Who was in the wrong here? >https://www.youtube.com/watc

>>115090058
I'll believe in global warming once Al Gore starts flying coach.

>>115090058

Bill "The Devil" Nye

Bill Nye, the Bacholers Degree Guy

Increase in co2 levels is directly correlated to higher temperatures. Global warming is the final redpill

>>115090058
A better question is "Who was in the right here?"
And the answer is neither, they were both acting like shitheads.
Tucker is denying based on prejudice and thus not actually debating.
Bill doesn't try to defend nor answer the questions, and instead just spews "facts" to reinstate his status.
In this video, neither actually give a shit about the facts of climate change, they just want the reputation of sacking each other.

Tucker is retarded sometimes

>>115090268
this to be honest.

those hillary voting city people are responsible for 70% of CO2 pollution.

they have the power to stop this but they're too lazy to get off of their fat asses and stop consuming so much shit.

File: 2017-02-28_22-48-57.png (175KB, 407x280px) Image search: [Google]

175KB, 407x280px

>>115090058

>>115090845
This, desu

>>115090058
>Who was in the wrong here

this is nto a fucking debate, this is some shitty sophistry that Tucker always does, he focuses on one point and keeps reiterating it. Don't get me wrong, Tucker is good when he is up against the media, but this whole shitshow interview with Bill Nye is just fucking retarded sophistry and you should be against it if you want to find truth.

Why the fuck are you even watching this shit if you want to know the answer to what is causing climate change, read a fkn book retarded bipartisan faggets; I say that from all the love and kindness that I have for /pol/, educate yourself.

File: 1471038658854.jpg (73KB, 640x460px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 640x460px

>>115090058
TUCK THE KEK
>TUCK THE KEK
TUCK THE KEK
>TUCK THE KEK
TUCK THE KEK
>TUCK THE KEK
TUCK THE KEK
>TUCK THE KEK
TUCK THE KEK
>TUCK THE KEK
TUCK THE KEK
>TUCK THE KEK
TUCK THE KEK
>TUCK THE KEK
TUCK THE KEK
>TUCK THE KEK
TUCK THE KEK
>TUCK THE KEK
TUCK THE KEK
>TUCK THE KEK
TUCK THE KEK
>TUCK THE KEK
TUCK THE KEK
>TUCK THE KEK
TUCK THE KEK
>TUCK THE KEK
TUCK THE KEK
>TUCK THE KEK

Tucker was trying his usual tactic to get Bill to say something he would have trouble defending. The problem is Bill was being purposefully vague and broad, not giving Tucker anything to latch on to.

>IT'S A SIMPLE QUESTION
>Muh ice caps
>IT'S A SIMPLE QUESTION
>Decades or maybe longer, or maybe shorter.

File: 1463678342802.jpg (189KB, 994x994px) Image search: [Google]

189KB, 994x994px

>What would the world look like now without Human activity
>The world would look like this and here are the effects
>DUDE YOU'RE NOT A SCIENTIST LMAO
I'm not sure who this Tucker guy is but he seems like a bit of a cunt.

>>115090058
Global warming exists. It's pretty much irreversible at this point. Plus, I don't think a nation should tax their citizens to death for it, so the elites can pocket the majority while the rest go unseen into taxpayer programs/renewable energy. If it's such a concern the country should make an effort that creates jobs, and reeducates people for new energy jobs, instead of laying the burden on it's citizens with zero short-term ROI.

>>115090058
Tucker

He gets straight answers from bill. Timescales for change of thousands of years are reduced to decades. Our climate was originally on course to stay like it was pre-industralization because the climate doesn't normally change a lot between the span of a few hundred years.

Tucker keeps repeating the questions and pretending he hasn't received an answer, because he has no refutation for the answer. He would have to say "ok, but I don't believe you" without being able to defend it and look like a dumbass. The real way to argue is to present information that's contrary to bill's claims, then you get to argue about which information if valid.

Then at the end he calls bill close minded when tucker himself has presented no information, there's nothing in the argument for bill to close his mind to. Unless maybe the fact that denialism is not skepticism. Global warming could be complete horseshit, but if you deny evidence without explaining why, you're a denalist, not a skeptic.

>>115090058
it was freezing today lol

>>115090058
BILL, BILL, BILL, BILL

haha he make a funny face he smart

>>115090058
>Bill Nye the 'mechanical engineer is a climatologist' guy

>>115090058
Tucker,
I can't stand that
Mother
Fugger

How was tucks interview with sessions yesterday? Curious if he would go easy on somebody in the trump administration

>>115090058
Global warming is real.
Bill Nyle is a scientifically illiterate hoax and a fraud. Instead of generating detailed report for discussion he is playing a fucking politician.

If I saw this guy in real life, I'd punch him so hard his teeth fell off.

>>115092491
You have no way to prove how CO2 introduced into the Earth's Atmosphere affects Earth's climate.

You don't know if all the CO2 emitted by man, prevented an Ice Age, did not affect the climate, or made an already warming climate warmer, or cooler.

On that score Tucker won.

>>115090058
>Who was in the wrong here?

Rural and suburban retards.

>>115091305
Reiterating a question that wasn't answered.

>>115093168
Rural retards that produce the least amount of co2 and farming actually reduces co2. Way to go city dweeb.

Just answe the question
>the science has been settled
Then answer the question
>science already did
Then answer the question
>but the science is already settled
So how would the climate look now
>we have charts

File: 3.jpg (139KB, 898x424px) Image search: [Google]

139KB, 898x424px

>>115093636
that's not true nigger

File: 1488151274954.jpg (17KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 480x360px

>>115090058
why dont environmentalist advocate for cleaning up the ocean and decreasing material pollution rather that trying to convince everyone that there is an apocalypse coming

even climate denier libertarians agree that we need to do something about murky rivers and smoggy skies
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9YlNzYO92r0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGxNAK5UefY

Prove climate change is not man made.

>>115094176
Climate changed before man, in many such cases even more dramatically.

>>115094432
How was this calculated and source?

>>115093752
Dude thats per capita. Consumption in Wyoming vs Jew York....

600k people in Wyoming, 8.5 million in NYC alone.

Of course thats going to look skewed.

>>115092273
>he seems like a bit of a cunt.
I would say a total cunt. He seems to interrupt every possible second and is not taking any answers.

File: Temp vs CO2 over a large geologic time frame.jpg (26KB, 413x369px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 413x369px

>>115094509

>>115093094
>You have no way to prove how CO2 introduced into the Earth's Atmosphere affects Earth's climate.

Me? I'm not making any claims.

But no one can prove anything in science, there is no absolute certainty, only educated guesses. If you mean to say there's no way to support the hypothesis that CO2 affects the earth's climate, you're making an assumption. There is potentially a way a support any claim that is falsifiable, it's called finding evidence.

>You don't know if all the CO2 emitted by man, prevented an Ice Age, did not affect the climate, or made an already warming climate warmer, or cooler.
>On that score Tucker won.

Tucker has no idea what volume of evidence bill nye has seen to come to his conclusion and if it is reasonable to "know" in a layman's sense (not absolutely certainty). It's another stupid assumption, actually its the same assumption that something beyond this arbitrary line is "unknowable" when it really might be if you are a climatologist.

>>115090845
well said

>>115094176
Did you think weather was stagnant before humans?

There's always been a change in climate year to year.

Remember canacuck this isn't a argument about if we're contributing to it.

>>115093752
>per capita


Hahahahaha nigger u gay

>>115094176
>prove a negative
Can't be done retard

>>115093636
Not entirely true, anon. Producing livestock puts a fuckload of methane and co2 into the air, cattle more than any

Bill switched gears at the end like a woman saying your dick doesnt work when the argument was about paint color.

>>115094509
it was much hotter when the dinosaurs were around

>>115094778
>But no one can prove anything in science, there is no absolute certainty, only educated guesses.

That's sort of true but that doesn't mean it's ok to do non-science and call it science because "lol nothing can be proved".

Climate science literally is not science. There's no control Earth.

>>115094720
He interupts because they are going off on tangents and not answering the question.

>>115090058
>Who was in the wrong here?
Bill Nye for not acknowledging his politics.

>>115095202
Fucking this. Bill instantly lost when this happened.

>>115090058
Bill Nye the Agenda Guy went straight for the 'think of the children!' ploy so I'm going with him being the worst. Show us the data then I might believe it. Even then, better show me all the data instead of hiding some of it which is possible.

I do agree with >>115090845 said too though. I thought Tucker asked good questions, but he was acting a bit hot headed. Then again I'd be too if the person always dodged the question.

