Climate change

>>130563249
>Why are Republicans so dumb?
They're not dumb. They're evil. Evil, greedy pigs.

File: Cartoon-Actual-Climate-Change-Pronouncements.jpg (54KB, 600x398px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 600x398px

daily reminder!

Science isn't based on consensus honey

>>130563249
yeah we better do something about the hole in the ozone layer or we're all going to be baked alive

>>130563249
Of course its real we are emitting CO2. Now whether that effects earth in a meaningful way i am uncertain.

>>130564039
> somehow rebuts the idea of Climate change

>>130563829
A
FUCKING
TOOL

>>130563249
If Hitler was alive, there would be no Paris, Retard.

his tweet is edgy enough for me to respect it

if ur gonna say something like that, don't half ass it

SAY IT WITH ME

CLIMATE CHANGE IS A HOAX

If everyone was so worried about the environment then there would be some sort of consensus on actual pollution reduction. Linking all this to carbon emissions and putting the blame solely on carbon is the big problem. People like me who oppose this are not in opposition because the earth may be warming (who fucking actually REALLY knows), but taking my money for carbon taxes isn't going to do shit but add another financial instrument to an insolvent banks balance sheet and push us closer to destruction of America sovereignty and global governance.

File: 98_percent_climate_scientists_graph.png (11KB, 495x460px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 495x460px

>>130563249
>muh concensus science

File: 19250707_735645659940700_5342302247963751414_o.jpg (125KB, 1241x960px) Image search: [Google]

125KB, 1241x960px

>>130564532
Maybe there were too many words in that cartoon for you. I got you covered anon!

File: chinese merchant.jpg (40KB, 501x585px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 501x585px

>>130563249
Shut down your industry gweilo. You velly, velly bad man.

>>130563249
>99% of scientists agree that man-made global warming is real

No you massive faggot, that so-called study was a fraud:

Cooking stove use, housing associations, white males, and the 97%

http://www.joseduarte.com/blog/cooking-stove-use-housing-associations-white-males-and-the-97

http://archive.is/xJqb4

>>130563249

If Hitler was alive he'd gas Xiu Xiu so he couldn't make anymore shitty fucking music lmao

>>130563249
Yeah that's nice and all I just don't want to be taxed for just heating my home and driving my car. Maybe these egg heads can stop reeing at us that climate change is real and you know.... Come up with actual good solutions to the problem besides hurrrr you get taxed and china don't have to worry bout nuffin.

>>130563249
Hey friend.
You misunderstand us.
We don't oppose Climate Policy based on denying Climate Change is happening.
We oppose Climate Policy because it's being used as a front to take your money and give the elites more legal power over you.

I HOPE YOUR CHILD KILLS THEMSELF

I AM THE GOOD GUY

File: ktsyukststst.png (145KB, 563x302px) Image search: [Google]

145KB, 563x302px

>>130563249

>>130563249
>99% of scientists agree that man-made global warming is real

What's wrong with 80% ?

http://www.joseduarte.com/blog/the-climate-science-consensus-is-78-84-percent

The 97-99% figure actually weakens the case for a scientific consensus because claiming almost a 100% of scientists believe in it sounds like it's a dogma. But when you have gurus like Dr. Michael Mann repeating the 99% mantra I guess it really is a dogma

>>130563249

I'll take climate change seriously when your "solution" is something a little more substantive than 'tax white people and give the money to brown people.'

>>130563249
Here's an example of climate change policy I would happily support:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ta2Wvy9F_gA

But it will never happen because it ebenfits THE PEOPLE and not The Elites.
Watch it and think about why they're not pushing for this policy.
The only answer I can come up with is that because The Elites can't use it to gain Political Clout

TL;DR - Instead of a Carbon Tax you PAY PEOPLE who reduce their Carbon use.

>>130565096
If only people would actually read material on topics they talk with aurhority of instead of posting pictures that somehow rebut the opponent's side's arguments

File: IMG_2919.jpg (140KB, 810x1440px) Image search: [Google]

140KB, 810x1440px

>>130563249 I agree totally. Finally someone who is educated like me.

>>130563249
Paris accord doesn't stop climate pollution it fucks the US and redistributes taxes to not the US

File: 1496110831305.jpg (15KB, 643x360px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 643x360px

>>130563249
>its getting warmer
>white peoples fault
Hahahahahahahaha these fucks are unfit to live

>>130565096
>the magazine cover on the right

if you believe CO2 is a problem then planting a lot of trees and building a lot of things with wood products would be a better idea than carbon taxes

>>130564532
The point is you idiots don't know what climate change is going to do. Let alone what fucking our economy will do.

File: 7593f1_4633329.jpg (171KB, 960x686px) Image search: [Google]

171KB, 960x686px

>>130563249
30 years ago they told us that 20 years ago there would be no polar ice caps in 10 years time.

File: 1478615169169.jpg (379KB, 671x800px) Image search: [Google]

379KB, 671x800px

>>130563829
Your flag is gay

>>130566323

No, they think that's bad too.

http://grist.org/climate-energy/earth-is-getting-greener-heres-why-thats-a-problem/

>>130565096
>>130566113
I recommend 'last chance to see' btw

>>130563249
Come on. Flat earthers are way below any other conspiracy. Even hollow earth.

What's really amazing is how attention gets directed towards certain topics.

For instance, when a coalition of international scientists authored a report citing the hazards of cell phone radiation in children, nobody cared despite cell phone towers being installed in close proximity to school playgrounds and day care centers. Not to mention, parents providing cell phones to young children. Ignoring the children, there is a large amount of data from the scientific community that cell phone radiation can cause harm in adults as well.

Despite all this information about the harm this technology causes, nothing is being done to fix the problem and in fact, the problem is actively being made worse with the proliferation and expansion of cell phone networks.

If you advocate that we must stop industrialization to solve climate change, then I must insist that we immediately cease the use of cellular phones and the installation of cellular network infrastructure.

>>130563249
I believe in man made global warming. I agree we should be trying harder to protect the environment, and even spend more money on it then we do now.

Please convince me that I want my country to be part of the Paris Accord. The kind of virtue signaling politics where you have to agree to anything titled as an environmental bill or saving the children is retarded and ruining the world. Just because it is "about saving the environment" does not, in any way, indicate that it is a good thing to be a part of.

When people complain about the costs of many such laws and agreements, the opposition usually assumes that they want to spend the money in other areas. This may not be true. If there is a more resources efficient way to improve the environment, then why would I choose to spend that money and effort on the Paris Accord instead just to virtue signal?

>wanting a carbon tax
>not knowing carbon tax is the first step to an oxygen tax

File: 1497841017817.jpg (56KB, 432x569px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 432x569px

>>130563249
Remember, the phrase "climate change" is a trap.

What they REALLY mean is "catastrophic man-made climate change", which is, in fact, absolute horseshit.

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

You can't argue with science, that's right because science isn't a sentient being capable of debate

>>130563249
>99% of scientists agree that man-made global warming is real
The other 1% they asked weren't trying to get federal grant money

>>130563249
do you have a list of every scientist? because without that there is no 99%

>>130566852
Play both sides for a shekel? Who would do this terrible thing???

>>130563249
99% of the scientists THAT WERE INCLUDED IN THE SURVEY. Only hand picked scientists were sent the survey. Its a bogus study.

