Weather Channel founder BTFOs CNN on the Climate Change Hoax

>>129415926
I'm surprised they even aired it instead of taping it and scrapping it.

>>129415926
fucking beautiful

You can hear the cock in the other guys mouth.

the first 30 seconds of the clip might be the most entertaining piece of television I've seen so far this year.

COLEMAN: I resent you calling me a denier, that is a word meant to put me down—I'm a skeptic about climate change. And I want to make it darn clear Mr. Kennedy's not a scientist—I am. He's the CEO of The Weather Channel now, I was the FOUNDER of The Weather Channel,
>lower third says "John Coleman | Co-Founder, The Weather Channel
NOT the co-founder!

HOST: And I'm glad you did, because I am addicted to The Weather Channel,
I watch a lot of cable news—

COLEMAN: Stop talking now, hold on just a minute, I'm not done.

>>129416880
I hate that host. idk what his name is but shapiro buttfucks him on a regular basis as well

>>129416485

someones getting fired.

He also did a series for the news channel he used to be on -- I remember seeing him all the time since I live in SD county.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SyUDGfCNC-k

File: IMG_0085.jpg (86KB, 1200x630px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 1200x630px

>>129415926
>I do love the Weather Chann-
>Shut up, sonny boy!

>>129415926
>tfw addicted to the weather channel

>>129417197
the first minute of this video is amazing. I was trying to figure out "wtf is this format, why is he gesturing at the green scree—oh, he's a weatherman, lol, perfect". def going to use both of these videos to redpill my otherwise redpilled sister when I see her next—it's her biggest missing redpill, she refuses to disbelieve it because she's an engineer and "the science is settled"

>>129416485
I'm honestly more surprised they didn't cut him off due to a "technical error"

>less than 500 views
>240p
the science is settled

>>129415926

>2014

>>129418115
lolol guess it is. it's been making the rounds this week though for some reason, and it was covered on No Agenda on the 8th.

still a great clip.
>...you wouldn't allow it to happen on CNN, but I'm glad that I got on the air and got a chance to talk to your viewers—Hello, everybody! There is no global warming!

This old fart has no idea what he's talking about.

He says he's a scientist, but his Wikipedia says he got his degree in journalism. Where and in what did he get this PhD he is suggesting he got? He had an interest in meteorology and got into the AMS, but that doesn't make you a scientist. He started The Weather Channel, but that doesn't make you an authority on climate science. It should be illegal for anyone without a graduate degree to position themselves as a scientific authority.

Science is about consensus, to a degree. Independent verification of experiments is a cornerstone of science.

His conspiracy theories about the motivation of scientists and governments is nonsense. Even putting aside the reach the conspiracy would need to have within the United States, there is a consensus view that climate change among the worldwide community of scientists.

Literally the only group of people who deny human-induced climate change are Republicans in the United States and people paid by industries dependent on fossil fuels.

File: Screen Shot 2017-06-10 at 6.40.34 PM.png (32KB, 898x900px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 898x900px

>>129415926
CNN is Hitler

File: 1490665095527.png (727KB, 677x741px) Image search: [Google]

727KB, 677x741px

>>129418873
Shut the fuck up sonny boy

>>129419486
CIA News Network. Anderson Cooper is confirmed CIA, check his Wikipedia. literal propaganda outlet

File: BillNyeSexAnthem-640x480.jpg (71KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 640x480px

>>129418873
>It should be illegal for anyone without a graduate degree to position themselves as a scientific authority.
Good rule. You guys go first.

>>129418873
he's got this
>Coleman obtained Professional membership status in the American Meteorological Society and was named AMS Broadcast Meteorologist of the Year in 1983.
I mean he's been apart of a scientific community and read scientific papers for 10 years that has to mean something.
>Science is about consensus, to a degree.
the scientific community is about consensus to a degree since new challenging data that affects the current paradigm must be presented in a way that doesn't differ from their lingual or informal "rules". Validation for your research doesn't equate to consensus btw, that just proves that the experiment is repeatable and has the same results when repeated.

Literally if you look up 97% you'll see tons of articles claiming that number of scientists coming to a consensus is false and that the number is misleading. Climate change research funding is given based on the premise that its happening no? I mean if its not why would anyone give money to research something that can be proven to never happen. Climate change is a huge political topic encompassing nearly every aspect of people's lives so its very reasonable why people would be skeptical of its existence or its consequences.

>>129421695
holy shit I'd already forgotten about Bill Nye. did liberals just agree to pretend that whole thing never happened?

File: 1496415748308.jpg (31KB, 206x180px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 206x180px

>I'm talking now

>>129415926
climate change is real, deal with it

>>129418873
>Wikipedia
stopped right there

>>129415926
ITM.

>>129417087
That's Stelter. He's a shill. Like a real shill. Not your Dem-loving braindead retard on Twitter. This guy sold his soul long ago to the left.

>>129415926
Just seeing him shut down that disingenuous sycophantic interruption from the reporter telling him how much he "loves the Weather Channel" made me like this guy instantly.

File: Scientists Can't Tell Where A Hurricane....jpg (33KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 500x500px

>>129415926

>>129423056
>climate change is real
and....? What should we do about it? Should we dedicate billions upon billions of dollars towards solar and wind energy since that's where the money's going to end up and millions of man hours to combat a climate disaster that has no concrete evidence of ever occurring? Should we dedicate billions into research of climate change and have some closure when it turns out humans have damn near no effect or very little effect on the climate?`

>>129423066

>mfw you're still in middle school so you think Wikipedia isn't a valid source. Just check the source included on the Wikipedia you fucking tard

>>129423056

Prove it.

>>129418873
His point was that science isn't a vote. The only "consensus" science gives a shit about is the consensus in results. People saying they agree is not science.

>>129423596

The problem with Whack Off Pedia, is that virtually ANYONE can edit a page on a whim. So how do you really know the information presented is 100% correct beyond any shadow of a doubt at any given time?

>>129418873
>wikipedia
>there are more elephants today in african than there ever were before

>>129423472
that's not comparable
I agree with your general message though, please don't gamer-shot me with a reaction image

>>129418873
>Literally the only group of people who deny human-induced climate change are Republicans in the United States and people paid by industries dependent on fossil fuels.

like the "green energy industry" isn't a multi billion dollar industry. only coal and oil have the money to pay for shills!

>>129423896
where do you go to get info about random people of note

If climate change was real, or at least a real danger, why aren't we spending more on LFTR and fusion development?

>>129423849
You check the list of sources at the bottom of the wikipedia page... If they're legit, the information is legit. If not, the information may not be legit. Really simple.

>>129415926
Climate Change= Global Wealth Redistribution

>>129424032
>why aren't we spending more on LFTR and fusion development?
because solar shills and oil shills have teamed up to destroy nuclear energy's image for the past 50 years

File: factcheck.jpg (43KB, 927x445px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 927x445px

>>129415926
looks like this was already debunked sorry guys

File: 3_07_meg.jpg (17KB, 229x356px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 229x356px

>>129422448
Probably too busy practicing versatile love.

>>129415926
>weather channel
>literally repackages NOAA-provided forecasts with advertisements
>CEO is clearly an authority on weather
>being THIS DESPERATE

Here's my take on the whole idea of climate change. If the government actually gave a shit about saving the fucking planet, why would they sell carbon credits to all the companies that they turn around and say is the source of the problem to begin with. It's just a fucking money making scheme, and the lemmings eat it up, never once questioning if the people telling them these things have an ulterior motive or not.

