*destroys the planet* heh....nothing personnel

good theres nothing worth saving anymore anyway

chink hoax chink hoax chink hoax
muh coal muh coal muh coal

>>75625755
Shut up animale

>>75626208
t. chink

chink hoax chink hoax

File: scivis_860.jpg (192KB, 860x672px) Image search: [Google]

192KB, 860x672px

>yellowstone volcano

>>75624694
Someone had to.

>>75624694
one day, children wearing gas-masks will learn at school how we had the chance to save the planet but failed because of America

funny thing is, amerifats seriously believe this pull out is cool, a realistic/valid/right thing to do

also fuck #notallamericans #mostamericansdisagree

>>75626869
I don't live near the blast radius, not my problem.

>>75627096
Don't worry, Macron said all of the smart Americans can just go to Paris. The brain drain should be immediate.

>>75627649
But climate change affects whole world

>>75627649
>implying any Americans, even academics and scientists, would ever want to leave the USA bad enough that they would learn French

Doubtful

>>75627707
And how do you propose to fix a natural climactic cycle that's been going on for millions of years?

>>75627754
By destroying our competetivness, raising taxes and redistribution and propagating a self-flagellating cult, naturally.

>>75627754
How do you know there is a natural climactic cycle?

>>75627754
SHUT UP GOYIM GIVE YOUR MONEY TO MERKEL AND THE EU

File: 1492644679166.jpg (6KB, 250x250px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 250x250px

>>75624694
>personnel

Back in dinosaur times, there were no polar ice caps at all and much higher sea levels than today. That was some time before Henry Ford invented the Model T.

>>75625755
>>75626674
t. Chino

>>75624694
The Paris Accords looked good diplomatically, but I'm not convinced they were doing anything in effect.

Whenever you hear UN officials setting carbon quotas and stuff, don't you kind of dislike the creepily Soviet-style language used there? "The Five Year Plan states that we will output ten million tractors by 1980."

File: 1250584678635445931.jpg (73KB, 800x362px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 800x362px

>first to use a nuclear weapon
>one of the world leaders in excess pollutants
>everyone drives oversized vehicles and pick up trucks
>too many guns to go around
>half the country interprets religion through KJV Old Testament fire and brimstone style
>Americans are obsessed with shitty muscle cars and gas guzzlers
Are you doing your part to bring apocalypse kino to real life anons?

>single handeadly make a stupid decision to utterly bother the world
>t-this is w-wroooooooooooong
>make stupid chimpouts and melodramas everywhere reporting them 24/7
>cry a river being extremely loud and sentimental everywhere on the internet
>a-america c-can ssssave the world!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! follow me, the world!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>keep on being chimips
>manage to change his mind or stop him reelecting
>usa usa usa usa


seriously go fuck yourselves the world "laughs at" you anymore but just gets sick of

>>75628173
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wG0dOPYbqyk
there ain't no doubt I love this land
god bless the USA

>>75627872
Geological record? I'm not that guy you're responding to, but we know very well that the temperature has gone up and down in very extreme ways in the past.

>>75628287
i just find it strange that people who trust scientists when it comes to geological record, suddenly distrust the same scientists when it comes to manmade climate change

>China and Russia classed as """"developing"""" in this dogshit chink treaty
Yeah what a loss

That's what you get for calling us fat.

>>75628342
You realise if the worst predictions are accurate then there's nothing you can do to 'reverse' the change and any further pollution is pissing in the wind, right? Shouldn't you be pushing for solutions to best handle the coming storm?

>>75628432
So because there might be the possibility that it is too late, we should do nothing and keep polluting the planet?

>>75624694
>not adhering to a series of bullshit protocols that nobody will actually respect means destroying the planet

I mean, China has horrible, horrible, horrible pollution. It's estimated that 40% of the nation will have cancer by 2040.

