>american "intellectuals"

this has to be fake, nobody can be that stupid

>>68262137
The concept of nickels were created for me to not be able to find any, evidently

it's fake you retard

>>68262149
It isn't.

>>68262149
Nope, he's that much of a fucking idiot.

https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/265895292191248385

Bonus: there are low temperatures right now so that invalidates climate science about long term trends.

https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/418542137899491328?lang=en

>>68262216
Hello /pol/

>>68262216
>verified account

he is right though, global warming is complete horseshit and spread by brainwashed marxists.

>>68262216
HE DIDN'T SAY THAT!

>>68262216
it's not, he's written plenty of nonsense on his twitter

https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/449525268529815552?lang=en

File: 5718724947808551036.jpg (38KB, 558x419px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 558x419px

he is right though, global warming is complete horseshit and spread by brainwashed marxists.

>>68262137
Global warming is a result of activity of the sun, as Mars and Venus are heating up in the same manner.

Throughout history climate has always varied, same is happening now. Trump is basically right.

>>68262276
this.
anyone above the age of 20 should recognize the pattern by now, we have these eco-dramas every couple of years and nothing ever comes of them.

ironically, one of the eco-dramas of the past was global cooling

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

File: 203_co2-graph-021116.jpg (289KB, 1280x800px) Image search: [Google]

289KB, 1280x800px

>>68262431
>>68262276
>>68262432
>>68262443

climate change denial is as fedora as it gets desu

>>68262529

fedoras are obsessed with global warming though, as are all leftists.

climate change skepticism is ok, but using boogeyman is a sure way to tell people you are a retard or appealing to retards

He is right, though.

>>68262431
>Global warming is a result of activity of the sun,
No shit, the problem is that human activities and carbon emissions intensify how hot it gets.

File: CC.jpg (175KB, 660x660px) Image search: [Google]

175KB, 660x660px

Americans haven't fallen for the man-made global warming hoax, as have Europeans.

>>68262432
>ironically, one of the eco-dramas of the past was global cooling

This, I remember this well from when I was young. During the 70s and 80s the media craze was "the coming ice-age", and because we had some really cold winters during that era, media and the usual suspects were freaking out over it.

>>68262612
Climate change skepticism is ok IF you do it at a scientific level. However, these skeptics never challenge the scientists making these claims (that would be hard and require intelligence and knowledge). What they do instead is launch a barrage of fallacious appeals to simplicity and emotion and see what sticks. It's paper-thin propaganda and anti-authority cretins lap it up just because it goes against the generally accepted narrative.

>>68262529
m8 CO2 levels have been 10 times the values of today in the past, and no ecological disasters resulted from it.

You do realize how much gasses are ejected in the atmosphere from even 1 volcanic eruption right>?

>>68262137
out of all the countries in the world, only america takes it. they will fall far behind in it, and when they realise their fault they wont be able to play a big role in it anymore. cant wait for the time when amerifat mobs marginalize, persecute and dismiss all the NASAs scientists and college professors in charge of it like a witch-hunt in the middle ages

>>68263195
The earth also used to be a ball of molten rock. Just because the earth has experienced many physical states doesn't mean that having those states now would be a good idea.

>>68263127
>>68262432
That was sensationalization by the press, mainly. Not actual scientific literature/findings.

File: 151208143801-china-pollution-780x439.jpg (34KB, 780x439px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 780x439px

But why would China make up a hoax where they're the biggest culprit on earth?

>>68262566
This really shouldn't be a left vs right thing.
This whole left vs right thing is just a politics 101 for retards, who can't make up their own minds, because they're too lazy or too stupid to inform themself properly.

>>68263492
It's turned into a trust in authority vs. distrust in authority argument, which approximately correlates with the newest incarnation of ""left"" vs. ""right"" paradigm.

>>68263573
The power of convenience. So will they try to deflect it on someone else once the shit hits the fan?

>B-b-but he was really just a libertarian!

>>68263656
IDK, this new politics is confusing and unpredictable.

>>68262137
There’s always an apocalypse requiring the expansion of state power. The visions of global famine were followed by more failed predictions, such as an “age of scarcity” due to vanishing supplies of energy and natural resources and epidemics of cancer and infertility caused by synthetic chemicals.

In a 1976 book, The Genesis Strategy, the climatologist Stephen Schneider advocated a new fourth branch of the federal government (with experts like himself serving 20-year terms) to deal with the imminent crisis of global cooling. He later switched to become a leader in the global-warming debate.