>>129415926
John Coleman is based, he was my local weatherman when I was growing up in San Diego. He gives no fucks.

He's absolutely right too, if the only money being offered to academics is to further support the narrative, of course the "scientists" are going to agree that climate change is a problem. No money, no voice.

>>129416485
won't do anything, he's too old and white and looks like he says nigger cummy tummy nigger cummy tummy nigger cummy tummy to himself before taking his naps in his custom hospital-bed at home the LOSER because CNN's viewership is overwhelmingly young and hip according to the ads sage man I'm tired now you feel that?

>>129423928

How is it not comparable? They literally use the same analytical models to forecast hurricanes landfall probabilities as they do to make predictions about the climate 100 years from now.

>>129422179
>named AMS Broadcast Meteorologist of the Year in 1983
He's just a really old TV weatherman that your grandfather used to watch on TV half a century ago. Zero scientific credentials and just a Journalism degree to his name.

I don't have a side on climate change debate (leaning towards naturally changing or solar activity more than human activity). The problem I have is the left or the right putting up people with fake credentials trampling over the real science. Both CNN and fox are equally guilty of this.

>>129423849
Yeah, literally ANYONE can change ANY website too, if they try hard enough.
You realize there's tons of wikipedia pages that are locked and can't be publicly changed, right?
When a bunch of sick-ass teenagers go and meme up a page, the admins of the site will usually lock the article up.
An example is Revolution 60.

>>129422179
He was not a scientist. He was a weatherman with an interest in meteorology that joined the AMS. That's it. He doesn't and didn't do research.

The idea of repetition is that someone else can do them and get the same results. A claim isn't considered "scientific" unless the community of scientists agree that it is.

>Climate change research funding is given based on the premise that its happening no?
As it should be because the evidence suggests that it is. However that is irrelevant. Climate science funding is given on the assumption that it is occurring, but the actual research simply uses tools to gather and interpret data.

The only people "skeptical" of climate change are American republicans, a group of people who are either uninformed and skeptical about "science" in general or benefit from the disbelief in climate change.

>>129424471
>The only people "skeptical" of climate change are American republicans, a group of people who are either uninformed and skeptical about "science" in general or benefit from the disbelief in climate change.

How can you claim to be a scientist when you make wildly inaccurate claims such as this one? Talk to a geologist, you will find that most of them do not believe that climate change as an issue necessitates the hysterical attention it currently receives.

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

191KB, 653x477px

>>129417551

>>129423849
How the fuck do you know anything you read is real beyond a shadow of a doubt?

Wikipedia is a great resource

>>129417087
He looks like a pedo.

>>129424471
>A claim isn't considered "scientific" unless the community of scientists agree that it is.
thats not true at all, there have been claims that aren't considered scientific at first because of the subjective matter of the scientific community but are actually scientific. Marshall's and Warrens theory on ulcers are bacteria based being a prime example of this, and the only example i can think of.
http://www.jyi.org/issue/delayed-gratification-why-it-took-everybody-so-long-to-acknowledge-that-bacteria-cause-ulcers/

>Climate science funding is given on the assumption that it is occurring, but the actual research simply uses tools to gather and interpret data.
You literally admitted that climate research is given so they can prove the already speculated hypothesis, there's no honesty in that when you already think you know the answer and are looking for proof for that answer. Its not right to generalize an entire group of people who are skeptical about something scientific for having political motives otherwise because that disingenuous and dismissive

>>129424471
>but the actual research simply uses tools to gather and interpret data.

You mean misleading data used to push their world view?

>>129418873
>His conspiracy theories about the motivation of scientists and governments is nonsense

so it's a conspiracy theory if the government is collaborating with scientists to meet an end, but not when corporations collaborate with scientists for the same purpose?

>>129424471
>The only people "skeptical" of climate change are American republicans, a group of people who are either uninformed and skeptical about "science" in general or benefit from the disbelief in climate change.

I don't have any political affiliation. I'm an independent voter. I'm just plain skeptical of any sort of alleged scientific inquiry that continuously silences any dissenting voice and proclaims "The science is settled!" Valid scientific inquiry would constantly be looking for answers to back up their assertions, not tell everyone "Shut up, we know what we're talking about, the science is settled.", or going back and rewriting past data to fit their narrative. And if the government actually gave a shit about saving the planet, why woulod they even bother selling "carbon credits" to the very sources of "climate change" that they continually spout off about, rather than crack down on them? The whole fucking thing is just a money making scheme.

>>129425494
also ITM, OP.

>>129423726
That is an empty point. There is science as a method and there is science as an institution full of people who use the scientific method. Our policies on scientific topics are generally (or should be) directed by the relevant scientific institutions.

When you deny the fact that 97% of experts in the field claim that human-induced climate change is occurring, you are claiming that they are lying or that you have access to a set of facts that invalidate their claim.

>>129425731
wwwwwwwwwwwwwwrong. The minute you begin blindly trusting anyone, scientists included, you become a slave to somebody else. Without recreatable evidence, it isn't science. It's just politics.

The 97% statistic is bullshit. It was taken from a survey of 100 scientists. It doesn't represent anything other than 100 scientists cherry picked from government funded institutions.

>>129424909
Asking a geologist about climate change is like as asking an a particle physicist about chemistry. Geologist work on a very different scale from climatologists and their work is distinctly non-anthropocentric.

>>129425731
If you're not trolling, I feel bad for you. Science has never and will never be an institution. It is a field of study, and in order to study it, you use the scientific method.

File: 1377231518694.jpg (9KB, 261x173px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 261x173px

>>129415926
HOLY FUCK BTFO

>>129426396
That's a complete false equivalence. Geologists have a thorough record of the Earth's warming and cooling cycles going back millions of years, they are certainly authorities on Earthly climatic phenomena. To disregard their views simply because they do not conform with your own is both foolish and unscientific.

>>129415926
Hahaha oh man

Im THE founder you little shithead

>>129418873
Im embarrassed for you with how hard this post got rekt.

>>129416485
The reason why they didn't cut off the feed is because they probably broadcasted this during a time no one watches, and lets just get down the the base how many people in the USA do you think actually saw this and took it as truth? I say not even 5%

>>129415926
He is spot on about the money thing. Researchers and Scientists need money for experiments, but to get the money they have to play with whoever is funding and prove whatever the funder wants. Like "Pepsi gives you liver cancer" a Research sponsored by Coca Cola.

>>129426899
Thats another they they can bury things, but the more proconservative stuff on at non-prime time, then when people analyze how "balanced" your coverage is, its harder to see the bias if they sample all the hours.

>>129426396
Wow just stop please this is too cringe

>>129426989
Yeah, nobody at the EPA will give you funding for cleaner coal, disproving man made global warming, etc

Thank god Trump is gutting it

>>129418873
all of those "pro man made climate change" studies published get torn apart in their peer reviews. they use flawed and biased research and when that is not enough, they just make up numbers.

to date there is not one published climate change study with favorable peer reviews.

File: non-arguements.jpg (34KB, 567x565px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 567x565px

>>129415926
>scientist
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ut-EUHouBs

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vh4dIkEyfd0

>>129422179
>the scientific community is about consensus
True.


-Science- IS NOT about consensus.

>>129425393
You only validated my point. I said "considered." It was not considered scientific until scientists decided that it was.

Strictly speaking, any claim you can test, whether it turns out to be true or false, is a scientific one. If you can't test it (whether due to practical or theoretical limitations), it's not scientific. What I should have said is that, informally, claims not accepted within the scientific community or not science. And by that I refer to the institution of people who use the scientific method in an official capacity.

