/ccg/ - Climate Change General

[Anonymous No.11785252]

We're absolutely fucked edition

https://www.resilience.org/stories/2020-06-08/collapse-of-civilisation-is-the-most-likely-outcome-top-climate-scientists/

So according to renowned climate scientists, we have 10 to 15 years to radically change our economy, i.e. degrowth, establishing strong local supply chains, basically ditching capitalism globally, before the positive feedback loops become unstoppable and Earth spirals into a massive extinction event.

Why is no one listening to scientists?

[Anonymous No.11785267]

>>11785252
>Why is no one listening to scientists?
Conservative opinion dominates America, and the rest of the world isn't going to change if America doesn't. We're too large and emit too much carbon, their efforts would just get canceled out.

>bu bu but muh China, what about the chongs anon? The chongs, they they pollute everything.
A large amount of China's emissions are from producing shit for the 1st world like steel, production factories, ect. You want their emissions to go down, you stop buying stuff from them.

[Anonymous No.11785275]

>>11785252
>degrowth, establishing strong local supply chains, basically ditching capitalism globally


OR we could build a metric shitload of nuclear power plants and solar/wind and start mass co2 sequestration without having ot cut our balls off.

[Anonymous No.11785277]

>>11785252
>Why is no one listening
You're not telling anything that affects the average guy. Everything in the pic is abstract.
Why not tell about the '30s droughts which will fuck up the world's bread baskets. 3rd world will starve, 1st world will see food prices explode.

[Anonymous No.11785289]

>>11785275
It isn't that simple. You think scientists would be calling for a restructure of the economy, when doing this is almost certain to leave them without funding, if there were other alternatives? Your big brain takes are worthless because hundreds of more intelligent and knowledgeable people have thought and are still thinking about this problem, it's basically their job, and they're saying the economy is the issue and are actively calling for a radical change. Big brain takes like yours only help spread misinformation and inaction.

[Anonymous No.11785311]

>>11785289
nice appeal to authority faggot.

Plenty of people support my ideas for things,including PHds. My path is actually APPEALING to people-it doesn't involve them sacrificing their standard of living and autonomy and having to adopt an authoritarian global political system,and it can solve the problem faster than plan.

Crack open some articles on next-gen fission reactors, read up on direct air capture and fusion power research, and quit being a faggot. We can solve this problem positively.

[Anonymous No.11785323]

>>11785311
why would you go for a 1/100000000 chance of survival with that fission reactor and other high-level research shit when you can restructure your economy, which the only thing it requires is human will, and efficiently solve the problem?

and people can live without buying iPhones every year, fuck off. planned economies don't even need to be authoritarian, specially if you want to go back to local-scale economies

[Anonymous No.11785332]

>>11785323
Cause thats how humans solve problems. We invent new solutions.

[Anonymous No.11785342]

>>11785323
Anon, you're torturing yourself with this blackpill nonsense.

https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML2007/ML20075A000.html

https://www.nuscalepower.com/

https://mipse.umich.edu/files/Shumlak_presentation.pdf

https://arpa-e.energy.gov/sites/default/files/Shumlak_arpae2019_compressed.pdf

https://carbonengineering.com/our-technology/

We don't need an impoverished low-energy society, we need a very VERY high-energy soiety-we need energy so cheap we can fix the planet as a fucking hobby!

LEARN ANON! READ!! GROW! HELP ME PROMOTE THIS CALL FOR CHANGE!

[Anonymous No.11785353]

>>11785342
A few thousand DAC plants,run off of nuclear/solar/wind energy at the same time that fossil fuels are removed from the grid could save us with ease.

[Anonymous No.11785404]

>>11785342
Nuclear power is dead and no amount of paid spam here will change that.

[Anonymous No.11785742]

>>11785404
>Fossil fuel is alive and no amount of paid spam here will change that.

[Anonymous No.11785749]

>>11785252
Almost all climatologists support carbon taxes, renewable energy and nuclear power. Nice try doomer.

[Anonymous No.11785751]

>>11785252
>if you dont do what we said 15 years ago when we said the world was going to end by now, the world will totally end this time, we're soper serial
>wash rinse repeat

[Anonymous No.11785753]

>>11785252
Yeah but the Mississippi basin has never had a crop failure regardless of weather. Climate is nothing more than the proportion and distribution of weather, therefore the USA will never have a famine.
Everything else can be mitigated as it happens and rebuilt.
Hurricanes? Mitigate and rebuild.
Heatwaves? Mitigate and rebuild.
Flooding? Mitigate and rebuild.
The only problem the USA faces is having a political system that can't manage the mitigating and rebuilding.

[Anonymous No.11785755]

>>11785753
>Mississippi basin
>never had a crop failure
Wrong

[Anonymous No.11786180]

If this thread is real and made by a genuine Anon... holy shit... the absolute state of 4chan........

[Anonymous No.11786276]

>>11785252
What about 10 years ago when they said we had ten years to radically change our economy?

[Anonymous No.11786288]

>>11786276
>>11785751
That's because it's a 10 years to change shit before we get locked on a path that will fuck us up in 50+ years.

Climate works on a long term lag which means it's hard for people without the ability to abstract to visualize and understand as being a risk.

[Anonymous No.11786337]

>>11785323
I just wish we had space based power collection, that shit is basically free

[Anonymous No.11787316]

>>11786288
I think you're missing the point. Maybe you should try to comprehend the claim before you claim people can't comprehend the future.

[Anonymous No.11787332]

>>11785267
I don’t think it’s fair to just blame America. Take a look at the petrostates like Saudi Arabia and Iraq, who don’t give a shit. Qatar is sitting on trillions of cubic metres of natural gas and they want billions for it.