Protip: 99% percent of scientists have been wrong many times in history.
Usually, the tell is when they want to stifle debate on the issue that 99% of them agree on.

File: 32712f891d207d7cc0c3cf1ad466b6d48c756544483a2c03e0ec2ef875347edb_1.jpg (31KB, 499x566px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 499x566px

>>130563249

You ever jizz on a bird, OP?

>>130563249

Yes? The Earth is clearly getting warmer. But the question is it worth it to let billions of people suffer for the SLIGHT possibility that the Earth will be saved?

The answer is no, because we have no idea how much the climate will change in the next 50 years. In current year, climate (((science))) is more akin to a doomsday cult than an actual academic study.

>>130563829

Commies aren't dumb.

They're evil. Evil greedy pigs

>>130567089
I recommend you go argue with Mt. Pinatubo about climate change. Maybe it will listen and never erupt again.

File: GlobalCarbonBudget_4-1024x439.png (180KB, 1024x439px) Image search: [Google]

180KB, 1024x439px

>>130563249
Air pollution actually cools the earth because the particulates reflect sunlight. China is actually clamping down on air pollution, so the effects of climate change are going to be even more apparent. Add in the fact that they promised to only hit peak emissions by 2030, climate change is unavoidable no matter what we do

>>130563249
lol these left wing nuts act as if they live in tree huts in the jungle and live off the land.

they've "destroyed"this planet as much as anyone else.

>>130563249
I don't deny thats is real I just don't think the consequences are worth becoming a faggot over.

>>130568722
Too much estrogen so they act on emotion. Nothing FEELS better than saving the planet.

>>130563249
>>99% of scientists agree that man-made global warming is real
fake stat

>>130565092
this is racist

File: getthefuckout.gif (1MB, 400x225px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 400x225px

>>130563249
Here is what real scientists think about climate change.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vr65GM648OI&ab_channel=TheHeartlandInstitute
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NtcNjoDe5Pg&ab_channel=TheHeartlandInstitute
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zMX2DBEiI08&list=PLgnnPnL9OL7H1_hH-MeHeLCZY1J3oFkBJ&index=2&ab_channel=TheHeartlandInstitute
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I048z-BfVJU&list=PLgnnPnL9OL7H1_hH-MeHeLCZY1J3oFkBJ&ab_channel=TheHeartlandInstitute

>>130567467
OP got BTFO by this.

>>130563249
we just want California and New York to be under water. nothing wrong with that

>>130563249
so sleepy so tired

>>130565096
turns out the upcoming ice age cover is fake

Climate scientists are artists not scientists. Otherwise we would call con artists con scientists. Anyone who tells you that if the global temperature rises 2 degrees we will see catastrophic mass extinctions and the only way to stop it is to give them more money to study it is a con artist.

>>130563249
>everyone denying it are Alex Jones-tier retards, at the same level as flat earthers and anti-vaxxers

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

Ad hominem (Latin for "to the man" or "to the person"[1]), short for argumentum ad hominem, is now usually understood as a logical fallacy in which an argument is rebutted by attacking the character, motive, or other attribute of the person making the argument, or persons associated with the argument, rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself.[2]

OP is a faggot... imagine that.

>>130563249
>1 post by this ID

typical slide thread...

File: 1496695125789.jpg (243KB, 1080x1080px) Image search: [Google]

243KB, 1080x1080px

>>130564039
Of course scientists look like they don't know what they're talking about if you personally don't have any idea what they have been saying.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_cooling
Show me any evidence that any of the ridiculous claims in your chart were ever widely accepted in our scientific community.

>inb4 you you can't respond

>>130563249
yet very real fukushima, china syndrome ignored

File: 1101070409_400.jpg (44KB, 400x538px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 400x538px

>>130565096
>Being this easy to manipulate

>>130566331
Actually our current models successfully reproduce temperatures since 1900 globally, by land, in the air and the ocean. So, we do.

>>130563249
99% of con scientists believe you're a good guy and you're making the smartest investment of your life

>>130565355

>take your money and give the elites more legal power over you.

Please tell me, how much obama taxed you, personally, because of global warming.

do people here SERIOUSLY believe that you can increase N2O by 20%, CO2 by 40% and CH4 by 150% without consequences?

FYI the Great Barrier Reef isn't really 95% bleached and dying from the temperature

scientists are just being paid by George Soros to pour clorox in the water

>>130575183
or fukushima

>>130574271

The China Syndrome was a fucking movie you retarded chimp.

>>130564532
Climate change is a fact. Now quantify any affect man is having on an already changing climate.

>>130566323
No. The only solution is to tax rich nations into oblivion.

>>130575418
the premise moved from fiction to fact

they can no longer locate the cores burgerman

>>130574976
A consequence of increasing CO2 is a massive increase in plant growth and health.

Do people seriously believe trying to stop the globe from becoming 1 degree warmer, on a planet that's temperature has been in constant change and forever will be, which has been both hotter and colder in the past, is somehow solved by massively increasing the power and control of government?

>>130575456
fukushima is the real clear and present earth killer

>>130575382
You think Fukushima is bleaching the Great Barrier Reef?

...why?

No I'm not asking why you think that. I'm not interested. I'm wondering why haven't you killed yourself yet.

File: shekelgatherer.png (376KB, 600x426px) Image search: [Google]

376KB, 600x426px

>>130574255
>Show me any evidence

It has never been about showing any real evidence but I'm sure you already know that.

>>130563249
Notice how you used two different phrases to explain the same theory
Notice how one is more broad than the other
Now, notice that since Global Warming isn't panning out, they change to climate change so ANY change in temperature (+/-) is "vindicated" by dumb people
Now...finally realize that even if everyone agreed to the Paris accord (which is non-ratifying) would change the temperature in 100 years only by .2 C

I'll agree with you our industrious and transportation centers have added to it
I'll agree that we can do better, and we have certainly gotten better over the years HOWEVER,

>We aren't the only cause
>In some ways, there's nothing we CAN do
>The only ways we can do anything to improve is what we're doing now, while adapting to the change and preventing previous mistakes

>>130563249
>99% of scientists agree that man-made global warming is real
Why you have to start with a false claim?

I'm sure these scientists in no way benefit from the Jew Bucks going to "climate change" research.

>>130575821

The world was a better place when we lobotomized you "people."

>>130563249
Not true at all.

>>130563249
Has one single person died because of climate change?

Also Al Gore said the polar ice caps would melt by 2012, why do you still believe him?

>>130563249
we need more migrants driving cars

>>130576278
Yes I do, you're correct. None of the right wing opposition to reality has ever involved anything other than feelings.

https://youtu.be/YQshyqCLYHo

Great.

Let's have Germany, France, and Belgium offer up the costs for the Paris Agreement without America. You can do it! Pay China and a bunch of 3rd world countries money to grow green and not coal, it's your money not America's!

>>130576142
Million of gallons of sea water have been dumped on the melted down nuke reactors for years . The ice barrier failed...unprecedented disaster as heavy untreated water is dumped in the pacific

wake the fuck up

>>130576970
Notice how they don't want to renegotiate?

Yeah, they didn't give a shit about the environment they just wanted us down a peg

>>130576440
enjoy your glow in the dark cali sushi roll , good shill hunting
how do you like that guac

>>130576791
You actually got that backwards but it's easy to do since they are two sides of the same shekel anyway.

>>130564198
True, its built on the overwhelming preponderance of evidence. So why don't you read a few climate papers?

