Climate change is a hoa...

>>132761110
-x

Prove causation, not correlation, then I'll take you seriously

>You could post deviant temperature from 10000 years ago and get different results
>If we've gone up 1 degree in about 100 years then why do we think 1 degree by 2100 is something that will end the earth?

>>132761110

>140 years

ahahahaha

>>132761369
what would you consider proof?

MERELY A COINCIDENCE GOYIM. BUY MORE LOW FUEL EFFICIENCY SUVS AND ELECTRICAL APPLIANCES

i'm not exactly a "denier" but it'd be a bit less disingenuous if you showed the thousand(s) before 1880

>>132761110
now lets roll back to 4.5 billion years ago
how was the earth's temperature back then?
;)

What will happen to this thread:

>Niggers storm in and post charts showing how much the earth temperature changed in the last 100 million years
>Always fail to mention that the temperature differences in their charts were not changed within 100-200 years like we have now but rather thousands of years
>Extremly temperature differences always had a cause that can be determined by the sun, vulcanos etc except for the rising tmeperature now

In other words people saying:
>B...BUT ITS NORMAL FOR TEMPERATURE TO RISE

are dumb idiots who cant realize how fucking wrond they are

>>132761110
Climate progress is real. No one disputes that. What is disputed (and not real) is that it's man made.

As much as the earth is not the center of the universe as much humans can not change the climate.

Typical leftist hubris

>>132761488
Halt all man made Co2 emissions for a day, measure the result.

>>132761488
a causal relation between human activity and temperature increase.

>>132761369
We know natural climate changes occur over thousands of years
We know the earth is getting warmer since about a hundred years
We know the industry became huge about a hundred years ago

>REEEE MUH CORRELATION IS NOT CAUSATION

>>132761477
this. show me the last 15,000 years you stupid piece of shit. that shows some inconvenient truths though so you won't

>>132761110
I'm all for the climate change meme if it means advances in green energy tech. Unfortunately the left are sadists and only push the climate change narrative because they want to punish industry.

>>132761404
>he thinks it'll end the earth
It won't. It'll have drastic complications with weather, sea levels rising. Basically any low lying place will be under water, creating millions & millions of refugees. Pull your head out your ass America, we don't need more refugees.

>>132761913
The earth has never gotten warmer before?

>>132761812
a days worth of Co2 is so insignificant, you wouldn't see a result

>>132761839
can you be a bit more specific on how that can be proved / what kind of proof you would accept?

Wow 1° difference in mean temperature. We're all going to die! There's no way that temperature could change by 1° in 150 years unless we did it.

Buy my green tech. Buy my leftover carbon emission credits. Import immigrants who will reduce your carbon footprint by, uhh, being brown... don't be racist!

>>132761110
Nice axes

File: 4c50ff073187d6a1bc0379ceacbe6948bb939f2cbb0b99097588b32f5d01d6c2.gif (628KB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

628KB, 500x375px

Soooo youre telling me the temperature is increasing as the ice age is ending???

>>132762355
It has
But like I said
Natural warming is a VERY LONG process
I literally learned that in high school, global warming deniers are beyond retarded
It would take a very stubborn autist to deny man influence on the current warming

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

21KB, 650x397px

>>132762005

>>132761110
WOW! That's a fancy looking chart with a lot of colors! It must be true now! Look at this chart guys, look at all the government funded science data we've just been shown in colors! Forget the fact that the government will only fund scientists that give them the results they want, THIS one is the real deal.

File: Phanerozoic_Climate_Change.png (30KB, 726x520px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 726x520px

>>132763185
500 million years of climate change

File: Five_Myr_Climate_Change.png (18KB, 745x224px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 745x224px

>>132763326
last

>>132761369
I thought only americans were this retarded

>>132761110
>claiming to have temperature data that old
>0.5 degree difference
ROFL!

>>132762440
how insignificant can a days worth of 21st century pollution be if 365x200 days worth of it supposedly got us this far without any external factors like natural warming and cooling cycles?

>>132761110
The number one reason I don't believe in climate change is this:

Supposedly, it started once humans started using fossil fuels like oil and coal. But in the 70's, the government scientists were SOOOO convinced of global cooling, that they were actually afraid of another ice age. So they were looking at the SAME fucking data scientists are looking at now, but they were seeing a massive cooling trend across the globe. Yet scientists today, are now claiming that there has always been a steady increase in global temperature since the first uses of fossil fuels. How can scientists only a few decades apart have complete opposite views on simple temperature. Someone is lying, and scientists should not be universally trusted without questioning their motives. Like how they only continue to get funding if they produce desired results.