>>115090845
>tucker is denying based on prejudice
Or if you weren't a nigger entrenched in a side yourself, you might want to ask the same fucking questions yourself your raging faggot.

Tucker does this shit all the time, its the best way to show people watching how stupid someone is. Just ask questions someone is to stupid to answer.

There is no physical way to know any of the shit tucker asked you fucking twat, that was the point. If you cant answer simple fucking questions like that the science isn't "settled"

File: 1488425057345.gif (2MB, 359x346px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 359x346px

>>115090058
(((( Bill Nyegold))))

Oy vey goyim, if you disagree with me then you have an X personality with X traits.

>>115090058
Did no one watch till the end?
What was with that Trump rant? Do (((they))) always have to bring up Trump? Leaks? What?

>>115092273
what was the climate like in 1750?

File: Screen Shot 2017-03-02 at 8.56.08 PM.png (172KB, 928x354px) Image search: [Google]

172KB, 928x354px

>>115090058
>Riddle me this Tuck Man -

Bill "Jail the dissenters" Nye

Is this the right guy for representing the scientific community?

File: 1488516333083m.jpg (106KB, 788x1024px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 788x1024px

>>115095976
A lot less niggers and westrels on welfare I can tell you that

File: grapes+.png (219KB, 604x586px) Image search: [Google]

219KB, 604x586px

lel
bill nein the "science" guy

>>115090058
Even if global warming was real... it would be incredibly useful for the world... would increase farming in northern areas that were unhabitable.. would make africa and the equator unlivable... Would eventually swallow up cities near the water (new york, florida, california coast)... Really I see no downside except the summers are hotter and not as much snow unless you move north

File: IMG_1447.png (2MB, 799x900px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 799x900px

>>115090058
Bill bill billl

>>115095241
>That's sort of true but that doesn't mean it's ok to do non-science and call it science because "lol nothing can be proved".

No one suggests that non-science being presented as science is permissible

>Climate science literally is not science. There's no control Earth.

You don't need a control for claims to be in the purview of science, they just have to be testable. Sometimes tests in science aren't experiments at all, EX: predictions turn out to be true.

What's really the problem is scientists have a horrible track record at predicting the future of chaotic systems.

File: grips.png (2MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1920x1080px

>>tfw He says that Humans are the biggest contributor to CLIMATE CHANGE but won't talk about the volcanos around the world becoming more active and Fukushima.

The sun has been getting closer for years also, has he talked about that?

>>115090983
Ultra merchant-ey!

>>115093094
>You don't know if all the CO2 emitted by man,
most of it is emitted by liberals.

its up to you to decide if they're human or not.

Do you believe in miracles?

What if God decided to tweak the climate how He saw fit? you wouldn't be able to see him tweaking it directly or measure it in a laboratory, so you would still assume your clockwork universe where everything always obeys the natural law.

In short, weathermen can't even predict the weather correctly for the next few days, how do you think they could predict it for the next few decades?

>>115093752
>per capita
nice try shekelstein.

now lets not forget that wyoming consumes very little and all the CO2 they produce comes from exports to cities.

Cities produce 70% of CO2 emissions.

source: http://mirror.unhabitat.org/downloads/docs/E_Hot_Cities.pdf

File: 1488425974097m.jpg (121KB, 1024x690px) Image search: [Google]

121KB, 1024x690px

>>115096309
My Climate test is that I go outside in February and it's cold as fuck. The top layer of rain water on my pool cover is ice. Al Gore is a mongoloid. Global warming a Jewish lie. Climate change a liberal bukkake circle jerk. Don't get all bent out of shape hippies. Look for some other wild non vital issue to push on others that hasn't yet been disproven. Keep fighting for faggot rights while violent hoardes of foreigners invade your nation's. Yeah, because the ocean getting warmer is really something I give a fuck about.

>>115096877
Thanks Kek. At least I know you aren't full of shit.

>>115095202
I kekek heartily

File: ffffffffffff.png (522KB, 793x1122px) Image search: [Google]

522KB, 793x1122px

Oh my god, this face.

>>115090058
>THE LANGUAGE THAT IM USING IS NOT TO YOUR AMUSING
>OUR TIME IS NOW FLEETING AS THE BEETLES HAVE STOPPED BREEDING
>CARRY ON TUCK MAN IM SURE WE'LL CROSS PATHS AGAIN

>>115095610
>What number is an apple?
>An apple is red
>Hehe you can't answer a simple question apples aren't settled

Bill said the % of change was an inappropriate metric, it's also ambiguous because there's so many ways to measure that and an audience wouldn't know what to do with the number if they heard it. If you were told 99% of a human was going to suck your dick, you might think it was a woman missing a toe. Chimpanzees share 99% of human DNA.

>>115097006
>HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA THAT WAS OMINOUS

>>115097004
That's the face of a role model becoming a Sith lord.

>>115090058
>science educator

The mega cities that house the liberal pest are responsible for more then half of the countries emissions. These cities are often only a few miles wide in density.
A few miles opposed to entire states difference.

Liberals are disgusting.

>>115096877
Where the fuck do you live? I live in the south and we didn't have winter at all this year. Spring temperatures started in january when february is supposed to be the coldest month.

File: happyasuka.jpg (26KB, 593x449px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 593x449px

>>115090058
The true answer for enlightened individuals not burdened by the blinders of partisanship is that both individuals did a poor job, but for different reasons.

>never answer simple questions
>win argument because you're "the science guy"
just lol

>>115090058
Tucker can't lose

>>115090058

bill "i don't know what cognitive dissonance is" nye the pathological science lie

>>115097065
Yeah i saw stupid niggers like you fixate on the "degrees" hur der thats a word you chose.

The problem is you niggers try to pretend you know something about science and you dont. The only person the word "degree" in the statement "to which degree did it effect it" would confuse would be a stupid nigger liberal. The point is extremely solid, and being so much of a nigger that you think "the science is settled" is a fucking disturbing stance for anyone to take when pretending to know anything about it.

The earth is more than likely being effected by us, but there is no actual science showing it. Ontop of that, you niggers dont know science so you picked CO2 because its abundant, but neglected to realize its the most harmless part of the combustion process besides water vapor. Even other forms of carbon are worse for our planet, not to mention the radiation spewing out of our nuclear power plants. But no its all about carbon dioxide in your little nigger brain, because the science is settled dont you know.

File: pepe1.jpg (20KB, 306x306px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 306x306px

>>115090058
I love tucker when he's embarassing libs but damn does he sound like an obnoxious scientifically illtiterate tard here

>>115097281
you just move there? happens every now and then

least your not in WA state, if we get some snow here our local news can't stop about the tragedies republican congress created due to their lack of care about Climate Change

Tucker cant argue for shit but global warming is bullshit.

http://www.pnas.org/content/97/4/1331.full

>As the world slid into and out of the last ice age, the general cooling and warming trends were punctuated by abrupt changes. Climate shifts up to half as large as the entire difference between ice age and modern conditions occurred over hemispheric or broader regions in mere years to decades. Such abrupt changes have been absent during the few key millennia when agriculture and industry have arisen. The speed, size, and extent of these abrupt changes required a reappraisal of climate stability. Records of these changes are especially clear in high-resolution ice cores. Ice cores can preserve histories of local climate (snowfall, temperature), regional (wind-blown dust, sea salt, etc.), and broader (trace gases in the air) conditions, on a common time scale, demonstrating synchrony of climate changes over broad regions.
>punctuated by abrupt changes. Climate shifts up to half as large as the entire difference between ice age and modern conditions occurred over hemispheric or broader regions in mere years to decades

>>115097789
Was supposed to say radiation from our coal plants, which is worse than our nuclear power plants.

File: n6noW9H.png (284KB, 460x554px) Image search: [Google]

284KB, 460x554px

>>115097281
THIS
When I was a kid, the winter landscape was typically covered in snow most of the winter.
Now we get several years in a row with no snow.
This year the highs were usually in the 50's, and often higher.
Even the GOP politicians and news have stopped denying it's getting a LOT warmer, now they're grasping at straws by asking if humans are responsible.

>>115090058

Why even ask here?

Everyone on this board sucks the dick of every rightwing faggot they can find, so obviously they'll hate Bill Nye despite him being correct.

File: 1475384991309.jpg (108KB, 624x434px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 624x434px

>>115097859
I just moved up here to WA a few years ago. All the dudes who have lived here forever have told me about the cold fronts that blow through and freeze everything every few years. Much like you said the news reports it like some kind of rarity.