>You literally admitted that climate research is given so they can prove the already speculated hypothesis,
Wrong. I said that it was given based on the premise that it was occurring, ie there is an assumption that climate change is happening. There is also an assumption that gravity exists and that macroscopic objects more or less follow Newton's Law's of motion. Do you have a problem with that as well?

The trouble you're having here is that you seem to think that if they assume climate change is occurring, that any research done on climate change using objective tools and data will always confirm the result. That is not how it works.

Yes, if you don't believe in climate change, I automatically put you into the boat of conspiracy theorist, retard, and/or fossil fuels shill, unless you can give some very good reasons why. I feel the same way about flat-earthers or HIV-deniers. We have a shared reality here, and there is a point at which your "skepticism" is just denial.

>>129427117

The EMU are ready for you.

Climate change over 100,000 years says that everything is normal, 3 decades is nothing but random static. Fuck your climate change.

File: Ted_turner_2.jpg (247KB, 1106x1484px) Image search: [Google]

247KB, 1106x1484px

>>129415926
>CNN has a strong position on climate change

No shit. Who do you think owns CNN.

>>129421695
You do know that plenty of paid medical research positions are held by BS's rather than grads right?

>>129425494
It is a conspiracy theory to claim that the world's governments are covertly paying tens of thousands of scientists to, in concert, falsify research on climate.

It is not a conspiracy theory to point out that the few scientists who dissent from the majority viewpoint are generally paid by an industry who sees climate change acceptance as a threat to its existence.

File: Willard-Scott.jpg-14888.jpg (22KB, 427x532px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 427x532px

He's a TV weatherman, not a scientist.

>>129428168
For cheap disposable screw-ups, yeah.

File: 1494198099094-b.jpg (9KB, 240x196px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 240x196px

>>129423056
>climate change is real
No warming in 20 years.

>>129417551
Well it's just climate change, it's not Benghazi or Seth Rich.

>>129428243
>falsify research on climate.

That's not true. They don't do research, they write studies that say what governments want them to say.

Not Science.

>>129424032
I don't understand it either. Nuclear is our only real hope for the foreseeable next 20-35 years and nobody is promoting it.

I can understand why climate deniers won't talk about it, because they are all basically funded by fossil fuel interests that don't want competition and policy threats to their business model. But I don't understand the silence on that solution from every other side.

WHAT PART OF SAFE CLEAN CHEAP 24/7 LOAD POWER DO PEOPLE NOT UNDERSTAND?

>>129426035
No one said anything about blind trust. You don't blindly trust doctors, but their opinions hold a lot more weight than your neighbor Joe. And if after a 2nd and 3rd opinion you are diagnosed with cancer, you don't remain a "skeptic." You are in denial about something the facts say is true.

>The 97% statistic is bullshit. It was taken from a survey of 100 scientists
Nope. It was taken by tens of thousands and has been done several times over.

>>129427843
What is the test for climate change?

>>129428716
Thorium reactors could do it.

The problem with thorium is it can't be used to make weapons.

File: Elites.png (3MB, 1249x8613px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1249x8613px

>>129428716
Cause the Elites who invest in thermonuclear warheads wants ALL the power of nuclear, does not want to share and God forbid have Russia or China develop some to rival their amount.

>>129428879
There isn't one. Climate changes over 100,000 years. We only have 160 years of records.

>>129427124
Coal is garbage anyways, Nuclear energy is the way to go.

Why do Republicans hate the environment? Why would you EVER be against an agency like the EPA? How do you not see the blaring conflict of interest when studies paid for by oil companies say that fossil fuels aren't the problem? How can you honestly think that pumping black tar into the sky could be a good thing? Have you ever taken a class on Meteorology or Environmental biology? Are you opinions rooted anything other than opinion and bullshit from Faux news? I could honestly support the right on many things but their complete non-acknowledgement of man made climate change is utter stupidity and not something that I can put my name behind.

>>129427843
>I said that it was given based on the premise that it was occurring, ie there is an assumption that climate change is happening.
isn't the scientific method about testing a hypothesis with an experiment and not the other way 'round?
>tfw when you fund groups based on finding data to prove a hypothesis instead ways to test the hypothesis you end up with something that isn't science.

>>129429213

>Republicans

RAPE YOURSELF WITH A KNIFE

>>129429213
You troll have never been to a refinery before have you?

>>129429213
kill myself

>>129429223
>you fund groups based on finding data to prove a hypothesis


You fund groups based on writing a study.

>>129415926
somebody turn this guy into a pepe
he earned it

make the anchor feels guy looking worried

>>129429308
I second this!

>>129426768
No it is not.

Geologists are certainly "authorities" on climate as it relates to the scale of millions of years, but that is worthless when it comes to the more specific, smaller scales of time that modern climatologists, the ones we're speaking of, work on, ones that are also much more centered around life on earth as it is today.

All the people that believe in global warming/climate change should watch George Carlin talk about it

https://youtu.be/BB0aFPXr4n4

I
Dare
You
Shills

>>129429169
Yeah, it is the highest tech we have for energy but people either want to burn coal or build windmills.

>>129429424
Right, anyone who disagrees with your climate killing agenda is a troll. Why about being a rightwinger makes you disregard science and concern for the environment?

>>129429685
There is no way anyone can -honestly- make correct predictions about the climate.

>>129429976
>you disregard science
The problem is -YOU- disregard science.

There is no "climate research" because we don't have enough accurate data.

>>129429685
>the ones we're speaking of
>citation needed
Show me the work of these modern "climatologists" that merits their opinion be put above that of others.

>>129429685
You're fucking retarded. The definition of climate is literally long-term patterns of weather based on a variety of things including location.

Pack it up boys. This thing is 100% trolling.

>>129415926
Both are retarded kikes. fuck off oil jew.

>>129415926
oh gee he surely owned them.

John Coleman is what Bill Nye is to demotards... if you fucks knew anything both don't have the necessary qualifications to even talk about climate change. Yet of course /pol/ never see that.

He's opinion has 0 credibility just because he was the Weather Channel Founder doesn't really mean shit when he was just a journalist.

>>129424163
Snopes claimed it "false" because his PhD isn't specifically in climatology and the data he presented, while true, wasn't based on his own personal experiments.

>>129429976
During a distillation of pentane and butane (common chemicals for gasoline) the overhead product must be condensed with cool water from an cooling water tower usually powered by wind, but some overhead is not the correct purity goes out those flares you see, where they are treated will gallons upon gallons of steam to break up the overhead into harmless CO2 and H2O which is what our atmosphere is made of. Most of the gases you say go into the sky is just steam. Anyone not in refineries would not know this because they are told in schools to fight the oil companies, the same way you say oil companies lie to people which is true.

>>129421695
Shitty rule considering most colleges nowadays are just expensive indoctrination programs.

>>129430499
John Coleman was saying that "climate change scientists" who only write studies are not scientists.

He's correct. They are not scientists.

>>129424471
science is application of a method, not a consensus among experts. if the method is applied correctly, the experts cant say shit unless they can now provide evidence to the contrary.

>>129430183
Except there is. There is tons of it. Not to mention that you don't need to be a scientist to know that pumping toxic chemicals into the air and water is a bad idea. Why are you so against protecting the air and water? What benefit do you gain from breathing and drinking toxic chemicals? Why are right wingers categorically against anything that seeks to help the environment? I get that your party hates science and hates people who care for the environment. But at some point doesn't it ever occur to you that you live on this planet to?

