Would it be so bad to just TRUST the entire scientific community

It's anti-scientific to trust the scientific community.

They've been co-opted by the globalists. All the honest scientists have been threatened.

>>129151528
TRUST NOBODY NOT EVEN YOURSELF

>>129151440
I thought it's called climate change now.

Parts of the world are cooler & wetter than before.

It would be great if they all agreed and had some proofs.

File: 1476469480368.png (358KB, 680x484px) Image search: [Google]

358KB, 680x484px

>>129151620
That's literally the scientific method.

File: BptVE1JIEAAA3dT.jpg (21KB, 600x405px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 600x405px

dah profesionals says it tru so it must b.

>>129151650
97% of them do agree. It's pretty much unanimous.

You would have to be a complete idiot to refute climate change these days.

>>129151616
You win dude.

Everytime scientists say something that doesn't suit your agenda you can just blame it on the gloablists.

All those studies about race and IQ are still 100% valid though and not biased in any way.

>>129151440
>entire

Rly?

>muh models

>>129151440
It's really a fifty fifty split as the REASON behind the change, i.e. anthropogenic, or natural cycle... this 97% aggree nonsense is bullshit. Plus the models they have don't fit the historical data collected from ice cores... They've literally got nothing. That being said any sane person can see that civilization is destroying nature (not necessarily impacting climate, yet), so they're grasping for straws, trying to find a way to reverse it using the same processes that is fucking things up. Many of them do agree that we've already passed the point of no return. Bottom line, civilization is the process of turning nature into waste.

>>129151440
>TRUST

THIS IS NOT HOW SCIENCE WORKS.

>>129155243

>>129151989
where is source that 97% of ALL scientists agree that HUMAN CARBON emissions cause climate change? Please.

>>129151440
Some of us actually us actually have scientists friends and know global warming was pushed from above. I put this simply: No shilling for global warming = No funds

>>129155427
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surveys_of_scientists%27_views_on_climate_change

>A 2016 paper (which was co-authored by Naomi Oreskes, Peter Doran, William Anderegg, Bart Verheggen, Ed Maibach, J. Stuart Carlton and John Cook, and which was based on a half a dozen independent studies by the authors) concluded that “the finding of 97% consensus [that humans are causing recent global warming] in published climate research is robust and consistent with other surveys of climate scientists and peer-reviewed studies.”

Here's a link to the paper:

http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/11/4/048002

Happy now? Let's see the climate change deniers try to weasel their way out of this one...

>>129155872
That's such a load of bullshit.

Do you have any actual evidence beyond meaningless anecdotes and speculation?

>>129151528
We have carefully peer reviewed the first post, and we agree that it is the best post.

>>129151989
Leave them to their stupidity.
Yanks can pay extra later.

also, read:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extinction_event
and
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anoxic_event

>>129151528
>>129151620
>>129155243
>>129156314
these

Blind appeals to (((authority))) is truly disgusting

>its an ice age!
>wait global warming we'll all be under water by 2015!
>Its actually climate change!

Its not that i dont trust their numbers, its that they jump to conclusions way too fast. They recently claimed that the carbon output is now "irreversible" which is a load of bullshit.

File: Cartoon - Climate Science.png (76KB, 400x305px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 400x305px

>>129151440

>>129151440
it's hard to find a more politicized area of science outside of human biodiversity

File: climate change.png (2MB, 1891x4901px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1891x4901px

>>129155902
yawn

File: 1469032055277.gif (67KB, 230x230px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 230x230px

>>129151440
Fuck that cat is so cute.

>>129157011
>97% of scientists agree that anthropocentric climate change is real
Appeal to authority. They were probably bribed by the globalist kikes who control the world. We can't trust these results.

>Some obscure study about race and IQ that has been debunked multiple times
Totally valid. No need for any further analysis. Whites > Blacks. End of story.

/pol/ are retards.

>>129157011
but the UN funded scientists all agree that X needs to be done about Y

>>129151440
Since there's no scientific consensus on global warming other than that its a thing (but nobody knows if man contributes meaningfully to it) I guess we'll never know.

Only safe thing to do is NOT cripple our industry so the Al Gores of the world can get an extra private jet.

>>129157401
>/pol/ infographic

Wow that changes everything. The whole scientific community worldwide has just been BTFO by some random infographic posted on /pol/

>>129151440
>TRUST

A suspicious mind is a healthy mind.