>>130565092
75/77 = 97.5%
Also you do realise that there are LOADS papers who find similar numbers within climate scientists. I suggest you look up the other surveys.

>>130564532
Here's your rebuttal.

DAILY REMINDER

* A doubling of preindustrial CO2, absent any feedbacks, would result in a maximum forcing of +1.2C.

* The General Circulation Models, and the IPCC, predict 2-8C of warming because AGW theory assumes a positive H2O feedback. They assume that if CO2 causes a little warming, the atmosphere will hold more water vapor and that more water vapor will lead to a lot of warming.

* The warming predictions cover such a large range because everyone assumes a different average H2O feedback rate.

* Every GCM based on this assumption has failed to model temperatures for the past 17 years. They are all trending too high.

* In the late 1990's the modelers themselves stated that if they missed their predictions for more then a decade that would falsify AGW theory.

* There is no data to suggest a +H2O feedback either now or in Earth's past.

* If there is no +H2O feedback then we literally have nothing to worry about.

* The average climate change believer knows none of this. Politicians, citizens, activists, surprisingly even a lot of scientists are literally ignorant of the theory and the math. In their mind it's simply "CO2 = bad" and "experts say we're warming faster then ever."

Why are you trying to convince complete idiots? They will never believe it cuz muh feminist/lefty/cuck/ propaganda etc. They are retarded and you should let them be retarded. Like who the fuck cares what this mongoloids think. Leave them be stupid and move on

File: Global-Warming-Cyclical.jpg (136KB, 975x630px) Image search: [Google]

136KB, 975x630px

>>130563249
We are way below what was known as The Roman Warming.
We are in a long term Global Cooling.
Maunder Minimum is coming, prepare.
These Global Warming idiot only use the last 100 years of data.
Also the Sun has gone into a quiet period.
Beware.

>>130565142
>No you massive faggot, that so-called study was a fraud:
>so-called study
>study
>singular
Always makes me laugh when you retards say this. It becomes immediately apparent that you haven't looked at the literature and instead listened to some blog or YouTuber rattle off how he feels he can discredit a single survey.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surveys_of_scientists%27_views_on_climate_change
Are all of them fraudulent?

>>130577370

>ooga booga bix nood

Also colour me surprised that most of the climate denialists/ alien believers/ reptile agendars, flat eartjers etc.... are Americans. Hmmmm really makes you wonder why???

>>130563249
99% of climate change scientists agree that they aren't full of shit

>>130574673
I'm Canadian and as Trudeau has said, the tax is coming.
Not only will I be paying Carbon Tax, but so will all the companies that provide me with goods and services.
That means the price of goods and services goes up.
That means that most people from my end of the country aren't going to be able to afford to live.

>>130577529
Can I please have a source on this sir?

>>130577757
If you ask people if they have killed someone, you will discovery we don't have any killer in our society.

File: climate models suck.jpg (77KB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 500x375px

>>130577462
>True, its built on the overwhelming preponderance of evidence. So why don't you read a few climate papers?
>"evidence"
The proper term for a scientific theory which has failed to predict real world observations is "falsified."

There's no H2O feedback in the form of amplified warming.

>>130563249
That does not make them right, 99% or not - why refute the 1% that prove them wrong again?

>>130577529
Forget CO2

fukushima still unresolved

the only eco disaster we turn a blind eye to

>>130563249
Nope. Sorry that your side lost embarrassingly and one-sidedly. You will not be allowed to steal, criminal.

>>130563249
Remember ClimateGate? Hundreds of "climate scientists" caught colluding and falsifying climate data.

>>130578069
You can not push an agenda with fukushima.

>>130563249
>people complain about global warming
>continue dumping billions into factory farming

Only vegans have any right to argue for climate change. They're also right

File: sea_radiation.jpg (129KB, 750x568px) Image search: [Google]

129KB, 750x568px

>>130576974

You are literally retarded.

>>130577915
wow, you gone feral

>>130578115

See an example. What is it whit you Americans?

>>130577935
The best part is when the inevitable global warming really starts taking effect, Canada has reduced the worlds emissions by 0.02%, yet none of it's people can afford to heat or cool their home during the coming "extreme" weather events.

File: Democrats.jpg (163KB, 964x1348px) Image search: [Google]

163KB, 964x1348px

>>130563249

Why is the left so obsessed with murdering people? Maybe we do need gun control and we can just make it illegal for anyone who's ever voted or sympathized with leftist politics to own a firearm.

>>130577529
>* If there is no +H2O feedback then we literally have nothing to worry about.

Here are some other positive feedbacks to worry about if you even believe the shit you just posted

>Melting Sea Ice reducing Arctic Albedo
>Increased wildfires releasing more CO2
>Melting Permafrost releasing methane
>Distabilised seafloor clathrates release methane

But yeah nothing to worry about XDDDD you know more than them stupid sciencetists.

File: anime girl reaction face 367.gif (1018KB, 500x388px) Image search: [Google]

1018KB, 500x388px

>>130578247
Your impotent screeching at the defeat of your pyramid scheme pleases me immensely. Your pitiful flailing attempts to steal money from Right Wing Men (the only kind of men) have failed.

Begone. Continue being angry and if at all possible, inform others.

>>130563249
>hitler would be for giving china a monpoly on industry under the pretense of destroying his own industry

not a single leader born pre 1940 would support this insane bullshit.

>>130563249
Climate is always changing. what difference does it make

>>130563249
>Some fucking chink has the balls to bitch about white americans polluting
Youre gonna have india tier deformities soon chang

>>130563249
Get your own money, faget. THIS was the ultimate in wealth redistribution and we saw right through it.

>>130563249
It is actually 80% not 97%

>>130578127
the fuck you talking about

ice barricade failed

lost cores, millions of liters of heavy water dumped raw in the pacific AND THAT is not a prob...

>>130578333

Because we need to eradicate dumb fucks like. Being on left doesn't mean you are good boy scout. We want to kill people, like the right does. Only difference is that right wants to kill their kind of enemies and we ours. What's the problem?

>>130563249

>99% of scientists agree that man-made global warming is real

You shouldn't be so obvious.

>>130573499
>oey vey goyim its fake news!!!

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

5 seconds in google faggot.

>>130578069
>fukushima
>"eco disaster"
God fucking damn it...

I am convinced that the right to vote or participate in any meaningful way in politics should be based on one's tested and verified mathematical abilities. All the bullshit you find in environmentalism and in economics comes down to the fact that the majority of people simply can't grasp the numbers behind their pet theories. If it's beyond basic arithmetic on the scale of day to day financial transactions, the average human being is as worthless as tits on a hog.

No one even died from Fukushima, and the maximum risk is probably a half dozen additional cancers over the next 50 years. That's not an "eco disaster".

>cue crackpot theories about polluting the entire Pacific and killing all the fishies

File: 1491343847913.jpg (894KB, 2250x1346px) Image search: [Google]

894KB, 2250x1346px

>>130563249
I don't deny it. I support global warming, and all other events that bring chaos and uncertainty.

>>130563829
communists are all jews or useful idiots

99% of niggers dont work so the wellfare system has become an invisible fence for the working populace to be robbed civilly instead of a fallback so that people with chronic and terminal illnesses don't have to work which could in some cases cut their lives even shorter than they already are. This doesnt help niggers and it doesnt help sick people but the left will continue to bitch about "muh polar icecaps" until the wellfare stops and the ghettos explode and they die in a raid on their neighborhood.

