/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.2634246]

What will happen to science and politics now that man-made global warming has been disproven? This new documentary is causing an uproar.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YaTJJCPYhlk&feature=related

[Anonymous No.2634284]

...and yet the outcome in nature will be a result of well understood physical mechanics no matter how many documentaries are made.

[Anonymous No.2634324]

>>2634284
umm try to make sense

[Anonymous No.2634330]

>>2634324
you must be dense if his sentence makes no sense to you.

>>2634246
you must be dense if you think global warming is "disproven"

I am the goddamn batman

[Anonymous No.2634331]

pics or it didn't happen

[Anonymous No.2634332]

This documentary contains falsified graphs and misinformation.

inb4 someone trys to tell me I'm wrong without even googling it.

[Anonymous No.2634339]

>>2634331

[Anonymous No.2634340]

>>2634332
prove it

[Anonymous No.2634346]

>>2634324
>>2634324
>>2634324
>>2634324

this
These global warming skeptics are morons. Pay attention. Because this thread is going to explode
It's getting warmer. Period. The end.

You can argue about HOW MUCH of it is being caused by human activity, but you cannot deny that our global action have no consequence.

[Anonymous No.2634347]

>>2634330
>derp derp ill pretend he didnt say man-made global warming

[Anonymous No.2634350]

It's irrelevant either way, most of the important changes which would have come from Global Warming need to happen anyways.

[Anonymous No.2634351]

>>2634346
your sentence is riddled with errors and on top of that you still pretend that global warming is the same thing as man-made global warming. only later to make the distinction in your post. youre a moron. man made co2 is like, what, 0.0005% of the gas in the atmosphere? and never mind the fact that it has almost no correlation to warming at all, instead it is solar activity which correlates.

[Anonymous No.2634363]

>>2634351
>>make fun of someone else, make the same mistakes.

[Anonymous No.2634367]

>>2634351
It's more like 0.02%.

Drink a glass of water that is 0.02% tetanus

[Krakengineer !!5XY+x7grkpt No.2634371]

>>2634246
Watch this:
http://www.youtube.com/user/greenman3610#p/u/58/boj9ccV9htk

[Anonymous No.2634373]

>>2634367
no dip shit, co2 would be about 0.02%, but MAN MADE co2 would be much less. global warming faggot liberals confirmed for uneducated faggots.

[Anonymous No.2634374]

>>2634351
Solar activity? Prove it.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11650-climate-myths-global-warming-is-down-to-the-sun-not-huma
ns.html

[Anonymous No.2634378]

>You can't say co2 can drive climate. It certainly never did in the past.

Wow, you made me snort 49 seconds into your movie.

This looks promising.

[Anonymous No.2634380]

Academic Scientists in 1970:

“We have about five more years at the outside to do something.”
• Kenneth Watt, ecologist

“Civilization will end within 15 or 30 years unless immediate action is taken against problems facing mankind.”
• George Wald, Harvard Biologist

“We are in an environmental crisis which threatens the survival of this nation, and of the world as a suitable place of human habitation.”
• Barry Commoner, Washington University biologist

“Man must stop pollution and conserve his resources, not merely to enhance existence but to save the race from intolerable deterioration and possible extinction.”
• New York Times editorial, the day after the first Earth Day

“Population will inevitably and completely outstrip whatever small increases in food supplies we make. The death rate will increase until at least 100-200 million people per year will be starving to death during the next ten years.”
• Paul Ehrlich, Stanford University biologist

“By…[1975] some experts feel that food shortages will have escalated the present level of world hunger and starvation into famines of unbelievable proportions. Other experts, more optimistic, think the ultimate food-population collision will not occur until the decade of the 1980s.”
• Paul Ehrlich, Stanford University biologist

[Anonymous No.2634385]

>>2634373
Regardless, it still harms the atmosphere.

[Anonymous No.2634386]

>>2634332
i'm sure it does, if it is ABOUT THE FALSIFICATION OF DATA.

that's like saying a movie about the dangers of drug use is bad for containing depictions of drug use.

anyway, anthropogenic global warming has NEVER not been an obvious bullshit 'gimme monies' ALL HAIL THE MASTER RACE CANNOT BE SPOKEN ILL OF EVEN ON 4CHAN scam. 'cap and trade' is a universal tax with a manipulable market built in. a terrible, terrible idea.

[Anonymous No.2634391]

Sorry academics. I guess we now know that the real scientists are engineers.