Something similar to this has happened to me every place I have moved too. California never saw droughts like this before, and they did. Massachusetts had never seen blizzards like this before, and they did. Its amazing how everyone remembers the crazy weather when they want to talk about bullshit, but forget all about it when ideology kicks in.

File: 1400792342766.jpg (156KB, 1023x729px) Image search: [Google]

156KB, 1023x729px

>>115090268


How about he sell his coastal property? You think if he believed this shit he would own a mansion along the coast.

Was thinking about that that nye debate . I fee nye is a high priest of liberal materalism . He's pushing his particular ideological biases twards cchristians or any theists in general .
If you disagree with a logical positivist or materialist they just claim your against formal logic and against the values and bedrock of western civilization . This approach is quite is evidently stupid . It's Made up of forces and force sublimated representations . In other words it's Obviously power as well. So it's It's really about power . One group dominating another one has so called truth another does not . The battle begins . But neither have Acsess to truth Anyway .The flaw of positivism is that it replaces explanation with description . It's pre consumed images that are recognizable by either side in otherwords a brand loyalty. The dichotomizations of reality into particulars removed from a universality is its self a obvious schizo approach . And quite dangerous and goes no where . In sum it differences its self form its self into a object element under the assumption the boundary of its self in relationship . But that's a major flaw a fragment can never be in control for long .and also it has to dominate to do so . The debate is about power . See I seen it as self referentiality. Or as Plato called it homonumon
Anyway as for logic goes I have no problem with irrationality and illogical actions . You will never get rid of them they are in a endless chapter of the myth of sysiphus

>>115090058
Ancient Egypt & Rome times had many degrees hotter on a global average.

Climate change is real, but not to the degree mainstream (((Scientific consensus))).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DrWznOFq38s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TCy_UOjEir0&

I like Bill Nye a lot, but he's a disgusting fuck on this topic propagating propaganda paid by his peers.

>>115098202
Its not getting alot warmer, infact there is no way you would ever feel global warming even as bad as the liberals pain it. This was common knowledge not that long ago, its the same reason why niggers on the right are wrong when they say it isn't real just because its cold.

I seriously cant believe there are people who think they can feel a .8 degree shift over 200 years, just because a fake scientist told them the numbers are worse than they look.

>>115098441
It isn't uncommon for us to have cold weather until late april here in WA, it could even rain all april and may and be 45 degrees and that is common for the PNW

>>115098644
you like him for the nostalgic entertainment factor or what?

File: 1485196599127.jpg (401KB, 900x800px)

401KB, 900x800px

>>115090798
The atmospheric c02 levels of much of prehistory was 1500ppm or more. For reference I think we are right around 450. I believe Nye mentions something about this in the video.

>>115090845
>>115091793
yee

>>115092273
I don't know how to say this, but you are literally retarded :( I'm sorry that you had to find out this way, but it was important for you to know.

>>115094720
I have never watched a tucker segment before this one, so I don't know about his 'constantly interrupting' shtick or whatever, but in this particular instance he had asked Nye some basic stuff that he had no idea how to answer. He seemed very unprepared. There are several times in the video where he talks for 20-45 seconds and nothing of value is said. Towards the end, he did get a bit more interrupty, but how can you not, when you just wasted 10 minutes talking about nothing, and have derived no real answers at all from what was said. Nye's answer to the question of 'how much of global warming is man made, and how much is naturally cyclical' was nothing tangible, it was just 'a lot'. at one point he said 100%. Literally. Watch it again. He had no sciencey shit to say AT FUCKING ALL. His fucking self proclaimed title is the science guy. Fuck! Anyway, Tucker was rude towards the end. It was rude to tell Nye he wasn't a scientist. Nye was obviously super flustered, and Tucker is more experienced with arguing(Preschool level Nye-sponsored Creationist debates aside), and so it was a little unfair I guess in that regard. Nye fucked up, though.

>>115092491
Bill's 'straight answers' were stuff like "We were going to have another ice age. Ain't gonna happen, cause of you and me" For real, he literally said that. Now, you have to remember. Tucker was asking one question, the same question, as is his apparent shtick, until the end of the video. He spent that entire video waiting for an answer to the first question. The question was 'To what degree is global warming caused by man'

Climate change is not the same as global warming. You simpletons.

Does bill creep anybody else out? Wouldn't surprise me if he turned out to be a pedo

File: 1487461237222.jpg (146KB, 2048x911px) Image search: [Google]

146KB, 2048x911px

>>115098758
It would slow our progress more than the Finno Korean hyperwar.

We are not gonna reach the average global temperature the earth had during Ancient Rome & Egypt for hundreds of hundreds of years.

File: fn_carlson-nye-800x430.jpg (87KB, 800x430px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 800x430px

>>115090058
Carlson: "I'm asking you a simple question"
*Nye answers question*
*Carlson asks same question*
*Nye answers question again*
*Carlson STILL doesn't like the answer, asks again*
*and again*
*and again*
(all the while ignoring the answer because it's inconvenient to his world-view)
Carlson: "why can't you answer my question?"

And sweet baby Jesus, that potato look on his face.

>>115097790
hello bill

File: crichton.jpg (391KB, 1854x781px) Image search: [Google]

391KB, 1854x781px

>>115090058

>>115099117
>*Nye answers question*
no he didn't

>>115098989
If you're the talking piece for global warming you should be able to explain it in layman terms.

The its to complicated but if we raise property taxes we can fix it, doesn't fly by with home owners.

I'm n sum nye is forcing his positivist " factual " materalism on people and if you don't like it that is have a opposite ideology in this case his anti Christian or theistic biases we will humiliate you . And show how much smarter we are we have ready produced facts based on our own ideology . I felt nye lost that debate because he was debating him self

>>115099117
retard alert

All credible "deniers" agree that CO2 causes warming. We know exactly how much it causes in isolation based on lab experiments.

The problem is we don't have an exact handle on the numerous feedbacks that exist to curtail the effects of CO2 on warming. If these didn't exist, then every time a volcano erupted we would be set on an irreversible path toward being Venus.

The Anthropogenic Global Warming crowd INSIST that not only does CO2 have long term warming effects not curbed by feedbacks, they say that it is actually magnified (3x) vs the results of lab experiments.

The skeptics say that the effect is halved, not multiplied by three, and they believe this takes place primarily because of increased water vapor, which causes upper strata clouds which reflect some heat back into space.

In my experience, with a background in botany, CO2 has a positive effect for the planet. This is evidenced on a global scale by planetary greening, especially around the equator (shown by NASA), as well as expansion of coral reefs. The globe being a few degrees warmer isn't going to kill off humanity (or nearly anything,) and neither would a tripling of current CO2. Many professional greenhouses increase the level of atmospheric CO2 to at least 1000 ppm, oftentimes more.

>>115099117
FOUND THE SHILL

>>115099117
>And sweet baby Jesus, that potato look on his face.
I can tell you're black

But no, he didn't answer the very simple question.

He asked "To what degree does man made global warming affect the climate?" After Nye said it was overwhelming scientific evidence, and everything about it was calculated.

He never answered.

climate change is real
but it's all about
laissez-faire
fuck the left

>>115099240
Nye lost that debate because he's done 20 years of manipulating children through movies that schools were in contract with.

If he spent the 20 years in science he could probably have defended his incorrect argument better.

>>115099117
He didn't answer the question until someone handed him a piece of paper. And the answer was complete horse shit.

The funny thing is, we could have been heading for another ice age right that second, and we fucked shit up so much not only did we stop the ice age but began to warm the planet up. There is no fucking way of knowing that though, and its just as feasible that we haven't really effected it at all considering how weak of a greenhouse gas co2 is.

>>115094778
>no one can prove anything in science
>tucker has no idea what bill has seen to prove his point, bill just doesn't bring them all up

The guy you responded to was actually on point. The truth is, nobody really knows to what degree global warming is man made. Furthermore, being on a kid's show in the 90s doesn't qualify you to speculate on climate change in any official capacity.

>>115099207
>>115099337

Tucker admitted that he believed the question he was asking was unanswerable, yet he pretended he was being sincere.

Classic Tucker hackery.

>>115099207
You just need to pay more attention. The earth finally hit equilibrium in 1750, the weather was finally ready to never change ever again. In comes us niggers with our hot CO2 injections, and the world has been irreparably changed forever. LEARN TO SCIENCE

File: OJ-Simpson-Dupers-Delight.jpg (26KB, 250x297px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 250x297px

>>115099207
>no he didn't
Actually he DID, repeatedly.
Most of the questions he asked were answered by statements made by Nye BEFORE Carlson asked them.
Then Carlson goes on to say "you don't know, you just pretend that you know".
If you can watch this and not realize Carlson doesn't even belong on TV, you're putting a awful lot of effort into denial.