The richest and most powerful have too strong short term interest to deal effectively with climate change. Scientists and engineers are our only hope.

[Anonymous No.11787337]

>>11787316
>https://www.resilience.org/stories/2020-06-08/collapse-of-civilisation-is-the-most-likely-outcome-top-climate-scientists/

This link is talking about how 9 of 15 different tipping points have already been reached. People are championing the idea that because we keep tripping over different points of no return it means that there are none.

It's not that we are dealing with the same tipping points that people are changing dates on. It's that we are dealing with things that had time points of 10,15,20+ years and we have already passed the 10 year ones.

[Anonymous No.11788106]

>>11785252

Silly malthusian drama queen

[Anonymous No.11788177]

>>11786288
>Climate works on a long term lag which means it's hard for people without the ability to abstract to visualize and understand as being a risk.
This is the exact same reason so many countries have utterly failed to contain the coronavirus.
If you want to see what the actual response to climate change will look like, look at how your government is handling the pandemic.

[Anonymous No.11788215]

>>11785252
>So according to renowned climate scientists, we have 10 to 15 years to radically change our economy, i.e. degrowth, establishing strong local supply chains, basically ditching capitalism globally, before the positive feedback loops become unstoppable and Earth spirals into a massive extinction event.
I for one am all for bashing my neighbour's skull in for the last can of tuna in the entire state and breathing in so much toxic emissions that my lungs mutate and become sentient creatures capable of higher and more complex thought than most human beings.

[Anonymous No.11788233]

Like it or not, there is nothing we can do. The sheer magnitude of climate change alongside the industrial overshoot from the demise of petroleum derivative industries will be so great that nobody but the biggest Giga chads will be capable of surviving after society goes kaput and we're all eating each other's limbs for sustenance. No amount of faggoty, pretentious pseudo-intellectual messiah complex appeals to authority are going to change the simple fact that there is not a damn thing that can or will be done about it. We are fucked.

[Anonymous No.11788246]

>>11788233
>there is nothing we can do
Absolutely a lie and you fucking know it. This is the time for action, corona has already crippled the fossil fuel industry massively, we just need to finish it off. Renewables are cheaper than ever, Tesla is gaining a foothold in the mainstream, farmers are waking up to soil depletion. There's everything we can do, if you want to bee such a doomer, kill yourself right now you pussy, put your money where your mouth is.

[Anonymous No.11788292]

>>11788246
You know he's right anon, and no amount of ''haha keel yoorself'' edgelord bullshit is going to make it any less true.

[Anonymous No.11788302]

>>11788246

Once the Arctic ice melts everything is over. We would have needed to stop CO2 output a decade ago to avert that.

[Anonymous No.11788310]

>>11788246
Oh, I don't want to or have any reason to kill myself, I'm just laughing at the fact that deluded, understimulated first-world babies like yourself honestly think that you stand a chance against the largest industries on earth with the most resources and wealth at their disposal. Coof crippling the fossil fuel industry? Are you fucking serious? If you seriously think that a meme virus is enough to put anything more than a dent in the capital of the virtuoso of the global economy than you are pants on head forget how to breathe retarded.

[Anonymous No.11788315]

>>11788246
>le commit suicide maymay
you just killed your entire argument with this shit anon, don't be such a cunt.

[Anonymous No.11788327]

>>11788246
There is nothing that you can do, though. Like another anon stated, we would have needed to do something about this at least a decade ago for this to be averted. No amount of sniffing your farts or thinking that you are a powerful revolutionary when in reality you're a faggot who needs to suckle on the teat of society yet demands that society ditch its entire power grid just to please your delicate sensibilities and obvious hero complex won't make you correct. The modern world cannot ditch fossil fuels or petroleum derivative industries without a major societal destabilization taking place, one that would be enough to trigger a collapse. We are long past the time for action and now all we can do is mitigate. It's not doomer shit, it's just reality.

[Anonymous No.11788391]

>>11788327
"There is nothing that you can do" Is a lie the fossil fuel industry started to keep itself in business. There's plenty you can do, take baby steps, ride your bike for transit if you have to, install solar panels, reduce meat consumption, turn up the AC in the summer and the heat down in the winter. Would you rather die with the guilt that you were part of the problem, no better than the fat American slaves? Or grab onto the slightest possibility that we could divert the greatest disaster in human history and die guilt free, or live. Nobody's going to change until everybody else does.

[Anonymous No.11788404]

>>11788391
It's not a lie you brat, it's the truth, pure and simple. The fossil fuel industry didn't gaslight us into a position of compliance, we just realized that it was too late for anything to be done about this and that society is going in a trajectory that will not allow for this to be prevented. You riding your bike or recycling some shit isn't going to do jackshit when 99% of the entire human population will go on about their business using fossil fuels anyway. Guilt? I'm not going to feel guilty over availing of the benefits of the only viable power source in the modern-day. Feeling guilt just for fucking existing in the first world is peak faggotry.

[Anonymous No.11788410]

>>11788391
>enviornmentality Reddit Bugman resorts to guilting and gaslighting tactics when his faggoty ideology doesn't get support
clockwork and pottery

[Anonymous No.11788418]

>>11788391
>Nobody's going to change until everybody else does.
that there defeats your entire point, because that's never, ever going to happen. dilate.

[Anonymous No.11788419]

>>11788404
Sheep mentality.

[Anonymous No.11788424]

>>11788404
They literally have been gas lighting us since before leaded gasoline. Where they fought tooth and nail to try and stop lead from being removed and ruined the careers of everyone who blew the whistle.