Environmental science has become so politicized that its myths endure even after they’ve been disproved. Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring set off decades of chemophobia with its scary anecdotes and bad science, like her baseless claim that DDT was causing cancer in humans and her vision of a mass avian die-off (the bird population was actually increasing as she wrote). Yet Silent Spring is taught in high school and college courses as a model of science writing, with no mention of the increased death tolls from malaria in countries that restricted DDT, or of other problems—like the spread of dengue and the Zika virus—exacerbated by needless fears of insecticides.

Similarly, the Left’s zeal to find new reasons to regulate has led to pseudoscientific scaremongering about “Frankenfoods,” transfats, BPA in plastic, mobile phones, electronic cigarettes, power lines, fracking, and nuclear energy.

>>68263836
The health establishment spent decades advocating a low-salt diet for everyone (and pressuring the food industry to reduce salt) without any proof that it prolonged lives. When researchers finally got around to doing small clinical trials, they found that the low-salt diet did not prolong lives. If anything, it was associated with higher mortality. The worst debacle in health science involved dietary fat, which became an official public enemy in the 1970s, thanks to a few self-promoting scientists and politically savvy activists who allied with Democrats in Congress led by George McGovern and Henry Waxman. The supposed link between high-fat diets and heart disease was based on cherry-picked epidemiology, but the federal government endorsed it by publishing formal “dietary goals for the United States” and creating the now-infamous food pyramid that encouraged Americans to replace fat in their diets with carbohydrates. The public-health establishment devoted its efforts and funding to demonstrating the benefits of low-fat diets. But the low-fat diet repeatedly flunked clinical trials, and the government’s encouragement of carbohydrates probably contributed to rising rates of obesity and diabetes, as journalists Gary Taubes and Nina Teicholz have chronicled in their books. (See “The Washington Diet,” Spring 2011.)
The dietary-fat debate is a case study in scientific groupthink—and in the Left’s techniques for enforcing political orthodoxy. From the start, prominent nutrition researchers disputed fat’s link to heart disease and criticized Washington for running a dietary experiment on the entire population.

>>68263885
But they were dismissed as outliers who’d been corrupted by corporate money. At one hearing, Senator McGovern rebutted the skeptics by citing a survey showing that low-fat diet recommendations were endorsed by 92 percent of “the world’s leading doctors.” Federal bureaucrats and activists smeared skeptics by leaking information to the press about their consulting work with the food industry. One skeptic, Robert Olson of Washington University, protested that during his career, he had received $250,000 from the food industry versus more than $10 million from federal agencies, including ones promoting low-fat diets. If he could be bought, he said, it would be more accurate to call him “a tool of government.” As usual, though, the liberal press focused only on corporate money.
These same sneer-and-smear techniques predominate in the debate over climate change. President Obama promotes his green agenda by announcing that “the debate is settled,” and he denounces “climate deniers” by claiming that 97 percent of scientists believe that global warming is dangerous. His statements are false. While the greenhouse effect is undeniably real, and while most scientists agree that there has been a rise in global temperatures caused in some part by human emissions of carbon dioxide, no one knows how much more warming will occur this century or whether it will be dangerous. How could the science be settled when there have been dozens of computer models of how carbon dioxide affects the climate? And when most of the models overestimated how much warming should have occurred by now? These failed predictions, as well as recent research into the effects of water vapor on temperatures, have caused many scientists to lower their projections of future warming. Some “luke-warmists” suggest that future temperature increases will be relatively modest and prove to be a net benefit, at least in the short term.

>>68263836
>>68263885
>>68263909
American intellectuals strike again.

>>68263573
The notion that the establishment is "left" is just a notion spread by those alt right types, who consider everyone who disagrees with them a marxist.
Because the real radical left share a distrust in authority, they just don't really exist anymore in relevant numbers.

>>68263972
Not an argument.

>>68264074
Neither was the drivel you copy-pasted into this thread.

>>68264074
Nobody's going to bother ripping your worthless fault-ridden pasta apart. Just from a glace I can see ten errors, for starters over-consumption of salt is so fucking bad for you yet american's gladly ingest heaps of the stuff, your government was trying to protect you but you're just too stupid to see that.

>>68264111
Except it is.

>>68264129
[citation needed]

>>68262137
you can make these easily with inspect element, even editing it in fucking paint will probably work too

>>68264164
It was exactly what I was describing above. No scientific refutation, no "J. Johnson et al. claim ____ but we disagree because _____", just a bunch of emotive tripe about the "Left" wanting to ban everything.