>>129156720
ironically global warming is the first "scientific" debate in which the majority of its debators have the slightest understanding of what theyre talking about,

"leave it to the marxists to turn even the weather into a struggle"

>>129157592
not an argument. You can't deny that scientists are funded by government, and governments need more excuses to pass bills for tax money and more importantly, POWER and CONTROL. They will twist the stats to whatever the hell they want it to be, scientists are the new preach and they want you to OBEY or shame you into bigotry, I mean hell.

also, race realism isn't an obscure study. It's common sense. You don't try to spend billions of dollars to lie to people that "racism is a bad thing" because the default state of mankind is to have pattern recognition and see that some races are more valuable than others

i hope you get run over by the truck of peace and diversity

>>129151989
do you know the source of the 97% figure?
using it is a sure sign you know nothing of the subject other than what the fake news media has programmed you with.

can you even name one climate scientist?

>>129157965
>can't fake an alien invasion
>can't allow uncontrolled or less carefully controlled false flags, because one mistake could result in global annihilation of habitation
>...
>ah, yes, let's say the external global threat is that evil capitalism has caused untold damage to the environment that only a global government can undo

>>129158235
see>>129155902

Go ahead. Try to refute that paper.

>>129158229
So anything that doesn't suit your agenda is propaganda and anything that suits your agenda is 100% valid and "common sense"?

It's amazing that people as dumb as you actually exist. I can only imagine that your mother must have drank a lot during pregnancy.

File: 1486969195107.jpg (106KB, 736x489px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 736x489px

Next time some shitlib gives you crap about not trusting (((climate science))) ask them to prove that it isn't just modern Lysenkoism. Then laugh as their worldview shatters.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lysenkoism

More detailed reading: http://thefutureprimaeval.net/politics-is-upstream-of-science/

>>129155902
>>(((wikipedia)))
from the paper:
>>(polled) Those who indicated that 'The majority of my research concerns climate change or the impacts of climate change.'
So 296 hillary-voting psuedoscientists who were funded by a far-left administration to "research" climate change and will basically get a big bonus if they say: 1. Humans cause it and 2. It will be detrimental to the world, "think" that that's the case?

I don't know if you've been on an american public university campus recently, but it ain't what it used to be. Regardless science isn't a matter of "raise your hand if you think this." or "if enough say yes, we'll tax the population enough to make you all rich for a very long time."

>The 97% “consensus” study, Cook et al. (2013) has been thoroughly refuted in scholarly peer-reviewed journals, by major news media, public policy organizations and think tanks, highly credentialed scientists and extensively in the climate blogo-sphere. The shoddy methodology of Cook’s study has been shown to be so fatally flawed that well known climate scientists have publicly spoken out against it,
>“The ‘97% consensus’ article is poorly conceived, poorly designed and poorly executed. It obscures the complexities of the climate issue and it is a sign of the desperately poor level of public and policy debate in this country [UK] that the energy minister should cite it.” - Mike Hulme, Ph.D. Professor of Climate Change, University of East Anglia (UEA)
>The following is a list of 97 articles that refute Cook’s (poorly conceived, poorly designed and poorly executed) 97% “consensus” study. The fact that anyone continues to bring up such soundly debunked nonsense like Cook’s study is an embarrassment to science.
http://climatechangedispatch.com/97-articles-refuting

File: lithium mine.jpg (56KB, 602x402px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 602x402px

>>129151440
OK I'm triggered enough to answer your stupid topic.

There are problems

There are solutions

Problem: earth is warming. OK I can accept that blindly because I know fuck-all about this

Solution: Let's destroy energy industry in the US while giving money to other countries to build coal plants. What the fuck kind of solution to the problem is this? Unless you literally hate the US there is NO WAY we should ever accept something so obviously biased against the US.

I have no idea what Obama admin was thinking but I don't think it was in our the best Interest of the US

>>129158756
Okay. You don't trust scientists (unless they say things that fit your worldview). There's really no point in arguing with you at this point.

It's hilarious how /pol/ is anti-science and intellectualism whenever it suits them.