“Scientists have solid experimental and theoretical evidence to support…the following predictions: In a decade, urban dwellers will have to wear gas masks to survive air pollution…by 1985 air pollution will have reduced the amount of sunlight reaching earth by one half….”
• Life Magazine, January 1970

“At the present rate of nitrogen buildup, it’s only a matter of time before light will be filtered out of the atmosphere and none of our land will be usable.”
• Kenneth Watt, Ecologist

“Air pollution…is certainly going to take hundreds of thousands of lives in the next few years alone.”
• Paul Ehrlich, Stanford University biologist

“We are prospecting for the very last of our resources and using up the nonrenewable things many times faster than we are finding new ones.”
• Martin Litton, Sierra Club director

“By the year 2000, if present trends continue, we will be using up crude oil at such a rate…that there won’t be any more crude oil. You’ll drive up to the pump and say, `Fill ‘er up, buddy,’ and he’ll say, `I am very sorry, there isn’t any.’”
• Kenneth Watt, Ecologist

“Dr. S. Dillon Ripley, secretary of the Smithsonian Institute, believes that in 25 years, somewhere between 75 and 80 percent of all the species of living animals will be extinct.”
• Sen. Gaylord Nelson

“The world has been chilling sharply for about twenty years. If present trends continue, the world will be about four degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990, but eleven degrees colder in the year 2000. This is about twice what it would take to put us into an ice age.”
• Kenneth Watt, Ecologist

[Anonymous No.2634396]

>>2634371
This.
Swindle movie confirmed for bullshit.

[Anonymous No.2634397]

>>2634332
And an inconvenient truth was misleading at every opportunity and had it's fair share of manipulated or biased data as well.

As long as this is a hot issue, it will remain fraught with bias to a degree which will make it impossible to determine wether AGW is a real phenomenon or not. We need something big to distract everyone so that some real, impartial research can be done.

[Anonymous No.2634398]

I wonder how the world would be today if CFC producers were as powerful back then as oil companies today.

[Anonymous No.2634399]

Scientists don't really disagree on the matter; 97.4% of practicing climate scientists accept the global warming hypothesis:

http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-scientific-consensus-intermediate.htm

That said, I can't really blame the general public for being skeptical. There is a LOT of money being spent on anti-GW propaganda. The anti-GW movement is political, not scientific. It's funded by a combination of right-wing extremists (the Koch brothers have given $42 million to anti-GW groups since 1997) and various corporations who would be harmed by environmental legislation (Exxon is one of the funders of the anti-GW group Heritage Foundation, for example).

[Anonymous No.2634400]

Dumping OC evidence against global warming.

This graph shows the distribution of DRY gasses in our atmosphere.
-It is difficult to measure the content of water vapor
-Water vapor however is roughly 50 times more than co2

[Anonymous No.2634401]

I agree that we should do what we can to help the planet
But i don't want to spend $4 per freaking gallon
Seriously somebody is laughing all the way to the bank out of this

[Anonymous No.2634411]

>>2634391
Fuck year.

[Anonymous No.2634413]

[Anonymous No.2634415]

>>2634391
>>2634380
YA, PEOPLE MADE INCORRECT PREDICTIONS

HAY IN BY THE TIME I FINISH THIS POST GRAVITY WILL CAUSE EVERYONE ON EARTH TO DIE

OH WELL I GUESS IT DIDNT COME TRUE

GRAVITY WRONG

[Anonymous No.2634416]

>>2634400

This graph simply shows what gasses absorb what wavelength of radiation.

[Anonymous No.2634418]

>>2634400
>It is difficult to measure the content of water vapor
What's so hard about measuring humidity?

[sage No.2634422]

>>2634400
Troll harder

You think that you are the first one to notice that fact you can find on wiki.

You think people who have spent their whole life reaserching climate did nt knew it and account for it.

[Anonymous No.2634423]

>>2634400 HURR water vapor!!

Are you goddamned serious? have some science, you moron:

http://www.skepticalscience.com/water-vapor-greenhouse-gas-intermediate.htm

[Anonymous No.2634424]

>>2634400
cute source
I like the part where you let us know that you are not a climate scientist and cannot possibly even begin to understand the complex systems involved.

[Anonymous No.2634428]

>>2634400
>>2634416

Last pic

As we can see, the amount of absorption of co2 is quite pathetic compared to water vapor. Co2 does play a role in the greenhouse effect, but it's in the little league.