>>68262137

"was created" is retarded, as it's clearly happening.

But his shitty logic has a silver lining: he's right that, if the USA (or other Western economies) tackle climate change by making ourselves less economically competitive, and China/India/other developing countries don't penalize themselves in equal measure, we're just going to fall behind the polluters.

Climate change legislation should only take place at a global level. Economics is a bottom-of-the-barrel mentality zone where the people who cut the most corners to provide the cheapest product gain largest market share, and that involves using dirty energy to fuel factories. That behavior needs to be accounted for.

>>68264164
https://lmgtfy.com/?q=salt+negative+health+effects

>>68264214
>>68264311

https://www.amazon.com/Genesis-Strategy-Climate-Global-Survival/dp/0306309041/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1473866356&sr=1-2&keywords=genesis+strategy

http://www.theexcellentpowder.org/index.php

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/05/160521071410.htm

https://www.amazon.com/Good-Calories-Bad-Gary-Taubes-ebook/dp/B000UZNSC2/ref=tmm_kin_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=&sr=

https://www.amazon.com/Big-Fat-Surprise-Butter-Healthy-ebook/dp/B00A25FDUA/ref=sr_1_1_ha?s=digital-text&ie=UTF8&qid=1473866625&sr=1-1&keywords=big+fat+surprise

http://www.city-journal.org/html/washington-diet-13370.html

http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/wg1/WG1AR5_Chapter09_FINAL.pdf

https://judithcurry.com/2015/12/17/climate-models-versus-climate-reality/

https://quadrant.org.au/magazine/2015/06/climate-wars-done-science/

https://www.cato.org/blog/more-buzz-about-rico-ing-climate-skeptics

https://cei.org/climatesubpoena

https://judithcurry.com/2015/12/08/senate-hearing-data-or-dogma-2/

>>68264366
Yet many climate researchers are passing off their political opinions as science, just as Obama does, and they’re even using that absurdly unscientific term “denier” as if they were priests guarding some eternal truth. Science advances by continually challenging and testing hypotheses, but the modern Left has become obsessed with silencing heretics.

In a letter to Attorney General Loretta Lynch last year, 20 climate scientists urged her to use federal racketeering laws to prosecute corporations and think tanks that have “deceived the American people about the risks of climate change.”

Similar assaults on free speech are endorsed in the Democratic Party’s 2016 platform, which calls for prosecution of companies that make “misleading” statements about “the scientific reality of climate change.”

A group of Democratic state attorneys general coordinated an assault on climate skeptics by subpoenaing records from fossil-fuel companies and free-market think tanks, supposedly as part of investigations to prosecute corporate fraud. Such prosecutions may go nowhere in court—they’re blatant violations of the First Amendment—but that’s not their purpose. By demanding a decade’s worth of e-mail and other records, the Democratic inquisitors and their scientist allies want to harass climate dissidents and intimidate their donors.

Just as in the debate over dietary fat, these dissidents get smeared in the press as corporate shills—but once again, the money flows almost entirely the other way.

>>68264366
>http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/wg1/WG1AR5_Chapter09_FINAL.pdf
>These models allow for policy-relevant calculations such as the carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions compatible with a specified climate stabilization target.
You may want to have a read of these before you post them next time.

>>68264496
>In summary, most CMIP3 and CMIP5 models overestimate the observed warming trend in the tropical troposphere during the satellite period 1979–2012

>>68264650
You literally made that up.
> Detection and attribution studies based on CMIP3 models suggest that models tend to overestimate the observed warming of warm temperature extremes and underestimate the warming of cold extremes in the second half of 20th century (Christidis et al., 2011; Zwiers et al., 2011) as noted in SREX (Seneviratne et al., 2012).

>>68262276
>global warning is complete horseshit
>implying the weather isnt changing
dude i went to london a year ago AND IT WAS SUNNY
even hot.

File: o.png (201KB, 768x720px) Image search: [Google]

201KB, 768x720px

>>68264804

>>68264284
Both of those countries signed the paris agreement and their leaders have no stated intention to pull out

Makes you think

>>68265061
The phrase didn't show up in a search for some reason. So you think an overestimation of the temperature trend of the tropical troposphere by about 0.05K is enough to discredit the notion of anthropogenic climate change?

Have you ever actually seen any evidence for global warming other than a few news articles stating that "scientists" claim this and that?

Me neither.

Really makes you think.

>>68265326
then why would it suddenly be a chinese incitement.

File: Climate models versus climate reality.png (140KB, 508x384px) Image search: [Google]

140KB, 508x384px

>>68265266
We are not going to stop being economically competitive because of this horeshit. Trump is right.