>>129158653
>So anything that doesn't suit your agenda is propaganda and anything that suits your agenda is 100% valid and "common sense"?

never said anything about propaganda or agendas. I accept truth, not people paid to lie. I never accept anything just because someone told me, that's sheep behavior and you know it

Pattern recognition is now racist? rofl. It's hilarious that you're discounting common sense, probably because you don't have any. From a britbong no less, truly human drones incapable of constructing their own thoughts

Weather changes. This isn't new. Taxing people doesn't change the weather. It's one of the few beautiful things the government can never control.

also nice ad-hominem lmfao, still not an argument kiddo

>>129159067
you don't what science is you dumb, globalist remain-tard cuck.

>>129156124
>Do you have any actual evidence beyond meaningless anecdotes and speculation?
What fucking evidence do you want? A memo? Politicians decides who get funding. I entered academia during the 00'whicg was the hay day of an inconvienient truth. Wanna get research funds i better be climate related and support global warming.
I'm not saying there isn't climate change or global warming. Or that it's man made or not.
'
I'm saying: We can no longer trust scientits who do work realting to climate. The same way we can no longer trust antropologists. Their field has been politicized

>>129159242
>not people paid to lie
How do you know they were paid to lie? Do you have any proof of this whatsoever?

>>129159275
>you don't what science is you dumb, globalist remain-tard cuck.
I voted leave.

I know perfectly well what science is. You're just an idiot who refuses to accept the truth when it doesn't suit your worldview. Cuck.

>>129151440
The (((scientific community))) has been co-opted by lysenkoism.

>>129159067
>/pol/ is one person
You have to go back

File: neb.jpg (109KB, 564x861px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 564x861px

Bait thread, but I'll post anyways.

There is plenty of reason not to trust this (((consensus))) within the scientific community but lets say we go with it. What then?

There has been not a single solution presented that is in anyways realistic. Unless you want to euthanize the majority of the third world and reduce the first world to a slightly more livable feudal age there's really nothing you can do. Even then, you'll still be hard pressed to curb emissions from china to the point where the loss of life would matter. The same scientists that unanimously agree that global warming is anthropogenic also largely agree that its too late to stop. good game, we are fucked, brace for impact.

Unless you have a good way to fix this shit, stop bringing it up as a hot button topic to lord some sort of asinine imagined superiority of the super serious and scientific left side of the aisle over the right side. Both sides are garbage, they are exactly the same, grow up, and I'm not even a nihilist i just think you are a jackass. It's a garbage fake controversy to drum up support of your shitty side of politics just like gay fucking marriage.

It doesn't imply that you should double the price of energy. That would kill more people than it would save.

>>129151440
Yes goy trust us. We're not trying to lead you to hell or anything :-)

>>129158831
This.

Assuming all the theories are correct, wasting trillions of dollars into "going green" is not going to achieve anything. Even the sources that stand strong on global warming say that current climate agreements would have negligible effects.

If people really wanted to make a difference, they should invest all that money into scientific research instead.

>>129159392
I mean some actual proof not just "my friend told me..."

>I'm saying: We can no longer trust scientits who do work realting to climate. The same way we can no longer trust antropologists. Their field has been politicized

What you're saying is that we can't trust them because they disagree with you. Fuck off.

File: 1496382526815.jpg (230KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

230KB, 1920x1080px

>>129159067
>scientists
>((((scientists))))
>muh experts
Even IPCC scientists admitted to skewed data faggot
>Im a scientist, and I advise you to drown yourself in petrol, and hire a migrant worker to light your lifeless corpse on fire.

t. faggot

>>129159275
>>129159392

don't bother with the cuck, the irony behind his posts is staggering. He dismisses race realism studies, but accepts kike-funded (((climate change))). "You don't trust scientists (unless they say things that fit your worldview)" is right

>>129159542
Yes. It's a FACT that (((universities))) are generally sponsored and endorsed by the state. It's a FACT that scientists receive money from the government that go towards funding be it as grants or otherwise. It's a FACT that in order to get more money as a scientists, you MUST publish things and skew data that makes more government necessary -- otherwise why leave oneself to starve? Don't be silly, they tamper with the stats whenever they damn could

If you're going to deny that people don't do things for money's sake or for government power, you're out of yer fucking mind

>>129158653
lol you do realise that quite a few of the authors of the papers that meta-study was based or were very angry their work had been misrepresented as supporting the AGW hypothesis when it didn't.