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

230KB, 1920x1080px

>>129418873
>Literally the only group of people who deny human-induced climate change are Republicans in the United States and people paid by industries dependent on fossil fuels.
And the ones that push it are paid shills by the kikes for carbon taxation.

File: mermismellajew2.jpg (84KB, 503x559px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 503x559px

>>129418873

>>129430887
>you don't need to be a scientist to know that pumping toxic chemicals into the air and water is a bad idea
So tell me more about how you get through the day without breathing.

>>129430821
I wasn't refuting that part, I was refuting the statement he said "I want to make it clear, Mr. Kenny is not a scientist, I am"

"After ten years of attending AMS National Meetings and studying the papers published in the organization's journal, Coleman claimed the AMS was driven by political, not scientific, agendas and dropped out of the AMS"

This guy needs to shut the fuck up.

>>129430821
How? Are they not doing research and peer review like every other scientist does?

>>129423566
>No concrete evidence

Jesus Christ you guys are just as bad as the pseudoscientific gender benders.

Brainlet gtfo reeeee

>>129430887
I just told you, it's not toxic, I work with the shit daily.

>>129430594
Snopes has been a liberal mouthpiece for the past decade. Just saying, they stopped caring about the truth in favor of pushing an agenda.

>>129430887
>Except there is. There is tons of it.
No, we have 160 years of accurate data. We need 1,000,000 years of accurate data.

>>129430611
Dude.... I am not talking about the steam coming from a refinery. I am talking about the bi-products and the billions of tons of fissile fuels that are pumped into the air by cars, ships, trucks, and industry.

>>129418873
>Science is about consensus
you failed science

>>129431148
>Are they not doing research

They are not doing research.

>>129429478
You faggots fund groups?

>>129431187
Which is the same CO2 in different percentages. The same CO2 that plants thrive on.

>>129431307
No, the people promoting "climate change" fund groups.


I prefer research.

>>129430324
By "the ones we're speaking of," I mean the climatologists who research under timescales relevant to human. Climatology is generally an anthropocentric science while geology is geocentric, meaning a geologist's research will not be concerned with hundreds or thousands of years, because it's a blink of an eye as far as the life of earth is concerned. Meanwhile, climatology research is primarily concerned with information relevant to humans, so it necessarily works on those scales.

>>129431171
Wrong again. There are ice cores that go back thousands if not millions of years. Your argument is like trying to convince people that smoking is safe. You don't have to be a scientist to know that sucking tar and smoke into your lungs isn't healthy.

REEEEEE

HE'S NOT EVEN A REAL SCIENTIST

BILLY NYE NEEDS TO PUT THIS FASCIST IN HIS PLACE

>>129422179
>9/10 dentists recommend colgate
This is the gimmick I think of when I hear the 97% meme.
Only a retard couldn't see through that.

File: 1487174814707.jpg (1MB, 3000x2077px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3000x2077px

It doesn't matter if climate change is real. We should be switching over to nuclear power as a matter of national security, and as a means of resource independence from mudslime shitholes.

>>129431323
stop

>>129431482
>climatologists who research

>climatologist
>research

Pick one.

File: 1497075417156.gif (904KB, 260x183px) Image search: [Google]

904KB, 260x183px

>>129431066
>Anthropogenic climate change fags will deny this

>>129431489
Ice cores are not accurate data.

A years worth of daily data is accurate data.

>>129428784
>>129428784
Oh, you poor brainwashed fuck.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/joseph-bast-and-roy-spencer-the-myth-of-the-climate-change-97-1401145980?tesla=y

>>129431036
That's like saying if I had my arm cut off and lived I shouldn't bitch because I'm still alive. You're retarded and you should feel bad.

>>129431690
Deny what? what volcanic eruption doesn't have much effect on CO2?

>>129415926
Earths natural climate is New York under 2 miles of ice


Mic drop

>>129428784

"Mr. Cook‟s work was quickly debunked. In Science and Education in August 2013, for example,
David R. Legates (a professor of geography at the University of Delaware and former director of
its Center for Climatic Research) and three coauthors reviewed the same papers as did Mr. Cook
and found “only 41 papers—0.3 percent of all 11,944 abstracts or 1.0 percent of the 4,014
expressing an opinion, and not 97.1 percent—had been found to endorse” the claim that human
activity is causing most of the current warming. Elsewhere, climate scientists including Craig
Idso, Nicola Scafetta, Nir J. Shaviv and Nils- Axel Morner, whose research questions the alleged
consensus, protested that Mr. Cook ignored or misrepresented their work."

from

https://www.heartland.org/_template-assets/documents/publications/bast-spencer_wsj_op-ed_on_consensus.pdf

(WSJ article reuploaded)

>>129431489
Big difference between "being healthy" and indulging in things at a pace that don't change the eventual outcome, but a faggot like yourself wouldn't get that, would you?

I'll leave you to use your limited mental capacity to see if you can understand how this relates to the topic at hand.

>>129431489
We simply don't have accurate data, nor can we draw a direct causal relationship between CO2 and temperature.

>muh smoking analogy
This is laughable. If you actually cared about the environment, you'd be focused on things like halting development in China and India, or leveling off population in the developed world.

Even if everything you say is true, the proposals you're talking about will have no effect at all on slowing down global warming. We're talking about half a degree in the next hundred years. All for the low, low price of $10 trillion dollars.

>>129431066
Is this supposed to show, somehow, that an increase in volcanic activity is why the earth's climate change? Not only does this graph not show this, humans put 100x the CO2 in the air as volcanoes do.

>>129431576
the only threatening thing of the exhausts is carbon monoxide which is the fumes in an enclosed area where it can not get enough oxygen. Cars outside pose no problems, just an annoyance or bad smell.

>>129431996
Perhaps you could do us all a favor and stop putting out CO2.

File: Co2-2013-top40.svg.png (97KB, 1200x1412px) Image search: [Google]

97KB, 1200x1412px

>>129431996
No, it's supposed to show the opposite. I'm not a dumb oil jew shill.

>>129431777
Yup

>NOAA’s Earth Science Research Laboratory program also measures CO2 in weekly flask samples taken at over 60 remote locations around the world. The Mauna Loa Observatory baseline CO2 concentrations agree very well with flask measurements taken at a similar latitude around the world, which confirms that the volcanic CO2 does not affect our final results. These measurements all show significant increases in CO2 over the last few years. (You can find this information up through the end of 2007 on our website at

https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/blogs/climateqa/mauna-loa-co2-record/

>>129428470
>They don't do research
So you have evidence of falsification of data. How are they publishing studies without data? Despite what your limited exposure to science may indicate, even climatological journals have standards.

>>129432215
Why would anthopogenic climate change fags deny it. I don't get it are you an accepter or denier yourself?

>>129423975
seeing Tesla car company got 500 million in grants to start up
Huge money in tax scam to bleed off trillions to pass around to friends on 400 foot yachts that go around blaming mom and pop for their CO2 footprint,

>>129431942
Figures you shit head right wingers would cite the ONE paper that disagrees with the 97% agreement by scientists and act like it's the "real" truth. In actuality the guy is just another right winger trying to further the right wing agenda of destroying the environment. Again my question is why? Why are you against protecting the environment? What about being a right winger makes you deny science and common sense? I think there is plenty of middle ground but when you try to defend this extremist position it just makes you look like a dumbass.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2014/may/28/wall-street-journal-denies-global-warming-consensus

>>129432476
Time for archive
https://archive.is/KxX0Q

>>129432271
We have 160 years of data. We need 1 million years of accurate data.