>>132763033
How can you possibly know natural warming is a very long process when we've only been measuring global temperatures with real accuracy for 100 years?

>>132761110
Oh, check it out.
Another model that conveniently starts at about 1850/1890.
How convenient for the ideologue supporting anthropomorphic global warming theory.
It would be nice if some of their models went back before 1850, but I guess that just wont happen.
OH WELL.

>>132762206
You're not even doing anything about the fake refugees now, when the climate ones show up you will have no choice but to bend over and take it with no lube

File: 1497573922565.gif (469KB, 512x807px) Image search: [Google]

469KB, 512x807px

>>132763664
>why is 1/73000 a small number?

>>132763994
>what is record keeping?

>>132763926
not even 100 years. I'd say less than 70 years. Even temperature readings made in the 30's are still disputed today

https://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/09/17/hottest_temperature_ever/

File: Screen Shot 2017-07-07 at 10.29.49 AM.png (76KB, 1354x366px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 1354x366px

>>132764424
>>132763926
Here's an example from the 40's. Don't mind the location goy, they have it rough out in israel

https://www.treehugger.com/natural-sciences/6-nations-set-new-all-time-high-temperature-records-this-year-so-far-none-set-record-lows.html

File: 1489562553366.jpg (111KB, 680x979px) Image search: [Google]

111KB, 680x979px

>single degree deviation from mean since 1880
>The scale only goes up to the current all time high to eventuate the scary colors
>I'm supposed to believe that temperature measurement in 1880 was as accurate as the systems we have only had in place since 2000 with wide use of GPS and weather satellites
Daily reminder that these numbers are all based on ground based measurements from inaccurate third world stations that have to have their data (((adjusted))) because it doesn't fit the narrative to use the highly accurate satellites that can measure the temperature of a fly's fart.

File: hqdefault__7_.jpg (15KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 480x360px

So whats to be done about this shit anyway? Is there a way to cut down on this that doesnt involve invading India and China and forcing them to abide and also forcing everyone to live in 1700's-esque conditions? Or do we continue on as before, just make sure to give more money to papa governkent to soothe our guilt?

>>132764221
this lol

>>132764680
My point with these posts
>>132764645
>>132764424
>>132763679

File: haiti niggers.jpg (114KB, 824x618px) Image search: [Google]

114KB, 824x618px

Ok you fucking morons. Say this is totally a hoax. And ((((((they))))))) are pushing it so you buy whatever (((((energy efficient)))))) garbage they are throwing at you.

But just what do you have against clean/renewable tech? Do you want to suck off the arabs for eternity for muh oil? Do you want the government to keep spending trillions and sending your soldiers to secure that oil? Do you want to bend your ass to schlomo shekelberg for eternity so you have a shitty little ally in the area so you can have your oil? Do you want to wear fucking masks on the street so you don't die of fucking lung cancer and your eyes don't burn the fuck out like the ching chongs? Do you want your tap water to look like piss?

Your mentality is not far from that of Haitian niggers who just squandered their country to no end. Or gypsies that get government housing and sell every brick and spend that shit on heroin, then blame the government for being racist and not giving them gibs.

>>132764196
so will you mate, we're all in this together retard.

1. Less than 1 celsius increase (wow, its fucking nothing)
2. We are going through a natural warming cycle
3. The only reason the kikes care is they can mess around with carbon credits. I heard some shit that they are now gaiming carbon credits by abortions. Sickening.

>>132762519
This level of retardation is possible only in US

>>132761110
They are lying. They manipulated the Data.
The warmest decade was the 1930's. Don't believe their lies!

Oy vey, our temperature measurements don't show any strong sign of warming. Lets just go back and change our measurements to get the results we want!
t. "scientist"

File: 6BE26752-2E1C-4F8B-A119-4471A578C1D9-3329-000002E7FD8EDCD0.jpg (11KB, 264x191px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 264x191px

Didn't you just get btfo'd earlier??

Hockey stick is a lie faggot.

>>132765162
Sadly what he described is actually painfully accurate to what some people say out in California.

>>132761110
>lets only look ath the data from 140 years
huh mks u tink

>>132765011
No-one is against clean energy you litteral retard. Nuclear is the way to go. What we care about is when they say westeners need to habe less kids but m'bungo in africa can habe 9 because they dont have a "carbon footprint", or when they use it as an excuse to take in "climate refugees".