>>115099833
Explaining what is going to happen is much different than explain how it happens

I think that's why he isn't answering the questions

>>115099717
So the correct answer would have been "Tucker come one now, there is no possible way we could know that" which is what an actual scientist would have said. That sort of turns your whole argument on its head though if its impossible to know how much we effected it.

>>115094736
Source of that image?

>>115099717
>>115099786
>>115099833
look at these libkeks who bought the global warming lie

>>115099130
nah just sad he lost a debate to bill nye the meme guy

dude i love bill nye's show but he is a fucking moron

>>115099117
I know this is bait, but the first(and seemingly only) question he asked was to what extent global warming is man made, and he never received an answer. I watched the whole ten minutes or whatever it was.

>>115099480
this

>>115099396
this

>>115099374
I don't see how any experiments done in a lab could really help predict the effects of certain gases on heat retention and magnification in our atmosphere. I will say that c02 is obviously good for plants, and that bugs, animals, and plants were much larger during a period of intense atmospheric c02. What I'm curious about is what the temperatures were during that time. I'm sure it would be easy to find out

File: VIjNaZh.gif (372KB, 460x260px) Image search: [Google]

372KB, 460x260px

>>115099643
>nobody really knows to what degree global warming is man made
Only if you insist on 9 decimal places of precision.
In a broad sense we are well aware that humans are 100% responsible for the radical acceleration of climate change, and thus if you had to pick a percentage it would be in the high 90's.
>hurrr,durrr, but you don't know if humans are responsible for 99.9% or 99,8%, hurrr,durr, you can't know nuffin
Even if humans are only responsible for 99.8% instead of 99.9%, we aren't going to get volcanoes and African wildlife to change their 0.2%.
One hundred percent of the change we can effect is inherit in our own behavior.
Even the Donald can't deny that.

>>115100158
Except I haven't made an argument; that was my first post.

Tucker was asking a nonsense question solely to try to cast doubt on what scientists "know." He wanted Nye to say "I don't know" or "that is unknowable" so that he could cast doubt on climate science generally.

Meanwhile 1991 video from Shell gets released showing that they were fully aware of climate change. Tucker was being entirely disingenuous as he often is in order to fulfil his role as a hack.

>>115100403
It was warm, but I believe that was because there were no ice caps at the time. Global temperatures seem dependent on our oceans more than anything else. I am sure CO2 affected it as well, but there are so many more potent greenhouse gasses like water vapor that change constantly.

It also caused so much oxygen to be produced that the air would explode during thunder storms.

File: 2vah-jay-jays.jpg (41KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 480x360px

>>115099900
>I think that's why he isn't answering the questions
What question didn't he answer?
Oh, I'm sure you didn't LIKE the answer.
And Carlson disliked the answers so much, he kept ignoring them, and talking over Nye.
but he did answer every question asked, even the "when did you stop beating your wife" style questions.

>>115100305
They should have sold it at a mcdonalds with a side of grease rings and then you would have bought it to you fat burger fuck.

>>115100662
>obviously that question is off limits because answering it correctly would make people question global warming
That is the problem nigger, not knowing the answer to that question should cause doubt to creep into your mind. Holy fuck you liberal niggers are cancer.

>>115100158
Finally. Someone eloquently puts the absolute truth together in an easy to read package. This is the only post that needs to be read in this entire thread. If theres no way to answer the question as many have claimed, then what the fuck is the entire point of the discussion? Sounds like our entire discussion/efforts should be directed to finding out exactly what is going on with global warming, not assuming that it's man made (or entirely not man made). The science is NOT in, and if it was, he should have just said 'the science' that was in, so we could know what the 'science' that is in, is!

>>115094736
>for 700mil years all of the organisms alive today couldn't survive

>>115100748
The correct answer is

"We don't, and couldn't ever possibly know"

But no, the entertainer went on to say whats going to happen to the ocean and people that live on the coast.

>>115100403
Re:>>115099374
Temperatures have been both higher and lower than current with higher CO2 present. Of course CO2 is not the only variable in warming.

The lab experiments don't help determine actual warming trends, that was my point. The "consensus" that is touted is that CO2 causes warming - that's it - and the so-called "deniers" also agree to that, which is why the figure is high at all. Everyone agrees that CO2 causes warming in isolation, the disagreement is about feedbacks.

Anyone who says "science is settled" is behaving unscientifically.

>>115100809
ebin post chang

Its sad after watching it again, Tucker kept trying to give Nye the benefit of doubt, by saying accelerating and Nye doubles down by saying, thats an understatement, its happening extraordinarily fast!

>>115100908
>Sounds like our entire discussion/efforts should be directed to finding out exactly what is going on with global warming, not assuming that it's man made (or entirely not man made).

The issue has been "discussed" by scientists for more than a century. The fact that some people refuse to accept the answer for political reasons is a different problem.

>>115099226

Here's the quick rundown:

>CO2, CH4, H2O (and other gases) absorb IR, which causes them to vibrate. We know this for a fact and exploit this in analytical techniques.

>The vibrations from the gases in the atmosphere create heat, which in turn heat up the Earth's surface.

>Humans have been releasing too much CO2 to be taken in by the natural carbon sink.

>Temperatures have been increasing with increasing CO2

>The temperature increase matched the predictive models that were made in the late 80s/early 90s

>The increase in temperature can result in releasing even more greenhouse gases, which in turn causes more heating. One example is that ice in Siberia is melting, creating marshland, which released CH4, causing further warming.

>>115100877
I know that's the point of what Tucker was doing...

No it should not cause doubt. It is not a reasonable question within the discourse around climate change. It is irrelevant to the science; it is literally a nonsense question.

Science does not claim to have the ability to answer any hypothetical question. It provides the best understanding of the data that is available.

If you were willing to learn something you might. I was a climate change doubter 14 years ago ass face. GTFO.

>>115091305
>talks about sophistry
>takes Bill Nye as a credible scientific source

Really stimulates my neurochemical reactions

Climate change is a giant red herring, but you westerners just keep indulging in it. I'll never fucking understand it.

>>115101087
>when lefties try out /x/ conservatives at spooky talk about conspiracies
you literally can not out /x/ the master of spooks
they are so desperate

>>115101200
The science is settled
Deal with it you uneducated nigger

>>115101337
The answer to all of this is

Additional taxes?

>>115100441
There is literally nobody who knows to what extent the warming is caused by man, if any. If you look at what has happened in the past, you can see some UNBELIEVABLY RAPID warming and cooling periods, even fairly recently, and before the industrial revolution. It could be 1%. it could be 5%. It could be 95%. Who the fuck knows? Not you, dude. I will say that it is entirely possible that we could be fucking things up, but where is the evidence for that? I mean literally any evidence at all, fuckin post me an infographic or something dawg dont leave me hanging

>>115090058
Tucker was being a fucker, but Bill was being a redditor.

>>115101363
>no it should not cast doubt, thats why you cant be allowed to ask questions
But you know it would so you lie about it, HAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHH science from a leaf everyone HAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHA

Holy fuck you are cancerous nigger, kys

posting this again for you low IQ shits

http://www.pnas.org/content/97/4/1331.full

>As the world slid into and out of the last ice age, the general cooling and warming trends were punctuated by abrupt changes. Climate shifts up to half as large as the entire difference between ice age and modern conditions occurred over hemispheric or broader regions in mere years to decades. Such abrupt changes have been absent during the few key millennia when agriculture and industry have arisen. The speed, size, and extent of these abrupt changes required a reappraisal of climate stability. Records of these changes are especially clear in high-resolution ice cores. Ice cores can preserve histories of local climate (snowfall, temperature), regional (wind-blown dust, sea salt, etc.), and broader (trace gases in the air) conditions, on a common time scale, demonstrating synchrony of climate changes over broad regions.

There are other arguments to be made too like the fact that warming will actually be a net positive. Also humans contribute only 3% of annual co2 emissions. There will be more greening and the biosphere will adapt to this new glut of co2.

File: 1478630922893.jpg (157KB, 501x585px) Image search: [Google]

157KB, 501x585px

>>115101363
>stop asking questions and be a good goy

>>115101726
It's the sort of question a hack who is uninterested in anything but his own hackery would ask. As I've repeatedly stated in my previous posts. Idiot.