>>130578781
this has no political use, thus no one cares, if you could take money away from people or regulate they life you would see a world commotion.

>>130578951

That's why we banned jews from our former yugoslavian republic, fucking dumbass.

but xiu xiu is literally the worst singer i've ever heard

>>130577989
>The proper term for a scientific theory which has failed to predict real world observations is "falsified."
Newtons gravity was falsified as soon as we observed the precession of mercury...should we discard gravity as a theory? No, we kept the idea of gravity and made a better model of it to accomodate the new data.

>no H2O feedback
Are you trying to say that water vapor is not a greenhouse gas or that an increase in temperature doesn't cause water to evaporate more?

>>130563249
>man makes globe warm
>kills 99% of man

>>130574255
We have always been at war with East Asia.

Yay loaded statements.

I too agree that the laws of thermodynamics are true.

I can agree that the cycles that contribute to this change are caused in part by man made objects.

These statements when combined together, have not been sufficiently quantified as to say "science says..."

>>130566852
That article states that the increased levels of carbon dioxide are causing plants to overgrow due to more nutrient availability. The main point was that despite this, the growth is not enough to keep up with the atmospheric carbon increase and only offsets it a little. There is nothing in there that says we should not make an effort to plant more trees.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T43vc4NZUUc

>>130563249
Name one climate scientist

File: models.gif (859KB, 500x281px) Image search: [Google]

859KB, 500x281px

>>130577989
Nice figure, now check out mine.

>>130578432
>>>130577529 (You)
>>* If there is no +H2O feedback then we literally have nothing to worry about.
>Here are some other positive feedbacks to worry about if you even believe the facts you just posted.
FIFY

>>Melting Sea Ice reducing Arctic Albedo
Too insignificant to measurably impact global climate.

>>Increased wildfires releasing more CO2
Kek. 1C of warming cannot cause this.

>>Melting Permafrost releasing methane
This either didn't happen during the Roman and Medieval optimums, or it was not significant enough to make a measurable difference. So why would it make a difference now?

>>Distabilised seafloor clathrates release methane
Please read this post: >>130578907
You are the mathematically illiterate person I am referring to. To disrupt seafloor temperatures by that amount would require an increase in solar output sufficient to kill us all LONG before the methane comes into play.

>>130578907
Gimme the digits of your dealer

Fuckusallshima is the only real topic of discussion

fact: #3 probe was to be sent in this week in an attempt to locate where 2 nuclear reactors have gone

meanwhile hundreds of thousands of liters of sea water have been pumped and dumped on the lost cores and the resulting heavy water is being untreated and dumped in the pacific ocean and your ass is worried about CO2

WOW

>>130579455
I'm going to assume this is the same bullshit gif someone posted in another thread. Here was my response:

FIRST SLIDE
1. The data is not improperly aligned.
2. Will address below.
3. The satellite and radiosonde data sets ARE in close agreement. Always have been.
4. What other groups? GISS? Call me when they reply to legal FOIA requests and stop adjusting their data up.

SECOND SLIDE
This pretty much confirms the first slide, but with the worst models pulled and a big gray area to make you think the models are "within range." Observations are at the bottom of the range, close to the models with the weakest H2O feedback. Another decade and no data set will be within the (ridiculously large) uncertainty range in this slide.

THIRD SLIDE
>Mann hockey stick
Enough said.

FOURTH SLIDE
Actual sea level rise is at the bottom of the range, again consistent with CO2 forcing only.

FIFTH SLIDE
Arctic sea ice is not driven by air temperature, but by shifts in ocean currents that are not primarily driven by global climate. Arctic sea ice is irrelevant any way.

SIXTH SLIDE
When AGW believers didn't see the warming they predicted in the ocean temp data sets from buoys they mixed in data from commercial shipping. The problem? Those ships typically measure ocean water at the engine cooling intake, where the water has already been warmed by the ship.

FINAL NOTE: the guy who created this gif shrunk everything to the point that it was hard to read/reference all for a shitty fade animation that resulted in 190 frames instead of 6. He's a piece of shit.

>>130579746
>THE NUKLEAR CORES ARE MELTING TO THE CENTER OF THE EARTH!
>"Gimme the digits of your dealer"
You first because he clearly has the best shit.

>meanwhile hundreds of thousands of liters of sea water have been pumped and dumped on the lost cores and the resulting heavy water is being untreated and dumped in the pacific ocean
>"hundreds of thousands of liters"
>affecting the Pacific Ocean
Pick one.

>>130579084
The pacific ocean and the millions of liters of untreated heavy water being dumped into it is more political than some theoretical CO2 bullshit

probe #3 has been sent down this week to ATTEMPT to locate melted down nuclear reactors

that shit I can quantify

we can send a NASA probe to see Ur-Anus but we still can't locate two fucking melted down nuclear reactors and this is of no consequence

WOW

>>130563249
>99% of scientists agree

False.

>>130579585
2 fucking nuclear reactors have gone broken arrow...millions of gallons of sea water are being pumped and dumped as heavy water back into the pacific a day and you wish to contemplate fractions of CO2 levels?????

You fucking huffing?

Our ass is on fire, stop checking out your crotch

lol @ Jamie Stewart being extremely bipartisan. I mean his music sounds exceptionally homosexual, but I thought there was a hint of irony to it all.

>>130580134
The japs are sending in probe #3 this week cause the 2 last one got fried ....no tech exists to withstand the insane levels of radiation and you are worried about CO2....

your dealer is the best for sure, even snoop calls your dude

>>130580513
>2 fucking nuclear reactors have gone broken arrow...
LOL no they have not. They're right where we left them. The probes aren't "looking for the cores", they're simply sent in to learn more about the melted mess. And the probes are failing due to high radiation levels.

>millions of gallons of sea water are being pumped and dumped as heavy water back into the pacific a day and you wish to contemplate fractions of CO2 levels?????
Do you have any fucking clue how massive the Pacific Ocean is? No. No you do not. We could take bulldozers and push all of Fukushima into the water and the impact would be entirely local.

How much co2 does the average volcanic eruption produce?

File: 2015110316390286643.jpg (32KB, 300x270px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 300x270px

>>130580772
>no tech exists to withstand the insane levels of radiation and you are worried about CO2....
Sure it does. But they're under-building the robots like they did in Chernobyl because everyone assumes the low end and then ends up paying 2/3/4x rather than just building the thing to the correct specs.

Also: they will probably build a robot that can survive just long enough to give them the info they want. Not survive and return because that would cost more $$$.

But again, you could push the entire reactor building into the Pacific and the Pacific would just laugh at your ass.

>>130581040
Ok Jimbo....

so dumping untreated radiactive water in the pacific since 2011 is cool cause... you know... da pacific is huge and shit ...is ok...cause it is so huge

but CO2 levels that plants and the ocean buffers is more of a problem than fucking nuclear waste

You want 2 scoops of depleted uranium in your raisin bran? cause its like only 2 scoops

>>130581423
This is not Hiroshima Mr Burger

Nuclear waste is not MUH

the Japs have been flooding the reactors with millions of gallons of water a day

the heavy water is untreated and dumped into the pacific

this has been going on since 2011

>>130581423
This is not Hiroshima Mr Burger

Nuclear waste is not MUH

the Japs have been flooding the reactors with millions of gallons of water a day

the heavy water is untreated and dumped into the pacific

this has been going on since 2011

>>130563249
>1 post by this shillD
>twitter screencap from a literal who
>200+ replies

>>130579455
rekt

>>130581668
>Ok Jimbo....
>so dumping untreated radiactive water in the pacific since 2011 is cool cause... you know... da pacific is huge and shit
Yes. That's exactly right. The Pacific is so large that the total amount of material in the reactor is irrelevant. And 99.99999% of the material in the reactor is still in the reactor.