They finished studies in the 80's confirming climate change with great accuracy but then gaslit the entire Baron by finding massive lobbies and marketing campaigns counter to their findings.

[Anonymous No.11788436]

>>11788410
You're exactly in the same position I am. Where will your pride be when the farmland turns to sand and the water runs out? You think yourself immune, you're not, and I hope you're one of the first people to die off.

[Anonymous No.11788438]

>>11788419
>Sheep mentality.
Just reality kid, when you grow up and stop buying into movements that manipulate your emotions and obvious guilt complex you'll realize how little power you as an individual have over the masses. You'll never save the world like in your green fantasies, but rather will suffer a life of self-imposed squalor and poverty, then die miserably having achieved absolutely nothing with the minuscule, sub-atomic impact that any of the shit you did had on the environment. The earth will shake us off like a case of ticks, we are not going to destroy it simply for having nice things.

[Anonymous No.11788444]

>>11788438
Boomer detected

[Anonymous No.11788455]

>>11788438
You played your conservative hand, you don't want to help the world or anybody else. You obviously have no future anyways, like I said, kill yourself so those who actually do have one might be able to live it. You're the disease, you're the ticks on the Earth, not us. Where I live renewables are the dominant power source, you disgust me.

[Anonymous No.11788468]

Cute, that you wish I'd die, but if you wanted to talk about being in the same position than I actually am; I cycle and walk everywhere, I don't pay for oil, gas or petroleum, I don't use AC, ever, and I eat very little meat. I don't do these things because I have delusions of grandeur about saving the entire planet but because I just like doing these things and because they save me an assload of money. I grew up having the environmentalist-movement guilt bullshit shoved down my throat and hate that shit with a passion because it's designed to make people self-loathe just for enjoying the wealth and nice things that living in modern society provides. I refuse to feel regret simply for availing of the amenities that are available to me simply because the earth is fucked either way. It's not even our fault, the deal was made and the hands were shaken decades before our birth.

[Anonymous No.11788488]

>>11788468
Anon, states of regret and self loathing are how we grow. Humanity needs some self loathing, we need to take a good long look at what we've built. I personally went through major depression about climate change a few years back, now I live like you do.

[Anonymous No.11788506]

>>11788106
The difference is, this catastrophe is unfolding bit by bit every day, and it is verifiable and measurable that it is occurring over yearly scales. There is abundant measurement evidence that this is occurring. It's not some hypothetical event. It's happening. Desertification regionally around the equator is all but inevitable. Unsurvivable summer environments (without indoor air conditioning which exacerbates the problem) where temperature and humidity render the sweating response insufficient to cool human and animal bodies will increase in geographical area over time. This is a total disaster, but denialist retards and fossil fuel shills will pretend it isn't even happening.

[Anonymous No.11788521]

>>11788438
>movements that manipulate your emotions and obvious guilt complex
Nigger what? This is a problem of physics, not human intellectual affairs like propaganda.

[Anonymous No.11788544]

Ditching capitalism aint gonna get you anywhere bud, changing the economy to a circular one is.

[Anonymous No.11788545]

>>11785252
Market forces will force most countries into carbon neutrality by 2030 because battery storage and renewables are dropping in price so fast.

Thank God and thank Capitalism, we're all gonna make it brahs.

[Anonymous No.11788584]

>>11785252
I'm drunk, don't freak out and study some Paleoclimatology..

[Anonymous No.11788633]

>nuclear power exists
NO YOU CAN'T USE THAT ONE
EAT THE BUGS REEEEE

[Anonymous No.11788634]

It's really socialism or extinction, uh?

[Anonymous No.11788637]

>>11788634
no, there are other options.

[Anonymous No.11788641]

>>11788634
>climate change can't hurt us if we create the food shortages ourselves

Genius
Also, human ingenuity will prevail. We'll just build arcologies or whatever

[Anonymous No.11788675]

>>11788637
>>11788641
Did you read the article. Radically changing the economy, degrowth, are basically keywords for a necessity-driven economy (socialism) instead of a profit-driven one.

[Anonymous No.11788687]

>>11788675
I don't need to read commie drivel to know that it's still not gonna work even if you'd try it for the hundredth time.

[Anonymous No.11788692]

>>11788687
Aight, have fun in your death cult. I'm listening to the scientists on this one.

[Anonymous No.11788697]

cancel the patriarchy eco-social revolution now!

[Anonymous No.11788702]

>>11788692
>have fun in your death cult.
Same to you, friend. You do see the irony tho, right?

[Anonymous No.11788705]

>>11785252
Because most of theworld is populated by shitskins and mongoloids who dont give a fuck.

[Anonymous No.11789031]

>>11788675
>doesn't care about the change in economy or lack of growth
>does care that the word socialism was triggered in his mind and word = bad

[Anonymous No.11789055]

>>11785252
https://phys.org/news/2020-06-warmest-siberia-10c-hotter.html

[Anonymous No.11789178]

I just realised the other day that the same people who say "Communism killed gazillion people" are deep capitalists that do not recognise that capitalism is leading to the extinction of the entire human race. Quite ironic.

[Anonymous No.11789194]

>>11786337
Don't forget it's also completely retarded

[Anonymous No.11789345]

>>11785252
>Why is no one listening to scientists?
climate “science” isn’t a science. In science you are allowed to ask questions and bring in alternative hypotheses which can then be debunked by data and such.. if your data and science are legit, you don’t have to do stupid deceptive shit like create a vague survey which counts “don’t know” and “more research needed” as a Yes and then claim that 97% of scientists agree that climate change is real and caused by humans.