>>75628519
I'm asking why you care about pollution if you're worried about climate change

The "pollution reduction treaty" is the classical example given for a multiplayer Prisoner Dilemma, and the winning strategy is not adhering, or adhering and not respecting it

>>75628342
They're different branches of scientists. Climate scientists have a history of believing things that were later proven to be falsehoods. Especially when there are huge economic incentives to believing in and researching climate science. There are a few grants handed out to climate change deniers, but mostly it's university grants we're talking about. The entire structure of climate science has been molded around the belief thereof. Moreover, the "consensus" is manufactured. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oregon_Petition#Signatories - in my education history, my geology and astronomy teachers both were climate change skeptics. My astronomy teacher actually wrote his master's thesis on how he believes changing temperatures are linked to solar phenomena. The peer-review system is a huge joke that in no way indicates wide-spread agreement. All that isn't itself an argument, but there are clear reasons to be skeptical of this scientism.

I myself am not sure what to think. My outlook is that we might as well invest in green and renewable energies because it doesn't hurt. Clean air is good for people's health no matter what, and it's smart to get the cutting edge on a new industry.

>>75628746 (continued)
About the Paris Accords, Trump may have been wise to stay in for diplomatic reasons, but I'm also not convinced the accords were effective in any real way. It's more super-government money shuffling that the US could do more effectively on its own.

>>75628746
Anyone have that Time Magazine cover from the 70s predicting a global ice age?

>My outlook is that we might as well invest in green and renewable energies because it doesn't hurt

If they can be made profitable and viable, that is not an issue. The problem is that these climate change "agreements" have tried to force a Soviet-style mandatory use of said green energy regardless of whether it's cheap and usable or not.

>>75628746
I would recommend you to check this out.
https://xkcd.com/1732/

>>75628847
So people made mistakes 50 years ago, thats why climate change isn't real?

File: Earth_tem_All_palaeotemps_mark-up_2-700x316.png (156KB, 700x316px) Image search: [Google]

156KB, 700x316px

>>75628746
I agree, but I'm not that much for widespread use of current "green" technology, stuff like solar panels and wind turbine generators require tons of rare earths that are terribly pollutant to produce and we don't currently know how to dispose of safely.
>>75628874
>going back to 2000 BCE
Literally meaningless in geologic terms, might as well calculate a country's GDP growth on a per second basis

>>75628874
Two things:
1) We're basing our current estimates on precise data from a very short period of time while in the past we're looking at very broad trends.
2) That graph conveniently starts in the middle of an ice age and ignores all the periods of extreme heating we know happened before the ice age.

>>75628991
You're the one who made an appeal to their authority. We're merely deconstructing that.

>>75629010
I think you forgot a zero, friend

>>75629104
Doesn't make a difference

>>75629063
The point of the graph is that the current change happens way faster than the changes of past.
which implies that the current change is different from the climate changes before

File: 1485157704912.jpg (78KB, 483x589px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 483x589px

>What the fuck America, stop butting in on other countries' politics!
>What the fuck America, stay in this political agreement!

>>75629165
I know exactly what the point was, and I explained why that point was poorly arrived to and in fact represented in a way that made it seem more true than it may be.

>>75629104
Doesn't change the fact that it is an extremely small time window when talking about geological and astronomical phenomena
>>75629165
>The point of the graph is that the current change happens way faster than the changes of past.
Of the past 20000 years, which is not a significant period of time to consider when establishing what normal conditions are

>>75629202
is there a contradiction?

Reminds me of when Reagan took Carter's solar panels off the White House lawn and liberals had a heart attack.

>>75628685
...what? Come again? Even ignoring the collapse of climate we're accustomed to, pollution has many other disadvantages.

>>75629229
Yes?

>>75629208
>>75629217
If you guys have any other points in history where the temperature changed drastically within a few hundret years, I would love to see it

>>75629329
If you have any other points in history during which it was possible to measure the temperature with the time resolution we have today, let me know

But Americans invented clean coal.

>>75629378
So if you don't have such data, how comes you deny man made climate change without any evidence?

>>75629465
You are the one making the claim temperature is changing more drastically than ever before without having the data to prove it

>>75629517
Not me, the overwhelming majority of climate scientists.

But I am curious, what is your alternative hypothesis? If not man-made, how do you explain the current climate change?

Solar output and volcanic activity have a considerable impact on climate desu.