> be me
> live in a second world illiberal democracy
> filthy rich capture a part of the shoreline
> 20 years of glad bal warming later
> rising sea wipes the walkable beach
> local government forces the Richie's to forget the land they illegally captured
True story.

>>132761110
Leftists are able to argue honestl-

>>132761110
Look at that, WWII raised the global temp and it peaked when the nukes were dropped. Hmm. Maybe all the bombing in the middle east and elsewhere is having an effect.

>>132763664
Also, CO2 emissions only have an effect on the climate years after due to the laws of thermodynamics. If you're too big of a retard to understand how atmospheric chemistry works you shouldn't really be forming your own opinion and leave it to the scientists.

>>132765423
You sure are gonna enjoy having a fucking nuclear reactor under your ass while driving.

>>132765446
> global
> forfeit
Fuck phoneposting

>>132765577
Ever heard of a battery you absolute mongoloid?

File: 1480972171351.jpg (59KB, 574x863px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 574x863px

>>132761110

>what is urban heat island
>what is inaccuracy of GissTemp and UHCN
>what is data manipulation
>what is natural albedo
>what is the fucking SUN

>>132765011
You don't seem to understand just how clean oil and fossil fuels actually are. There have been huge improvements over the past few decades to make them clean. Just like how smog in the busiest cities doesn't exist anymore, because cars have become much cleaner. Just because something runs on batteries doesn't make it "clean". They're making incredibly toxic items, and that toxicity doesn't just disappear, it stays there forever. AND not to mention, where the fuck do you think the energy comes from to power these teslas? Here in the US, it comes from fossil fuels. So while those people are feeling all high and mighty about their green car, they forget that they're just driving using power from the same place as the diesel truck next to them. And secondly, how much energy do you think goes into these cars? It's the equivalent CO2 production of using a gasoline car for 8 YEARS. 8 years of driving that tesla around will just start to break even with the Co2 production of a gasoline car. Think that lithium ion battery will last for 8 years? tell me how long the battery in your phone lasted for. Then imagine having to get that replaced after 5 years of normal use. In 5 years time, that "green" tesla just output the equivalent of 16 years of Co2.

http://www.climatedepot.com/2017/06/21/tesla-car-battery-production-releases-as-much-co2-as-8-years-of-gasoline-driving/

Green energy is a nice though, especially because it might mean its more inexpensive that it is now, but to think that it's dirty is wrong. With the exception of fucking china, but nothing you can do about that.

>>132765011
I agree with your point, but I do not appreciate being taken for a fool. New energy technologies are a good thing, just don't try push them using fear and lies while simultaneously profiting from the fear and lies.

>>132765577
See thorium
Also consider the following. Shit hole North Korea has been using nuclear power since the Soviet days.
Funny how we don't hear about any accidents from them.
Makes you think.

>>132765878
Thorium is a meme. The best option is hydrogen or battery.
But yes, 1st world nations don't have nuclear disaster (see sweden). We fucking detected the leak from tjernobyl before anyone else did. Obviously communists cant handle a nuclear power plant, nor can gooks or niggers.

>>132765818
Data manipulation by who? NASA? Multiple government agencies around the world?

Why can't you just accept what is being said by the experts?

>>132765577
You realize that nuclear is the only option right? It's the only readily available energy source that produces 100% of the time, with no byproducts, and takes up minimal space. It's the best of all worlds. And I'm sure if they thought really hard about it (aka get funding) they could figure out good uses for the spent fuel.

there's a nuclear power plant just up the road from me here in california. Mitsubishi fucked up making the new turbine for them or some shit, so rather than making a new one, they just shut down the plant, took the unspent fuel and just put it out on the fucking beach. Yeah, you read that right, there is unspent nuclear fuel sitting right out on the beach in california. Because that sounds like a much better idea than just fixing the turbine and getting massive amounts of power

>>132766162
These same "experts" say cutting of a kids dick is a smart move. You would have been the guy in the 50s who got a lobotomy because shlomo finkelstein said it was a great and safe procedure.

>>132765287
Yes, but 1° on global scale isn't small thing.
I know most of scientists are ideologists these days but man-made climate change is real.
Lignite and oil are biggest pollution causes.
You should focus on alternative energy sources like nuclear or hydro.

>>132766141
I always wondered about thorium just being a meme. What's the short coming?

My point with North Korea is more that it's not nearly as dangerous as people make it out to be if even best Korea can manage to not fuck it up. Negligence is the only danger.