If your data and science are legit you don’t go around bullying and demonizing people who have brought up data from 10k years ago that have shown almost similar reduction in ice sheets and rise in global temperatures.. you should atleast have the courtesy to take it into account and try to differentiate that data from the modern data and have a somewhat workable theory to prove that the climate is being fucked by humans.

Not to mention how westerners want India and China to go back to stone ages while they are worst polluters on the planet and use 20x as much resources as an average Chinese and Indian

It’s just a political propaganda game to ensure other non western don’t come up and are economically and politically neutered in the name of climate change by some faggy white faggots

[Anonymous No.11789351]

>>11789345
I bet you're also a holocsaust denier.

[Anonymous No.11789362]

>>11789345
>you don’t have to do stupid deceptive shit like create a vague survey which counts “don’t know” and “more research needed” as a Yes and then claim that 97% of scientists agree that climate change is real and caused by humans.
Which survey did this?

>If your data and science are legit you don’t go around bullying and demonizing people who have brought up data from 10k years ago that have shown almost similar reduction in ice sheets and rise in global temperatures
Warming 10K years ago was an order of magnitude slower than the warming today. We also know that warming was part of the Milankovitch cycle caused by Earth's orbital eccentricity. According to that cycle we should slowly be cooling but instead we're rapidly warming. Do you have any clue what you're taking about?

>you should atleast have the courtesy to take it into account and try to differentiate that data from the modern data and have a somewhat workable theory to prove that the climate is being fucked by humans.
Please explain how climatologists have failed to differentiate Milankovitch cycles from greenhouse gas emissions. You are demanding an explanation that has already existed for decades.

>Not to mention how westerners want India and China to go back to stone ages while they are worst polluters on the planet and use 20x as much resources as an average Chinese and Indian
LOL, I hear the exact opposite all the time, that global warming is a hoax because only Western nations are going to be taxed while third world countries are the "real" problem. Make up your minds, conspiracy schmucks.

>It’s just a political propaganda game
Then it should be easy for you to show how the science is flawed. But you don't even understand the science to begin with.

[Anonymous No.11789386]

>>11788506

Verifiable means something can be verified.

We are still waiting on a single verifiable prediction.

...and stop making analogies, that's not science.

[Anonymous No.11789399]

>>11788584
>>>/x/

[Anonymous No.11789405]

>>11789351
yes and flat earther too

[Anonymous No.11789407]

>>11785252

4chan climate threads;

1. Science fanboi shares link to article not written by a scientist while asking /sci/ why they don't listen to scientists.

2. Scientists explain the article is silly.

3. Science fanboi makes analogies and confuses verified predictions with hindsight.

4. Return to line (2) and loop.

[Anonymous No.11789415]

>>11785311

>Plenty of people support my ideas for things, including PHds

Take your lithium

[Anonymous No.11789417]

>>11789386
This. I know avg global temperature is a nice stat to start with, but how about some more resolute predictions in the mainstream.average arctic temperatures will increase on average x +/-y within the next (10,15,20) years. Or subsaharan rainfall etc etc...

[Anonymous No.11789426]

>>11789417

Correct - using a climate model to make a predictive claim regarding a specific climate system would establish the field as legitimate.

Temperature averages are tough, since moving the sensors or assuming different gradients between sensors will give us a different result.

[Anonymous No.11789431]

>>11789426
Do you know if any such verifiable predictions exist/ have been made? I have seen predictions of temperature/ rainfall variation on simulations but the fact I have never seen such stats on mainstream news articles makes me think they are worried about tarnishing their field in the public eye with 'false' predictions.

[Anonymous No.11789439]

>>11789431

I've been reading CMIP papers since the project started and have never seen a verified prediction.

Instead we get conditional hindsight - eg, xyz *may* have been caused by climate change.

[Anonymous No.11789443]

AGW is a hoax, a ploy for world globalhomo control.
>Eat the bugs
>Live in the pod
>Pay the taxes
>Take the vaccines
>Stop reproducing
>Stop taking vacations
>No AC for you
>No personal car for you
>No meat for you
>No home for you
>No land for you
>No money for you
>No travel for you
>No family for you
Don't forget the stuff that's always tacked on to this shit
>Love the gays
>Support the trannies
>Bring in the immigrants
>Give up your guns
>Report the hate speech
>Free the criminals
>Pay the reparations
>Open the border
>Disband the police
The elite will live like they always have, but force us common people to give up even more than we have, leaving us with nothing, like slaves. No rich person will give up their mansion, vacation jets, 5 limousines, and million bucks. And no sane person would give up their AC, home, meat, family car, one vacation per year, or right to have kids.
I will never yield to your fear tactics, because I know the real reason. Ivory tower scientists will say whatever they are paid to say. Also the worst ACTUAL models predict none of what you are selling, snake.

[Anonymous No.11789445]

>>11789439
...which is impossible to prove unless your model is predictive, which they, apparently, haven't proved.

Do you think the field is advancing substantially/ will we see some predictions in the next 10-15 years?

[Anonymous No.11789446]

I used to believe climate change until I realized it is 100% based on completely fudged stats that a bunch of barely scientists did for international applause at the IPCC. The whole thing is a scam, we don't even know if it's warming or not, nobody did credible research with proper methodology.

It's the one hoax that is actually true

[Anonymous No.11789486]

>>11789446
What stats are "fudged?"

[Anonymous No.11789531]

>>11787332
It's not fair to blame anyone. Sitting around blaming people isn't going to save humans from extinction. Only action is.

