Cognitive Dissonance Thread

Can I believe it was predominantly due to burning coal and that a nuclear civilisation sooner than later would probably solve the problem?

If so, can Canada fuck off and realise /pol/ is also right about climate change.

We fixed it, the cycles of glaciation with small interglacial windows, as well as the multibillion year trend towards CO2 depletion and extinction of all plant life. We kicked ass and saved life on Earth. Humanity fuck yeah.

if there really is a conspiracy to fake the data on global warming, it would be both the biggest AND most idiotic conspiracy in the history of the world

I mean, why would climate scientists not only make most of the supposedly "real" raw data freely available, why would they update (aka "fake") the data multiple times every couple of years? Why not release only 1 faked data set and keep going with that instead of risking people exposing your brilliant conspiracy?

this is dumb

>>129492075
Climate change is real.
Race realism is real.

Liberals and Conservatives ignore science whenever it fits their agenda.

Real solution, from a pragmatic point of view, would be to sterilize niggers and impose parenting licences on everybody else, killing both birds with one stone.

Less people = Less CO2 emissions
Less niggers = Higher world average IQs = Better societies

There is literally nothing wrong with eugenics.

curious the lack of emphasis on reforestation and clean oceans.


OP, would you concede this guy is smarter than you?>

https://youtu.be/TCy_UOjEir0

Climate change is due to natural causes.
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glacial_period
Anyway global warming is the most welcomed thing since my bolls are freezing in winter. Humanity should totally release as much as possible CO2 and methan in the atmosphere.

That isn't the highest historical CO2 level. The current levels have been matched at several other points in the earth's history. I find it funny that, on top of stamping a perfectly valid graph with a falsehood, you also chose to use such a bad font for it.

>>129495843

if you're interested in the opinion of smart people, why not take a look at the work of the people who actually study the climate professionally, instead of the unpublished opinion of people with no expertise in this field?

Kek at the shills here trying to look like polack

>>129496523
If you're interested in science then why don't you stop appealing to prestige as a source of truth?

>>129492075
See this is how I know you're reyarded, because in the science community when something is proclaimed as a "theory" it means the parameters of that experiment that proves the hypothesis correctly have been repeated with the same results multiple (like hundreds or thousands) of times. So the THEORY relativity isn't just a theory, because it has been proven to be true based off the experiment conducted, by scientific peers over and over again. But why would you know That? You're just a fucking leaf

>>129496647
when you have a rash on your skin and i tell you that you should let a dermatologist take a look at that, I guess what you would do is tell me "stop appealing to prestige" and then wander off to the next urologist

>>129496966
Yet the fact of the matter is that no title makes a wrong man right. The theory of man-made global warming is wrong. Even if every other human on the planet were to support it, it would still be wrong. Trying to distract from that by calling attention to people's titles is flat-out unscientific. It used to be that doctors would recommend leeches and astrologists would tell you that the sun revolves around the earth. Suddenly now professionals are infallible?

File: 1478991802055.jpg (42KB, 396x385px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 396x385px

>>129492075
The earth can safely do 1500ppm CO2. The climate change religion is there to make sure the west doesn't become too prosperous and therefore have no need for global governance but that's just tip of the iceberg. First of all, if the northern ice caps did melt sea levels would fall, not raise. Don't believe me? Try putting ice cubes in water and see what happens to the water level after they melt (hint: ice is less dense than liquid water). Furthermore, an increase in CO2 would be great for plant life all over the world. CO2 over geological history was much higher than it is today and plants are starved for it. Finally, an increase in global temperature would disproportionately raise temperature the closer to the poles you are. That's a good thing. That means more farm-able land and therefore more food. So, basically, you're an idiot. CO2 is good for the earth.

>>129495247

looks more legitimate to keep up the facade, no one is gonna believe it if they see it once

>>129495605
Thank you for your sacrifice

>>129497550
Don't argue with Germans. 90% of them are people with proxies trying to stir shit up. Same with Swedish people.