>>132766162
because those experts have alterior motives, which is to feed their families. If a scientist puts out data saying that there isn't evidence of warming (which you'd expect there to be at least a few based on chances of temperature fluctuations) they wouldn't have a job anymore.

>>132764221
its not as small as youre making it out to be you disingenuous little faggot.

I think this video really sums up the financial element of pushing man made climate change. I have no doubt Neil DeGrasse Tyson has shares in new energy companies. Look how he wags his tongue in anticipation like a greedy money hungry dog in this debate: https://youtu.be/Klgp_qDiRhQ?t=4m8s

>>132766365
I'd like to see the explanation of the ice caps being bigger than they've ever been before, and how global warming causes that. That should be some good mental gymnastics

>>132766502
Skip to 4 mins

>>132766278
Yes circumcision and the lobotomy were both proven false over time, climate change has not.

File: 1487979342625.jpg (43KB, 919x517px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 919x517px

http://principia-scientific.org/breaking-fatal-courtroom-act-ruins-michael-hockey-stick-mann/

http://dailycaller.com/2017/07/05/exclusive-study-finds-temperature-adjustments-account-for-nearly-all-of-the-warming-in-climate-data/

EXCLUSIVE: Study Finds Temperature Adjustments Account For ‘Nearly All Of The Warming’ In Climate Data

>>132743983

>>132766559
Factually incorrect my dude

>>132766162
Read the thread. We don't use the satellite data in these measurements because it's inaccurate* (read: doesn't fit the narrative). Instead they rely on a composite of various weather centers throughout the world, many of which are highly inaccurate. To correct for this they end up (((adjusting))) the data to be correct.

When you're talking about a climate change of a single fucking degree over 130 years I'd argue that small inaccuracies can ruin your data set. Especially when a huge majority of that data was likely collected by hand using visual measurements like Mercury thermometers handled by pajeet that didn't realize his measurements from 1920 would be used to push a narrative on how the Earth is a degree hotter 100 years later.

>>132766682
Several climatologists have come out and said they dont belive it.
One of them being the founder of the weather channel in the us.
>muh 99.9% of all scientists a-agree
No they dont. Keep repeating msnbc talking points you brainwashed little lemming.

>>132766422
Do you think that the scientists putting out data that using leaded petrol wasn't harmful had to feed their families too. It wasn't until a few scientists bit the bullet. And now blood lead levels have decreased.

someone post the temperature stations location collage, I'm too lazy myself

>>132766682
Scientist survive on grant money. There's no money in questioning the narrative.

File: Average_Libtard_2017.jpg (48KB, 428x285px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 428x285px

>libtards in 1950's
"It's Global Cooling!!!!1!1!"

>libtards in the 1970's
"It's Global Dimming!!!!1!1!"

>libtards in the 1990's
"It's Global Warming!!!!1!1!"

>libtards in the 2010's
"It's Climate Change!!!!1!1!"

No, it's just marxists trying desperately to gain centralized control over a massive chunk of the global economy.

Why do we accept that "climate scientists" exist? Pseudo-scientific bullshit. We do not understand how the climate works, we can't even predict the weather tomorrow properly.

>>132761110
>that heating during WW2

And here I thought winter was particularly brutal during the war years, which yet again saved the squatters

>>132766603
Today was 23 Celsius in Toronto. Tomorrow will be 22 Celsius.

I too can use truncated data to fit my narrative.
Hysterical left BTFO.

>>132766963
Many people have come out and said they don't believe in evolution and they were wrong too.

lol I don't watch MSNBC

Interesting image op. I haven't seen a rainfall display of warming before. Nice addition.
Yes, I agree with the conclusions based upon a large number of studies that ask the question if the earth is warming.
No, I do not agree with the proposed solutions.
That is all.

>>132766860
Which fact?

https://www.nasa.gov/content/goddard/antarctic-sea-ice-reaches-new-record-maximum/

>Global warming causes colder winds

Yeah, okay pal. I'd like you to notice how they changed the word from "global warming" to climate change, so they can now encompass ANYTHING weather related. Cold weather? Climate change! Hot weather? Climate change! Too many tornadoes? Climate change! Not enough tornadoes? Climate change! Too much rain? Climate change! Etc. you get the point

>>132767180
I fucking remember global cooling. Teacher said we might experience a new ice age. I cant take their climate change bullshit seriously when they pushed that fake scaremongering narrative to us when we were kids.

>>132767079
well there you go. The consensus was that leaded fuel was okay, until decades later when a few admitted it wasn't. Aren't you proving my point?