[Anonymous No.11789688]

>>11789486

Temperature averages

[Anonymous No.11789701]

>>11785252
>let's give up our destiny as man and submit to a circlejerk of scientist
This is no different to the ideology behind UN, ICC, WTO, NATO and all your other little globalist circlejerks.
Fuck you.
I hope you drown from the rising seas.

[Anonymous No.11789705]

>>11785323
Found the retard.

[Anonymous No.11789707]

>>11785252
Whatever. If humanity is too dumb to not murder itself we don't deserve to live anyways.

[Anonymous No.11789719]

>>11788488
This is your mind on atheism.
Take the Christpill, anon. That's the only way to be saved.

[Anonymous No.11789727]

>>11788702
He doesn't get it.
But he will.

[Anonymous No.11789730]

>>11788545
proof?

[Anonymous No.11789732]

>>11789719

[Anonymous No.11789733]

>>11789345
Yup.
The European Elites like their place in the ladder, and everything that's happening in the world today is because they want to keep it.
As a South African, Africa is the future. Holland can go sink.

[Anonymous No.11789741]

>>11789426
>>11789431
Simulations can never beat the real thing.
Simulations will never be a real experiment.
Want to see what the outcome of climate change will be? Just wait.

[Anonymous No.11789746]

>>11789732
>The Vatican is shit
Welcome to the 16th century.

[Anonymous No.11789752]

>>11789688
How are they fudged?

[Anonymous No.11789753]

>>11789741
we have been waiting.

[Anonymous No.11789757]

>>11789753
And everything is still fine.
>climate change confirmed hoax

[Anonymous No.11789760]

Just face reality op, the world is ending. There is nothing we can do bar some sort of radical global revolution against capitalism and its entrenched longing for infinite growth and destruction of nature, And no, biden winning wont change anything.

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

[Anonymous No.11789765]

>>11789757
Brainlet tier bait

[Anonymous No.11789770]

>>11789752

Curve fitting between sensors stations

[Anonymous No.11789782]

>>11789765
Explain exactly how the graph you posted means anything?
How is it material?
Because everything is still fine.

[Anonymous No.11789784]

>>11789770
This is the "missing link" bullshit all over again. You are gonna go, "muh curvefit". There are gonna be more stations and satallites launched confirming the curvefit used. Then you are gonna go "they are fitting between those new stations and the old ones"

Rinse and repeat until the entire earth is literally coated in sensors and we have the most boring version of the grey goo scenario ever conceived.

[Anonymous No.11789803]

>>11789782
Everything
>Coral reefs die off due to bleaching
Is
>Intensification of natural disasters
Doing
>Phytoplankton die off due to acidification
Just
>Artic melts and turns fucking green as algae starts to grow on its surface
Super
>Permafrost melts in Russia releasing methane
Fine
>Sea levels rise faster than expected

[Anonymous No.11789814]

>>11785252
because we collectively want to die a as a species.

[Anonymous No.11789819]

>>11789784

Move all sensors from their current locations 100 miles west. Does the average change?

[Anonymous No.11789821]

>>11789803
>>very
>>selective
>>list
>>of
>>nothings
>All is alright
Yup.

[Anonymous No.11789833]

>>11789803
>child mind thinks the Earth can only change when/how he wants
>and that humans have the power to irreversibly fuck up an entire planet

[Anonymous No.11789842]

>>11789770
What curve fitting?

[Anonymous No.11789847]

>>11789782
You said simulations are meaningless and we have to wait to see the effects. But simulations have accurately predicted global temperature.

[Anonymous No.11789857]

>>11789847
Past performance is no guarantee of future results.
Those confidence intervals are also incredibly wide.

[Anonymous No.11789872]

>>11789819
You get the funding to do that and let me know. But there are a lot of statistical methods that are used to ensure data fidelity out of that the simplest of which being a bootstrap.
>>11789821
You wanted examples of things that are being directly fucked. You, for some reason, think that losing the largest CO2 sink/O2 producers on the planet is nothing.
Guess you are either trolling or too dumb to try and talk with.
>>11789833
You wanted things that we are fucking up. The planet won't be irreversibly fucked, but it will be inhospitable to human life. Life would survive if the entire surface of the planet got glassed.

Humans definitely have the ability to make the planet inhospitable to most life ourselves included which is the current trend.

[Anonymous No.11789878]

>>11789857
Do you even know what a model is?

[Anonymous No.11789879]

>>11789872
Go cry in your cornflakes.
Everything will still be as is tomorrow.

[Anonymous No.11789899]

>>11789842

How do you think temperature is estimated between sensors?

[Anonymous No.11789901]

>meanwhile in denmark
>think we're pretty good on the green front
>time to renew the bill that allows for search and use of oil in the north sea
>a new accept would run until 2050
>haha the government will surely say no
>no one in this day and age would allow for new search of oil until 2050 haha
>but anon think of the income
HOLY SHIT JUST SAY NO RIGHT NOW

[Anonymous No.11789906]

>>11789878
It's a numerical method to find some kind fit or to replicate a set of data. This can then be used to make future predictions. Bayes theorem is a nice example.
But they aren't reality, only approximate predictions. An experiment needs a verifiable, repeatable result. It's the basis of science.
Without the world actually collapsing all predictions of it collapsing are just that, and not Proof of the Collapse. Rising temperature by itself obviously has not collapsed the world.

[Anonymous No.11789924]

I'm mostly worried about the rising concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere.
It's recommended that the concentration of CO2 in a workplace should not reach above 1000 ppm.
It's over 400 ppm outside now and climbing, going to be great when we hot 1000 ppm in 2060.