>>129492075
Friendly reminder that denying racial differences in IQ is more retarded than denying evolution.

>>129497557
I never understood how the ice caps melting = flooding. No way they could've overlooked such a simple thing as the volume difference between the two forms. Why the fuck did they say shit would flood? Fearmongering?

bait thread but i'll bite.

what's significant about CO2? why do you think trees cant regulate it? why do you think it will increase the temperature?

(((climate scientists))) are only worried about CO2 when there's a hundred different factors at play concerning temperature and climate change. did you know there's more trees now than in the past few hundred years? did you know the glaciers are the biggest they've been in 10,000+ years?

the climate changes naturally over time, humans affect a tiny percentage of it. not nearly enough to worry about. i think it's funny how it used to be "global warming" but now it's climate change because they got it wrong, but it's okay because theyre totally right this time.

>>129496523

Like Al Gore? or maybe Leo DiCaprio. How about one of those 97.3% of scientists?

Can you name one ?

>>129497906
Yes, it's fear mongering. No self respecting scientist could agree with "the consensus", since it makes absolutely no sense and is completely inconsistent with everything we know about the climate. The reality is that water vapor is the PRIMARY greenhouse gas (by a huge margin) but it also has a build in negative feedback. The more water vapor gets produced the more cloud formation there is, which raises the albedo, putting downward pressure on the temperature. The runaway greenhouse gas theory just doesn't agree with observations. A system that is that inherently unstable would have gone into a runaway warming regime a, long, long time ago.

>>129495605
I agree this is the only feasible solution.

File: tldr on race.png (611KB, 1317x1598px) Image search: [Google]

611KB, 1317x1598px

>>129492075
you forget to mention that librals are the ones who.
>deny the existance of race
>the diffrences between men and women.
science is a tool used by pseudo intellectuals only if it fits in to their agenda wether the are conservatives or librals doesnt matter.

File: ab2670fbf53ea3beade907a26ba3150dc786cdafbf8bb4aa18f27e08606e1521.jpg (90KB, 1024x576px) Image search: [Google]

90KB, 1024x576px

>>129492075
Your chart says highest historical level. Just a blatant lie.
https://www.livescience.com/44330-jurassic-dinosaur-carbon-dioxide.html
"Dinosaurs that roamed the Earth 250 million years ago knew a world with five times more carbon dioxide than is present on Earth today, "
That would be 2000 ppm but as high as 3000 ppm.

35 million years ago it was on average 700-900 ppm but sometimes went up to 2000 ppm.
3 million years ago it was a bit higher then what it is today, around 410 ppm.

Hahahahaha
Retard thinks tens of parts per million change atmospheric co2 will actually have an impact on temperature.
>we only increase atmospheric co2 by 1/6000 a year.
>retard thinks this will actually increase temps by several degrees c
>venus only 2.5 times warmer, basically co2 only atmosphere that also weighs 93 times as much and receives 40 percent more solar radiation.
You do the math there bud, if a 300 ppm can increase temps by 3c then Venus should way warmer.

>>129492075
"scientists shouldn't be skeptical"

Fuck off shill.

File: Discuss.png (1MB, 1338x1789px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1338x1789px

>>129499947

>>129492075
Co2 levels were higher before humans even existed.

So let's see your mental gymnastics to blame that on humans too.

>>129492075
Friendly reminder that there won't be any white majority nations that matter at the end of this century, long before even the most absurd climate alarmist projections are realized.

If you want people to care about the climate, you're going to have to stop exterminating their people in their own homelands, you miserable fucking kike.

kill yourself

>>129499495
I think when they say that the melting ice will raise the water levels they are talking about ice that is on land that will melt then go in to the ocean then raise the water level. right?

>>129501485
If all the ice on earth melted (something that isn't going to happen any time soon) the sea level would rise significantly. Thermal expansion of the water would also add to this but I wouldn't worry about it.