My climatology professor was quite adamant that global warming was bullshit.

[Anonymous No.2634431]

>>2634380
>ecologist
>biologist
>making statements about something outside of their field of study.

[Anonymous No.2634435]

>>2634428
"my climatology professor"
lols

[Anonymous No.2634439]

>>2634415
No. You're wrong. And your academic butt-buddies are wrong. And no matter what you faggots say:

1) CO2 will continue to be pumped into the atmosphere more and more veery year. If not by us then by the Chinese or Indians.

2) The world is going to continue to have earthquakes and hurricanes and droughts and floods like it has for millions of years.

3) The subhuman academic pukes will continue to cry that the apocalypse is nigh and they need more funding to save earth from the evil corporations! Oh Noes!

[Anonymous No.2634441]

>>2634399
>hypothesis

[Anonymous No.2634446]

>>2634399
>>2634399

That doesn't make sense to me, global warming was a political movement during the Reagan/Thacher (corruption) period.

And it has been reintroduced again, not by a scientist, but by a politician.

[Anonymous No.2634448]

>>2634435
name, and university where he works

[Anonymous No.2634449]

I don't see whats so hard to believe about global warming
We've pretty much have made animals go extinct without even trying in the past. I think the same applies for our careless pollution

[sage No.2634450]

>>2634439
>>You are an idiot
>>2634424
Refer to the picture

AGW or NOT Steps taken to get off fossil fuels will benefit us in long term

[Anonymous No.2634452]

following in the tradition of dumbassery

[Anonymous No.2634457]

>>2634399 Exxon is one of the funders of the anti-GW group Heritage Foundation, for example

Fuck, sorry; that should have been the Heartland Institute, not the Heritage foundation. Don't know how I got those two confused.

[Anonymous No.2634471]

Besides global warming is just a "theory", if there was evidence proving global warming then why isn't it a fact?

[Anonymous No.2634472]

http://conservapedia.com/Global_warming

[Anonymous No.2634474]

>>2634449
Yeah, we made the dinosaurs go extinct. Things don't just go extinct on their own by way of natural selection weeding them out.

>>2634450
You don't understand economics. You don't know what will benefit people in the long term you. If you did, you'd be rich, and not a bitch.

[Anonymous No.2634475]

>>2634471
You are right man global warming is just a thoery(a guess).

[Anonymous No.2634476]

>>2634471
troll harder communist

[Anonymous No.2634478]

>>2634398

>Skin cancer, skin cancer everywhere.

[Anonymous No.2634482]

Global warming is seriously why I hate most people.

STOP FUCKING FREAKING OUT. IT WILL BE FINE.

I hate you fucking whiney little bitches who do nothing but bitch and whine about possible apocalypse scenarios. It's not like we've been trying to predict the end of the world for years and have been successful..

[Anonymous No.2634483]

>>2634474
Nope. Actually I do know what will benfit people in long term.

And its not fossil fuels.

[Anonymous No.2634484]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_dimming#Relationship_to_global_warming

[Anonymous No.2634485]

>>2634471
0/10

>>2634472
>conservapedia

>>2634474
>ludicrous argument regarding dinosaurs regardless that it is widely accepted that a meteor wiped them out.
>you don't know what will benefit people in the long term. that's why you're not rich.
>long term investments. rich now.
>how does i economics.

Oh god, this thread, so much derp.

[Anonymous No.2634487]

>>2634446 And it has been reintroduced again, not by a scientist, but by a politician.

Al Gore might have popularized it in the public eye, but the theory has been quietly gaining acceptance in scientific circles for decades. Right now, you're about as likely to find a biologist who doesn't believe in evolution as you are a climatologist who doesn't accept the GW theory.

[Anonymous No.2634493]

>>2634418

>What's so hard about measuring humidity?

On a small scale it's easy, but we are talking about the entire atmosphere......

>>2634422
>>2634423
>>2634424

I simply referred to it as evidence against global warming, not conclusive proof.
The fact that you all made conclusions before i had even finished posting shows how scientific your analysis of the data was.

[Anonymous No.2634494]

>>2634378
After only about a minute, I lost count of how many lies were told. I'm assuming they're lies, though it's quite possible most of the quotes here are taken completely out of context.

[Anonymous No.2634496]

>>2634474
>>you don't understand economics
oh god
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_theory
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economics#Criticism_of_assumptions

[Anonymous No.2634501]

>>2634493 The fact that you all made conclusions before i had even finished posting shows how scientific your analysis of the data was.