[Anonymous No.11789929]

>>11789924
>wear the CO2 filtering mask wagie

[Anonymous No.11789981]

>>11789899
Kriging.

[Anonymous No.11789991]

>>11789906
>But they aren't reality, only approximate predictions.
Yes, the same could be said about all scientific knowledge. So are you arguing we should ignore all scientific knowledge?

[Anonymous No.11790000]

>>11789899
Why do you think interpolation is "fudging" when it is standard statistical analysis?

[Anonymous No.11790041]

>>11790000

Interpolation is by definition fudging and anyone regularly conducting statistical analysis will tell you the same.

It's completely acceptable when the uncertainty is low enough to produce a verifiable prediction.

[Anonymous No.11790059]

>>11789991
I just told you that
>An experiment needs a verifiable, repeatable result. It's the basis of science.
What don't you understand?
A simulation isn't real. Hitting a nail with a hammer is real.

[Anonymous No.11790078]

[Anonymous No.11790109]

>>11790059
>Here are a bunch of experiments
>Here are the casual mechanisms behind them
>Here are models based on these casual effects
>Here is data that fits into the predictions the model has made

MoDEls aREnT ReAl

There are no true models only helpful ones is the often abused saying in mathematical modeling courses. The climate models have shown themselves to be very helpful for us in understanding the direction our climate is taking. We can't test the orbit of planets by removing Jupiter but our model of the solar system makes predictions that have been verified so we can use our model to show how planets move and predict how physical forces work.

[Anonymous No.11790140]

>>11790109

tHosE aRe noT pRedIctiOnS

[Anonymous No.11790146]

So are we gonna die or not

[Anonymous No.11790151]

>>11790041
>Interpolation is by definition fudging
No it's not.

>It's completely acceptable when the uncertainty is low enough to produce a verifiable prediction.
So it's competed acceptable for average tempurature.

[Anonymous No.11790162]

>>11790140
>Make a model
>Collect data
>Data matches model
>Not a prediction

Are you retarded?

[Anonymous No.11790166]

>>11790059
>What don't you understand?
What experiment are you talking about? Are you talking about comparing models to observations? Yes that can and has been done repeatedly. You're avoiding the question. Why should we ignore the predictions of climatology but not other sciences?

[Anonymous No.11790168]

>>11790151

You don't regularly conduct statical analysis

Qed

[Anonymous No.11790170]

>>11790168
>You don't regularly conduct statical analysis

[Anonymous No.11790171]

>>11790168
>I don't have an argument so I'll just say you are unqualified.

[Anonymous No.11790176]

>>11790162
A biased model

[Anonymous No.11790186]

>>11790176
My model is biased towards predicting future trends! Oh no! How awful, guess I'll just have to bin it then. Really it's the only sane choice, pretend it didn't predict anything at all and refuse to make new models. Because any model that is made is obviously biased so long as it doesn't confirm your worldview.

[Anonymous No.11790190]

>>11790171

Well? Do you regularly conduct statistical analysis?

[Anonymous No.11790196]

>>11790186
Don't you know that you can't no nuffin?

[Anonymous No.11790199]

>>11790186

Wtf did the model predict, with what uncertainty, when was the prediction base, when was the prediction observed?

eArtH hOttER!

mOdeL wOrK!

[Anonymous No.11790201]

>>11790190
Not the person that you tagged originally but yeah, I do. I do protein folding and bioinformatics.

Really though that doesn't matter because you are just a whiny cunt who doesn't have any argument past "I don't want it to be real"

[Anonymous No.11790202]

>>11790190
Well? Do you have an argument?

[Anonymous No.11790215]

>>11790202

Yes. That anyone who regularly conducts statistical analysis will tell you interpolation is a methodical process that fudges results.

[Anonymous No.11790231]

>>11790202

Why do science fanbois never answer questions to establish expertise in the topics they troll?

[Anonymous No.11790239]

>>11790199
https://www.google.com/amp/s/climate.nasa.gov/news/2943/study-confirms-climate-models-are-getting-future-warming-projections-right.amp

Takes like 5 seconds. But you can just dismiss it as biased blissfully ignorant of the irony.

[Anonymous No.11790243]

>>11790201

It's real, you're just wrong likely about the results.

I hope your models have less uncertainty than a climate model.

[Anonymous No.11790253]

>>11790231
I did. Although maybe I shouldn't have because it should be irrelevant to the content of the argument.
>>11790215
Interpolation can be used in conjunction with other methods in order to identify the error on the assumed average between two data points. In the climate models they aren't just naively assuming that the temperature is the average between too stations, they just can't get continuous data in those regions as meteorological satillites don't work like that. So one can interpolate between the two station, check the validity of that interpolation through discrete longer time resolved data from passing satallites and verify whether or not the assumed continuous temperature average matches to the discreet data.

[Anonymous No.11790269]

>>11790215
It's not. And you're just arguing semantics anyway. There are more than enough samples to get an average temperature with low uncertainty.

[Anonymous No.11790274]

>>11790231
OK so you lost the argument since all you have are ad hominem. Thanks for admitting that.

[Anonymous No.11790317]

>>11790253

All it takes is one prediction, twat. You could just find one and btfo of the entire climate denial community.

[Anonymous No.11790331]

>>11790274

Requesting bonafides isn't ad hominem. It's an appeal to authority. Study debate, too.

[Anonymous No.11790349]

>>11785252
Who wants to tell people that they cant have unnecessary consumer goods and to have less babies?

We are fucked to be sure, the only uncertains are the time frame and how much more damage is done to the ecosystems before we are taken out of the picture.

