/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.11616003]

The official science on climate change is junk, and the Earth may actually be heading towards a mini ice-age similar to the one recorded in Medieval times in Europe. Large corporations are using both deniers and believers in global warming to stoke the fire in public discussions and change the conversation away from how industrial activity is destroying the environment. The real issue is not the increase in CO2. It is the thousands of metric tons of endrocrine disruptors, pesticides, pharma drugs, chemical carcinogens, radioactive debris from military apparatus, etc that are killing the planet and us with it.

[Anonymous No.11616041]

lithium mines per kilowatt hurt the environment more than oil per kilowatt

but don't be ignorant. Petro dollar. Fuck communists

[Anonymous No.11616086]

>>11616003

> About Climate Changes & Global Warming:
https://files.catbox.moe/q4g7j2.webm

> Why You need to change ALL your plans for the Future:
https://files.catbox.moe/7tywlb.webm

> Will YOU Survive the Coming Ice Age?:
https://files.catbox.moe/vrf5fj.webm

> How the ENTIRE European Population will be NORDIC in some thousand years:
https://files.catbox.moe/w5dd23.webm

>>11616041
Fuck communists and capitalists alike.

[Anonymous No.11616088]

>>11616003
Don't forget deforestation and (which contributes to) desertification.

[Anonymous No.11616091]

>>11616088

> About Earth Erosion
https://files.catbox.moe/d1bqre.webm

[Anonymous No.11616259]

>>11616086
>Human contribution of CO2 into the atmosphere
>Ignores that natural sinks absorb more CO2 than natural sources emit, while humans don't.

>CO2 lags temperature by 800-2000 years
Of course it does, if orbital eccentricity causes insolation to increase, then warming starts the feedback loop between warming and CO2 evaporating from the oceans. The climate has never had humans dump massive amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere, thus we have never seen CO2 start to increase before temperature, until now! Do you think climatologists don't already know this? Do you not realize that without this feedback loop you cannot explain the Milankovich cycle? No of course not, you have no idea what your idiotic memes are even implying.

>The models are wrong
Actually the data is wrong. Several sources of error were discovered in the satellite techniques since 2009 and they are now much more in line with the instrumental data. To see how well the IPCC is doing I suggest you look at current updates:

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2011/01/2010-updates-to-model-data-comparisons/

>Ice core samples indicate warm periods long before the Industrial Revolution
Local samples, not indicative of a global average temperature.

And last but not least another fraudulent graph, using flawed, cherrypicked data and not even showing surface temperature.

[Anonymous No.11616278]

>>11616003
>The official science on climate change is junk
Give an example.

>the Earth may actually be heading towards a mini ice-age
Why?

>similar to the one recorded in Medieval times in Europe.
So Europe is the entire Earth?

>The real issue is not the increase in CO2.
Please show your scientific comparison of the effects

[Anonymous No.11616301]

>>11616259
>I suggest you look at current updates:
>2010
Xenoestrogens in the drinking water must be rotting your brain because not only have you missed the point of the thread, you have also made a terrible argument.

[Anonymous No.11616318]

>>11616278
>Give an example.
Not including changes in the sun (by far the most important factor) in climate models.

>Why?
Because we are living in an unusually warm period (since before modernity) and it makes sense it'll get cold again like usual.

>So Europe is the entire Earth?
Europe is where the Europeans lived and recorded things. Monkey people in other places didn't really record much.

>Please show your (((scientific))) comparison of the effects
No.

[Anonymous No.11616328]

>>11616301
Calm down retard, I posted the wrong link.

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/climate-model-projections-compared-to-observations/

>not only have you missed the point of the thread, you have also made a terrible argument.
I'm not responding to the entire thread, I'm resounding to the image in your post that is full of misrepresentations and outright lies. Predictably, you have no substantive response. Thanks for admitting you posted junk propaganda.

[Anonymous No.11616375]

>>11616328
That wasn't my post. I don't care about these kinds of arguments about climate change at this point since it's clearly bullshit.
>look at this graph
>ah ha! no sir, look at this graph!
End of the day third world shitholes including their corporate masters will pollute as much as they want and the western middle class will bear another tax, regardless of the facts.

[Anonymous No.11616397]

>>11616375
Western nations have the highest cumulative emissions by several orders of magnitude, the highest per capita emissions by several times, and are responsible for the majority of industrial emissions in non western nations.
The fact you've posted outright lies and are doing everything to avoid responding when called out on them proves you're posting in bad faith, probably a shill given who stands to gain.

[Anonymous No.11616399]

>>11616091
>>11616086
>varg
>heil odin
This is why Scandinavia is falling to the Jews while Poland resists. Scandinavians understand how to live but they don't have the social technology to resist Jewish tricks.

[Anonymous No.11616425]

>>11616318
>Not including changes in the sun
Which models don't include changes in the sun?

>(by far the most important factor)
Wrong. Pic related.