Of course he can ask the question. It just proves he is a hack. And your posts prove that you're not genuinely curious, and are incapable of dialogue.

There was a time in which earth was a giant iceball and a time when where was no ice caps. In either situation, we can acknowledge that the earths weather changed drastically over millennia without humans. To whatever extent humans might cause an acceleration of this process, the outcome wouldn't be a human caused. Let's say that he's mans cause a global warming increase .01% ahead of its geological warming trend. Would the lack of humans have stopped the warming trend? This is the lost discussion.

>>115101363
>It provides the best understanding of the data that is available.

And what if that understanding isn't very good?

File: 1MnFX3r.jpg (2MB, 2448x3264px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2448x3264px

>>115101145
>The correct answer is
>"We don't, and couldn't ever possibly know"
Carlson asked "to what degree are we responsible for climate change"
Nye responded "changes that would have taken thousands or millions of years are taking decades or even years".
THAT'S the answer, which Nye stated repeatedly.
YOUR problem is you want an exact numeric answer, accurate to 100 decimal places.
And you only insist on this nonsensical standard because you know it can never be met, despite the existence of an obviously true general answer,

>>115101337
>gases
Yes.

>Too much c02 to be taken in by natural carbon sink
Nope! 1500ppm dinosaur times baby

>Temperatures increasing with increasing c02 levels.

Hold up a sec, isn't our atmospheric c02 450 ppm? How long has it been that way?

>temps matched predictive models from the 80s

So we are right on point where we are supposed to be, or was that a model that was designed to showcase our man made c02 caused global warming? I need a link, sir!

>snowball effect
Well once again I point you to the massive c02 levels we had had before humans were present. If anything our c02 is super low now, and i'm concerned. We need more c02!!

File: 1481677397645.jpg (87KB, 953x960px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 953x960px

>>115099786
>The earth finally hit equilibrium in 1750, the weather was finally ready to never change ever again.

>>115101930
hack hack hack hack STOP ASKING QUESTIONS I CANT ANSWER! hack hack hack

did you get lost on your way to reddit?

>>115101930
>all questions I don't like are wrong!
Of course nigger, any question that would cause doubt must be squashed!!! Its science after all, you wouldn't want people asking questions that made them think. Can you imagine if we actually let people try to question science?!!??!

>>115101801
lol, you got me eichmann.

>>115101337
>The vibrations from the gases in the atmosphere create heat, which in turn heat up the Earth's surface.
Not known to what degree, only estimated.
>Humans have been releasing too much CO2 to be taken in by the natural carbon sink.
Also not known with any surety.
>Temperatures have been increasing with increasing CO2
Burden not met to go beyond correlation.
>The temperature increase matched the predictive models that were made in the late 80s/early 90s
Now that is just laughable. There have been dozens of predictive models and even the conservative ones overshot reality.
>The increase in temperature can result in releasing even more greenhouse gases, which in turn causes more heating. One example is that ice in Siberia is melting, creating marshland, which released CH4, causing further warming.
Not in every case. Also, what you're describing inevitably leads us to runaway greenhouse gas, which we haven't had yet despite significantly higher levels of CO2 in the past. Why did warmer temperatures and higher CO2 not cause a runaway effect? Because you're leaving shit out.

>>115101087
Bill Nye lost the conversation there, by looking like a fucking loon.

Was he always this fedoracore? Or was it just radiation from his fanbase?

>>115101957
Then maybe Tucker should have asked about that instead of being a hack like he so often is.

>>115101949

The "natural" trend is towards cooling, actually, towards another ice age. Or was.

>>115101999
>tens of thousands, or millions
>relating to each other at all
>this is the current state of popular science

>>115090058
Nye just regurgitates the same old crap like an insipid "science fan" that he is. Clinging on to the topic that keeps himself relevant by confirming the biases of libtards while self-identifying as a scientist. Tucker could have smacked him down easily but apparently didn't study. Winners: grapes. Rarely mentioned in US political debates, the grapes finally got the attention they so richly deserve.

>>115101999
thousands, or who knows maybe millions of years. Now it just takes years! or maybe decades!

Sounds sciencey! How accurate do you think his politically charged faggy guesswork is?

>you want accurate answers to within 100 decimal places, but the truth is the general answer is true.

Dude, it might be true. How can you quantify it? How can you measure it? We need to figure out exactly how much, if any, is caused by man. For someone to say that they know it is heavily influenced by man, shows your hubris and lack of understanding. Even that most basic principle is not understood fully by us.

>>115102274
>Now that is just laughable. There have been dozens of predictive models and even the conservative ones overshot reality.

What is really laughable is that the only actual argument in your post is outright wrong.

>>115090058
>8:15
>I think that is probably all true....so much of this you don't know, you pretend that you don't know, but you don't know.
So Carlson agrees but wants to stick his nose up and instead and say "you don't know that!"

There was a little bit of cringe on both sides but I think that was the worst part.

>>115101999
>changes that would have taken thousands or millions of years are taking decades or even years
that's not scientific

>>115098989
Yes in prehistoric times co2 levels have been high.

>>115102172
You're being a clown. The discussion between the two was not a debate about science. It was a political discussion. Tucker was playing a political position, he was not genuinely interested (as he claimed he was).

But Bill Nye, he had to do whatever Tucker wanted him to do right? Of course not. Tucker can ask what he wants. But it's transparent what he was doing, and Nye fended him off well.

>>115102760
Why not?

File: 1EJUlqy.jpg (37KB, 460x460px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 460x460px

>>115102524
>>relating to each other at all
They're both longer than "decades or years".

>>115102604
>How accurate do you think his politically charged faggy guesswork is?
It's not guesswork. It's observed fact.

>politically charged
>implying the denial of scientific observations doesn't fall clearly along political party lines.

>>115101777
Warming is a positive, and so is increased CO2.

>>115102755
he's saying that he thinks it is probably true, but he doesn't go around claiming he knows for certain, because it is not a settled science; a way more respectable position than Nye's

>>115102751
No nigger, they haven't been correct on a single model. By this point according to 1994, there would be no trees. By this point according to 2001, there would be no more ice caps.

They have discredited themselves over and over, the worst part is it might be true, but I doubt CO2 is the culprit. We have reached boy who cried wolf levels at this point.

>>115101999
>"changes that would have taken thousands or millions of years are taking decades or even years

wheres_the_proofs.jpg

File: 1488487871684.jpg (72KB, 500x702px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 500x702px

>>115090058
Maybe once the enviro-cunts start pushing for actual sustainable, practical and clean nuclear energy I'll start taking them seriously. As it is, all they do is grandstand about how horrible we all are for consuming energy and offer pipe-dream solutions that are utterly impractical and prohibitively expensive.

Both were being dicks here, by the way. Nye is more correct, but neither is right.

File: Climate Impact of Increasing Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide, Science, vol. 213, pp. 957-966, 1981.jpg (573KB, 1260x754px) Image search: [Google]

573KB, 1260x754px

>>115103028
>No nigger, they haven't been correct on a single model.

ORLY?

File: 1482254755771.jpg (68KB, 589x595px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 589x595px

>>115101200
I agree with you. I don't think that c02 itself, however, is as much to blame for global temperatures as people tout that it is. Who fuckin' knows, anyway. It's been made into a political issue. On one side, you have a very juicy carbon tax, and other shady, low hanging fruit. On the other hand, you have people who don't want a carbon tax. In the middle, you have John Q Public. John has no fucking clue what the truth is, because it is a political issue, somehow, and the truth is obscured, just like every other thing we would like to know the truth about. The age of information, and we have to do our own research for everything it seems. :(

>>115102909
because that is a conclusion
conclusions are based on data
where is the fucking data

File: Screen Shot 2017-02-27 at 1.06.24 AM.png (515KB, 511x511px) Image search: [Google]

515KB, 511x511px

>>115098495
ew wtf is in her anis

>>115102903
I am definitely making fun of you, I am glad you can pick up on that. There is a reason the science is questioned, its because most of it isn't science. I definitely think humans are fucking up the planet, I just don't think any of your lies matter. I am not going to latch onto an ideology just because it fits my world view like you. News flash nigger, just because liberal global warming is trash doesn't mean we aren't fucking up the planet. What it means is the garbage science you have been pushing is just that, absolutely garbage.

File: 6a010536b58035970c017ee88df70e970d.png (410KB, 898x728px) Image search: [Google]

410KB, 898x728px

>>115102751
Pointing out lack of certainty where it's being posed is an argument.