Wait, the fact that we proved your argument wrong is proof that we aren't scientific?

Does that make sense in retardese?

[Anonymous No.2634502]

Notice how the GW propenents only use arguments to authority? Quoting engineers doesn't prove anything. Why don't you post evidence which actually proves GW? Oh right...

Pathetic.

[Anonymous No.2634511]

>Scientists speak about the world getting colder.
>It stops getting colder and getting hotter instead.
>IT'S GLOBAL WARMING.
>Same freak out as in the 70s-80s.

People are so stupid it hurts.

[Anonymous No.2634514]

>>2634493
YOu have got it man. You have disproven AGW through a 4chan thread. A noble prize In (chemistry,physics,peace) awaits you. Go publish a paper.

[Anonymous No.2634521]

>>2634416
Holy arbitrary cutoff point, Batman!

>>2634482
By which you mean you're just like everyone else, having only analyses of risk: "Whatever" and "OH JESUS FUCK I'M GONNA DIE". Living in an arid country I've got good reason to be concerned about increasing drought frequency even if I'm not going to set on fire every time I leave shade.

[Anonymous No.2634523]

>>2634493
>>herp derp the atmosphere is only made up of .02% blah we only contribute even tinnier
dude, chaos theory. Small, very small changes in initial conditions can make vast changes on a large scale. I don't need to "scientifically analyze your data" to know you're full of shit.

It's like arguing that since the sun fuses 4 million tonnes of matter every second, there's now way that it could be older than 6000 years and still be "burning".

[Anonymous No.2634528]

>>2634502 Notice how the GW propenents only use arguments to authority? Quoting engineers doesn't prove anything. Why don't you post evidence which actually proves GW?

There's no nice way to say this, so I'm just gonna come right out with it; the average person is not informed enough to be able to judge the validity of raw scientific data. You cannot have an informed opinion on something as complex as climate change without taking AT A MINIMUM college level courses on it.

[Anonymous No.2634530]

>>2634511

The average IQ of most GW proponents is close to that of creationists, they literally have no critical thinking skills, at all, ugh, how can they be so stupid? It's sad really, that people like this exist, it really annoys me how the credulous masses actually think GW is real.

[Anonymous No.2634532]

>>2634528

I have studied global warming at a graduate level, have you?

[Anonymous No.2634539]

>>2634530
All of my physics Profs are global warming proponents. Many of them have multiple doctrate degrees. So thier IQ is comparable to creationist.(Not making athourity argument just pointing out your idiocy)

[Anonymous No.2634540]

>>2634532
Sure.
Anonymous is always qualified.
have a published paper on GW? Link.

[Anonymous No.2634543]

>>2634532
How does it feel knowing in twenty years, the science is all going to change? Because it will. That's how it happens. Thirty years ago, the theory was that the earth was freezing. And the science at the time perfectly supported it. But they were wrong. And you will be too.

[Anonymous No.2634556]

>>2634502
>Notice how the GW propenents only use arguments to authority?

An Appeal to Authority is a perfectly valid argument, IF the authority you're referring to is accepted as an expert in the field in question:

>We must often rely upon expert opinion when drawing conclusions about technical matters where we lack the time or expertise to form an informed opinion. For instance, those of us who are not physicians usually rely upon those who are when making medical decisions, and we are not wrong to do so.

http://www.fallacyfiles.org/authorit.html

And we do it because you the average layperson does not understand climatology well enough to be able to tell whether the actual evidence for it is compelling or not. It's a highly technical, scientific field.

[Anonymous No.2634557]

>>2634543
By perfectly supported it you mean they claimed a Ice age was coming in 20,000 years(which is still belived to be true).

[Anonymous No.2634554]

What will happen to science and politics now that evolution has been disproven? This new documentary is causing an uproar.

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=expelled+no+intelligence+allowed+part+1&aq=1

[Anonymous No.2634562]

>>2634543
>>the science will change
yes
>>30 years ago the science...
stop right there. Show me this "science" 30 years ago

[Anonymous No.2634565]

>>2634398

These reports that the chlorine in CFCs destroys the ozone lair are nothing more than charlatans with a political agenda.

Our research actually shows it INCREASES the thickness of the ozone layer by 15%.

Sadly, people are being force fed these lies by the media, and any criticism against them is met with derision and even outright mockery.