I'm saying that all "climate scientists" are not scientists. Their opinions are disingenuous at -best-.

>>129431777
Oh wait I think I fugged up

>>129431690
Is supposed to say "non anthropogenic"

>>129430892
>>129430927
>>129430966
>>129430989
>>129431025
>>129431066
I love how all your shitty little correlation graphs get bent over the table and fucked in the ass by >>129430976
Man loves to think himself to be God, but historically there are plenty of rapid fluctuations in both CO2 and global temperature, and until we develop a hard science accounting for all of the variables in our climate and able to extrapolate accurate and precise future climate patterns, this "climate science" will all be no more than a religion.

File: leglobalwarming.jpg (397KB, 380x316px) Image search: [Google]

397KB, 380x316px

>>129432476

97% Consequential Misperceptions: Ethics of Consensus on Global Warming https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2887245

>The notion of consensus defies the fundamental principle of scientific inquiry which is not about agreement, but rather a continuous search for understanding. This paper evaluates key disparities of Cook et al (2016) and outlines why a claimed consensus is a powerful tool for driving public policy, but an inappropriate and unethical means of conducting scientific inquiry or informing the public.

>The 97% figure suggests "all" scientists have been surveyed, and indeed so the President’s tweet literally reads, when this is not the case.

>“In 2012, there were 6.2 million scientists and engineers (as defined in this report) employed in the United States” with some 4% or 248,000 working in the physical sciences.” http://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R43061.pdf

>Humans are highly compliant, herd mentality beings who are easily swayed by apparent majority views, especially by role-dominant experts. Asch (1951) Schacter (1951) Cialdini (2007)

>Humans are strongly averse to rejection or exclusion.Sarnoff & Zimbardo (1962) Williams (2007)

>Consequently, the claim that a statistical majority, nearly 100% of role-dominant expert individuals like scientists agree to a sweeping statement about climate change, is very effective in swaying public opinion.

>>129432562

and if we had 1million years of data you'd be telling us we need 1bln

nigga pls

>>129432476
The study cited here is where the statistic originally came from. The article is from the one of the original authors saying the data was misconstrued. So no, I didn't pull anything from one paper. The left misconstrued data from this guys study, and here he debunks that. I honestly can't believe how mind numbingly retarded you are.

File: Phanerozoic_Forcing.gif (12KB, 400x309px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 400x309px

>>129432602
kek, this million year again. easy to debunk, it's not just CO2 that is driver of climate change, CO2 along with Solar activity is.

File: younger_dryas-trigger1.jpg (40KB, 476x254px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 476x254px

>>129432476

>Earth scientists are some of the more skeptical in light of the vast temperature changes they have studied over the past 4 billion years.

>In the geologic record, carbon dioxide is seen as a consequence of the earth’s climate, nominally a cause, and there is no correlation between temperature and carbon dioxide levels in geologic time.

>Carbon dioxide has been at very high levels while temperatures were extremely cold and vice versa.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O-mMpGBxPwI&feature=youtu.be

File: Solar_Irradiance_English.jpg (135KB, 960x720px) Image search: [Google]

135KB, 960x720px

>>129432595
Although I think global warming is a mix of both anthropogenic and non anthropogenic. For example solar irradiance has been steadily increasing as well.

>>129432602
>I love how all your shitty little correlation graphs
of recent history
>get bent over the table and fucked in the ass by >>129430976
a chart of millions of years of history dating back to the beginnings of life on earth

wew lad

>>129432128

>Per Capita

Nigga the fuck is wrong with you?

>>129432680

More data is always better. 160 years is not even vaguely enough, it is nothing but static compared to the timescale of the climate.

this is an old video back in 2014 why is it being presented as new is this a slide thread?

>>129430892
The planet is fine the ppl are fucked

File: temps.jpg (158KB, 931x760px) Image search: [Google]

158KB, 931x760px

>>129430892
>>129430927
>>129430966

>>129415926
BASED!

>>129432719

wrong link

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1L5AVBOh4SM&

File: dai-drought-2060-2069-woceanlabels.jpg (823KB, 1809x875px) Image search: [Google]

823KB, 1809x875px

>>129432889
Only crazy commies claim that planet will explode, we will just get BTFO while Leafs and Siberians will enjoy being comfy

>>129416485
He's an old white male. The american public's ears are deaf to his voice unless he lobbies for more gibs or bashes drumpf

>>129432921
see >>129432712
Also it was not a very comfy place for hominids in some of those million years.

>>129432719
So your source is some random guy who also happens to be the son of an oil exec telling people that climate change isn't real? Why do you shit for brains right wingers always find the least credible source and hold it up as if it means anything? It's like you lack critical thinking skills.

>>129429999
>quints speaks the truth
In all seriousness, I believe in man-made climate change to an extent, but I seriously don't blame people for being skeptical

>it's okay to pollute the Earth if you pay a carbon tax
>it's okay to use non-biodegradable plastic bags that birbs may choke on and sie as long as you pay 10 fucking cents a bag
>climate change is a big deal, so we're gonna form an agreement where performance, donation, and participation are voluntary with nothing that's legally binding you to uphold your end of the bargin
>there are "enviornmental" shills exploiting gullible Califucks to vote democratic because anything with an eco-friendly label is objectively good
>but climate change is reeeeeeeeal bad guys

>>129431975
EUHouBs
CO2 lags behind heat in the studies, CO2 increase due to more plant life in upper hemispheres during warm periods, CO2 does not heat the earth, sun solar cycle do more to our climate than fossil fuels.

>>129424092
>Climate Change= Global Wealth Redistribution

DING DING DING!

We have a winner.

I remember when the climate change (Anthropogenic Global Warming) media push was just getting started a couple of years back... I did some research and found that the literal only "Solutions" that had been put forth was basically a global tax on all energy and life, paid DIRECTLY to the world bank, imf, etc...

>>129427238
That isn't true. If a peer gives a potential article a bad review then the journal doesn't publish. Peer review isn't post hoc. That being said, you're reviewed by "peers," meaning people who do similar research to you, so it's incredibly vulnerable to systematic bias. It's poor research, but it passed the peer review stage.

>>129432476
You have no idea what my political stances on climate change are, and I'm perfectly willing to have a discussion when you start using facts to present your case. So far all you've done is argued points based on lies and hysterical absolutes.

>97%
>if u dont support the left you hate the earth and want it to die!!!

File: global temperatures.png (163KB, 1018x1025px) Image search: [Google]

163KB, 1018x1025px

>hurr durr climate change

>>129432705
The article I posted clearly discredited the guy who is saying there isn't a 97% consensus. That was my point. It's just another bullshit right wing attempt at science to support their climate killing agenda. Why do you hate the environment so much? Why do you want to see more chemicals and pollutants put into the air and water?

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

2MB, 1891x4901px

>hurr durr manmade

File: 1463922614817.gif (692KB, 359x202px) Image search: [Google]

692KB, 359x202px

>muh 97 gorrilion percent

>>129433458
But it didn't. At all. All it did was say "He's right wing so it doesn't count"

>>129432712

Need some context to understand what this actually means, also my timescale didn't go back millions of years, just a few thousands. How much effect do you think CO2 emissions have on the climate compared to other forces? I hope you're not saying it's just solar+CO2 there are other factors like inertia and ocean currents heat transfers and so on

>>129433170

It was the wrong link, my mistake. The other link is my source.