Fake news and fake data make by scientist afraid of losing their gibs. Go shill somewhere else libtard

Sage

>>132767304
Lol. If anything, global warming is a religion. Praise the almighty black science man! Abort your kids for carbon credits! Its 2017!

>>132767230
There's actually no such field. It's a combination of various fields that nobody is master in all of just because of time required.
Find me someone that is a PhD in meteorology, geology, marine biology, physics and all the other shit that goes into climate science.

>>132766234

You know that if you pile those rods there is a chance of causing a thermonuclear explosion. It depends on how enriched the uranium is.

File: url.png (79KB, 700x700px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 700x700px

>>132766946

Oh yes, the nefarious conspiracy by the world's scientific community to install a communist world government controlled by the UN using publicly available data which can be checked by anyone.

>>132767468
To be fair, that's because warming has dramatic effects in cooler regions as well. For instance, more warmth at the poles results in the jet stream slowing down. This results in more arctic vortexes which cause massive cold snaps. In the antarctic, more warmth leads to more water being evaporated which leads to an increase in precipitation. In the case of the antarctic, more snow.
The allegations of tornadoes and hurricanes though has been found to be bullshit so far. That is, studies have not been able to correlate changes in warming to more intense hurricanes and tornadoes.

>>132767500
Yeah my scary time stories where about the hole in the ozone, which is why I stopped using hair spray causing me to look unkempt and never get laid in high school.

Never again leftists. Never again.

>>132764221
kek stupid confederates

>>132761110
So the earth is billions of years old, but we can judge climate trends from 130 years of data. Lol. I thought liberals were pro science and reason.

>>132766946
Spending millions of dollars on weather centres to be inaccurate... ok

A single degree in 130 years is an upward trend, things will only get hotter.

Old measurements being Inaccurate measurements, like how Hubble's observations in 1935 of an expanding universe are still correct.

Who is pushing this narrative? The whole world have forged their evidence and it was the exact same results? ok

>>132767739
Yeah, well tell it to the liberals that don't want a power plant and want to continue to have rolling blackouts

http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/sdut-san-onofre-stranded-waste-2016jul22-htmlstory.html

>>132767659
Is this b8?

>>132767818
Don't put words in my mouth nigger.
I didn't say they're hiding the data or that it has anything to do with muh globalist. The date is just inaccurate by nature of where it comes from. I'm supposed to believe weather measurements coming out of India when they can't even manage public sanitation? They freely admit they adjust the data to correct for those inaccurate data points but how do they correct without inputting bias? How were those data points being measures in 1880 when it was just some asshole with a rudimentary Mercury thermostat that could probably only measure within a few degrees of accuracy?

>>132767856
I can atleast understand that line of reasoning. But my number 1 point still stands in this post. This is the ONLY reason I can't ever believe in man made climate change

>>132763679

File: Climatechangeiseverything.png (2MB, 2400x1800px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2400x1800px

>>132767468
>Yeah, okay pal. I'd like you to notice how they changed the word from "global warming" to climate change, so they can now encompass ANYTHING weather related.
Pic related.

>>132768186
>They freely admit they adjust the data to correct for those inaccurate data points but how do they correct without inputting bias?

Have you ever read a single paper on temperature data homogenization?

>>132761730
pretty much this. dipshits who deny climate change because the other team goes 'hey this is probably something bad for humanity and the world as a whole' so obviously we gotta fight em on it

>>132768110
People don't make mistakes on purpose anon. That's why they're mistakes. The tools used to measure any time prior to computers are bound to be inaccurate. Especially when we're dealing with fractions of a degree change in temperature. If it was the same temperature in 1880 as it is today, that's lost to inaccurate data collection. It's important.

>>132768316
LAAMMOOOO!!!!! HAHA!! Fucking rediculous! Just like how they say climate change is racist and sexist!

>>132767680
Exactly - but because scientists are perceived as the arbiter of truth, they have a power to convince people to believe things that aren't necessarily true.

People are intimidated by the idea of scientists because they are bestowed an identity of superior intelligence, therefore they understand things you can't - so you just have to take their word for it.

I'm afraid many scientists are just as thick and dogmatic as creationists, and others are weasel cunt scam artists using its power as a way to profit socially and financially.

>>132763185
>>132763326
>>132763367
I call bs.

