet. You seemed interested in finding who oppose your ideas on climate change and there being a supposed consensus in to what degree we’re causing it. If you have any scientific integrity you would follow the simple fucking path I told to discover it.

[Anonymous No.11196104]

>>11196087
Are you calling the evidence to who killed JFK here say? We might have to call up /his/ on you.

[Anonymous No.11196112]

>>11196098
Right so I briefly checked out the Stossel video. He just strawmans some non-scientific claims, gets his heartland institute buddies (literally funded by the oil baron Koch brothers) to tear apart these non-scientific claims and uses this to "disprove" AGW. This is basic denier tactics.

[Anonymous No.11196118]

>>11196104
>Are you calling the evidence to who killed JFK here say
No, I'm calling the "official story" (your own words) hearsay. Is there evidence to prove/disprove the official story? I'm sure there is, but in this case you'd just be saying to the conspiracy theorist "this is what the government said so it must be true", not actually showing him the evidence for or against said story.

[Anonymous No.11196121]

>>11196118
Guy that last post wasn’t an argument just a way to mock and get you angry. I thought you would be able to tell.

[Anonymous No.11196125]

>>11196112
Cool. You should make a video or post explicitly debunking them. I’d watch it.

[Anonymous No.11196152]

>>11196125
>a video or post explicitly debunking them
Debunking what? He didn't make any actual scientific arguments in the video, he just took a bunch of scientifically dubious statements made by politicians and activists, pointed out that the statements aren't supported by data and then used this to somehow try and delegitimise actual climate science.

The three "experts" on his panel are all bankrolled by oil barons. One of them isn't even a climatologist. Michaels has been caught blatantly doctoring graphs to suit his statements before (see his statement to the house of rep. regarding Hansen's scenarios)
https://skepticalscience.com/patrick-michaels-serial-deleter-of-inconvenient-data.html
Timestamped video of him doing this:https://youtu.be/ugwqXKHLrGk?t=811

They don't actually source any data for their claims, they just say "Holland could survive a localised temperature increase therefore it's not a problem in the rest of the world, we can just adapt like they did".

Stossel then asks "why won't the other side debate?". Maybe if they had set up an actual third-party-moderated debate and invited actual scientists (not politicians and activists) they would've gotten a response.

[Anonymous No.11196269]

build a giant hoover and suck all the bad away