>>68265391
Interesting, I attended a talk not long ago by an American climate scientist and the graph that he used (a total average of all the models) showed that the trend coincides quite well with observed data. Could it be that your sources are not being entirely honest in their representation of data? They have no peer review, after all.

>>68265326
how about the fact the weather has been going crazy all over the world?

A) voting for a candy shop owner making a lot of sweet promises
B) voting for a doctor who says he will hurt you for your own good
america has had way more candy shop owners than doctors as presidents if you know what i mean.
its obvious america is steering towards short-term benefits, only makes sense they would choose to heat up the whole globe just for their own good.

>>68265493
Not an argument.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judith_Curry#Career

US has been polluting the shit out of the planet at the expense of other countries that weren't industrialized enough for it.
Now that the other countries are catching up it still want to pollute a much or more

>>68264180
https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/265895292191248385

File: madlad.png (53KB, 634x485px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 634x485px

Just checked his twitter feed to see if he posted anything kek worthy, wasn't disappointed.

>>68264284
>clap clap clap clap

>>68265677
>the US is fucked
he really is a moron

America may run away, but technically it will be behind the world

>>68262276
>>68262402
hello CTR

File: ChristyChart500[1].gif (859KB, 500x281px) Image search: [Google]

859KB, 500x281px

>>68265586
Some graphs 4 u.

>>68265786
>i post a study from a Professor and former Chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology who has published over 130 scientific peer reviewed papers

>replies to me with a meme gif

File: 1464181843687.jpg (21KB, 248x189px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 248x189px

>>68265723
I am betting that he'll start a war somehow, his ego is infinite and he'll soon be craving a war hero image, just for the ratings LOL

>>68265842
>The final frames of the animation compare modeled and observed changes in global surface temperature (Mann et al. 2015), sea level rise (IPCC AR5), Arctic sea ice (Stroeve et al. 2012), and ocean heat content (Cheng et al. 2015).
There's a scientist in Japan who thinks ice crystals grow differently depending on the emotions of the people around them. Should we all start being extra nice to water?

>>68265842
He did point out the faults with valid points in that gif though

>>68265912
He didn't.
>>68265900
How is that relevant to Judith Curry?

File: 1469884305043.jpg (51KB, 420x420px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 420x420px

>>68265936
He did

>>68265936
I'm saying that
1) the graph you posted is obvious bullshit and
2) one (or a few) scientists holding a contrary opinion does not mean that the majority are wrong

US leads the pollution per capita by far though.

>>68262137
he did but i really doubt he honestly believe this.
reality is that he pretended to be retarded to win cause americans are retarded themselves
prove me wrong

>>68265958
>>68265974
I expected better from liberals.

File: Näyttökuva 2016-12-05 kello 14.48.43.png (1MB, 2202x904px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2202x904px

>>68265061
It's nice of you to try and educate us about climate science but why didn't you take screenshots of whole chapters, or at least enough to assure that none of us draw incorrect conclusions about that 850-page article?

For example box 9.2. where that blue text is from (1/2)

File: b36[1].png (7KB, 420x420px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 420x420px

>>68266057
Why don't Americans believe in climate change?

File: Näyttökuva 2016-12-05 kello 14.49.22.png (3MB, 2078x2734px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2078x2734px

>>68265061
>>68266078
(2/2) You should have included especially these graphs to show what you're talking about

File: global mean temperature projections fig_11_25a.png (329KB, 1218x562px) Image search: [Google]

329KB, 1218x562px

>>68265391
That only shows the average and without any reference to confidence intervals. At first glance, it looks like the climate models are completely wrong. But when you look at the individual models, you can see the observed temperature increases are still within the range of predictions.

In addition, surface temperature predictions, which are more immediately meaningful (e.g. for agriculture and glacial melting) have generally been far more accurate.

File: Näyttökuva 2016-12-05 kello 14.58.04.png (656KB, 1028x1756px) Image search: [Google]

656KB, 1028x1756px

>>68265061
I think this is also a relevant graph from page 824. The models were compared to historical data (if I understood correctly)

>>68266078
>>68266091
>>68266130
>>68266203
>>68266224
Cry more. America is going to be great again.

>>68266290
i was interested in your initial argument at first, but thats not an argument. try harder next time

>>68265998
think that might be australia actually

>>68266290
I'm not crying. I'm having serious discussions and they're not about the USA.