File: Conspiracy.jpg (428KB, 867x991px) Image search: [Google]

428KB, 867x991px

>>129428243
>It is a conspiracy theory to claim that the world's governments are covertly paying tens of thousands of scientists to, in concert, falsify research on climate.

It is also a conspiracy theory to suggest that more than one person robbed the same liquor store during a particular robbery.

People like you keep throwing around the term "Conspiracy Theory" like it's an insult... which is absurd as fuck...

Especially since a Conspiracy is two or more people planning on committing a crime...

And Theory is a hypothesis that attempts to explain how it went down.

Conspiracy Theory isn't an insult, because it is by definition, Forensics

>>129433808
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6YMPAH67f4o

File: IMG_1656.jpg (172KB, 750x975px) Image search: [Google]

172KB, 750x975px

>>129415926
Yeah? And the inventor of fire probably wouldn't shut up about how it was a gift from the gods for humanity being in their good graces.

Who cares if he founded it, the man has lost the plot.

>>129433808
>>129433939

The last time I did the math on how much the carbon tax would be, they said it was something like $0.25 per ton of carbon dioxide, or something to that effect.

From the United States ALONE, it was upwards of $800,000,000,000 (800 billion) per YEAR.

That's more than WE spend on our Military.

And this was a tax that was supposed to have been paid by every nation on the planet.

>>129433588
Sorry, thought you posted million years ago. Greenhouse gassed and Solar activity are the 2 most major ones, there are other factors but not as significant.

>>129434137
>Who cares if he founded it, the man has lost the plot.

You don't get to decide the plot, youngster.

And neither does the world bank.

Solar cycles effect solar out put, the sun hemisphere effects amount of cosmic particles from reaching us.
sun ATM is in a grand solar minimum and cosmic dust is hitting our atmosphere and creating a nucleus for water vapor, creating more cloud coverage, this combined with low solar output and 1000 year wobbles, creates glacial periods on earth, we are in the longest and hottest warm period AKA inter glacial period, we are headed for another cold trend here soon, Human Global Warming is a money scam, sold by retards and their feelz.

nuff said on that

>>129418873
>this government conspiracy is non-sense

1 line later

>everybody who denies climate change are people paid by the gas companies

wew lad. shoot yourself

File: 1493869587247.jpg (110KB, 1000x847px) Image search: [Google]

110KB, 1000x847px

>>129415926
>CNN JEW GETS BTFO BY SCIENTIST GRANDPA JEW

B T F O

>>129415926
He's right about the research funding, this happens everywhere right now. They will pay you only for conclusions that match a government talking point, and the process of getting funding is completely feudal with very few spots open so grad students and postdocs will write up grant proposals that produce shady research to get at these positions.

There are indeed Jaden Smiths in academia. I personally know people who did their first degree in a meme humanities subject, and got a PhD position in (top 5 world school) doing (in-demand science subject) and followed by a postdoc in a great institution based entirely on their father being very important in the subject or their parents had donated to the school, or were politically connected.

That's why you are seeing tons of this climate change research, look who is funding it. To understand the truth, find the non gov funded or activist organization funded studies and they will tell a different story.


These people got funded graduate spots in the best departments in the world, beating out others who obtained first-class degrees (4.0 for the North Americans) and worked their entire lives towards this dream.

>>129424078
>wiki claims X
>sources confirm X
>all sources for -X are erased
>therefore X must be true

>>129415926
That was one of the funniest fucking things I've seen all year. Also, holy crap I just now realized its the middle of June.

>>129434239
>youngster
Hey- you in the tinfoil hat- I promise I'm older than you. Next you'll call me gramps. You'll do everything except admit this guy is saying something that flies in the face of mountains of evidence to the contrary.

Please stay in school.

>/pol/ now has unironic warming shills

God smite these little faggots and the Jews brainwashing them

And solar and battery resource mining is extremely hazards to the environment, and are not land fill friendly, but hey it makes my feelz good
but we have perfected the extraction and refining of fossil fuels to the point they have zero impact.
while those who claims nuclear is the thing, conveniently forget about Fukushima dumping toxic waste in the ocean for 6 years with 3 cores MIA

stick with what works, research more on the feelz, quit fucking taxing everyone, and force feeding this pseudo science crap down our pie holes.

>>129433405
>>129432921
http://hot-topic.co.nz/easterbrooks-wrong-again/

>>129417197
This guy was a fucking riot, I had no clue he was alive.
>We got a breeeeeeeeze coming in off the Pacific.
>Temperatures will reach the mid 90s all next week so you know what that means.
>Hot Hot Hot starts playing
>Ancient Weatherman starts dancing around to the music.

>>129434773
Can you guys actually disprove man-made climate change consensus instead of screaming "Jews!" and "Chinese conspiracy!"?

>>129433463
>because climate changed in the past men can't be influencing it now

wanna know who love oil more than oil companies

Big Government globalist shills that use it as an excuse for war, no one in the history has ever gone to war for someones solar panel............

>>129429881

His point supports climate change theory. He is saying that it IS happening and all we will do if shit changes for the worse is kill ourselves, the Earth will regenerate on its geological scale, and we will be gone and forgotten. Climate change isn't about saving the enviornment, it is about saving humanity. We can't adapt like the Earth can, we are too small and too fragile. If you think because we have a little tech on our side we can't suffer the same fate as dinosaurs, you are completely wrong. But frankly, humanity doesn't want to be saved. It wants to collect its short term jew gold at the expense of its own survival. We are all going down, and you will applaud as it happens, because you are too ignorant and can't get past sound bytes. Your mind is small, worried about left and right and attaining that "gotcha" moment against some other like minded moron, when the real fight is much bigger. You aren't intelligent enough to see it. But that's ok. It's all too late anyways.

Enjoy the show.

>>129435285
look at my posts newbie

>>129434773
>t. kike shill
Fuck you amerifat, go ruin another planet. far right was always green, because you shitty jew cocksucker lolbertarian came along.

>>129435297
How much climate change would have happened without humans? People on the global warming kick have zero reason not to abuse it for whatever they want.

>>129435365
So, can you?

File: download.jpg (11KB, 238x212px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 238x212px

>>129418873
Also the founder of the weather channel tho

File: 1950-2003 CO2 vs Welfare.png (110KB, 724x745px) Image search: [Google]

110KB, 724x745px

Premise: pic related is a CO2 emissions chart (black line) overlapped with a welfare spending chart (blue), and as you can see, emissions have gone up in close correlation with welfare spending up until Clinton got into office, when welfare spending had a huge boom.

Hypothesis: If we stop welfare spending, we will also reduce CO2 emissions. More spending implies more resources used and less conservation, and more fossil fuels burned to distributed said resources.

Experiment: Stop enabling welfare in most European countries, and stop welfare and foreign aid in the United States of America. The costs are negative for every country involved in the experiment and so can be implemented at a moment's notice.

Control Group: Germany. Despite being pro green, their emissions have gone up some 2% while enjoying a rampant welfare state. Germany should stay the course and allow more immigrants and refugees, although most of Europe is no longer paying welfare. To eliminate a bypass, members of the EU are a single unit and therefore cannot give each other foreign aid.

Expected Conclusion should match the hypothesis, and the scientific method is used to the fullest. All that's left to see is if the left values the environment or the polluters more as they strive for a greener earth.