[Anonymous No.2634569]

>>2634543
>>2634511

Read this:

http://www.skepticalscience.com/ice-age-predictions-in-1970s.htm

[Anonymous No.2634571]

>>2634557
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2005/01/the-global-cooling-myth/

[Anonymous No.2634573]

>>2634562
OK. This is going to be a bitch, but I will search for some Internet information that I can share. Unfortunately, it is from the 70s and 80s, so it is all in printed form. I would say go look it up at your local library, but I'll see what's on the Internet.

[sure is /new/ in here No.2634577]

Didi everybody here come out of alex jones school of science.

[Anonymous No.2634582]

>>2634569
see
>>2634573

You're already getting beat

[Anonymous No.2634589]

>>2634557
20,000 years? No. They were predicting much sooner.

[sure is /new/ in here No.2634590]

>>2634573
Please link to actual papers.

>inb4 articles that qoute mine

[Anonymous No.2634593]

>>2634589
[citation needed]

[Anonymous No.2634596]

>>2634569
As an oldfag, I find this frustrating to read. Please go read something published in the 70s and 80s on the subject.

[Anonymous No.2634600]

>>2634543 Thirty years ago, the theory was that the earth was freezing

It actually wasn't, that was a myth. See:

>>2634571
>>2634569

Even in the 60's, the vast majority of scientists thought warming was more likely than cooling. Since then, the evidence for global warming has grown to the point where the only reason people deny it is a) they're ignorant of the research, b) they're conspiracy theorists who think it's faked, or c) they're paid to deny it.

[Anonymous No.2634605]

>>2634539
All of your physics professors are probably all socialists too, even though those theories have been, continue to be, and always will be proven much more inefficient and oppressive than free markets.

Your professors are self important and ego maniacal idiots. Sometimes they're useful idiots, but mostly just idiots.

[Anonymous No.2634607]

>>2634332
>Implying all hot-topic documentaries don't do the same thing.

>Implying it isn't the point of a documentary to sway the viewer to a specific viewpoint.

[Anonymous No.2634615]

>>2634474
Not dinasaurs
Just tasmania tigers, certain breeds of wolves, dodos, certain tropical frogs and whales, tigers and black rhinos are all endangered because of people

[Anonymous No.2634617]

>>2634605
Ego manical idiots. Stopped reading thier.

[Anonymous No.2634621]

>>2634577

Global warming denialism is the new "cool" conspiracy theory. Kinda like how in the 90's everyone thought JFK was assassinated, then in the early 00's everyone thought the moon landings were faked.

In ten years time, everyone will think Nixon was secretly from Venus, or whatever the popular conspiracy of the moment is. It's just the way our minds work.

[Anonymous No.2634626]

This thread is terrible and everyone here should feel terrible.

[Anonymous No.2634627]

>>2634605
Yeah everyone knows economists know more about than environment than scientists that based their careers about things such as studying the environment and weather

[Anonymous No.2634630]

No links to any papers yet

[Anonymous No.2634632]

Gentlemen, are you aware that climate change deniers use automated software to give the appearance of being multiple people, even when it's just one or two actual humans? They set up different "personas" with fake backgrounds (facebook pages, twitter accounts, etc.) to give the impression of being real. A single person can appear to be tens or even hundreds of people online. It's entirely possible that on all of /sci/ there has ever only been one or two climate change deniers. You'll probably notice how slightly formulaic their arguments and posts are. They tend to focus on a limited set of key words.

[Anonymous No.2634636]

>>2634571
>whois realclimate.org
>google
>wikipedia
Environmental Media Services (EMS) is a Washington, D.C. based nonprofit organization that is "dedicated to expanding media coverage of critical environmental and public health issues".[1] EMS was founded in 1994 by Arlie Schardt, a former journalist, former communications director for Al Gore's 2000 Presidential campaign, and former head of the Environmental Defense Fund during the 1970s.

[Anonymous No.2634640]

sho is retarded in here

[Anonymous No.2634642]

>>2634621
yes because watergate was disproved after kubrick died

[Anonymous No.2634644]

>>2634636
So public health issues are a huge conspiracy funded by al gore to ensalve mankind.

[Anonymous No.2634648]

OP, the people that pay me to conduct climate science are the same people that pay you to deny it.

enjoy your gas prices supporting my work, I get paid far more than you do.