Quite honestly I dont give a fuck anymore. This has been on the cards for over a hundred years now. No one did anything of significance in 1920. No one does anything of significance now. Human society has proved itself unworthy of continued existence. Perhaps the remaints, if any, will be more successful next time around. Providing the world can support a civilization next time around.

[Anonymous No.11790371]

>>11790317
Glad to see you moving goalposts again.
>>11790331
It's been fun arguing with trolls but I got shit to do.

[Anonymous No.11790395]

>>11790371

...like homework lol let us know when to celebrate your graduation!

[Anonymous No.11790555]

>>11790239
Mean global temperature isn't actually that useful. Sure the models have got this accurate, but have been regularly updated such that they are only projecting 3-5 years in advance. What about more specific/useful predictions that can be used to guide policy?

Region y will show an average temp increase/ rainfall increase/ sea level rise of x +/- z over the next 15,20,30 years. It is at this point such models become useful. As far as I know we are not at that point yet. Please prove me wrong if we are.

Futhermore, models only take into account what we know. There could be mechanisms we know nothing about that could have a dramatic affect (either positive or negative) which are not accounted for?

[Anonymous No.11790582]

>a government finally steps up
>we got a plan to reach zero carbon emission within 5 years
>we will lose a lot of luxuries and it will hurt the economy but this is for the better good
Why haven't this happened yet?
The people will accept it and those who don't will be seen as ignorant assholes.

[Anonymous No.11790597]

>>11790555
Our sea level models underestimated the rate of rise partially due to unexpected shrinking of the artic ice sheets beyond hoped for minima. This is a sign that our models might be too conservative.

And we do have those predictions the problem is that they are 20-40 years in the future based on global shifts. There are whole maps you can look up of climate change vulnerable areas. But looking at any one area and trying to predict how it will do something very difficult as local geography, incumbent weather systems, and even geologic events can alter local results. This is why climate models stick to larger scale systems. We are getting better at short term modeling in smaller areas, and we have some okay models for predicting the rise in general but it's not great.

Right now we have a mercury thermometer that is telling us that we have a pretty rough fever going. Arguing that we need a digital thermometer that measures rectal and cranial temperature before going to a doctor because mercury isn't as accurate is counterproductive. Yes it would be nice to have and yes we are working on getting them. But by the time we wait for the shops to open the fever might progress far more than we can recover from.

>>11790395
Are you trying to shame someone with the perception that they go to school? /sci/ becomes more of a shit hole every day.

[Anonymous No.11790665]

>>11790597

No, I'm specifically shaming you for speaking beyond your expertise. Spoiler, you're going to learn that you were wrong about other stuff, too!

[Anonymous No.11790667]

>>11790239

naILeD iT lol

[Anonymous No.11790674]

>>11790555
You could just go read some IPCC reports to find out.

[Anonymous No.11790715]

>>11790665
Then do that; your insults are as weak as your rhetoric.

[Anonymous No.11790732]

>>11790331
>Requesting bonafides isn't ad hominem.
It is.

>It's an appeal to authority.
No, an appeal to authority would be "X is correct because the person saying X is an authority," not "X is incorrect because the person saying it doesn't have expertise." But at least you admit you are relying on a fallacious argument.

[Anonymous No.11790745]

>>11785275
Economically coal and LNG are still easier and less expensive to extract. Nuclear stalls while wind and solar still produce a remarkable amount of co2 to be deemed clean.

[Anonymous No.11790876]

>>11790674
I have read several but as far as i can tell they never give a substantial verifiable statistic that is region specific. They group risks, and potential risk based on temperature rise, but no actual regional statistics as far as i have seen

[Anonymous No.11790878]

>>11790876
*global temperature rise

[Anonymous No.11790887]

>>11790876
Learn 2 reading comprehension

[Anonymous No.11790891]

>>11790887
?
Surely they want to make it as clear as possible. I haven't seen any.

[Anonymous No.11790894]

>>11785252
Here's the thing - the reason we are fucked:

Long term considerations put you at a competitive disadvantage over the short term.

Here's your "great filter" - here's your evolutionary trap. This is why human beings will eventually use every single Joule available through fossil fuels, and THEN turn to using every single Joule available through nuclear power, thereby turning the Earth into an overheated, radioactive wasteland that supports a few shrubs and small rodents in its most biologically diverse regions.

[Anonymous No.11790981]

>>11790894
The problem isn't the term, it's the totality.
Freedom isn't free.

[Anonymous No.11791059]

>>11789446
There is an alternative view of looking at Climate change - the idea that we should not disturb very complex ecosystems because we don't know what the effects will be. The current ecosystem and makeup of our planet serves humans well (we can survive). Dramatically changing that (increasing temperatures, melting of ice etc..) can lead to very bad outcomes for humanity.

You don't even need to believe that all what we're doing is harming the planet. You only need to believe that our actions are changing the planet and we don't know what the effects of that will be on the survival of humanity. So why take the risk? Well, big oil companies need to make their billions.

[Anonymous No.11791082]

>>11790582
Too many senators out there jerking off the collective dicks of airline travel and fossil fuel companies. Plus muricans don't like losing their freedom to spurt more carbon into the air.

[Anonymous No.11791354]

>>11789362
>Which survey did this?
Read more about the debunking process and how a retarded study in 2014 started this 97% consensus meme

1.6%, Not 97%, Agree that Humans are the Main Cause of Global Warming

https://www.econlib.org/archives/2014/03/16_not_97_agree.html

>Recall that Bedford and Cook lumped together those who believe that humans are the main cause with those who believe that humans are a cause. Cook et al did not report the percent of abstracts in which the scientists said that humans are the main cause of global warming. But Bedford and Cook (the same Cook), citing Cook et al, misrepresented the results of Cook et al.