File: middle_finger_flame.jpg (14KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 300x300px

>>132761110
The conclusive findings of this research are that the three GAST data
sets are not a valid representation of reality. In fact, the magnitude of
their historical data adjustments, that removed their cyclical
temperature patterns, are totally inconsistent with published and
credible U.S. and other temperature data. Thus, it is impossible to
conclude from the three published GAST data sets that recent years
have been the warmest ever –despite current claims of record setting
warming.
Finally, since GAST data set validity is a necessary condition for
EPA’s GHG/CO2 Endangerment Finding, it too is invalidated by these
research findings.

https://thsresearch.files.wordpress.com/2017/05/ef-gast-data-research-report-062717.pdf

We have been lied to.

File: url.png (60KB, 405x311px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 405x311px

>>132768236

Oh good, so now it's settled, then?

>>132767554
oh no I have been checkmated. It is 4am here. Whatever you can have your opinion.

>>132768402
I saw an explanation of how they correct by looking at nearby weather centers and they skew towards those that are closer to the mean. The point still stands that they don't know that those other centers are any better. Why don't we use the satellite data which would eliminate those inaccuracies?

File: Texas2011-2016.gif (54KB, 500x340px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 500x340px

Oh, and who could forget this shit??

https://science.house.gov/news/press-releases/former-noaa-scientist-confirms-colleagues-manipulated-climate-records

>>132768521
This is actually kind of true. Though I will say this, I've never seen a more spirited, skeptical, and ultimately heated debate, as I have seen two paleontologists Argue about the Fucking T-Rex and the feather coverage.
But then, in other debates, it's an honest challenge of the claim and an attempt, in the end, to arrive at the truth, no matter how upsetting it is.

File: All_palaeotemps.png (58KB, 800x233px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 800x233px

>>132768561
of course you do, kikefag
https:// en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geologic_temperature_record

>>132768316
>We still pay these people

>>132768573
See
>>132768767

If the data is so readily available, why fake it?

File: 720px-temp-sunspot-co2.png (107KB, 720x540px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 720x540px

>ITT retards

There was never a Scientific consensus on global cooling, only the media pushed this shit. Most Scientists were predicting warming

Climate change has always been climate change. There are papers from the 50's using the term 'Climactic Change'

More CO2 is maybe good for plants, but drought, flooding and increased range of pest species isn't. CO2 is also bad for humans.

The fact that 'climate has always changed' is utterly meaningless. The change now is faster than almost any time in history and climate scientists KNOW what caused past warming, and none of it explains todays rise.

No, it isn't the sun, the sun has been steady in its output for 40 years and temperatures keep rising.

A small amount of warming (1 or 2 degrees) is in fact VERY bad. It translates to far more than that on the land surface of the planet as the oceans warm much more slowly. Some warming causes positive feedbacks such as arctic albedo lose, and melting permafrost releasing methane.

There is no conspiracy. 'Climategate' was investigated several times and nothing resembling a conspiracy was found. However several 'skeptics' such as Willie Soon have been funded by oil companies

The models have been fairly accurate

The ice caps aren't growing, overall Antarctic and Greenland are losing huge amounts of ice. Antarctica has at times made small gains but overall there is a net loss

There is a very clear consensus amongst all earth science fields

There is no pause in the warming, the last 3 years are the warmest on record. 1997/1998 had a strong El Nino so deniers use it to cherrypick

Nobody is claiming CO2 is the only cause of warming, climate scientists know of everything that causes warming and only CO2 explains current warming

Al Gore isn't a climate scientist, neither is Bill Nye

Urban and Rural regions show the same warming

The Medieval warm period wasn't as warm as today

>>132768316
>climate change is contaminating water sources with fecal matter

L M A O.
are they calling pajeets climate change now?

>>132768713

In other words, you haven't read any papers. Typical.

>Why don't we use the satellite data

Well, first off, we do use satellite data to measure temps. But obviously you can't use them to correct surface temps because the satellites are not measuring them, duh.

>>132769094
Explain it then. If you understand it you can explain it.

>>132768800
There are great scientists out there as well who are purely committed to finding truth, rather than spouting pseudo-science to further some kind of hidden agenda.

File: 1491142984433.png (29KB, 250x280px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 250x280px

>>132768842
>Wiki
Hold your horses there , sven.
I think you got jewed.

>>132768767
>Look they changed the scale and thus it looks like they modified the data.
You... don't really understand what you're seeing do you? Look closer at it. The data points are the same. The difference is that it scales up to 20 and 68 this is a lower resolution and higher resolution result. At the scale in the 2016 version, 17 is defined as the lower limit and the scaling between 63 through 68 are better defined.
Also, I'm going to make a claim which should probably be checked for accuracy. They probably ran the averages, along with some simple algebra, and found that their slope scale was incorrect for the 2011 version.
I can't make this claim without seeing the source papers (Please link those) but I'm going to allege that this is presented out of context in order to allege that the graph has been unethically modified. But that in making the allegation you fail to describe their assigned context for both graphs and thus are misleading people.
Please do me a favor and link the article. I'd like to actually have a spirited debate on this one.