File: retarded.jpg (76KB, 528x565px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 528x565px

>>115103028
>They have discredited themselves over and over,
Let's not forget the scientific community has given us all modern technology as a spin-off of scientific research.
I notice you don't spend time denying science that relates to computers, airplanes, nuclear bombs, toaster-ovens or modern medicine.
All THAT science is just fine, but the science that tells us we should pollute less, even if it means 1% less profit for a bunch of ((((billionaires))), now THAT science is all just homosexual communist lies.

>>115103028
>they

Yes, climate scientists use one central model on one centralized computer and there is no discussion or disagreement between them. They never talk about the limits of the models.

Have you ever looked at a paper buddy?

and stop calling people nig*er you child.

Nye is a fool. He won't accept extreme scepticism on GW: "The evidence is overwhelming" Well we've never been wrong before with a strong consensus hmmm?

>>115103427
Lol, in this case there's some irony involved.

We aren't discussing any facts, and I haven't advanced any propositions (or lies) regarding climate change. We've been talking about Tucker's question. Go back and reread.

I'm glad you care about the planet.

>>115103562
You're denying that feedbacks like water vapor half the effect of CO2 on atmospheric warming. You're the denier.

>>115103480

A sourceless graph which contradicts itself is not exactly helping your argument.

>>115090400
I spat my milk laughing, thx m8

File: 2564058688_3f1995c901.jpg (45KB, 401x302px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 401x302px

>>115090058
BBBBBUTTT TUCKER, GLOBAL WARMING EFFECTS MUH SWEET BERRY WINE GRAPESSS...

File: strawman.jpg (95KB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

95KB, 500x375px

>>115103819
>You're denying that feedbacks like water vapor half the effect of CO2 on atmospheric warming. You're the denier.
?????
Did you reply to the wrong guy, or are you just really bad at creating stawmen?

>>115103843
>can't read graphs

File: 1472751064008.jpg (690KB, 1680x1050px) Image search: [Google]

690KB, 1680x1050px

>>115103004
This.

>>115102950
>it's not guesswork, it's observed fact

Look, the 'observed fact' is that we are like one degree higher than we were in the 70s, or whatever amount it is. That is true! If you think that the 'millenia to decades' thing is true, and it is "observed fact" then why dont you just go ahead and provide me with a source there, friendo :)

The 'truth' is that we simply don't have a clue whether or not we are affecting the climate, and if we are, we have no clue to what degree. The temperature drastically rises and falls without our help (sometimes, even more so than in our history). There were periods in the past called 'ice ages' and such and temperatures were not always the same.

>>115103562
Holy fuck you are retarded. Just because science as done amazing things doesn't mean you bow down to anyone who calls them self a scientist.

You faggots can tax the rich all you want i dont care, use something real though. The only part of all this that concerns me is you are the same faggots who kill any alternative energy besides the ones that aren't ready like solar or other "green tech" You faggots are preventing us from having an energy revolution that could change the world.. You are the same faggots who have been hindering science since the dawn of civilization.

I get supreme joy in imagining Bill Nye one day looking back and realizing that he was the "church suppressing the heliocentric model" of the modern age.

90% of these people self worth comes from believing themselves to be objective and rational arbiters of truth. The sad part is they'll never admit they were wrong. Theyll move the goalposts after every failed prediction.

>>115104008
That's what you're doing whether you know it or not.
The label of denier is utterly meaningless because it applies to data from both sides of the debate.

One side just contains a bunch of uppity liberal faggots who like to take ownership of words for the purpose of propaganda.

>>115104008

He's just randomly posting bullshit he read somewhere. Try asking him how exactly will water vapor "half" global warming.

Riddle me this, Drumpftards: If humans have no effect on the climate, then how come the weather started warming only after Drumpf was elected?

>>115090845
/thread

>>115103751
No we were discussing how you are so much of a nigger, that you think questioning science is wrong. We were talking about how you think its wrong to ask questions that might turn someone into a skeptic. We were talking about how you literally know nothing about science, but pretend to. Are we done already?

>>115090845
>Tucker is denying based on prejudice
Except this is okay to do when you're actually right and your opponent is an absurd moron

>>115104268
I already explained that.

File: 06-bigfoot-1.jpg (137KB, 900x600px) Image search: [Google]

137KB, 900x600px

>>115104077
>we simply don't have a clue whether or not we are affecting the climate
We do know it's getting warmer.
And we know things we do cause it ti get warmer.

How much more help do you need connecting the dots?

But on a broader note:
How many climate change deniers here also dent the scientific consensus regarding vaccines?
How many of you think the moon landing was fake?
Honest, serious question.

Saying "we can't know if we're causing climate change" is like saying "you can't prove bigfoot doesn't exist".

>>115090058


Tuckfag

>>115104521
you're an ignorant fuck

>>115104768
Is that what you call willing to think for yourself? You libniggers are hilarious.

File: strawman2.jpg (107KB, 800x800px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 800x800px

>>115104181
>doesn't mean you bow down to anyone who calls them self a scientist.

I'm running out of "strawman" pix, please switch to a different logical fallacy.

>>115104743
>We do know it's getting warmer.And we

no we don't

> we know things we do cause it ti get warmer.

No we don't

>>115104890
What the fuck do you think you were doing by bringing up science that has nothing to do with global warming you fucking nigger? Or do straw men only apply to other people when you are assmad? I assumed you were just shitposting and announcing your straw man to the world ironically with your hahahahaha. I forgot about the influx of newfags.

>>115104743

we don't know that things we do make it warmer. there's simply no way at all to test for that. and given the infinitesimally small sample size, for all we know mans actions are making the world colder.

but i do like the comparison of climate change to bigfoot. that makes sense. we have some evidence of both, but you still can't really say ' i know for a fact bigfoot exists' or 'i know for a fact global warming exists.'

>>115104873
>I'm willing to to think for myself
>unlike those who oppose my opinion those sheep!

>>115104743
well hold on now

>we know its getting warmer

yes, seems to be a little bit. This is something that has always happened, before us, though.

>we know things we do cause it to get

like wat? the c02? the c02 that seems to be relatively low, actually, at the present moment in time, historically? the c02 that barely warmed the planet when it was THREE OR FOUR TIMES as much? :(

>some big foot straw man thing
k

>>115090798
That isn't the case that is being made. The case that is beimg made is that what we are doing is going to destroy the planet. We all agree that more Co2 = more hot.

>>115105177
Kek'd and Chek'd my friend.

File: 1d5dEkB.jpg (39KB, 720x445px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 720x445px

>>115104935
Even mainstream republican politicians can't support the idea it's not getting warmer.
Now it's getting harder and harder to deny we're the cause.
Just look at OP's video. "Your guy" has fallen to denying we know how much of the change is our fault, because the rest of the debate was long ago solidly settled.

>>115090058
Tucker kinda lost his composure and not in a good way.

No one, its freedom

Tucker has the right to be a retard, nothing wrong about that.

>>115103289

It says a lot about /pol/ when actual, relevant scientific information is ignored and people just call each other "nigger" instead.

File: education-teaching-tongue_tied-tongue-speech_impediment-speaking_impediment-stutter-rkin20_low.jpg (26KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 400x400px

>>115105138
You don't even know what "ironic" means.
Take your jibber-jabber to /x/ where it belongs.

>>115105193
>you use the word skeptic to group together anyone who doesn't agree with you to pretend they are all in the same group
>you neglect to realize most of these people don't have a consensus they just have different questions
>you then compare it with the group of sheep you are with, who refuse to question anything.
>the only commonality in the skeptics, is disagreeing with you, their opinions however seem to be wildly varied
Apparently you don't know what thinking for yourself is nigger, you should give it a try. It might lead you somewhere else other than the "consensus" you think science is.

>>115097859
Well in the 80s and early 90s we were getting blizzards this time of year

>>115105356
Dude. It gets warmer, and colder, all the time, for billions of years. Who would argue that at all?

>even politicians cant support its not getting warmer
>now its getting harder to deny we're the cause

two unrelated things.

>your guy has fallen to denying we know how much, cuz muh settled

Dude. that's literally the whole debate. I mean, it is literally the only thing that anyone could possibly care about with this whole issue, so what are you even talking about 'the rest of the debate' even is, man?

>>115105628
Damn newfag are you still getting triggered?

>>115105647
I haven't said a thing to you except point out the hypocrisy of you calling someone a libtard while claiming to be open minded.

File: SarahSilvermanPits.jpg (226KB, 851x1280px) Image search: [Google]

226KB, 851x1280px

Which liberal hero do you want to see get tucked next?