>>130581967
It could go on for the next thousand years and not impact the Pacific. I mean that literally.

>>130584263
Missed: >>130579938

>>130563249
I believe in climate change but I kind of want to bully Xiu Xiu now.

US SENATE CLIMATE HEARING, FULL

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=EHFfOOF-6Fs&feature=youtu.be

Basically NASA and other government agencies wasted trillions making shitty computer models and then they fudged the data to make them work, which all got way out of hand.

>>130584378
Burger level intelligent

No way to stop Fukushima ...none

File: 1454293332936.png (290KB, 512x384px) Image search: [Google]

290KB, 512x384px

>>130563249
I bet you anything you dont know shit about what the Paris Accord actually entales or how it would actually effect global pollution

>muh virtue signaling!!

Fuck off and get saged nigger

>>130584760
You are mathematically illiterate which is why you think NUMBER THAT SOUNDS SO BIG could affect an ocean with 710,000,000 km3 of water.

>>130579938
>being this desperate
Every single one of your rebuttals is incredibly weak.

>FIRST SLIDE
You purposely missed 5)

>worst models pulled
Any proof of this or are you just going to assert it?

>big gray area to make you think the models are "within range."
>error bars are a conspiracy

>Observations are at the bottom of the range, close to the models with the weakest H2O feedback
Are you blind?

>THIRD SLIDE
Nice argument

>Actual sea level rise is at the bottom of the range
Again, are you blind?

>Arctic sea ice is not driven by air temperature, but by shifts in ocean currents that are not primarily driven by global climate.
Nice source

>NOAA data set is fucked because they used data manipulation that i don't understand
https://curryja.files.wordpress.com/2015/11/combined-buoy-sst-trends-full.png

File: IMG_1617.jpg (23KB, 380x133px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 380x133px

>>130581668
4 scoops CMON

>>130577757
>It becomes immediately apparent that you haven't looked at the literature

>he reads Wikipedia and he thinks he now knows everything

The Cook study was the most publicized study of this kind and it was a fraud, go read the link I posted. TAKE THE TIME TO READ THE WHOLE PAGE. It took me about 30 minutes. And then ask yourself what the other studies are worth if the biggest one is clearly an intellectual fraud.

speaking of Oreskes:

Leading scientific journals 'are censoring debate on global warming'

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/1489105/Leading-scientific-journals-are-censoring-debate-on-global-warming.html

and she's a crazy climate armageddon activist who predicts a cat holocaust for 2023:

http://www.geocurrents.info/physical-geography/eco-authoritarian-catastrophism-dismal-deluded-vision-naomi-oreskes-erik-m-conway

I have a link on the Anderegg study somewhere. It's also weak.

File: 1497896407590.jpg (25KB, 525x704px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 525x704px

Of course climate change is fucking real, it changes all the time on a geological scale. Humans have witnessed it in the past too; we've been coming out if a cooling phase for a long time due to high solar activity which was interrupted briefly by large volcanic eruptions. We're soon going into a grand solar minimum and should start seeing cooling. Most people don't deny climate change they deny that it is anthropogenic in cause because it isn't caused by humans. The earth is extremely good at regulating itself we've had life on this planet for millions of years; you think a couple millennia of human intervention is ending the planet? You're an idiot. We're just seeing a climactic shift we haven't seen before due to cyclical variables we haven't been around ling enough to experience.

>>130589490
>TAKE THE TIME TO READ THE WHOLE PAGE. It took me about 30 minutes.

This one:

Cooking stove use, housing associations, white males, and the 97%

http://www.joseduarte.com/blog/cooking-stove-use-housing-associations-white-males-and-the-97

http://archive.is/xJqb4

>>130563249
I fail to see what sullying the coasts of my country with windmills that produce no energy will do to stop alleged man made climate change

>>130567348
>What's really amazing is how attention gets directed towards certain topics.

Monsanto made a deal with the WWF to get a stamp of approval from the biggest and wealthiest Green group on the planet. Their intensive soy culture is now certified 'green' by the WWF. And of course the WWF is all in on the catastrophic global warming climate change train.

'Climate Change' is a Weapon of Mass Distraction. It's not pollution and we're going to have to adapt to climate changes in the future anyway.

>>130563249
99% receive govt funds for their "credible" work.
kek

File: mikiru google it.jpg (15KB, 633x356px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 633x356px

>>130576970
Green energy is already cheaper than coal. Nobody wants coal any more.
Want to know what the end result of Trump "withdrawing" from the Paris Accords will be? The US will be a decade behind the rest of the world in moving to renewables and will have to pay through the fucking nose to catch up.

Oh, and Trump only started the process of leaving the Paris Accords...which takes 4 years. The next president is just going to turn around and say "welp we're staying in after all" and that will be that.

>>130589490
>go read the blog I linked
Nah I'm good.

>reads Wikipedia and he thinks he now knows everything
I'm just trying to illustrate that consensus has been shown in multiple papers, not just Cook which is not a perfect survey I'll admit.

>links a newspaper and a blog
Nice one. Well just brushing through the telegraph news story:
1) Dr B. Peiser is not a climate scientist, he's a social scientist at a shit tier uni
2) If you'd actually looked deeper than a news article you will of found that Dr Peiser decided to look at non-published articles by non-scientists and found his conclusion. I'm sure you could find a failure of consensus for gravity in this way.
3) Peiser has pretty much shriveled back all his objections since

>>130578894
>This hypothesis had little support in the scientific community, but gained temporary popular attention due to a combination of a slight downward trend of temperatures from the 1940s to the early 1970s and press reports that did not accurately reflect the full scope of the scientific climate literature, which showed a larger and faster-growing body of literature projecting future warming due to greenhouse gas emissions.

On the very page you linked

>>130563249
few people deny that man made climate change can have an impact

MANY people deny that its as bad as all you guys make it out to be

Beyond that, why not ask about chem-trails?

>>130563249
really then how come scientist have been caught not telling the truth about what they found

File: donald-trump.jpg (24KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 480x360px

>>130564039
>Retard cherry picks ideas that were always in the minority of scientists.

>>130563249
Can you retards ever learn to report and sage 1-post-by-this ID hatebait threads for fuck's sake?

>>130592564

>Nah I'm good.

It's just a complete deconstruction of the fradulent study concocted by John Cook and his pals. I'm surprised you don't want to read it. What are you afraid of?

>I'm just trying to illustrate that consensus has been shown in multiple papers, not just Cook which is not a perfect survey I'll admit.

>not just Cook which is not a perfect survey I'll admit.

It's not just not a perfect survey, it's a fraud. Go read the page I linked to. Do it you you fucking pussy. The author isn't even a conservative capitalist, he's a liberal mexican-american and I'm sure he doesn't like Donald Trump.