[Anonymous No.2634652]

This thread

[Anonymous No.2634657]

>>2634621
JFK was assassinated
Oswald was brainwashed by the CIA to take down Kennedy since he indirectly lead to the hippy revolution with his speech (ask what you can do with your country) and the fact that they didn't trust him because he was a "liberal"
Later on the government conspired with Richard Nixon with the watergate scandal so that he would be reelected and keep the Vietnam war going

[Anonymous No.2634659]

>>2634636
You may have noticed that on websites with real scientific information, the sources of the information are given so that people can verify it themselves and check out the details.

[Anonymous No.2634676]

>>2634642 watergate

What the fuck does that have to do with anything?

[Anonymous No.2634681]

>>2634659
>real scientific information
(that a researcher can't get fired for publishing)

[Anonymous No.2634694]

>>2634681
Oh lawdy lawd the science world is run by evolunist, socialist, global warming proponents

[Anonymous No.2634704]

>>2634676
that's the point. what do the moon landings or nixon being from venus have to do with global warming?

[Anonymous No.2634712]

>>2634632 Gentlemen, are you aware that climate change deniers use automated software to give the appearance of being multiple people, even when it's just one or two actual humans? They set up different "personas" with fake backgrounds (facebook pages, twitter accounts, etc.) to give the impression of being real. A single person can appear to be tens or even hundreds of people online. It's entirely possible that on all of /sci/ there has ever only been one or two climate change deniers. You'll probably notice how slightly formulaic their arguments and posts are. They tend to focus on a limited set of key words.

Not sure if you're trolling, but this really does actually happen. I post occasionally on Fark.com (a news aggregate site), and they had a minor scandal a few months back when a few of their more prolific posters were found to be paid to post.

[Anonymous No.2634718]

>>2634694
universities are controlled by the elite who own oil companies and the fed. global warming makes them richer.

[Anonymous No.2634720]

>>2634676
The whole water gate fiasco happened when Nixon tried to spy on Democrats in order to use information agaisnt them so that he would remain in power.
The once who uncovered his plot though were the journalists, which means the government was behind it as well and was supporting Nixon.

[Anonymous No.2634725]

>>2634704

Nothing, the point is that sometimes a conspiracy will catch the public's imagination and become popular. For a while in the early 90's it seemed like fucking everyone was positive JFK had been assassinated by the CIA.

[Anonymous No.2634729]

>>2634725
and what makes you think he wasn't?

[Anonymous No.2634737]

>>2634725
logical fallacy: pretense of gnosticism

[Anonymous No.2634739]

>>2634729

... because the CIA would have done a less shitty job of it? JFK nearly survived because Oswald was such a crappy shot.

[Anonymous No.2634743]

>>2634718
I am pretty sure not I am friends with many reaserchers my self.

[Anonymous No.2634754]

>>2634725
he was. it was a fucking coup, the CIA/mafia (same difference, the CIA is the 'crime guild' of the US government) took over everything after. and maintain that control today.

>>2634739
what the shit? two headshots with one bullet is a shitty shot? gtfo.

[Anonymous No.2634755]

>>2634605
>>All of your physics professors are probably all socialists too, even though those theories have been, continue to be, and always will be proven much more inefficient and oppressive than free markets.

actually now that I think about it, if we just deregulate enough, won't the free market solve global warming for us? like it solves all other social and economic problems in the world?

[Anonymous No.2634759]

>>2634739
Are you shitting me?
He shot was unbelievable
He shot kennedy in the head yards away, while the car was moving and killed the front passenger as well

[Anonymous No.2634764]

Obvious troll thread there are like 5 of these on /sci/ at this momemt

[Anonymous No.2634768]

>>2634755
Not sure if sarcasm. We know that free market doesnt solve any problems if their is no money to be made.

[Anonymous No.2634770]

>>2634759 He shot was unbelievable

His shot was lucky.

And Kennedy still nearly survived - he bled out on the operating table, but could probably had lived had he had modern medical treatment.

[Anonymous No.2634771]

HURRR DURRR WE ARE CURRENTLY IN A ICE AGE AND HAVE BEEN FOR THE PAST 100,000 YEARS BUT THE EARTH IS WARMING UP DURRR

[Anonymous No.2634772]

>>2634764
this is the "original" one.

[Anonymous No.2634776]

>>2634754 it was a fucking coup, the CIA/mafia (same difference, the CIA is the 'crime guild' of the US government) took over everything after. and maintain that control today.

Note to global warming denialists; you guys sound just as crazy as this nutjob.