File: laughing suicide emoji.png (6KB, 249x202px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 249x202px

>>132768316
>climate change EVERYTHING
And it's supposedly the right that's fearmongering

>>132769041
>There was never a Scientific consensus on global cooling, only the media pushed this shit. Most Scientists were predicting warming
>Climate change has always been climate change. There are papers from the 50's using the term 'Climactic Change'
>More CO2 is maybe good for plants, but drought, flooding and increased range of pest species isn't. CO2 is also bad for humans.
>The fact that 'climate has always changed' is utterly meaningless. The change now is faster than almost any time in history and climate scientists KNOW what caused past warming, and none of it explains todays rise.
>No, it isn't the sun, the sun has been steady in its output for 40 years and temperatures keep rising.
>A small amount of warming (1 or 2 degrees) is in fact VERY bad. It translates to far more than that on the land surface of the planet as the oceans warm much more slowly. Some warming causes positive feedbacks such as arctic albedo lose, and melting permafrost releasing methane.
>There is no conspiracy. 'Climategate' was investigated several times and nothing resembling a conspiracy was found. However several 'skeptics' such as Willie Soon have been funded by oil companies
>The models have been fairly accurate
>The ice caps aren't growing, overall Antarctic and Greenland are losing huge amounts of ice. Antarctica has at times made small gains but overall there is a net loss
>There is a very clear consensus amongst all earth science fields
>There is no pause in the warming, the last 3 years are the warmest on record. 1997/1998 had a strong El Nino so deniers use it to cherrypick
>Nobody is claiming CO2 is the only cause of warming, climate scientists know of everything that causes warming and only CO2 explains current warming
>Al Gore isn't a climate scientist, neither is Bill Nye
>Urban and Rural regions show the same warming
>The Medieval warm period wasn't as warm as today

WRONG

>>132768888

You are being lied to by political fanatics and people paid by the fossil fuel industry. There is no manipulation because there is no way they'd be able to get away with it.

http://www.lse.ac.uk/GranthamInstitute/news/more-fake-news-in-the-mail-on-sunday/

>>132769232

Explain what?

File: 1496938295506.jpg (1MB, 1200x7920px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1200x7920px

>>132761730

>oh god I'm so retarded please rape my face

t. (you)

File: earth3.gif (19KB, 880x422px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 880x422px

>climate change

AHHAHAAHHAAH

>>132761110
(((mean)))

File: 1494606018206.jpg (37KB, 559x392px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 559x392px

>>132765562

>Yes goy, rely on us scientists.

The scientists are out there telling us we need to be net zero on carbon emissions to do anything of any value to halt warming of the planet (and we need to do that basically right now).

So basically, everyone needs to be dead, because that would be how you get to zero carbon emissions in that kind of time frame.

If you need to roll back humanity to hunter gatherers or murder literally everyone (and lets be honest as far as the climate Jews are concerned the ones they want dead are the "polluters" aka western white men) to make a meaningful difference to address a "crisis" then what the fuck is the point of it?

>what is the point of it goy?

Start asking that question and you realize what the fuck is actually going on.

>>132769456
>There never was a consensus on global cooling
There really wasn't. It was newsweek that ran the article. follow the sources on those news articles which alleged cooling. You'll find that they all trace back to one paper, and the papers conclusions weren't even about cooling.

>>132769344
Public perception is everything. It's still disingenuous to make your data look scary with selective ranges that only serve that purpose.
For instance OP has the scale that only goes from the lowest measured to the highest which makes a single degree change look like we're on the surface of the sun to the layman.

>>132761110

Invented by the fucking chinks to get us to slow down production, ruin our economy with "clean" energy, and destroy our food supply.

Fuck you chink.

reality is waves. there are really big waves that move really small particle things into different energetic positions, exposing them to different intersections of space and time.

>>132763033
>Learned it in high school
>Literally
>Using insufficient data to make a statement sound like a settled fact

*Hand rubbing intensifies*

>>132761110

That's not what you boys present the grant office.

You still have the government believing the ice caps would've been completely melted by 2016 in some projection made in the 70s. -ITS 2017

Terrible attitude.