>1) Dr B. Peiser is not a climate scientist, he's a social scientist at a shit tier uni

Oh and who is John Cook? He's a professor of psychology and communication, he's not a climate scientist either. Since we're talking about the topic of a consensus among a group of people then being a social scientist is very relevant. You don't ask an astrophysicist for example to do a survey among scientists, you ask a social scientist to do that kind of thing. Duh.

>2) If you'd actually looked deeper than a news article you will of found that Dr Peiser decided to look at non-published articles by non-scientists and found his conclusion.

>he thinks the peer-review system works perfectly

Oh boy we got a real clueless one here

>3) Peiser has pretty much shriveled back all his objections since

OK, maybe it's true, my climate file is disorganized I haven't had the time do clean it up and update all the different sections. But do you think the great scientist Naomi Oreskes will take her cat holocaust prediction back? There's only six years left. The clock is ticking. Prepare to say goodbye to your cat.

>>130563249
We're not giving you trillions of dollars and even more unrevokable regulatory power for a projected and obviously "optimistic" PERCENTAGE OF A DEGREE change by 2100. A date so distant few of us still l live to see if it even works.
Cost/benefit, motherfucker, do you know it?!

>>130573499
It's TIME magazine, both are fake!

File: 1497651666060.jpg (103KB, 1500x645px) Image search: [Google]

103KB, 1500x645px

>>130563829
>They're evil. Evil, greedy pigs.
Climate change takes it's first victims

Grenfell Tower became more energy efficient, but the space between the cladding and the building increased the potential damage from fires, leaving hundreds of residents at the fire’s mercy.

cladding “is used as an insulation to make buildings more sustainable to meet green energy requirements.” Some 30,000 buildings in the U.K. have been retrofitted with cladding to cheaply comply with green energy mandates.

http://archive.is/mhbFf

Climate change nut jobs BTFO

>>130577757
>Naomi Oreskes

http://thelukewarmersway.wordpress.com/2015/01/08/the-grand-tradition-of-propaganda-in-climate-releases-to-understand-lewandowsky-you-must-travel-a-long-road/

"In 2004, Naomi Oreskes published a paper in Science titled “Beyond the Ivory Tower: The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change“. It purported to be an analysis of * a literature search for papers with the keywords “climate change”, * although she later corrected this to say the search terms used were “global climate change”. The search yielded 928 academic papers published between 1993 and 2003 in the ISI database and Oreskes’ analysis said that 75% of the papers either explicitly or implicitly supported the consensus view of climate change, while none directly disputed it. I’ve never seen what her criteria were for the six segments of belief/disbelief. If someone knows what they were I’d appreciate a reference.

Be that as it may, a number of publications by noted skeptics during the period between 1993 and 2003 escaped Oreskes’ attention. To be fair, there may be legitimate reasons why the results didn’t turn up in her search. The words “climate change” may not appear consecutively in the title, for example. For example, skeptical scientist Richard Lindzen’s 1993 paper ‘Climate Dynamics and Global Change‘ may not have appeared in the results because Climate and Change are not together. And skeptical scientist John Christy’s 2000 paper, ‘Assessing levels of uncertainty in recent temperature time series’ doesn’t have ‘climate’ or ‘change’ in the title at all. Similarly, Nils-Axel Morner’s 2003 paper, ‘Sunspot activity, solar wind, Earth’s rotation and climate on a decadal time-scale‘ may have been missed. [...]"

John Cook & the SkepticalScience forum used the same trick: if you use the right key words you miss many relevant studies.

File: jwo-and-you.jpg (371KB, 650x789px) Image search: [Google]

371KB, 650x789px

Things we can Thank Jews for:

The Climate Change Hoax
Communism
Zionism
Cultural Marxism (Social Engineering)
Usury
Feminism
Gun Control
The Homosexual and Transgender 'Movements'
Organ Trafficking
The Federal Reserve and IRS
The WTO, IMF, and World Bank
Iraq I and Iraq II
The Coming War with Iran
September 11th
WW1 and WW2
Holodomor
The Atomic Bomb
Open Borders, Mass Immigration, and Multiculturalism (but not for Israel)
The 'Holocaust' Lie and Extortion Racket
The Attack on the USS Liberty
Pornography
The Liberal Media
Hollywood and Obscenity in Movies / TV
Circumcision
Stock Market Bubbles and Crashes
Every Regime Change
Fluoridated Water, GMOs, Chemtrails
The Demonizing of Muslim People and the Wars Against Them
Kosher Tax
JFK Assassination
American Slave Trade
The Death of Jesus Christ

Etc, Etc, Etc...

>>130563249
>democrats are in bed with untold amounts of fossil fuel energy money and lobbying
>muh republicans
my god you shills are so pathetic with the same tired threads over and over, telegraphing you silly and impotent little plan

>>130565092
not just that, but the views of some of the scientists were misrepresented

the scientists are giving nuanced and detailed responses, while the propagandists spin that into a yay or nay

tl;dr it's much less than 97% of that list of climate scientists

>complaining about the weather getting nicer
lmao

>>130595810
The cost difference between flammable and non-flammable cladding tiles was £2/unit. The overall cost increase would have been around five grand.

In a multimillion-pound refit and rebuild project. That's not "global warming conspirators" causing all those deaths, that's some fuck pocketing £5000 from the budget so they get a nicer holiday.

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

157KB, 501x585px

>>130563829
Ya Think You're Hot Shit, Dontchya?!

>>130588836
>>FIRST SLIDE
>You purposely missed 5)
#5 shows just how ignorant the person who made the gif is. The temps are measured SURFACE to 50k. And while we may not live on Everest, the predictions of AGW theory are made to that altitude.

>>worst models pulled
>Any proof of this or are you just going to assert it?
You mean besides the fact that the uncertainty range is smaller (lower) than the worst model predictions?

>>big gray area to make you think the models are "within range."
>>error bars are a conspiracy
The uncertainty range published after Christy published his graph is so large (for the question of AGW) it's fucking ridiculous. It's propaganda, not science.

>>Observations are at the bottom of the range, close to the models with the weakest H2O feedback
>Are you blind?
Are you blind? Because that's exactly the case on slide 2.

>>THIRD SLIDE
>Nice argument
The Mann hockey stick has been thoroughly debunked. If you're citing it you are either ignorant or dishonest.

>>Actual sea level rise is at the bottom of the range
>Again, are you blind?
Do you see the little squiggly observation line? You know, the one near the bottom.

>>Arctic sea ice is not driven by air temperature, but by shifts in ocean currents that are not primarily driven by global climate.
>Nice source
This is like a man claiming to be a mechanic demanding a source for the claim that the gas pedal is on the right.

>>NOAA data set is fucked because they used data manipulation that i don't understand
Oh, I fully understand what they did. And it is fucked. But the ground data set always has been fucked for a dozen reasons. It's pure shit.

>>130598224
>That's not "global warming conspirators" causing all those deaths,
“is used as an insulation to make buildings more sustainable to meet green energy requirements.

>>130563249
If Hitler were alive he wouldn't have let jews fuck the climate in the first place.

>>130563249
>99% of scientists agree that man-made global warming is real
how many scientists were asked? and do any of them rely on government funding for their projects?

>>130598822
5 grand "saving" killed scores of kids. The cladding was going up anyway (all the expensive apartment blocks nearby wanted to disguise the ugly 70s brutalist tower) so it's not like the choice was what you seem to think it was.