[Anonymous No.2634778]

>>2634768
yeah, was just trying to discourage more FREE MARKET!!! libertarians from slapping their dicks about the thread

[Anonymous No.2634785]

>>2634776
He's not crazy
Why do you think we went to the Iraq war?
Because of false intelligence provided by the CIA
The CIA were thugs at the moment they were created and are still thugs today

[Anonymous No.2634787]

>>2634755
Yes. C)2 emissions is not a problem, but lets assume it is. No one lives in Antarctica because it sucks. People live in Arizona and in Minnesota. Really hot and really cold and yet there are millions of people living there. As far as all of those other problems you're talking about. It's impossible to end all suffering, but the closest we can get is capitalism. Capitalism is what has just recently pulled 200 million people out of poverty in China. It's what drives economic growth and that's what drives standards of living.

The world isn't perfect. Grow up.

[Anonymous No.2634793]

/sci/ might want to google climategate.

[Anonymous No.2634804]

>>2634776
Oh come on, at least it's reasonable to think an intelligence agency could stage a coup against its government. Those fuckers think a group of scientists are conspiring to take over the world.

[Anonymous No.2634808]

>>2634793
Retard might wanna goggle climate gate verdict.

Paraphrasing" No fraud found"- British High Court

>inb4 legal system is owned by the communist and NWA

[Anonymous No.2634812]

Ugh.

If you take a glass and fill it to the brim with water, it won't spill. This represents Earth before man started spewing TOXIC ASS CHEMICALS AND GASES into the atmosphere.

Add that ONE TINY .02% drop that man adds and it overflows, and it overflows more than the drop you put in.

WHY CAN'T YOU FAGGOTS UNDERSTAND THIS? Just because we add only a small percentage of what naturally happens DOESNT MEAN IT SHOULD BE IGNORED.

[Anonymous No.2634816]

>>2634808
i've read the hacked emails before they where removed from the internet so fuck you

[Anonymous No.2634830]

>>2634816
>>i've read the hacked emails before they where removed from the internet so fuck you
>>removed from the internet

THEY ERADICATED IT FROM ALL THE WEBS

[Anonymous No.2634832]

>>2634816
>Implying you have read all 1300 of them
>Implying you can make something out of them
>Implying you didnt just watched the fox news coverage of the emails

[Anonymous No.2634835]

>But i don't want to spend $4 per freaking gallon


You spend $4 on gas because of bullshit; it has nothing to do with global warming.

[Anonymous No.2634841]

>>2634793
You might want to actually read the emails, rather than just rely on what people say about them in the internet. If you read them in their full context, it becomes plainly obvious that there's no evidence of data manipulation.

[Anonymous No.2634844]

WHAT IF GLOBAL WARMING IS A BIG HOAX
AND WE MAKE A BETTER, CLEANER WORLD FOR NOTHING????????????????????????????????????????????

[Anonymous No.2634856]

>>2634844
well seeing how algore is the front man for the so called carbon tax.

with all the money he will be getting it won't be all for nothing. Also the carbon tax might make the recession go away

[Anonymous No.2634865]

So are you fucking faggots actually FOR pollution? Why are you so agianst cleaning up the world?

Do you think we DONT pollute? Do you think we're NOT making multiple species of animals extinct every month? Do you really believe we should just throw our fucking sludge and poisonous gases everywhere?

WHY DO YOU THINK THIS SHIT? This is why global warming had to be inflated; morons need a "reason" to keep their fucking environment clean other than just to keep the fucking shit clean!

[Anonymous No.2634871]

>>2634816
>Implying you can banish things from the internet.

[Anonymous No.2634883]

>Besides global warming is just a "theory", if there was evidence proving global warming then why isn't it a fact?

Yeah. I know right.

And that gravity thing, THATS just a theory. Fuck that fake shit.

And continental drift. FUCK THAT SHIT. SHIT IS JUST A THEORY!!!

Fucking SCIENTIFIC THEORIES, HOW DO THEY WORK???????????????

[RoboMendel !!BJTz0OTwQdf No.2634893]

Global warming exists, there is no reason to argue against retards on the internet because lets face it, retards (trolls) will be retards (trolls).

I honestly hope people were trolling in this thread, because if not, I truly do feel bad for your lack of critical thinking skills.

[Anonymous No.2634896]

>>2634856
>Get a new tax in place
>?????
>Profit

[Anonymous No.2634902]

>>2634844
>WHAT IF GLOBAL WARMING IS A BIG HOAX AND WE MAKE A
STARVING, UNSUSTAINABLE WORLD FOR TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS?