>>75628107
what? establishing deliverables is what any sane organizations do, and had existed long before the soviet union

>>75629655
>Not me, the overwhelming majority of climate scientists.
Which have been wrong in the past, see the fear for global glaciation in the '70s, and whose predictions in the early 2000s have been proven wrong by the fact that the ice caps are still there
>If not man-made, how do you explain the current climate change?
Solar activity, tectonics, volcanic activity, just like every other climate change before

>>75629777
>Solar activity, tectonics, volcanic activity, just like every other climate change before
Scientists already thought about those effects
check this out

https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2015-whats-warming-the-world/

Here's the thing...if you're a climatologist and you don't subscribe to Gorebull Warming, you get your research funding taken away.

You can find a lot of parallels between the AGW cult and communist pseudoscience like Lysenkoism.

>>75629465
You can't make a claim and then tell other people to prove it wrong.

I'm not denying an 'inevitable truth,' I'm just saying that I'm not ready to assume a bunch of things in order to accept a viewpoint. But like I said, there are other good reasons to invest in green technology, in my opinion.

wahhh wahhh muh ebul carbon

Climate change scientists are know. To blatantly lie for money ( see climate gate from the UK)

Many "green" resources involve using heavy metals and other highly toxic metals (battery recycling, there's a reason why we ship them to Mexico to recycle instead of doing it here)

The paris accords is a way to funnel money to africa, China and Russia. And forces people to accept "climate refugees)

https://friendsofscience.org/assets/documents/deFreitas.pdf

>>75630031
I am pretty new to this whole climate change deal, but i never heard about such stuff happening.
Care to name some climatologist who lost their funding due to their opinion?

File: IMG_1553.jpg (54KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 480x360px

>>75627872

Let's talk about the late 80s ozone scare. They said that aerosol sprays and Freon were causing a hole in the ozone layer over Antarctica. So they banned Freon, which was comparatively nontoxic, and replaced it with very nasty, toxic refrigerants. Why did Antarctica have an ozone hole? Duh, the polar regions get sunlight six months of the year and the continuous UV rays burned through the ozone there. I mean, I don't think there's ten million people down there spraying aerosol cans into the air.

In the end, it was a clever ruse because the patent on Freon was about to expire and the company that manufactured it wanted to replace it with some new proprietary refrigerant.

File: the-present-carbon-cycle.jpg (72KB, 700x666px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 700x666px

>>75629854
>simulation model created by people that believe in man made climate change reflects the beliefs of their creator
Really? Also, only a fraction of greenhouse gases are released by human activity, and the carbon in fossil fuels was in the atmosphere at some point

>>75628342
Maybe it's that geologists aren't being silenced and shouted down for having dissenting opinions. Or it could be the millions of grant dollars to find global warming proof

>>75629854
Cleaned up graphs that organise data such as to give as strong a perception of correlation as possible and showing a very short period of time. They chose to show greenhouse gases at such a metric as to make the lines match up as evenly as they could. Meanwhile, other things that actually were increasing consistently were shrunk down to make them seem like less viable arguments.

Yes, it's true that "greenhouse" gases and global temperature have both been increasing (in fact, the global temperature increase is likely the product is researcher selection and there are leaked e-mails that outright state that), but that isn't itself proof of causation.

>>75630292
current average temperature is -31.50 degree celsius?

>>75626869

Soon, I hope.

>>75630374
Read the title of the graph

>>75630221
Not lost, more like never got. I don't know specific examples, but it's an obvious occurrence in that realm. Jordan Peterson just lost funding for his political beliefs in spite of the fact that he does great work, in recent news.

>>75628107
In this case, it's like "The Five Year Plan to reduce carbon emissions by two million tons by 2020."

I'm not fooled by this stealth Marxism even one bit.

>>75630367 (continued)
There was actually a climatologist that pointed out that when you look at the correlation closely, the greenhouse gases rise in response to the temperature, not the other way around. Though I don't feel informed well enough about that to say that definitively guides me.

>>75630374
This>>75630398

>>75630334
>Also, only a fraction of greenhouse gases are released by human activity, and the carbon in fossil fuels was in the atmosphere at some point
I am not an expert, but I heard that scientists can differentiate between natural and man-made CO2, due to isotopes. And they say that the increase in man-made CO2 matches perfectly with observed climate change

>>75629290
Yes, none of which are related to climate change. Why do you keep dodging? Why did that other anon fail to respond?

>>75630528
So we both agree that the graph is not about the increase in average temperature?