File: natural_anthropogenic_models_narrow.png (30KB, 648x291px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 648x291px

>>129435467

>>129435524
click my ID and scroll the thread

I refuse to hold your hand, I'm starting to worry you can't grasp the simple concept of finding my post on 4chan that you lack the ability to comprehend whats going on to begin with.

>>129417197
How has this guy not ended up suicided via 10ft away self inflicted double gunshots for redpilling this hard

>>129435658
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OJ6Z04VJDco

File: Screen Shot 2017-06-10 at 11.36.17 PM.png (35KB, 618x264px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 618x264px

>>129415926
>>129417197
Snopes has proved this didn't happen, he never Denied Global warming, infact this is just a CGI created by Big Oil to throw you all off

Fact Check Here:
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:http://www.snopes.com/politics/science/coleman.asp

See Global Warming is real!

File: 1496972109595.jpg (28KB, 609x609px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 609x609px

>>129435700
And how did you measure the last 100 years of Earths climate both with and without humans present on the planet to draw those conclusions?

>>129435658
you're a fucking moron

>>129435311
oil is useless until it is refined
which country refines the most oil

>>129436158
I believe China
we haven't built a refinery on years
keep scrolling

>>129436039
I feel you, I just know you can reduce CO2 by stopping welfare, whether CO2 is causing climate change or not

File: ghgconc2000-large.jpg (106KB, 800x570px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 800x570px

>>129436055
you just take out the amounts of human caused greenhouse gassing out of equation.

>>129435705
Yeah, I've read your posts.

>dudes, da shillzz............
>feelz goodz our pie holes
>dats be money scam nuff said

Somehow, it's not very convincing.

>>129436112
how you figure, ladyboy?

File: _85319913_poop_protest.jpg (56KB, 720x405px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 720x405px

>>129436055
Listen Tucker Carlson we have incredibly advanced computers that can provide data to show what the world would be like without Humans.

See this computer Generated picture here! This is what the world would look like without Human / Man Made Carbon Fibers in our Atmospheres! Don't destroy the OH ZUNE you bastards with your CFG's!

And Just Reflect on how beautiful the world would be without Man Made Climate Change!

>>129435705
Answer this question: if human are not causing warming, then what is?

>>129436352
wow that has to be the biggest non argument i've ever seen,
your point oh ya
I believe in human climate change cause my wet feelz says so
fuck off fag

The global average concentration of CO2 in Earth's atmosphere is currently about 0.04%
but its 100% responsible for the earths climate how fucking retarded do you have to be to believe that......

>>129434207

There is no way you can scientifically determine to what degree CO2 emissions influence the global temperatures, that's the point. Maybe they are just as irrelevant as you think the other factors are. Prove me wrong with science.

Also since I didn't post millions of years the point still stands.

>>129436055

They didn't. They just assume the climate is extremely sensitive to CO2 and if you assume that and then reduce the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere that's how you reach that conclusion. The science behind this assumption simply isn't solid enough.

File: foundthisoldmemejustforyou.jpg (67KB, 600x833px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 600x833px

>>129415926
Is there anyone who isn't taking a shit on CNN nowadays ?

>>129436042
jesus christ...

>>129436588
CNN maybe

>>129436580
ICE CORE
they sampled gas caught in ice at different period of earths climate prior to talking monkeys, and have plenty of data to know the make up of our atmosphere.......
real science not models

>>129436578
Do you think your posts sound more intelligent if you put "......" at the end?

>>129418873
>His conspiracy theories about the motivation of scientists and governments is nonsense. Even putting aside the reach the conspiracy would need to have within the United States, there is a consensus view that climate change among the worldwide community of scientists.


the reach of money for "climate science" doesn't stop in the US. The push for climate change bullshit and carbon credits, etc. hold huge monetary implications for every country on the map. That's why they're all squealing like pigs rushing to the slop bowl. They're all wanting money.

As for "climate science" and consensus, they're doing the same thing, following the money.

File: Lemon Pepe.jpg (68KB, 900x900px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 900x900px

>>129436793
does it trigger you.............................

>>129434640
>You'll do everything except admit this guy is saying something that flies in the face of mountains of evidence to the contrary.

Why would I want to agree with you if you are wrong?

>I promise I'm older than you.

You are a newfag.

File: invonvenient_truth_still_a_l.jpg (39KB, 675x380px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 675x380px

>>129436599
Here is a Rare photo of Jesus Christ showing how Global Warming will 100% Undeniably destroy the world in 10 years. This photo was taken in 2004 at the Jesus Saves us from Global Warming conference.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JS1-mC0KZFw

Tucker Carlson interviews Judith Curry a crazy right wing conspiracy theorist tinfoil illiterat-

Oh, wait

>Judith A. Curry is an American climatologist and former chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology. Her research interests include hurricanes, remote sensing, atmospheric modeling, polar climates, air-sea interactions, and the use of unmanned aerial vehicles for atmospheric research. She is a member of the National Research Council's Climate Research Committee. As of 2017, she has retired from academia.

>Curry graduated cum laude from Northern Illinois University in 1974 with a Bachelor of Science degree in Geography. She earned her PhD degree in Geophysical Sciences from the University of Chicago in 1982.

>Curry is the co-author of Thermodynamics of Atmospheres and Oceans (1999), and co-editor of Encyclopedia of Atmospheric Sciences (2002), as well as over 140 scientific papers. Among her awards is the Henry G. Houghton Research Award from the American Meteorological Society in 1992.

If you don't know this brave woman you should be ashamed of yourself

>>129436910
I just think that you look like an underage reddit kid who, unfortunately, found his way into 4chan.
I guess it triggers me a bit.

>>129436580
you probably can't determine the exact degree, but you don't need to. if you factor in all the influences of climate and then compare all of it to temperature, you can come up with a pretty close estimations.

see >>129435019 for non-million year graph

>>129417197
is anything he is saying not true? did he provide enough evidence?

>>129437064
your Nativity is exposed by assuming I am X so therefore i am X

Next

>>129437026
You think that your point was proven because one person with scientific degree agrees with you?

What about thousands of scientists with degrees who believe in man-made climate change?

>>129437276
ya 50% of the scientist say it not real, the topic is not closed for debate, its open
you have any real argument? or are you some kid that found 4chan

File: SCARYOBAMA.jpg (32KB, 500x312px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 500x312px

>>129437015
>>129436042
>>129436528
This is how you "NAZIS" respond to 100% undeniable Liberal Truth! Ignoring my FACTS.

It's been fun watching your Orange President make a Joke out of America but seriously we can not let him get Cheetos Dust on the Nuclear Launch Buttons!

File: 1495241422321.jpg (255KB, 724x844px) Image search: [Google]

255KB, 724x844px

>>129415926
>Climate Change Hoax

Yes goy ignore global temperatures it's all a hoax, good goy

>>129437276
Everyone on earth believes in man-made climate change. What all of those scientists disagree on is the DEGREE on which man is effecting the climate. Some think we're the sole reason it's getting warmer (tiny minority group, almost certainly wrong). Some think we're the primary driver but there are other factors (main group #1). Some think we're not the primary driver but we play a strong minority part (main group #2). Some think we're a driver but we're minuscule (minority group), and some think we're not doing anything that could actually change the climate (tiny minority group, almost certainly wrong).

>>129423849
That's why they have moderators too, retard.