>>130563249
Autism is contagious
You can't prove me wrong when shit like this exists.

>>130563249
>it's a social media screen shot thread

>>130566113

There is NO FUCKING WAY to determine what percentage of "global warming" is caused by MAN you STUPID FUCKING NIGGER!

>>130563249
You probably have no fucking idea what the Paris Accord entailed. It was, as all liberal things are, a well-intentioned impractical idea that left Americans with the bill and responsibility for other countries behavior. I think California responded perfectly. Go fucking fund it yourself with the few shekels you have left after all the other well-intentioned liberal bullshit you've bankrupted yourself for. Don't drag me into it.
That is just the thing about this shit. Climate change is a thing. But fuck the climate. At this point We'd just be saving the earth for millineal genderconfusedmuslimrapelovingniggerfaggots who never deserved to live in the first place. just for this, I'm going to dump my garbage on the street tonight by some elementary school.

>>130563249
>99% of scientists agree that man-made global warming is real

wrong

100% of scientist agree that there are only 2 genders, yet that doesn't stop you leftie fruit loops from being autistic science deniers.

>>130563249
What morally good people these are.

>>130577757
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surveys_of_scientists%27_views_on_climate_change

I like how they put John Cook's propaganda upfront.

By the way there's at least one study missing from that page, "Stenhouse, Neil, et al. "Meteorologists' Views About Global Warming: A Survey of American Meteorological Society Professional Members." Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society 95.7 (2014): 1029-1040." >>130565791

And there's a more recent survey by Bray and von Storch that's not on that page either.

As a general rule Wikipedia is a joke. If you believe in Wikipedia you're a sucker. That place is specifically targeted by all kinds of activists to try to push their Narrative.

I agree. All republicans should be shot.
God Save the Queen.

>>130563249
fuck your scientist you follower hippy

>>130563249
Ya he would. But only because he realizes how much of a sucker ppl are.

The thing with "knowledge" of the physical sciences is this - you didn't create this world so the knowledge which already exist, is given to you. Whites were given the knowledge but what they did with it was evil - so whites must pay.

>>130563829
We will burn you. Scumfag.

Xiu Xiu is one of my favourite artists.

It kind of bums me out when they stick their head into the political arena.
I'd be equally pissed if politicians got involved in music (Tipper Gore and Mrs Bush I'm looking at you).

File: Screen Shot 2015-12-01 at 10.42.28 AM.png (25KB, 872x214px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 872x214px

>>130601557
>least one study missing from that page
I never said it was comprehensive, I was just demonstrating there are multiple surveys confirming consensus, such as:
>Stenhouse, Neil, et al. "Meteorologists' Views About Global Warming
"Climate science experts who publish mostly on climate change and climate scientists who publish mostly on other topics were the two groups most likely to be convinced that humans have contributed to global warming, with 93% of each group indicating their concurrence. The two groups least likely to be convinced of this were the nonpublishing climate scientists and nonpublishing meteorologists/ atmospheric scientists, at 65% and 59%, respectively. In the middle were the two groups of publishing meteorologists/atmospheric scientists at 79% and 78%, respectively."
"Our findings regarding the degree of consensus about human-caused climate change among the most expert meteorologists are similar to those of Doran and Zimmerman (2009): 93% of actively publishing climate scientists indicated they are convinced that humans have contributed to global warming."
Read studies not blogs.
>Bray and von Storch
Pic related is their calibre of question and they still give 87%.
https://www.hzg.de/imperia/md/content/hzg/zentrale_einrichtungen/bibliothek/berichte/hzg_reports_2016/hzg_report_2016_2.pdf

>>130563249
i've listened to the band that tweeted that before, strange shit

they literally have an entire album that was made just using vibrators

>>130563249
>>130563249
let me bring you up to speed because you're clearly autistic. the 99% meme is from a study done where they asked scientists if CO2 was a "greenhouse gas". That is nowhere close to saying that "global warming is real" or that "global warming will be bad" (it would probably be a net benefit for the globe, allowing us to feed billions more). Insert climate climate, wash rinse. Please grow up and get a new hobby.

>>130564198
Actually peer review is the fucking point of science tardbot

>>130604387
>I was just demonstrating there are multiple surveys confirming consensus,

And you're still refusing to read the most definitive deconstruction of the biggest most publicized of all those 97% consensus studies, here >>130589725 Why? Because it's not on Wikipedia? What are you afraid of? You take the time to reply to me but you refuse to take 30 minutes to read that page. Stop being such a coward and go read it.

File: frabz-What-The-Fuck-Am-I-Reading-b24151.jpg (169KB, 600x432px) Image search: [Google]

169KB, 600x432px

>>130563249
>You guys realise that if Hitler was alive he'd be for the Paris accord, right?
lolno

Hitler knows a jewish scheme when he sees one

File: IMG_6665.png (158KB, 1125x2001px) Image search: [Google]

158KB, 1125x2001px

>>130563249
Guarantee you that I've done more to mitigate climate change than you have. You're all talk, nigger.

>>130563249
The issue isn't even about climate change anymore. It's politicians like Our One True Leader Justin Trudeau using it as an excuse to take our shekels with bullshit like carbon taxes.

>>130563249
They line is 97%, kiddo.
Learn your lines first

>>130606773
>Actually peer review is the fucking point of science tardbot
The fucking point of science is the pursuit of the truth nature of the world. Peer review is a relatively recent construct of gatekeeperism in the overall arc of history in relation to man and his long standing scientific curiosity. That peer review is perceived by you to be the end all be all is for the fact that until very recently it did act (more or less) in the service of pure science (when you don't pause and take into consideration all those times now debunked scientific theories were advanced through that day's peer review). When it no longer does, science is no longer about the pursuit of truth, but a process of passing through the gate according to the rules of that gate's keepers.

>>130571008

Horseshit.

This is what a real scientist thinks about climate change: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t0yd1avJrV8

File: enroncarbon.jpg (66KB, 300x225px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 300x225px

Follow the money.

>>130563249
The Yellowstone super volcano will cause climate change. Go protest that.

File: enroncarbon2.jpg (65KB, 300x225px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 300x225px

Follow the money

>>130607171

Aww, isn't it cute? The privileged white male thinks he's making a difference with his solar panels. I'm sure that Tesla runs good on all that smugness.

>>130563249
this is shit tier bait nigger
doesnt matter if it is real, what matters is if we are having such a big effect as the (((msm))) think we are, which short answer is no. saged

>>130608619
take your privilege and shove up your ass, that should put on a show for your wife and the nigger she is fucking .

>>130609586

Fuck you, you inbred, toothless hillbilly.

>>130608567
>>130608607
Indeed follow the money. The money of carbon credits, and how those of the alarmist green movements intend to enrich themselves by redistributing the west's larges to the 3rd world, as directed by a political body (the UN) mostly made up of representatives of those 3rd world countries.

>>130563249
Real or not, would you use coal & other pollution-inducing stuff again?

It's bullshit science, but it doesn't matter if you concede the science is all real. We aren't doing anything about it, especially not the people getting money for anything. The biggest producers of CO2 and pollution are India and China and they aren't going to de-industrialize.