I could start listing papers and names, interviews with nobel prize winners who call it bullshit but there is no point with retards like you.

>>129158826
This

Anyone who cites the 97% figures shows themselves to be a wilfully ignorant moron.

>>129159903
I'm asking for proof that scientists were paid to lie.

Do you think they faked the moon landings and that the earth is flat too? I mean how can we trust anything scientists say if we're to assume that they're always lying to us?

>>129159905
So you can't refute the paper then. Didn't think so.

>>129160223
No, I just can't be bothered wasting keystrokes on closed minded low IQ retards with no understanding of basic scientific principles.

>>129160399
Sure. You're just another loser on /pol/ who thinks he's smarter than 97% of the world's scientists.

>>129160223
oh and btw
>>129158826

>>129151440
>entire scientific community
Lmoa

File: 1489088511398.png (77KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 500x500px

>>129160514
>"97% of scientists who we extensively filtered to weed out anyone who doesn't agree with us agreed with us."

Fuck off faggot. They can't even get 100% of their shills to toe the party line.

Argumentum Verecundia

>>129160223
>I'm asking for proof that scientists were paid to lie.

I just told you the proof lmfao, if you don't think (((universities))) are state-sponsored, or that scientists don't get money from the state, or that more environmentalist alarmism doesn't get them more gibs you're just braindead m8

>Do you think they faked the moon landings and that the earth is flat too?

It doesn't matter if the moon landing is fake or not, they're no longer taxing us to specifically fund such things or to raise alarmism that we must land on the moon ASAP or the world will apparently end. People can do """science""" as much as they like, just leave taxpayers out of it and keep government the fuck out from fucking things up even more

>>129160514
>listen to this authority or else!!!

and you claim to be for intellectualism? you're the kind of cunt that would say the same shit to the man who first said the earth was round and say "BUT 97% OF THE POPULATION SAYS THE EARTH IS FLAT THAT AUTOMATICALLY MEANS YOU'RE WRONG!"

File: EichenwaldTentaclePorn.jpg (17KB, 320x294px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 320x294px

>>129151440
>Would it be so bad to just TRUST the entire scientific community on global warming?
You know the "97% consensus" thing turned out to be a bit of a myth. It was actually a small fraction of a percent, but I can see how a libtard would find that confusing.

>>129160514
now you are just making a fool of yourself

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

here are over 30k scientists who don't believe in AGW

keep digging that hole fucktard

you gonna look real stupid in a year or so.

>>129159392
>identify a problem
>spend money to research it and find solutions
>this is a conspiracy
Politicians make retarded and cronyist political moves all the time. The issue is real, but both sides are manipulating resources for shekels. Both oil corporations and so-called environmentalists do this.

I hate how so many /pol/acks have such a knee-jerk reaction to anything the left says that they refuse to consider the issue rather than the people feeding off of it.
It's such an obvious position for us to have, preserving the planet: saving animal species and seeing nature prosper is just a small step away from wanting to preserve our race. Basically, where the left scoffs at the concept of white genocide because of (((indoctrination))), /pol/ (and much of the (((right))) ) does the same to climate change.

>tfw both white nationalist and environmentalist
>tfw majorities of both hate you for the other

>>129160223
>Do you think they faked the moon landings and that the earth is flat too?
Straw man

File: pepe-the-frog-with-gun.jpg (15KB, 328x328px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 328x328px

>>129160514
>97% of the world's scientists
Your disingenuous character shows very clearly through your typing. Saged.

>>129151440
what a lazy bait, sage.

File: bulldog-puppy-cute-dog-photography-23__605.jpg (43KB, 605x432px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 605x432px

Would it be so bad to just TRUST the entire scientific community that the Earth is the center of the solar system and the sun revolves around it?

>>129161359
>Would it be so bad to just TRUST the entire scientific community that the Universe was created in an instant out of nothing for no apparent reason at all?

Remember when the scientific consensus was that doctors were gentlemen and asking them to wash their filthy hands was undignified and they refused to do it? Remember when the scientific consensus was that spontaneous generation and phlogiston were things. Or that miasma was the cause of all ills, bloodletting and trepanning were practical and effective procedures? The Sun orbits the Earth?