>>129501230
Shit, that's better than any argument I've heard here.
Even if climate change is happening is horrible and we're doing it why the fuck should I care? Only low iq GIBZMEDAT shitskins will suffer. Hell even if climate change isn't happening the fact that these worthless subhumans are becoming the majority means that civilization will cease to exist pretty soon, that's way scarier.

>>129501133
The sun was significantly dimmer back then.

File: image.png (11KB, 495x460px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 495x460px

>>129492075

>>129492075
It's real you conservitards!
That's why we should subsidize population and industry booms in the third world!

File: image.jpg (41KB, 354x404px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 354x404px

>>129492075
What if I deny both? Neither are retarded to deny.

>>129499431
Paul Crutzen
James Hansen
Eric Rignot
Richard Alley
Jennifer Francis
Veerabhadran Ramanathan
Zeke Housefather
Carl Mears
Makiko Sato
Susan Solomon
Aradhna Tripati
Michael Oppenheimer
Stephen Schneider
Kevin Trenberth
Benjamin Santer
Tom Wigley
Stefan Rahmstorf
Mojib Latif
Michael Mann
Wei Liu
Gavin Schmidt
Rasmus Emil Benestad

>>129492075
make a significant agreement that actually curbs emissions of CHINA and doesnt just accelerate the planet destroying 3rd world population boom and ill be all for it

File: antarctica[1].jpg (137KB, 550x423px) Image search: [Google]

137KB, 550x423px

>>129497906
>>129497557
the problem is antarctica and greenland, not sea ice
if all the ice on both of those landmasses melted, the sea level would rise by over 200ft. Together they make up something like 99% of the total freshwater on the planet.

>>129502342
Haha climate chang is real, like oh my god how can you deny it? What? You want to stop subsidizing sand nigger and nigger and spic breeding so that we don't have overpopulation?
RACIST!

>>129501920
Climate change will probably not directly affect Europe or North America on a significant level, but in the regions that it will, you're going to see huge numbers of climate refugees into the west, and I doubt the west can stomach shutting down their borders in the face of nuclear-armed nations. The rise of extremist governments and ideologies in those sensitive regions (especially South Asia) is the biggest threat.

>>129492075
>Evidence for Anthropogenic Climate Change: None, though Jews push it strongly
>Evidence for Evolution: None, though Jews push it strongly
>Evidence for The Holocaust™: None, though Jews push it strongly

rly meke u thonk

>>129502396
then you win and shills can't touch you.

>>129492075
Muh false equivalency

You can watch evolution directly. "Man made involvement in climate change" is more like a hypothesis than a theory. You simply cannot test it in a tangible way that guarantees cause and effect on humanities end. No way to measure our involvement with climate change, but the fact that you act like it's as simple as watching evolution is, proves you don't know what the fuck you're talking about.

File: emissions.png (59KB, 965x509px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 965x509px

>>129502540
The west really should do more though.

>>129492075
I don't deny climate change, just the unproven hypothesis of Anthropogenic Global Warming, which posits that humans are responsible for and the primary driver of climate shifts. Not only is the data they produce (more than 70 failed models at this point in time) inconsistent with their hypothesis but scientific journals and governments actively work to marginalize those with disagreements to this hypothesis, not only that but both of the most popular sources for the "97%" consensus figure are from polls done on absolutely minute sample sizes and therefor cannot be trusted to reflect the actual views of the scientific community.

Because of the disingenuous behavior of AGW advocates and because of their continuous demand for expansion of government power as if more government will somehow create less pollution, I immediately distrust these people and their motives. If they actually conclusively knew what they were arguing for is true, they wouldn't have to lie, segregate dissenters, or manipulate statistics to present their argument.