>>130564926
This. I don't give a fuck whether or not global warming is real (it probably is). I just know that your bullshit liberal solution isn't going to solve the problem and is just going to cost me additional money

>>130610136
>follow the money

A hundred trillion dollars


Mobilizing the Billions and Trillions for Climate Finance

http://archive.is/RvFrR

http://www.worldbank.org/en/news/feature/2015/04/18/raising-trillions-for-climate-finance

"Over the next 15 years, the global economy will require an estimated $89 trillion in infrastructure investments across cities, energy, and land-use systems, and $4.1 trillion in incremental investment for the low-carbon transition to keep within the internationally agreed limit of a 2 degree Celsius temperature rise."

File: nobelscientist-e1436281292525.png (525KB, 1200x516px) Image search: [Google]

525KB, 1200x516px

>everyone denying it are Alex Jones-tier retards, at the same level as flat earthers and anti-vaxxers


Nobel Prize-Winning Scientist Says Obama Is ‘Dead Wrong’ On Global Warming
“I would say that basically global warming is a non-problem,” Giaever, who won the Nobel for physics in 1973, told an audience at the Lindau Nobel Laureate meeting earlier this month.

Giaever ridiculed Obama for stating that “no challenge poses a greater threat to future generations than climate change.” The physicist called it a “ridiculous statement” and that Obama “gets bad advice” when it comes to global warming.

“I say this to Obama: Excuse me, Mr. President, but you’re wrong. Dead wrong,” Giaever said.

Giaever was a professor at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute’s School of Engineering and School of Science and received the Nobel Prize for physics for his work on quantum tunneling. Giaever said he was “horrified” about the science surrounding global warming when he conducted research on the subject in 2012.


http://dailycaller.com/2015/07/07/nobel-prize-winning-scientist-says-obama-is-dead-wrong-on-global-warming/

>>130611079
Thanks, archives anon. Sometimes you leafs aren't so bad.

By my math, the interests of hundreds of trillions of dollars are more worthy of being followed for their potential to corrupt than some few millions. (>>130608567, >>130608607) Would that be in keeping with a scientific approach to the economics of the debate over climate change narratives?

>>130598738
You are either retarded or a shill.

>>130606957
Ok I read it and I've already said I didn't think the Cook study is anywhere near gold standard. Despite that, even if you removed every fault that Cook made in including/excluding papers it wouldn't make a difference. Look how large the data set is:
http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/8/2/024024/media/erl460291datafile.txt
Pick 100 at random and if you want to make a considerable difference to the percentages you have to find ~10 fucked entries.

I'll let you have it, discard Cooks results. Still every other survey gives a huge consensus.

File: congo1.jpg (36KB, 736x411px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 736x411px

>>130563249
>Tonight

>>130563249
>Xiu Xiu
>XiuXiuForLife
>羞秀
What did she mean by this

>>130563249
>Hitler would love to bankrupt his country in order to give tons of money to a bunch of Jews.
I don't think so.

>>130563829
sage tovarishch

>>130612420
>I've already said I didn't think the Cook study is anywhere near gold standard

It's an intellectual fraud concocted by the Climate activists of the SkepticalScience.com forum. They called it the Consensus Project. You're so dense it's almost funny.

>Ok I read it

For real?

>Despite that, even if you removed every fault that Cook made in including/excluding papers it wouldn't make a difference

oh OK, you didn't read it.

>Look how large the data set is:

Irrelevant. You can't have activists for a cause conduct a study that violates their own official protocols multiple times and then pretend they're doing science. It was a fraud designed to be used as propaganda. Dana Nuccitelli himself said it on the SkS forum, he said "we're going to say it's 99%" even before they began the Consensus Project. They were discussing marketing ideas even before they began the so-called study:

http://www.hi-izuru.org/forum/The%20Consensus%20Project/2012-01-19-Marketing%20Ideas.html

"People think there's this big debate amongst climate scientists, and we're going to say there's a ~99% consensus. We also have to make the point that the ~1% of 'skeptics' are being given a disproportionate amount of attention in the media. Not a part of the paper of course, but in any blog posts and other media discussions of the paper."

>Still every other survey gives a huge consensus.

The one from Oreskes is also a joke >>130596947.

>>130563249
If Hitler was alive, there would be no Paris

File: muh_feels.png (20KB, 682x197px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 682x197px

>>130563249
Modern day science is a joke. Everything than can touch muh feelz is pretty much banned for discussion in western science world

>>130577757

The one from Doran is a sample of how many, 79 people? So the most prolific writers of peer-reviewed papers in the Climate Change category think Climate Change is very very very very important and also caused by human activity -- and I'm supposed to be surprised or convinced by the results of that survey? The opinion of the top researchers who have a vested interest in the Anthropogenic Global Warming theory because the current alarmism surrounding that theory is what enables them to have a long career and an inflated sense of importance will always be biased in favor of the conclusion that 'climate change' is very very very very important and that 'we must do something'.

Hence the need for objective data that can be analyzed by other people who may not have a vested interest in the Anthropogenic Global Warming theory. And that's when you run into problems that need some 'adjustments'.

>>130563249
>99

That number keeps going up

Hurrr durr how can we stop global warming OH I KNOW LETS TAX IT.

Yes you are RETARDED.

>>130600141
I'm going to dump my garbage on the street tonight by some elementary school.

My fucking sides....

>>130563249
>99% of scientists
oh yeah? well what about the other 1%? checkmate!

>>130607971
Lawl oh god guys plz halp me contain my sides

Saged

>>130618187
Sage is not a downvboat.

>>130565096
>>130564039
Ice ages last for about 120k years and are separated from each other by a 12k year warming period, which we are currently experiencing. The ice caps melted about 12k years ago, so naturally we assumed there would be another one soon. Now the claim is that global warming is going to prevent the next ice age from happening. There is no inconsistency here, you are just too stupid to do your own research so don't understand what's being presented.

Having said that
>>130563249
>99% of scientists agree that man-made global warming is real
The number 97% and the article this number came from is retarded. It was literally just a PhD student and her colleague sending an email to a few thousand "scientists in the field of climate change", to which about half replied, containing 2 questions and specifically asking for nothing more than a yes/no answer:
>has the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere risen in the last 50 years?
>did humans contribute in any way to this?

No fucking shit most answered yes to both, those questions are vague as fuck. The fact that even 3% answered "no" to either of them suggests they either took it as a joke or there really is genuine supporting evidence that it's all very questionable at best.

Here's a link to the """""study"""""
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2009EO030002/abstract

>>130618587
It is when I don't bump this shill garbage

Saaaaged

>>130619210
>contribute nothing
Also, announcing sage is against the rules.

>>130563249
Who the fuck care

according to scientists the planet is fucked no matter if we did. lib shits need to realize that the earth is not going to be around forever

Its because USA has already lost the renewable energy market to china's manufacturing hub in Shenzen.

Fossil fuel companies know they will be out of business in their lifetime so they are jewi'ing every last penny they can

>>130616934
>Hurrr durr how can we stop global warming OH I KNOW LETS TAX IT.

>Yes you are RETARDED.
To be fair, taxing things eliminated poverty, raised grades, cured diseases, stopped obesity, defrayed the costs of highway construction until they were paid off, halted the consumption of evil spirits and permanently safeguarded federal programs from insolvency.

/sarcasm

File: fire.png (361KB, 742x505px) Image search: [Google]

361KB, 742x505px

>>130563249
Saving the planet by cooling down the whole earth 2 degrees... easy peasy...
Putting out a wildfire.. impossible for humans

>>130592050
>four years from now
>new president

i have bad news, anon.