>>129151440

the thing is doubters assume a worldwide conspiracy when that kind of thing literally never happens. countries don't ever agree on anything and there's no way that many scientists would agree on something unless it was factual. but fuck it, people think trump has nothing to do with russia and that iraq did 9/11.

>>129151440
Yes. Because it's a lie. Don't be a retarded cultist.

99 percent of all species that have exist have gone extinct.
People will fade as well.
Species can self destruct or put themselves at demise. (Pandas)
Humanity has destroyed advanced civilization before (roman empire) Climate change is just a form of entropy for us. Smog and pollution is the weakest form of it since its not usually deadly except For the elderly.I cant fanthom current civilization go more than a 100 yrs with all these countries homing nukes.

I read a study a while ago where they took 100 random scientific studies, about 97 of them proved their own hypothesis, and the others found their hypothesis were untrue
This study redid all of the studies again and found only 37 of them were accurate.

There is a lot of bias and human error in science.
If your whole career is based on getting 3-4 papers published every year, and you know there is a bias in the publishers and the financiers of scientific studies in favor of a positive result (proving the hypothesis) then the scientist is going to have a bias in favor of that as well, whether consciously or not.

You can't just blindly trust these people.

>>129155902

>Cited by 1 articles

what a groundbreaking discovery. about as good as the humanities. what a fucking pile of shit. what the fuck journal is iop science? is that even peer-reviewed?

File: 2017-06-08 14.48.31.png (448KB, 1080x1920px) Image search: [Google]

448KB, 1080x1920px

Quit spreading propaganda, leaf! It's far from the whole Scientific community.

File: 1493334058631.jpg (81KB, 802x592px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 802x592px

>>129151440
if global warming is really real, then shouldnt as invest ore money in reversing its effects? Not reducing carbon emissions but actually trying to create global cooling to counter it. Stuff like cloud seeding.

If humans can actually cause changes to the global climate, then we should just play god and really Control it!

>>129151650

Their proof is their PhDs

>>129165157

We should at least genetically engineer ourselves to adapt to the changes in climate (which everyone agrees is happening even if there is doubt its man made)

>>129151440
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8mmYwZXiGE

>>129155902
He cooked the numbers on this. He took something like a sample of 40 papers from 10,000 on the topic of climate change and of the 40 paper sample 97% of the researchers agreed that climate change is man made.

>>129151440
Scientist say we're already fucked if global warming is manmade.

>>129160853
John H adrain, a doctor.
David agerton, A risk assesor with PHd.
Robert A. Ahokas, phd in zoologie.
Robert J. Alaimo, works in chemical health.
Go through the list and pick any name, most are actually bullshit accountant.

If you want to redpill the truth, don't stoop to leftist level of using flimsy evidence.
Use facts from actual scientist, read fucking papers and download studies.

>>129167768
Hey dummy only about 20% of the IPCC have any scientific qualification at all, if you want to play genetic fallacy and argument from authority

where is your list of scientists that support AGW btw?

Go and read Hal Lewis' resignation letter from the american physical society over it.

>>129169417
Just to clarify I know that Global warming as shown in the media is a hoax, just trying to fucking teach you to use good sources.
And Hal Lewis is and was always a dickhead.

>>129170373
Hmm so science calling someone a dickhead.

What about Ivar Giaever? is he a dickhead as well?

>>129151440
>Would it be so bad to just TRUST the entire scientific community on global warming?

Seeing as how the entire scientific community can't agree 100% on anything, no I don't suppose it would be too bad.

However you're naive if you believe that no one in said community has political motivations for stating "X is the cause of Y."

>>129170588
Nah Giaever is good.
He states good points and does it the right way.
I recommeded to read the analysis he made of the data

>>129151440
Global Wealth Redistribution, the HIPPEST new Commie scheme!
Join your local Cult of Climate Change now!

>>129157011
>"here is what's happening and reasons x y z as concluded by independent experts"
>nah I don't trust u

Brilliant, you got it all figured out

File: maxresdefault.jpg (140KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

140KB, 1920x1080px

>>129151440
>just TRUST the entire scientific community
So "science" based on nothing but Faith, eh?

How charmingly medieval.

>>129151440
Doctors used to drill holes in people's heads to cure headaches. Shall we do that too?

File: 1472616356945.jpg (3KB, 64x64px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 64x64px

>>129151440
you wouldnt download a car, so why would u believe anything science has 2 say about something they dont even research