/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.2991556]

I'm not sure how often climate change is discussed 'round these parts, but that's just what I'd like to be discussed.

What are your current beliefs on the matter?

source on pic:
http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/

[Anonymous No.2991628]

its here its real. the only semi ligit argument is the causation v. correlation one. (specifically for your image)
its also understood by many (who dont think of the social sci, and Politc stuff as trash) that we are unlikely to solve the problems by any type of reduction or diet.
we need to find exciting growths in Tech, and offer people more sloth and consumerism to solve this, as people will not opt to reduce their own comfort.
(social sci, has its merit when human action/inaction is a required force)

[Anonymous No.2991672]

>>2991628
agree in large part; however the only thign that can truly be said about climate is that it will inevitably change
As far as interpretation of our impact on this change, at this point there is so little that we can do to alter what is currently happening. Meetings every four or eight years amongst the countries high leaders certainly doesn't brew any new ideas that could actually cause a change that people will go for.
Where we are as far as impact goes is where we are..less people = prolonged human race

[Anonymous No.2991677]

>and offer people more sloth and consumerism to solve this, as people will not opt to reduce their own comfort.

Wisdom.

[tinycat !!qoWPGZQ4oQc No.2991695]

Climate is always changing.
Co2 has been way higher in the past.
Climate change correlates to solar activity more than carbon
Sure man has an effect on the climate, so do squirrels, trees, dolphins, and cicadas


Plants will grow larger the more carbon dioxide there is in the atmosphere, countering the deforestation we have been doing.


We should be more concerned with the dead zones we are creating in the oceans

[Anonymous No.2991701]

>>2991672
bullshit. people having been saying this exact same load of crap every 25-30 years since the late 18th century, i.e. Malthus.

we'll come up with a way to have carbon neutral energy as well as cheap carbon capture in the next few years, maybe a decade tops.

[Anonymous No.2991735]

>>2991701
you're out of your mind if you think somethign that will suck the carbon up out of the atmosphere and close the holes near south pole is coming within a decade
Carbon neutral energy ha...ok so what about cfcs, etc.

[Anonymous No.2991771]

>>2991735
plants and animals will evolve and humans will wear sunscreen.

and some shit that could capture that much carbon would be some sort of massive geoengineering project, not a factory or some bullshit like that.

[Anonymous No.2991791]

>>2991735
>what about cfcs
>thinks ozone depletion and AGC are related
note: the hole in the ozone is shrinking.

[Anonymous No.2991842]

>>2991791
referring to kyoto protocol.. hole still there.. our contributions are not going to end what is already here.
Seriously how many generations of financial downturns will it take before we rid ourseleves of the infrastructure and products currently used that generate the shit in the air.
Thanks for yoru words, my faith in humanity is as limited as our capacity to control climate

[Anonymous No.2991852]

>>2991556

I will say what I said last time.

1. Climate change, in the form of global warming, ozone depletion, and other forms of air pollution, are real. Usually the term refers to the climatic effects of global warming, that is to say, the anomalous increase in the global average surface temperature of the Earth over the past 150 years.

2. The cause of modern global warming is the increase in the concentration of numerous greenhouse gases of primarily anthropogenic origin causing an enhanced greenhouse effect. This is the only plausible explanation for global warming and is supported by physical theory, experimentation, and observation.

3. There is no conspiracy of scientists fabricating data to show trends that don't exist, no massive incompetence on the part of entire scientific fields that could cast the science into doubt.

[Anonymous No.2991859]

>>2991695

>Sure man has an effect on the climate, so do squirrels, trees, dolphins, and cicadas.

Troll or reeeeeaaaallly stupid.

[Anonymous No.2991881]

Before this thread descends into another shitstorm, I'm going to point out two awful trolls that you guys should be aware of

1. The guy who insists that all scientists are incompetent, and that even prominent skeptics like Lucia Liljegren and Richard Muller, or independent "citizen science" projects like Clear Climate Code, are also incompetent when they re-analyzed the climate data and re-affirmed the science behind global warming. He believes that he is smarter, less corrupted, and better-equipped to analyze the data than the thousands of other scientists who've done that already, and therefore only his own analysis of the raw data can reveal the truth. He thinks Google, Wikipedia, and the IPCC cannot be trusted, which probably has something to do with how he seemingly can't find any raw data until /sci/ held his hand through the links.