>>115105954
Pretty sure that's shopped, either way she is hot despite her far left wing political views.

>>115090058
Cool climate change is real the science is settled but what the fuck is the solution kek, they never seem to have a non meme answer for this

>>115106125

>hot

That's a weird way to describe a fridge.

>>115105488
In all fairness man, you seem like a nigger. No one cares about some shit graph with no references.

Bottom line is, you think your answer is 100% accurate and questioning it is somehow wrong. I on the other hand, am comfortable with the fact that we couldn't possibly know the answer using real science, and am not willing to prevent humanity's power revolution on a whim. Every technology we would use to scrub carbon dioxide from the atmosphere will be needed, why not start practicing here.

>>115103380
That's pussy hair, virgin.

File: 1476994184359.jpg (191KB, 653x477px) Image search: [Google]

191KB, 653x477px

>>115105820
Oh sorry I didn't realize you were so lonely you were jumping into someone elses convo, I wasn't paying attention lad.

File: Not this one you moron.jpg (13KB, 273x184px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 273x184px

>>115106401
>No one cares about some shit graph with no references.

>>115090058
Both were in the wrong. Nye never answered the question properly until about 7 minutes in and then Tucker was in the wrong by saying he didn't answer the question sounding scientific enough.

>>115090058
Don't give a shit. Make Siberia Warm Again.

They were both in the wrong. Bill couldn't deliver anything but qualitative stuff, Tuck couldn't take anything but quantitative answers, and it took more than half way through to come to the point that we're accelerating the issue to an uncertain, but not insignificant amount.

They both embarrassed themselves here, and I generally like Tucker. Tucker's answers mockery and claims wouldn't satisfy anyone but the "Fox News" Republicans, and Nye's smug, self-righteous, hand wavy answers only satisfy the hard core climate change cultists.

Real or not, climate change is a fucking distraction from more important issues. But yeah, let's subsidize electric cars and solar panels because that's going to save the planet. Sure why not.

These (((scientists))) will always rattle on about how (((climate change))) is such a pressing issue, yet they never offer any real solutions.

Put up or shut up, I don't fucking care that Bill Nye and Black Science Man are making PBS specials about it, we don't need awareness, come up with an affordable and realistic solution or else I see this as nothing more than greedy kikes wanting to raise taxes and get more funding so they can publish a new study about how in 20 years we'll all be underwater.

>>115090058
How the hell is that cuck ''scientist''? Because he has college diploma?So do I.
He is race denialist yet promoted some made up warming of the world when here it's getting colder then usual.

File: 8rBgE88.jpg (190KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

190KB, 1920x1080px

>>115108140
Liberals believe their own lies

>>115108435
wrong

>>115095175
You mean livestock that everyone eats, including people in the city?

>>115108435
>when here it's getting colder then [sic] usual.

in other news, there is no such thing as world hunger since I ate breakfast this morning.

i seriously hope you're not this retarded.

>>115101529

I made no mention of what the answer is. Just the evidence of man made climate change.

>>115102070


>Nope! 1500ppm dinosaur times baby

By "dinosaur times" I assume you mean 250 million years ago, when there was a large amount of CO2 and the overall climate was hotter. The large amount of CO2 was produced by sudden volcanic activity, and the carbon sink back then was less effective than it is now. The key difference is that there wasn't a steady increase in the level of CO2, which means that eventually the carbon sink removed the "excess" CO2 produced. The reduction in CO2 took
.
>Hold up a sec, isn't our atmospheric c02 450 ppm? How long has it been that way?

In the last 50 years it has increased from ~325 to ~409 ppm; it has never been above 300 ppm for hundreds of thousands of years.

>So we are right on point where we are supposed to be, or was that a model that was designed to showcase our man made c02 caused global warming? I need a link, sir!

I think I have made a mistake with this one. The IPCC produced several models that attempt to fit the observed rise in temperatures over the past 200 years, and only when the effects of CO2 were included did they get an accurate fit.

>Well once again I point you to the massive c02 levels we had had before humans were present. If anything our c02 is super low now, and i'm concerned. We need more c02!!

Yes, there was a very warm period about 55 million years ago, which was caused by a massive increase in CO2. What exactly led up to the huge release in CO2 is unknown, but it was very similar to a positive feedback. These things have occurred in the past before as well. The key difference is humans weren't alive when this happened.

>>115095175
COW EXTINCTION WHEN? Gonna be some mad pajeets

>>115107107
which is all a valid assessment of the video. the only problem being that just because nye wasn't able to answer quantitative questions on the spot (which is more or less what happens to anyone of any party when asked to provide complex proofs and details of their views on the spot) doesn't mean they don't exist. they do, and climate change deniers don't care.

>>115109423
There's also the possibility that no matter what we do, and even stopping now won't change a damn thing. This is why quantitatively answering Tucker's question is important.

At this point, I'm willing to accept we're fucked and start building cities along the future coastlines when sea levels rise 58m when Antarctica finally melts down.

>>115090058
Carlson was right.
Bill Nye just went autistic there and jumped like ten minutes ahead of their conversation and at the end shat out that completely unrelated Trump leaks tangent. It's like he was more focused on vomiting talking points out then actually having a conversation.
All Carlson was asking for was where's the evidence and how the world would look like today. Bill Nye is probably tired of spoon feeding people sure but you can't just blow off their question and leave them behind like that, that's not a conversation at all. Sure Carlson might have had the intention to use Nye as a punching bag and Nye caught on to that, but when you jump around like that it just makes you look autistic.

The problem you really see for the Science community is the whole shut up and listen approach they have on things. Sure people are intentionally denying it but others legitimately don't see it, when you autistically vomit out talking points like that it just puts off the people that are legitimately no seeing it and empowers the deniers.

>>115102274
>Not known to what degree, only estimated.

Actually, we do know to what degree:

>Also not known with any surety.

Except it is known. The level of CO2 has been rising steadily since industrialization. Humans release 30 billion tons of CO2 each year, which is too much for the carbon cycle to remove. Imagine it like filling up a bath with the plug removed - if the rate of water entering matches the rate of water leaving, there is no net gain or loss, but then if you add even more water into it, the amount of water in the bath will increase.

>Burden not met to go beyond correlation.

You're wrong.

>Now that is just laughable. There have been dozens of predictive models and even the conservative ones overshot reality.

Such as?

>Not in every case. Also, what you're describing inevitably leads us to runaway greenhouse gas, which we haven't had yet despite significantly higher levels of CO2 in the past. Why did warmer temperatures and higher CO2 not cause a runaway effect? Because you're leaving shit out.

We have had periods of positive feedback such as with clathrate gun hypothesis. Another example is the ice-albedo effect, where the melting of ice causes less light to be reflected and therefore increases temperature, or converse freezing of water produces more ice which reflects more radiation. Another famous example is water vapour feedback; water can act as a greenhouse gas, so as more water evaporates and the amount of water increases, the amount of radiation absorbed instead of leaving the planet also increases (with CO2 absorbing IR radiation at different wavelengths from H2O).

Venus is an extreme example of a runaway effect, but that will never happen on Earth as it is not close enough to the sun to receive the same kind of radiation. Interestingly, Venus' atmosphere is 96.5% CO2, and it is even hotter than Mercury, despite Mercury's closer proximity to the Sun.

>>115106710
Weird I didn't see that pink line there on the original graph. I must have missed it.

>>115090058
As a liberal I can tell you that Bill Nye is a TV scientist who has never done anything in the science field of merit. He's a personality, that's it.

Climate change is real, it's man-made, and it's possibly too late to reverse it, but Bill Bye isn't going to convince anyone, especially on Fucker Carlton.

>>115090058
>two idiots who know nothing about the subject talking over eachother and being complete idiots, unable to bring a single point or argument to the table
What the fuck did I just watch?

This shit is beyond embarrassing. Neither of them knew what they were talking about, but Cucker made the worst impression.
Just read the comments on the video.
>Tucker is so fucking dumb omfg. And he won't let the man answer his dumbass questions. I hate Fox News with a passion
This is why you faggots have been losing before Trump and will continue losing after Trump.

This is why everyone hates Fox News.
This is why everyone hates Conservatives and goes ''hurr hurr, go back to Fox News'' whenever someone suggests that borders are good or laws should be enforced.

Fucking faggots. This is why no one likes you.

>>115113149
Thank you, Oreo.

You may as well have Kim Kardashian and Paris Hilton debate the subject.

Nye the Liar Guy and Fucker are both complete retards.