File: 1460501672602[1].png (8KB, 420x420px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 420x420px

>>68266290
An unsubstantiated refutation?

File: 1471027189456.jpg (40KB, 586x440px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 586x440px

>>68266290
So you're just giving up your argument?

>>68266057
>Palestinian liberals

wtf I love trump now

File: tmp_21598-1480345375121-1010842987.jpg (2MB, 1031x1500px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1031x1500px

>>68262137
>americans unironically elected a generic neocon as president because he told them he was going to "drain the swamp"

>>68262137
But this is true

>>68266476
what does that expression mean?

>>68266476
It was more about the opposition (Hillary Clinton is an unelectable shitbag) and winning over the idiots in the rust belt.
>>68266508
It's a Trump phrase for ending corruption in Washington.

>>68262276
This. Look at any long term global temperature graph and you'll see our current increase is exactly as it has been in cycles for millions of years.

>>68266568
People who actually know what they're talking about seem to disagree.

>>68266568
I'm pretty sure that's wrong. I believe these rates of change are largely unprecedented in our current climate record.

>>68262137
Trump isn't an intellectual

>>68266649
Wikileaks already exposed a big part of the hoax, and yes, temps are gradually increasing on earth, as they are on every other planet we have observed.
It's not man made,at least not to any signficant degree

>>68262149
It's very real, but I'm pretty sure he's just being a populist

File: 129635315Y1630-255G.jpg (195KB, 640x960px) Image search: [Google]

195KB, 640x960px

Global Warming is misleading term developed by media as a means of fear mongering. The preferred term is Rapid Climate Change.

Climate change is a natural process wherin temperature rise and a fall over time. it occurs due to the green house effect.

The Green house effect refers to the process our planet undergoes to perserve heat radiation from the sun within our atmosphere. This is the procees that is believed to be affected by human industry.

The Green house effect occurs due to various "greenhouse gasses" like carbondioxide, methane and nitrogenoxide all forming a "blanket" over our atmosphere. a problem arrises when these gasses are increaseed by excessive amounts due to their production at the hands of man.

Tl;dr: Greenhouse Gasses are a blanket keeping us warm, but if too many layers of blankets are added the earth will get hot.

>>68266811
I prefer the coupled pendula argument desu. If put more energy into the pendula at the top, then the ones at the bottom will start swinging more wildly and unpredictably.

>>68266677
Phew I'm glad he's just our president

This is for all the retards in this thread.
https://youtu.be/OWXoRSIxyIU

File: tmp_21598-1480543002517780231499.png (1MB, 1400x1052px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1400x1052px

>>68262432
>the media is representative of actual scholarly opinion regarding climate change

File: tmp_21598-1480263998789791832954.jpg (3MB, 3500x4930px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3500x4930px

>>68266553
>Hillary Clinton is an unelectable shitbag

She was elected as Senator, and won the primaries with a million more votes than Sanders.

File: spedepasanen.jpg (6KB, 196x223px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 196x223px

>>68266934

Here's an article for the scholars in this thread courtesy of
>>68265061
which he must have included to show his openness for honest serious discussion as it contradicts his personal opinion:
http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/wg1/WG1AR5_Chapter09_FINAL.pdf

File: 1470370975029.jpg (132KB, 939x527px) Image search: [Google]

132KB, 939x527px

>tfw no nuclear power
>tfw all efforts to quell climate change will be spent towards making life hell for car enthusiasts like yourself
Seriously? We're not that big of a group anymore, and we're shrinking as time goes on and people move back into cities. Leave us and our V8's alone; go after a source that actually matters

>>68267227
And then the DNC proved they had cheated to get her there and we know damn well the media, general zeitgeist, and polls, effected that outcome as well.

In a truly open and fair election, whete money, media coverage, etc, were equal, Clinton would likely have not been the left's canidate.

>>68266290
Cop-out of the fucking year.

>>68267387
>a source that actually matters

On their top 10 list of causitive factors for man-made global warming, the EPA puts burning of fossil fuels for transportation at number 2, just under power plants and above the food animal industry.

We have a nuclear power plant in my province. I agree that's the way to go

>>68266290
Kys amerifat. And take your inbred family with you

>>68267588
That number should drop over time, especially as electric vehicles proliferate further into the mainstream and more people start to find a less car-centric urban life appealing. I can understand incentives towards public transportation, but I don't understand why someone should be stopped from keeping a 40 year old Lincoln Continental roadworthy unless a disproportionate amount of the population starts doing it.

File: autistic screeching pol.png (25KB, 235x215px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 235x215px

>>68266290