2. The guy who insists that he's read a lot about climate change, even though he never cites a single source ever. His argument is that "we just don't know enough," which he will say about every piece of evidence presented to him. He doesn't actually make any arguments of his own, only that everyone else doesn't know enough to know anything. Sometimes he'll accuse you of being a "hippie green politicized faggot who's destroying science" or something along those lines if you criticize climate change skeptics.

It's possible that they're the same person

[Anonymous No.2991901]

>>2991791

It was shrinking before because we banned CFCs. That doesn't mean the ozone hole disappeared, or that CFCs are no longer in the atmosphere.

Also, it started growing again:

http://www.nasa.gov/vision/earth/lookingatearth/ozone_record.html

http://www.awi.de/en/news/press_releases/detail/item/arctic_on_the_verge_of_record_ozone_loss/?tx_li
st_pi1[mode]=6&cHash=70ef96e9f3829953d209a68efb70e5c2

http://www.eurasiareview.com/arctic-on-verge-of-record-ozone-loss-25032011/

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/03/110314100835.htm

[Anonymous No.2991988]

>>2991852

Here's some ebooks which OP or others might be interested in

Houghton, Global Warming: The Complete Briefing (super comprehensive, written by one of the most knowledgeable guys in the field, no math)

http://www.mediafire.com/?px169hvqe603c4o

Pittock, Climate Change: The Science, Impacts and Solutions (no math, but similar to first except shorter)

http://www.mediafire.com/?f9e48o0idwhnyql

Ahrens, Meteorology Today (first-year undergrad meteorology textbook)

http://www.mediafire.com/?26hacfo80dbyvbo

Archer, Global Warming: Understanding the Forecast (some precalc and high school chem, very concise, comes with excellent online supplement)

http://www.mediafire.com/?a31tiy7cfy2sgde
http://geoflop.uchicago.edu/forecast/docs/index.html

Letcher (ed.), Climate Change: Observed Impacts on Planet Earth (authors not associated with IPCC if you want an updated alternative perspective, very comprehensive, math is optional)

http://www.mediafire.com/?1wozy30z8co00ab

Pierrehumbert, Principles of Planetary Climate (college level math required, rigorous explanation of atmospheric physics, online supplement, best textbook of its kind)

http://www.mediafire.com/?eenoyepca1pacth
http://geosci.uchicago.edu/~rtp1/PrinciplesPlanetaryClimate/index.html

Marshall and Plumb, Atmosphere, Ocean and Climate Dynamics (introductory textbook with emphasis on fluid dynamics, requires college math, textbook for the MIT OCW course with the same title)

http://www.mediafire.com/?b3c7i6vh0kc8w19

[Anonymous No.2992017]

>>2991988

The IPCC reports in PDF format. (You can also read it online: http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/publications_and_data_reports.shtml))

http://www.mediafire.com/?y6nvtd8i1ym8gp2 (WGI. Warning: 1000 pages, 200 MB. But this is the most important part of the 2500-page Fourth Assessment Report)
http://www.mediafire.com/?37d61wm7kj3wvj0 (WGII)
http://www.mediafire.com/?5dfr9865vbcofu4 (WGIII)

Older college textbooks on atmospheric physics:

http://www.mediafire.com/?5dfr9865vbcofu4
http://www.mediafire.com/?1rmiceqt2jhhy5m

And lastly, a Teaching Company lecture series for people who hate reading and don't mind listening

http://www.mediafire.com/?sidp8vw47238toh
http://www.mediafire.com/?3piuaajfb7rkj6o

[Anonymous No.2992050]

http://www.skepticalscience.com/

Here is a site with all skeptic arguments collected and refuted. Something like TalkOrigins.org for creationists. ;)

Just posting it incase a denier shows up.

[Anonymous No.2992086]

>>2992050

Unfortunately, skeptics will say it's IT'S BIASED and IT'S A GREENIE PROPAGANDA BLOG

But it's actually really good. Very careful to cite sources. Always corrects factual errors. It just happens to be biased in favour of the truth