>Unfortunately, neither Cook et al nor Bedford and Cook reported, even though they had a category for, the percent of abstracts that claimed that humans are the main cause of global warming. Fortunately, Mark Bahner, an enterprising commenter on both David Friedman’s and my posts, managed to find their data and went through and did his own calculation. He reported his results in a comment on my previous post but, because the post was two days ago, it’s worth pointing out in a separate post. Thus this one.

>According to Bahner (and I have not gone through and checked the raw data for myself), of the 11,944 abstracts that Cook et al examined, only 64 claimed explicitly that humans are the main cause of global warming

The link provides the main study that is often quoted by many climate "scientists" to peddle the 97% narrative

.

[Anonymous No.11793104]

>>11791354
Nope

[Anonymous No.11793119]

>>11785252
Nobody believes it because none of the previous predictions came true.

[Anonymous No.11793133]

Facts:
1. Global warming is disastrous
2. Humans are the sole cause

[Anonymous No.11793143]

>>11793104
This only proves that the hoax has been endorsed for 30 years.

[Anonymous No.11793305]

>>11791354
This is nonsensical. First they criticize Cook for "lumping together" those who quantified AGW with those who didn't, and then they make the exact same mistake. Not to mention that they competent ignored the second half of the study which directly surveyed authors to get quantified answers. The result was 96%.

[Anonymous No.11793308]

>>11793143
>it's not a consensus!
>OK it is a consensus but it's a hoax!
Then why are you the only one being caught lying?

[Anonymous No.11793309]

>>11785323
retarded. The solution is obviously to find a way to get energy in a more clean + economic way.

[Anonymous No.11793323]

>>11785252
Is there any evidence that flooding developed countries that actually have the capacity to solve these problems with thridworlders won't lead to catastrophe?

[Anonymous No.11793327]

Does the weakening magnetic field strength have any effect on this?

[Anonymous No.11793384]

>>11785267
>stop buying stuff from them.
Stop being racist to the China people

[Anonymous No.11793406]

>degrowth, establishing strong local supply chains, basically ditching capitalism globally

Idiotic.

[Anonymous No.11793422]

The solution is not degrowth, radical societal restructuring, or similar leftist bullshit proposals.

The solution is replacing fossil energy with advanced nuclear power.

[Anonymous No.11793429]

>>11793308
Not him.

[Anonymous No.11793433]

>degrowth

Stagnation means death.

[Anonymous No.11793442]

>>11793433
There is a reason why they're flying a black flag outside.

[Anonymous No.11793489]

>>11785252
My country is going to have higher GDP growth and increased food production. We will just kill refugees. Deal with it.

[Anonymous No.11793494]

>>11785252
what about stopping sending food and medicines to africa to stop overpopulation?

[Anonymous No.11793537]

I dont understand why this issue isn't discussed at its most fundamental level.

The planet can sustain only so much pollution
People cause pollution
The amount of pollution is equal to the number if people on the planet multiplied by the amount of pollution each person creates. That could be expressed simply as:

CC = Population x Pollution/person

Therefore to reduce climate change the options are:

1) Reduce the number of people, or
2) Reduce the amount of pollution each person causes, or
3) Do a bit of both.

However the problem is people dont want to address the problem of limiting population, since that would require authoritarian control over reproduction. Secondly, reducing pollution would likely reduce the average standard of living, which the vast majority of people are not willing to accept.

Therefore, given the relative inaction on CC in any meaningful sense, we can conclude that people dont listen to the scientists due to current political and social factors being more important than long term survival.

Gentlemen. I present the Human species. Now, are you so sure its worth saving?

[Anonymous No.11793724]

>>11793489
>MUH POLISH APPLES

[Anonymous No.11793758]

>>11785252
none of those things will cause “collapse of civilization”

[Anonymous No.11793762]

>>11793537
>Gentlemen. I present the Human species. Now, are you so sure its worth saving?
People will learn to deal with the pollution and civilization will grown and phosphor. Humanity will survive and phosphor.

[Anonymous No.11793771]

>>11793762
>Grow and phosphor
>Phosphor is a term for phosphorus
A substance that glows and spontaneously ignites. Very accurate.

[Anonymous No.11793792]

>>11793537

>Secondly, reducing pollution would likely reduce the average standard of living, which the vast majority of people are not willing to accept.

I dont think it will reduce standard of living much, if at all. With renewables getting very cheap and nuclear you can have high standard of living with very little CO2 pollution.

But its a race against time. We better switch sooner rather than later.

[Anonymous No.11793814]

>>11793537

That relationship calculates total pollution, not climate change.

Don't mess with Texas was a superior campaign against pollution.

[Anonymous No.11794055]

>>11793537
Ah, the age old Malthusian crap.

[Anonymous No.11794342]

>>11793537
Every single one of your other (You)'s is an extremely stupid human, and no they most certainly are not worth saving. The problem is that sooner or later they'll blame their troubles on the very same people who tried to warn them.

[Anonymous No.11794696]

>>11794342
Good.
Just like the (((you))) cycle.

[Anonymous No.11794733]

>>11785252
Dude calm down if it gets to a point where it actually hurts the economy and the international communit can't come to an agreement, then one of the G10 will simply decide to implement geo-engineering (which we know to be incredibly cheap and effective) and forcibly coold down the planet - all the ice related problems disappear.
We'll have to deal with some unintended consequences and probably lose more biodiversity but civilization threatening disaster will easily be avoided.