>>115114289
They're both morons, and Bill Nye isn't even a scientist, but at least he knew how to behave himself.

People like him are one trick ponies. They're like Bill Maher. All they have to do is act real calm and smug, give very vague and flawed answers, and then act more smug when the person they're debating gets flustered.

>>115108140
They do offer realistic solutions, investing in green energy infrastructure, more efficient ICE vehicles, if not just phasing them out with green vehicles. Clean and green energy is actually cheaper now days to produce as well. Lower carbon emissions and save money doing it, there's plenty of smart and easy steps in the right direction, win - win. A lot of them aren't utilized because of powerful lobbying and propaganda against green energy, since primitive fuel companies want to keep their monopoly on the energy markets.

>>115115368
Those aren't realistic solutions. Switching to ''green energy'' doesn't stop China, India and Africa from using normal sane people energy.

An actual realistic solution to the non-existent problem would be to switch to nuclear energy. If you showed the rest of the world that nuclear energy is great, they would have a much easier time selling the idea of nuclear energy to the citizens.
The only real reason we haven't switched to nuclear is because ''muh Chernobyl! muh Fukushima!'', and cold war nuclear scare.

>>115090845
>le classic I am smarter than everyone xD

>>115090058

tucker is a moron and bill nye is a moron for going on a moron's show

>>115116272

>>115116218

I like Tucker, but he did sounded like a typical Republican simpleton in this debate. The whole "Yeah, I admit the climate is changing, but I don't know why!" non-argument is getting old. Do they really think man wouldn't be the number 1 suspect for what is changing the climate? I'm going with the scientists on his one. Sorry Tucker.

>>115117071
>climate cycles sporadically for the entire history of the earth
>mankind shows up
>climate cycles sporadically
guess it's settled then

>>115092273
the grapes thing was bullshit btw, romans taught britons how to make wine. there are documented royal vineyards and they mostly died out because of wars and trade and shit making wine less important

>>115116029
I almost mentioned it but yes, nuclear energy is one of the best right now, I don't think its technically green but it's virtually clean as can be but it's competitive with primitive fuels and is a over all good switch.

I have to disagree on your other point though, the bigger nations tend to play role models for the others. Surely they'll switch once other nations start setting the example to follow, not to mention with the falling prices they'll surely move over for the cheaper power as well. Also I'd like to point out China is one of the fastest adopters of green solutions now days.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renewable_energy_in_China

File: Screen Shot 2017-03-03 at 1.30.20 PM.jpg (9KB, 131x58px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 131x58px

>1 post by this ID op
>1 post by this ID bot shill replies
>a week late
>desperately trying to portray /pol/ as supporting Bill Nye the Faggot Guy
lame

File: 7715613132_c3359839ee_b.jpg (188KB, 1024x683px) Image search: [Google]

188KB, 1024x683px

Daily reminder, Bill Nye is not our guy.

>>115090058
Tucker doesn't know what cognitive dissonance is - that's the problem here.

File: IMG_0799.png (167KB, 504x375px) Image search: [Google]

167KB, 504x375px

Those comments are advanced cancer even for jewtube. They're all
>lol Tucker wouldn't let him answer
>Fox news more like fuck you
>he could answer if he wasn't interrupt
It's like they don't understand they were on a delay and if your guest panders and starts talking about fucking grapes you need to intervene and get them to answer what you asked. Tucker didn't do a good job but Shill Nye proved he's just an Al Gore dicklicker. Best part was the random close up of Nye's lips at 4:20

>>115097004
>>115097129
You guys gay, man

>>115094176

Look below retard
>>115094432
And there you have it. It such a simple format even your downsie ass can understand. It happened before man. Many times. Proven. Science settled.

>>115090845
Tucker was right for the beginning but when Bill Nye actually fucking answered the question after 8 minutes he fucked up.

File: 1488510677131.jpg (70KB, 683x1024px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 683x1024px

>RIDDLE ME THIS, TUCK-MAN!
>WHAT COUNTRY HIDES THE GREAT THREE APES
>OF GRAPES, AND NAPES AND RAPES
>THAT CLIMATE CHANGE HAS SURE DERANGED
>AND BROKE NEW CRIME STAT RATES?

>>115090058
>what we shouldn't do is give sucker to those who spread hate speech, hate messages: demonizing particular races or religions.

So we can't criticize islam, expose it for what it is, and show the cancerous effect it has on the world?

Europe is going full authoritarian. I want to go home pls.

>>115121537
shite wrong thread

>>115116218
>>115116573

lots of people think they're the king or queen of england. many of these people are in insane asylums. they're all wrong except for 1.

in any case, you don't have to be smarter than everyone to see tucker is a tryhard moron

>>115098495
>that picture
you have to go back

>>115117724
China is leading it because they are leading in all kinds of alternative energy, including LFTR. I have no problems pursuing all viable options. Liberals are cancer when it comes to science though, as long as they can somehow attach the environment to it.

Global warming is a problem because its an all encompassing answer to actual problems. CO2 is not the fucking answer to all of our problems, and it never will be. There are so many worse things that come out of the combustion process, and so many different things that effect our atmosphere more than our CO2 like water vapor and methane.

>>115122287
damn bro you said some shit that you gotta read twice to realize how smart it is. specially the last sentence or 2

>>115090268
What a retarded non-argument

>>115090058
Bill Nye is a fake scientist faggot, so Tuck.

File: 1487356779185.jpg (63KB, 817x857px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 817x857px

>>115090058
Holy fuck, Bill really got BTFO

>"Climate change is happening!"
>By how much Mr Nye? What is the rate of change of the climate, what percentage of this rate of change is caused by humanity?
>"uh uh I-I th-the ice age a-and but the rate is f-fast uhm t-the ice age"

>>115090058
Larry Wilmore

File: 1473702333687.png (298KB, 600x336px) Image search: [Google]

298KB, 600x336px

I shitposted in this thread earlier today, and the previous ones. It got me thinking, so I decided to do some research. After a couple hours, it seemed I was wrong about the amount of c02 we are responsible for. We have had an increase of like 40% in our c02 levels thanks to the industrial revolution beginning in the 1800s. It's insane how quickly the c02 rate has (exponentially) increased during that time.

I was stunned but kept reading shit, and eventually came to the conclusion that c02 has absolutely fuck all to do with temperatures, or very little to do with them anyway. It turns out I was right in the end, about climate change not being majorly influenced by man, or it at least seems that way. If I am wrong I would love for somebody to refute me, but this thread is about done. Maybe next thread. Here's some links!

http://theinconvenientskeptic.com/2010/10/taylor-dome-ice-core-analysis/

http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/environment/wrjp365g.html

https://data.giss.nasa.gov/modelforce/ghgases/Fig1A.ext.txt

File: 1487345279177.jpg (98KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 600x600px

>>115125112
Don't get me wrong, I'm concerned about the c02 levels. I think it's proper fucked that we approach our environmental issues with such a cavalier attitude as a society, but it doesn't seem to indicate that the c02 has much to do with global warming. c02 is very good for certain types of organisms including plants. I'm not sure what other effects it may have. I am forgetting my main point, which is that we are probably throwing some REALLY nasty shit into the atmosphere and the ground and oceans, that is way scarier than c02. I am all for environmentalism as long as it makes sense

>>115103380
>her>>115094698
19.8 million in the ny state itself

File: duurr.png (55KB, 137x193px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 137x193px

>>115090058
Why does tucker constantly look like nothing is happening in his head and just waiting to read his next teleprompter line?

File: IMG_0209.jpg (76KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 600x600px

>>115093752
google the definition of "per capita" you retarded fucking leaf

then see which state has more emission per capita(example: wyoming vs new york)

>>115126215
*more emission as a whole state

>>115096393
Unfortunately humans produce 100 times the CO2 as volcanos, so I'm afraid this argument gets a 1/10.
https://youtu.be/w5p9osQqpSE

>The sun has been getting closer for years also, has he talked about that?
I'll have to give this one a 0/10 I'm afraid, the sun and earth are actually separating at 1.5cm per year.

>>115097065
Arguing with idiots will lead you nowhere. Same shit with nye and tucker

>>115105488
Hi welcome to /pol/.
You seem to have completely ignored the poster's high-level input to the discussion.
If you wish to continue your PC dicketry, please fuck off to Reddit. Thanks.
>By this point according to 1994, there would be no trees. By this point according to 2001, there would be no more ice caps.

>They have discredited themselves over and over,

>>the worst part is it might be true,

>but I doubt CO2 is the culprit. We have reached boy who cried wolf levels at this point.