>>129437471
Wtf I love global warming now

>>129436308
That's completely unscientific, you cannot control for the amount of CO2 that would have been generated in the absence of humans, it's a completely ridiculous proposal. Even if you could there are literally billions of other factors involved, millions in how much CO2 is in the atmosphere alone which would all be completely different without humans, its complete best guess pseudoscience bullshit

>>129437471
Here's the one thing I would point out: you know we're still in an ice age right? And you know that there are many, many times where the earth has not been in an ice age in the past right? So is it 100% inconceivable that the planet might be getting warmer on its own? Personally I think mankind is helping the process along at least a bit, but I sincerely doubt that if we hadn't discovered the combustion engine that the earth would go on a cooling trend. It's been on a warming trend for literally thousands of years.

>>129437724
exactly where we are right now in the longest "INTER-GLACIAL PERIOD" and its coming to an end, the great warming pause was our peek, we are going see global temps fall,
just one big cycle.

>>129437720
Why would any more or less CO2 be generated without humans? how is it ridicule?

>>129424296
this projection tho

Wow, Holy shit. Surprised they didn't "oh nooo" him.

>>129424296
>he's too old and white and looks like he says nigger cummy tummy nigger cummy tummy nigger cummy tummy to himself before taking his naps
who actually does this?

>>129437924
Not to mention the last ice age was kicked off by a big ass asteroid cooling the planet due to the dust. The glaciers have been receding ever since.

Notice how there's no more ice bridge between Russia and Alaska (and hasn't been for a few thousand years)? Guess that's global warming's fault too right?

>>129437959
volcano and forest fires and limestone erosion make up for most of the 0.04% of CO2 in our atmosphere.

ya 0.04% is 100% responsible for the global warming

>>129438144
actual the great ice bridge was a land mass, with most of the water locked up in the caps, oceans were 400 feet below what they are now, Russia and america were the same land mass

>>129437268
>Nativity
is Nativity the new pottery?

>>129437471
>thinking any political point can be refuted by just saying "good goy" and posting the jew meme
deposited

File: air_temp_EE.gif (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

tidees go out, tides go in
can't explain that

The climate change myth was invented by Nazis. Nazis wanted to create a moral argument to motivate the public into investing huge sums of money into alternative energy resources so Germany would not have to import fossil fuel anymore.
The idea was adopted by environmentalists after ww2

Essentially the climate change myth is anti-Russian and -Saudi oil.

Europeans are totally on board with it, because we don't have any fossil fuels. In the US fracking kind of destroyed that movement.

>>129438197
What's your point? yes volcanos and forest fire are no the main causes of global warming

>>129423323
>>129425650
itm & tyfyc

>>129435658
unrefuted :)

not to mention high levels of CO2 help plants retain water, less air ducts need to absorb CO2 therefore less water loss, and studies show plant have better yield with only 1/4 of the water needed.
cut off enough CO2 ATM is only 0.04% and we risk triggering a mass plant die off

File: easterbrook_fig5.png (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

But let's look on a bigger scale

>>129415926
He looks like a big old texan to me. Don't trust a business man about ecology and climate change.

>>129438427
yes it is, are you spell checking for tendies or your own sick thrills?

File: smugness.png (242KB, 391x373px) Image search: [Google]

242KB, 391x373px

>>129438569
why not? if someone is purely focused on business, then surely they'd care about the impact of climate change because of how it would affect their profits? I'd trust a businessman about climate change long before I'd trust any fucking politician.

>>129438483
>Why would any more or less CO2 be generated without humans? how is it ridicule?
you asked
"Why would any more or less CO2 be generated without humans? how is it ridicule?"

nothing about global warming.
you point was?

>>129438737
climate change is Original Sin for atheists. it's something you are inherently doing wrong every day and must atone for. this is what lack of religion does, it makes people fall for bullshit like this.

File: vostok-last-12000-years-web.gif (33KB, 650x414px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 650x414px

after all, if global warming is the end of humanity as all gore predicted....how the fuck did the Romans survive when global temps were 1-3 degrees C warmer than they are now?

>>129438563
see >>129435019

>>129438737
read the context. I asked why would natural causes change without humans influence, did we make more volcanos erupt or something?

>>129415926
Isn't the "97%" figure even more wrong than that guy lets on? Like it's not "97% of government-funded studies" but rather one single researcher (Cook) and his team cherrypicked a shitton of papers slightly related to climate and geology and chemistry and so on and then skimmed the abstracts and checked an arbitrary box on their clipboard for "yes this study supports my personal claim of anthropogenic global warming". E.g. totally made up out of thin air to the point some of the papers' authors wrote and said "this is an improper conclusion being drawn from my paper"

File: Holocene_Temperature_Variations.png (38KB, 600x400px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 600x400px

>>129438943
ok, how about an average across all the different ice cores that we have?

>>129438441
sauce?

>>129438896
>how the fuck did the Romans survive when global temps were 1-3 degrees C warmer than they are now
it wasn't
see >>129430927
>>129430966

>>129438943
>natural causes
"causes change without humans influence"
????
ENGLISH
Google Translate is not your friend

>>129415926

Follow the money.

>>129439005
yes, exactly. but it's "correct" enough to repeatedly parrot "97% of scientists" at every possibility, even though literally one study with a small sample size concluded that.

also, the US federal government granted something like $4,000,000,000 to various climate change studies last year. only studies that provide the results that ((they)) wanted get funded. >>129439162

>>129438867
this exactly
Original Sin is really big on the left these days, Climate Change, Slavery, whatever other white guilt they feel like self-flagellating over on that particular day

File: elk-4.jpg (214KB, 600x900px) Image search: [Google]

214KB, 600x900px

>>129438705
I would trust scientists and people on the field
Interesting quite new study about the yellowstone ecosystem is another proof of the climate change

>>129439041
>if you adjust all the raw temperature readings, then they show that the past was cooler all along so nothing to see here
seriously?

And then you get lines like this:
>Whether temperatures have been warmer or colder in the past is largely irrelevant to the impacts of the ongoing warming.

>>129439296
thank you for bringing up slavery, I'm glad I'm not the only one that sees it. the concept of "you've already fucked up from birth and here's how to do what you can to fix it" is a powerful one, but in modern Christianity, it's less of that, and more of "well you're human, so you're going to fuck up and sin, and that's bad but it's ok, as long as it's not a Cardinal Sin, you'll p much be forgiven as long as you recognize your sin and ask for forgiveness"

with liberals it's "YOU'RE A FUCKING WHITE MALE, BOW DOWN AND FEEL BAD ABOUT YOURSELF AND YOUR HERITAGE AND COUNTRY ALREADY, NOW VOTE FOR THESE PEOPLE IN ORDER TO MAKE IT ALL BETTER"

>>129439034
>Only using ice cores
How much of the world is ice friendo?

File: God Kill Me.jpg (34KB, 490x375px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 490x375px

>>129439550

>>129423056
You should do something about your smog ridden country

File: MWP ensemble.png (46KB, 275x203px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 275x203px

>>129439666
How much?

Also you do realise that
>>129438563
is the light blue proxy in pic related?

Wrong poster
>>129439922
>>129438563

>>129439083
I'm not using google translate, not my problem that you are too stupid.
Causes as in plural of cause, what don't you understand burgerfuck?

>>129439472
No, i didn't say that past temperature are irrelevant.

>>129439922
Ice core studies are done at the poles retard, they go back 1.5 mil years
are have been and always will be there.


Oldest ice core: Finding a 1.5 million-year record of Earth's climate

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/11/131105081228.htm

>>129440036
"natural causes change without humans influence"
WTF are you trying to say

basically who fucking cares anymore
fuck off fag.............................................................................................................................................................................