People engage in debate with flat earthers and creationists constantly because they are sure in their capacity to dispute and debunk their claims. AGW advocates dodge debates and would prefer to evangelize at events like the Paris climate accords because the audience has already accepted the AGW hypothesis because it advances their political goals.

Also why don't you show the rest of the graph faggot, you know the parts further into the past where carbon levels were up past 4000ppm long before humans even existed.

>>129502580
Change is inevitable and shutting down industry in the US isn't going make a difference. If the ice caps melt, they melt and we'll have new coast lines. On the other hand we'll also have far more farm-able land and longer growing seasons and healthier plants (assuming CO2 continue to rise). Fresh water is a concern but an increased temp also means an increase in precipitation. The REAL source of pollution you should be worried about isn't CO2. It's heavy metals, pharmaceuticals and a myriad of other pollutants that get bumped into the ocean everyday. Yet, you'll NEVER hear one of the climate alarmist talking about that. The truth is they don't care about the environment at all. All they care about is their sanctimonious blathering that accomplishes less than nothing!

>>129497757
Kek

>>129502910
>niggers with nukes
>implying we wouldn't nuclear holocaust them all
Ahahahahahahahaha

>>129492075
>As retarded as rejecting evolution
>rejecting evolution isn't retarded at all
Therefor rejecting anthropogenic climate change isn't retarded either. Good to know.

>>129495247
>earth is in trouble
>humans are the reason
>how to fix?
>regulate and tax certain everyday necessities
>pass universal carbon/living tax
Boom, converts everyone into slaves who must pay to live

File: 65_Myr_Climate_Change.png (21KB, 650x397px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 650x397px

>>129492075
Cherrypicked timeline.
Earth is BILLIONS of year old, thousands of years is NOT an appropriate time scale.

Life and Earth was fine with CO2 levels >2000ppm and MUCH higher temperatures. In fact, life EXPLODED - that's when mammals started to become prominent!

https://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v406/n6797/abs/406695a0.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleocene–Eocene_Thermal_Maximum

Increase in CO2 levels is BENEFICIAL, as is increase in temperature. A warmer climate is better for humans - higher crop yields and lower heating bills.

>>129492075
There was 5x as much co2 in the atmosphere during the time of dinosaurs you know when the entire plant including Antarctica was a fucking jungle.

>>129503676
> Not only is the data they produce (more than 70 failed models at this point in time) inconsistent with their hypothesis

Yeah, if you're talking about the IPCC's models, that's bullshit.

pic related

Even though the surface temps don't match EXACTLY 1:1 with the models, other metrics such as sea level rise, ocean warming, and arctic sea ice melt rates all pretty much did.

You also have to remember, not even 3% of warming caused by GHGs affect surface and atmospheric temps, almost all of it goes into the oceans so if you really want an accurate view of the predictive power of climate models, see what they've been predicting about our oceans.

>AGW advocates dodge debates
No, not really. This is done more on your side.

>carbon levels were up past 4000ppm long before humans even existed.
Sun was much more dimmer back then.

File: model10.jpg (588KB, 2254x1883px) Image search: [Google]

588KB, 2254x1883px

>>129505672
forgot pic

>>129505672
WTF is this meme response:

>Da sun is was Dimmer Bro.

I've heard this several times, and each time, no one even tries to explain it..

>>129504789
How the fuck is it cherry-picked?

You have a figure showing a clear pattern of CO2 for the past 400,000 years, and how it completely goes out of whack right when humans industrialize.

Do you think it's a coincidence? How far do you have your head in the sand?

Agreeing with liberals for the wrong reasons - global warming.
We should not try to disprove the leftist theory/religion of global warming. Don't try to argue with them that the current predictive data has 100% uncertainty or that CO2 is a relatively mild climate gas. No, you want to push this meme to our advantage, so we can push for stuff like
>population control in the third world
>polution control in the third world
>tarrifs on oil from the middle east
>stoping immigration

>>129506015
Hey guys, did you know that the universe is was YOUNGER when it was dinosaur. That's why earth had regenerative properties of a tiny teen - now she's and old milf with with wrinkles you can't even iron out.