>Because we are living in an unusually warm period (since before modernity) and it makes sense it'll get cold again like usual.
The warm period before modernity is called an interglacial, which began 10,000 years ago. The climate has cycled between warm interglacial and cold glacial periods for about a million years. According to this natural cycle, we should be cooling over the next tens of thousands of years into a glacial period. Instead we are rapidly warming on top of the interglacial warming, an order of magnitude faster than interglacial warming. Arguing that global warming will reverse because of the natural cycle when global warming completely violates the natural cycle is idiotic.

Instead of using non-reasoning, why don't you look at what causes the natural cycle and what causes current global warming?
Here, I'll help you get started: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milankovitch_cycles

>Europe is where the Europeans lived and recorded things. Monkey people in other places didn't really record much.
The LIA is not known from contemporary records, which are anecdotal. It is known from various proxy records such as radiocarbon dating of plant matter.

>No.
Then your claims can be dismissed as easily as you made them.

[Anonymous No.11616428]

>>11616375
>That wasn't my post. I don't care about these kinds of arguments about climate change at this point since it's clearly bullshit.
Then why are you responding?

[Anonymous No.11616438]

>Western nations have the highest cumulative emissions by several orders of magnitude
Completely false.

>>11616397
>Western nations are responsible for the majority of industrial emissions in non western nations
Pure white guilt bullshit. Non western countries are the majority of the worlds population and they are increasingly living lives of high consumption. Also you are missing my point that these climate regulations are used as a weapon against westerners moreso than a tool reduce co2.

>probably a shill given who stands to gain.
Big oil is a big proponent of "green energy". I'll let you figure out why.

[Anonymous No.11616443]

>>11616003
This is the most logical appraisal of the issue I've read. Spam this.

[Anonymous No.11616453]

>>11616399
Based and Christpilled.

[Anonymous No.11616537]

>>11616425
>> citing Wikipedia

[Anonymous No.11616977]

>>11616003
>The official science on climate change is junk
you started so well
and then, everything derailed

[Anonymous No.11617167]

>>11616438
>>Western nations have the highest cumulative emissions by several orders of magnitude
>Completely false.
Completely illiterate. Don't know what cumulative means?

>Also you are missing my point that these climate regulations are used as a weapon against westerners moreso than a tool reduce co2.
How so?

>Big oil is a big proponent of "green energy"
Wrong.

It's another "Retard can't even begin to counter the science so goes straight to idiotic conspiracy theory" episode

[Anonymous No.11617175]

>>11616537
Where did I cite Wikipedia? Illiterate retard.

[Anonymous No.11617201]

>>11616003
>ice-age
lol

[Anonymous No.11617229]

>>11616003
Climate change (and the negative impacts to current living organisms) is objectively happening. There is no debate or argument on if it is happening. Any child with a knowledge of basic science concepts and ideas can observe this. I agree with you that CO2, while causing negative impacts, is not the real issue. In my own opinion the real issue will be resource competition. Earth will reach is carrying capacity in the near future. Fossil fuels will run out within 100 years and there is no way to prevent this from happening. Water scarcity will bring about the end of of hundreds of millions of people's traditional way of life. Agriculture and feeding humanity will become impossible. The strain on resources will lead to a chain reaction of competition and death. And thats ok. They system can and will correct itself. Some of us just won't enjoy the process.

[Anonymous No.11618379]

>>11616003
Really, not shining into a black cloud would make even ionisation of air different?

[Anonymous No.11618420]

>>11616003
>endrocrine disruptors
Ah, so you mean plastics products, a product of fossil fuels
>pesticides
Also exclusively a product of petrochemicals
>pharma drugs
a significant proportion is made using benzenes and other fossil fuel derived chemicals
>chemical carcinogens
Literally the definition of coal power plant emissions: sulphur, mercury, lead and particulate carbon matter, and afterwards coal ash getting dumped into the water ways. Then car exhaust: carbon monoxide, nitrogen compounds, guess what? Also a product of petrochemicals. Also microplastics in the water.
>radioactive debris from military apparatus
You got me there, but the only way I see to reverse this is if our military hadn't blown up atom bombs in New Mexico in the first place, nothing much we can do about it now.

All those "more important" problems we can deal with also involves phasing out fossil fuels. Why not hit two birds with one stone? Stop using fossil fuels altogether.

[Anonymous No.11620219]

>>11616375

The majority of "third world shithole" pollution is done in the name of churning out consoomerist crap for your stinking mutt ass

[Anonymous No.11620296]

>>11616003
>The official science on climate change is junk

source: /pol/

[Anonymous No.11620434]

the strongest deniers mostly dont understand how science works. they think a mistake or two or a wrong idea occasionally meanas the whole thing is wrong. again, not how science works. knowledge evolves. scientists rarely talk in absolutes unless something is very certain. in fact, the consensus now is that estimates from the IPCC were lowballing in order not to freak out any impetus for change.

have a nice day.