[Anonymous No.2634915]

>>2634556
>And we do it because you the average layperson ....

And exactly what makes YOU NOT an "average layperson"????

[Anonymous No.2634925]

>>2634893
yes we are trolling. but it does suck we are going to die from global warming on dec 21 2012 :(

[Anonymous No.2634926]

I think, global warming is real, just not caused by humans, at least not as much as we like to think to feel important.
Seriously, climate changes all the frucking time, it's natural, maybe we are accelerating it a little, but I doubt that(I'm totally open to evidence proving me wrong)

But I also think we must progress in better energy sources and shit because oil isn't eternal, and because it has other side effects besides CO2, who cares about CO2 when it also creates smog and shit that ACTUALLY damages you and every other living thing?

and well, it will surely be nice to have clear skies and water, even if just for the aesthetic value.

[Anonymous No.2634950]

MFW I'm in Canada and global warming turns us into a tropical paradise.

[Anonymous No.2634965]

>>2634739
>JFK nearly survived because Oswald was such a crappy shot.
>crappy shot
>from far away
>a moving target
>odd angle
>HORRIBLE, INACCURATE RIFLE

You're an ignorant fuck. It's a wonder he was hit anywhere at ALL.

[Anonymous No.2634982]

>>2634950
lmao fuck yeah!!!!

fellow canadafag here.

i wish it would hurry up it's been -30 for the past 4 days here in alberta edmonton

[Anonymous No.2634995]

>>2634965
if you belive he was the shooter and that was the rifle used your the ignorant fuck

[Anonymous No.2635018]

>>2634995
>believes in crazy conspiracy theory's based on no evidence
>but the guy hes replying too is the "ignorant fuck"

cool story bro.

[Anonymous No.2635027]

>>2635018
belives everything he see's and read and i'm the ignorant fuck

[Krakengineer !!5XY+x7grkpt No.2635033]

>>2634982
>>2634950
Western Canadafag here. Winters aren't cold enough to kill off Pine Beatles any more. Goodbye forests and logging industry, I'll miss you.

[Anonymous No.2635034]

>>2634902
>WHAT IF GLOBAL WARMING IS A BIG HOAX AND WE MAKE A
STARVING, UNSUSTAINABLE WORLD FOR TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS?

Yes, because it was unsustainable before the industrial revolution. Everyone was starving before then.


I mean, who would believe such a thing?

(the only reason oil is still used is because oil companies own everything and can stop anything that can compete. The first MODERN electric cars were hushed; hundreds of electric car testers had them confiscated even though they were supposed to be able to own them. They rotted in a parking lot for 15 years. The oil companies took them away.

[Anonymous No.2635041]

>>2635027
you're a fucking faggot.

[Anonymous No.2635051]

>>2635027
Theres no reason to not believe it.

Or did you find some proof and evidence?

[Anonymous No.2635058]

>>2635027
>Doesn't believe years of investigation and study by hundreds of people from different groups.

I bet you think space is blue!

[Anonymous No.2635069]

>>2635034
Take a good look at the pre-industrial world.
Notice anything we have now that might be unsustainable if we spent all our money shoving ourselves back there?
Faggot.

[Anonymous No.2635091]

>>2635041
your butt hurt
>>2635058
you wacth to much tv
>>2635058
space has no colour

[Anonymous No.2635524]

>>2634532

some chiropractors call themselves "doctor", too .... what the fuck is your point exactly?

[Anonymous No.2635676]

>>2634778
Free market is more anarchist.

[Anonymous No.2635682]

>I have this documentary that totally disproves...
Cool science, bro.

[Scientist No.2635693]

Protip: Free Markets are not laissez faire. Laissez faire is about as far from free markets as Marx communism is from free markets. All 3 operate on quite fundamentally different assumptions, means, and goals.

Protip: Adam Smith, the founder of the term free market, was for progressive taxation.

[Anonymous No.2635705]

maybe if we kill the scientists global warming will go away?
problem solved, faggots.

[Anonymous No.2635706]

protip: people believe what suits them. this includes you and your opponents.

[Anonymous No.2635713]

>>2635706
you didn't cite a single article or evidence.
lrn2science, stupid faggot.

[Anonymous No.2635759]

Lol, state funding will get you anywhere.

[Anonymous No.2635763]

>>2635713
i'm the place the citations lead to gaywad