In conclusion, the earlier data is irrelevant.

Come again.

I fucking LOVE global warming!

File: consider.jpg (7KB, 259x195px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 259x195px

>>129492075
that graph is inherently misleading

>it starts at 180 parts per million
>it starts at 400k years
>its claims HIGHEST HISTORICAL when the earhs history is BILLIONS OF YEARS
>it implies CO2 is a highly dangerous green house gas when nothing could be farther from the truth if you want me to believe Methane is dangerous ill believe it we have records showing a mass extinction due to Methane
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/methane-spewing-microbe-blamed-in-earths-worst-mass-extinction/

You are afraid of questioning your teaching because you are a zealot who believes that even if you are wrong your cause "a greener earth" is justified. You are the hippy who fights against the US using its own resources and then does not bat an eye when we import from china who pollutes their own country like crazy. You are the same kind of person who when they see starving Africans they donate thousands to the red cross and put local farmers out of business with the free food brought in. Then they breed and cause the problem again in 20 years.

OP you look for temporary solutions to long term problems and blame white people to make yourself feel good. You are probably under 25 years old and have a bachelors at some state university.

>>129506282
>Do you think it's a coincidence?

No, but the point is - it doesn't matter. The real point of OP's graph is to show current CO2 levels as something completely out of whack and disastrous, while in reality it's way below past levels when life flourished.

On the appropriate scale - which for climate means millions of years - current rise is an insignificant blip.

>>129507433
**Earth

and i didnt check the flag that was my bad... leaf

>>129502580
>the problem is antarctica
No. No one is worried about antarctica.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antarctica
"Antarctica, on average, is the coldest, driest, and windiest continent, and has the highest average elevation of all the continents.[6] Antarctica is a desert, with annual precipitation of only 200 mm (8 in) along the coast and far less inland.[7] The temperature in Antarctica has reached −89.2 °C (−128.6 °F), though the average for the third quarter (the coldest part of the year) is −63 °C (−81 °F)"
http://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/earth/geophysics/question473.htm
"The main ice covered landmass is Antarctica at the South Pole, with about 90 percent of the world's ice (and 70 percent of its fresh water). Antarctica is covered with ice an average of 2,133 meters (7,000 feet) thick. If all of the Antarctic ice melted, sea levels around the world would rise about 61 meters (200 feet). But the average temperature in Antarctica is -37°C, so the ice there is in no danger of melting. In fact in most parts of the continent it never gets above freezing.

At the other end of the world, the North Pole, the ice is not nearly as thick as at the South Pole. The ice floats on the Arctic Ocean. If it melted sea levels would not be affected"

>>129492075
>Malthusianism, we're probably going to starve
>Neo-Malthusianism, we're definitely going to starve
>Doomsday Clock, we're all going to die in a nuclear war
>Mass extinction due to loss of keystone species, it's going to happen soon
>Hole in ozone layer, we're all going to die from using too much hairspray
>Global Warming, we're all going to drown
>Climate change, we need to give money to China

Germany will produce more carbon in the next twenty than the previous. Because environmentalist don't like nuclear power.

>>129506015
Usually when someone says "well CO2 was xxx level in the past!" they're trying to ask why the earth wasn't cooked back then if our "measly" 410 ppm is so bad now, and the answer to that is that the sun was significantly less active, and so there was less radiation entering earth's atmosphere.

>>129507433
The entire point was to show how massive our emissions have changed the atmosphere.

>>129507491
Yeah, but the sun wasn't as active as it is now. Earth should be COOLING if the climate was truly insensitive to GHGs.

>which for climate means millions of years
No, that's totally wrong.

>>129506299
the jews are too good at this man
the paris accord that liberals are crying about MADE US GIVE MONEY TO BREED NIGGERS