>>75630367
but wasn't the CO2 emission the only factor that considerably rose over the whole time?
And its growth seemd to correlate to temperature rather well

>>75630543
Well, pretty much everythomg is related to everything to some degree. Take aerosoils. They kill thousands of people in Europe every year and affect cloud formations.

>>75630569
There aren't many other places with an ice cap that old, and ice caps are the most reliable way to measure temperature
>>75630533
>>75630646
First, correlation does not imply causation.
Second, those were the result of a simulation model and not actual real world data

File: 1495995704502.gif (3MB, 425x239px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 425x239px

>Claims to be the job president
>Hundreds of major companies come out in support of the deal
>USA will not be number one in green tech
>Coal is outdated, shit and on its death bed whether inbred cousin fuckers like it or not
>Oil and gas are starting to lose ground in terms of powering cars and trucks
>Renewable energy is growing at a monstrous rate
>Knows the move is stupid and unpopular so he hires dozens of paid shills to hoot and holler at his announcement
>World collectively gets to make fun of the backwards troglodytes that are yanks

>>75630740
>First, correlation does not imply causation.
Certanly not.
But we do have an unprecedented speed of temperature increase, which correlates well with human CO2 emission.
Maybe there is some other, undiscovered reason for temperature increase.

But I think it is better to be safe than sorry and do our best to reduce CO2 emission, especially since it has other positive side effects like becoming less dependant on the finite fossil fuel

>>75630756
>some rich people have a Tesla car
>this means that oil and gas are losing ground
Kek, look up how the energy to power up your toy is generated

File: 002386.jpg (51KB, 539x538px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 539x538px

>>75630338
>Or it could be the millions of grant dollars to find global warming proof
>Money can fake facts and statistics
>Thousands of scientists who dedicated their lives to finding the truth are in on the conspiracy and 100% complicit
>Not a single one is decent or honest
>This is what American actually believe

Christ you guys are gullible

>>75625755
t. covfefe

>>75627599
>implying the ashes fallout won't destroy every crop on the midlands for the next 3 years after it blows up
>implying the draught on the west coast will improve anytime soon when it's been linked to a disruption on the water cycle caused by global warming that the US has recently decided is not even real
>half of America will starve, the other half either moves away or has to import 90% of their food

same applies to Canada's food production

>>75630856
>Nobody used to drive electric cars
>Now people are starting too
>This is the literal definition of losing ground
The devil is in the details my English impaired bambino

>>75631025
>how is electricity generated?

>>75631096
>regular cars generate 100% of their energy through fossil fuels
>electric cars generate a percentage lower than 100% through fossil fuels
>countries like Brazil and Canada generate a ridiculous amount of it through hidroelectric dams
>iceland exists too

File: ChinaVehicleSales-FT5-25-12.gif (9KB, 600x250px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 600x250px

>>75631165
>China's population is buying cars en masse
>this has less of an impact in relevance of fossil fuels than a bunch of yuppies buying an expensive toy to be hip

>>75631096
>What is nuclear power
>What is wind and solar
>What is hydroelectricity

And before you type your stupid response realize that my province has several nuclear plants and Quebec makes so much hydroelectricity they sell it to the states

File: PEV_Registrations_China_from_2011.png (141KB, 800x834px) Image search: [Google]

141KB, 800x834px

>>75631263
>listing literally every car sell
>assuming they're all gas fueled

>> The production of all-electric buses totaled 115,664 units in 2016, up 31% from 2015.
>>By 2020, the country is expected to account for more than 50% of the global electric bus market.
>As of December 2016, with more than 630,000 new energy passenger cars sold since 2005, China has the world's largest fleet of light-duty plug-in electric vehicles, after having overtook during 2016 both the U.S. and Europe in terms of cumulative sales.

>>75631408
Do you have any fucking idea how much waste is involved in producing an electric bus?

>>75631263
And when the technology catches up, which it will soon, the chinese government can invest as much as it wants into subsidizing electric vehicles. Besides a lot of chink cars are small motorcycles or shitty 2 cylinder cars with 45 horsepower. Hardly comparable to a western pickup truck or full size sedan.

I would be fine signing an international climate agreement if they developing world promised not continue growing their population by 80 million every year.

