Global Warming

>>128656472

>CO2 in atmosphere causes oceans to evaporate and ice to melt
>extra water vapor in air traps heat
>however, extra water vapor also creates more clouds, storms, etc
>clouds and storms act as repellents to the sun's UV rays
>the system equals itself out

that x axis does not go far back enough and is convenient to the point you're trying to make but is also misleading/fake and gay

>>128656472
>4,000,000,000 year old planet
>400,000 years

>>128656472
Why do you repost the same thread over and over?

SAGE

>>128657203
Do you really want to count the formation time, where the earth basically was a burning ball? we only can compare it to the state where it had plants and animals.

>>128656472
A logical argument that doesn't rely on one of the following:

1) Correlation != causation fallacy
2) Using different baseline temperatures for propaganda purposes (show absolute numbers in temps or gtfo)
3) Explain the CO2 measurements from the Vostok Ice Core sample please. And no it's THE RUSSIANS!!!!1111!!! is not a good enough explanation.

>Using 2 different data collection methods on the same graph without specifying

>>128656738
And as a bonus: explain why won't the plain self-regulate?

>>128657484
the planet*

global warming alarmism is an international plot to tax carbon dioxide and loot trillions from the economy to fund far left causes.

>>128657416

so add 250 - 500 million years to that number my dude

When the elites who are pushing the agenda start to do video conferances instead of flying around the world in their private jets to discuss taxing the working class. If they dont believe it enough to be mindful about their carbon foot print then I will continue to not believe it either.

Well, think about it asshole. Does that answer your fuckin tard question?

>>128656472
Since the CO2 has gone up by about 33%, have temperatures increased similarly since then? They haven't.

I think that's the issue people have with it. The Earth hasn't "warmed" enough to seem like something that's undeniably unnatural. It doesn't help that the extreme projections continually fail to live up to expectations.

>>128656472
You are worried about a greenhouse gas comprising all of 0.01% of our atmosphere potentially comprising 0.03-0.04% of the atmosphere. Even though all combined greenhouse gases comprises about 10% of our atmosphere depending on where you live.

You think this slight change of plant fertilizer in our atmosphere is going to melt the icebergs, raise the sea levels, create massive hurricanes, destroy all coastal cities in an apocalyptic nightmare scenario?

Whos crazy now?

>>128656472
>What kind of proof would you accept?
climate models making accurate predictions

>>128656472
I simply do not think the information is conclusive enough, or predictive for that matter, to make the drastic decisions globalist forces are pushing. The fact that it has become politicized and treated in such an unscientific way (consensus, bullying, delusions of denial and projection), makes me extra wary.

>>128656472

Why did they cut it off going 650K years back? That's an odd, arbitrary number. Bet they're cutting out higher natural spikes.

>>128658862

Because thousands still sounds like a large number when millions shows massive discrepancies that dont support the narrative.