>>75631477
>Making people promise not to fuck
lmao u fuckin wot m8? Population growth slows sharply as standard of living rises.

>>75631374
Are China's cars solar or nuclear powered?
>>75631408
>assuming they're all gas fueled
No, but thanks for finding me the actual number of them which are not
>more than 630,000 new energy passenger cars sold since 2005
Which is about 0.14% of total cars in China, assuming there were no cars before 2000
>>75631463
>And when the technology catches up, which it will soon, the chinese government can invest as much as it wants into subsidizing electric vehicles
Great, so they'll increase their output of rare earths necessary to produce the electric motors, fucking up their environment even more

>>75631433
I'm aware there's contamination with the mining for batteries lithium. Also the inventor that designed our modern lithium batteries that made every modern gadget possible has recently patented a newer and more efficient design.
So, the question is, what contamination is more managable, the one created when manufacturing and operating a gas vehicle, or the one when manufacturing and operating an electric vehicle.

Electric cars have room for improvement, but everything that burns hydrocarbons will always create more CO2

>>75631002
Most of the world would starve if the yellowstone supervolcano erupts

>>75631560
>Which is about 0.14% of total cars in China, assuming there were no cars before 2000

630,000 is the number of passenger cars. Your graph is total vehicles, that includes everything from buses, trucks, and passenger cars. And everything coming out of the Chinese government regarding climate change gives off the impression they're taking it seriously, going to impose carbon trading and subsidizing cleaner technologies

>>75631768
Not us, wind currents keep most of the shit from the northern hemisphere on the northern hemisphere, at least here. And most predictions show that our farming industries won't suffer as much as every other country.
If anything, we will turn into the world's granary once again.

>>75631969
You don't think a supervolcano spewing ash into the air will be a problem?

>>75626869
>Chimpcago, Frisco and Los Angeles would be taken out in one fell swoop

Just erupt already.

>>75632407
You do realize that Chicago is the transportation hub of the US. Taking it out would be really bad.

File: come listen to the song of my people.gif (393KB, 342x342px) Image search: [Google]

393KB, 342x342px

Don't worry we have ''''''''''''''''''''''''clean''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' coal.

>>75632719
It's much cleaner then what they burn in the rest of the world

>>75631002
>implying the draught on the west coast will improve anytime soon when it's been linked to a disruption on the water cycle caused by global warming that the US has recently decided is not even real

The Western US aside from the Pacific Northwest is a desert, sweetie. Did you know that the 20th century was an unnaturally wet period for California? Unfortunately, most of the state's infrastructure was built at that time...

>Trump pisses off the entire world by leaving some shitty agreement that would not have had much of an effect anyway
>The US continues to lower its carbon emissions through butthurt libs putting up their own money, and technological innovation.
What a time to be alive

>>75630756
>Green energy innovations continue on
>Somehow Trump is an idiot for not putting shit regulations in place that would limit current jobs
Why are people so retarded and think PRIVATE individuals won't be putting in the funds and time to research these. Government isn't needed.

>>75633517

As I said, >>75628847

>>75631914
>taking Chinese stats seriously
In other news, the Soviet Union projected that they would have a higher GDP than the United States by 1980.

File: 1487784545660.jpg (27KB, 508x524px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 508x524px

>>75627938

>>75630143

>there's a reason why we ship them to Mexico to recycle

I love you too.

>>75630756
It's Kodak all over again. Are you ready to be third world country behind India, america?

File: trumb.jpg (67KB, 1365x1374px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 1365x1374px

>>75632916
>it's less dirty than burning rubbish so it's okay

File: shit.jpg (36KB, 268x322px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 268x322px

>>75626869
>tfw live just into the light yellow area

>>75632398
It will, sure. I think there was a geological statistic that said that every 1,000 years there's a huge volcano explosion that changes the climate on its region, and every 50,000 a bigger one that changes the entire world climate.

So we will probably be quite affected by it, but not destroyed. Can't say the same about North America

File: a367658378eb2792334287351122b3e0.jpg (66KB, 736x553px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 736x553px

Why can't they just become a nation of farriers if their nations is full of retarded people in need of ancient, irrelevant jobs?
It would be much healthier for them and us.