File: climate change.png (173KB, 1618x788px) Image search: [Google]

173KB, 1618x788px

>>132761110

File: 1475165807255.jpg (58KB, 580x679px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 580x679px

>>132761110
and why exactly should i care you fucking nigger?

>>132761913
We also know that the coldest period in history happened during the industrial revolution, explain that fag.

>>132769984
*recent history

>>132769687
Oh I agree that it's disingenuous. Which is why I personally want the source articles. Sometimes you find graphs like the one I'm asking about are actually done by people who want to push a narrative of "Scientists are modifying the data" Unfortunately, such things are terribly common. Me, I try to go to the source itself in order to get to the truth of the matter.

>>132769524
>Humans don't contribute most CO2

Do you realise what balance is? Our emissions are destabilizing the equilibrium of the carbon cycle.

>CO2 higher in the past

And the sun was much weaker in the past. Also, CO2 has never risen this quickly. When it does rise quickly you tend to get extinction events like the end permian

>Earth warmed before

These graphs use '0' to mean present, which means '1950' in Science. So ignores all the recent warming

>Sea level rose faster in the past

Of course it did, half the planet was covered in ice. Sea level rise is speeding up
http://www.pnas.org/content/113/11/E1434

>No increase in drought etc

Local impacts, are not global impacts.

>Al Gore

Not a respectable source

>>132769540
This graph ends before 1950

>>132769516
Temperature data homogenization. It sounds like it's exactly what I described. Picking points from nearby centers to correct for outlier temperatures measured by inaccurate weather centers.

But how does this determine that the surrounding centers are accurate and how does this account for historic data with a margin of error well outside of the range of change we're seeing?

That last part is my biggest question.
If some guy is using a thermostat with 5° increments, how am I seriously supposed to compare his data to modern measurements that can detect changes to a thousandth of a degree??

>>132766682
Yeah it has you just refuse to admit it.

>>132761730
>he doesn't know about the volcano eruptions in the 1800s
>he has never heard of volcanic winter
brainlet

>>132761110
Doesn't matter if it is or isn't, I just don't give a shit. I'm not gonna change my life over it.

>>132769344
1: No, this has nothing to do with scaling. Look at the high temp on the far left. In 2011 its 66 degrees, in 2016 its 65 degrees. Yes, they changed the scale, but they also modified temperatures

2: you're telling me that they're changing their methods so much in less than 5 years that it's causing retroactive fluctuations of a degree or more?? It should be pretty simple to have set standard on determining temperature, if they don't how can you trust ANY of their data?

File: 1486133756509.png (2MB, 2898x2226px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2898x2226px

Don't fall for the (((global warming))) meme

>>132761369
Look up what the black body temperature of the earth would be without any greenhouse effect whatsoever. Then come back and argue that changing greenhouse gas levels isn't going to have any effect on average temperatures.

>>132761488
LOL, those digits.

Seriously though, the left has ruined this issue by demonizing anybody who is skeptical of anthropogenic global climate change on top of only offering pipe dream solutions that would, at best, knock us back to an 18th century standard of living.

>>132770180
> I'm not gonna change my life over it.

the good news is you're ugly and fat and you'll never get a woman so you'll never have kids so if it's real you won't have to worry about your children ever having to deal with it

File: climate change myths.png (767KB, 1562x2546px) Image search: [Google]

767KB, 1562x2546px

Stop cherry picking data and go do some actual research on the topic. Ask real questions, like "How could this be true without CO2?" I know, the burger school system is a bit shit and they kind of brainwashed everyone into listening and believing shit about climate change. Take a step back and actually question your beliefs, and maybe you might come through smarter than you started.

A leading NOAA Scientist has admitted that that the data sets were cherry picked by the NOAA.
It's all about an agenda.

>So, in every aspect of the preparation and release of the datasets leading into K15, we find Tom Karl’s thumb on the scale pushing for, and often insisting on, decisions that maximize warming and minimize documentation. I finally decided to document what I had found using the climate data record maturity matrix approach. I did this and sent my concerns to the NCEI Science Council in early February 2016 and asked to be added to the agenda of an upcoming meeting. I was asked to turn my concerns into a more general presentation on requirements for publishing and archiving.
https://judithcurry.com/2017/02/04/climate-scientists-versus-climate-data/
If they said there was no problem, they would literally diminish their usefulness and cut their pay scale in half.

>>132761110
1 degree difference in 100 years?....
cmon.

>>132761110
It's not so much the science I'm against as it is your bullshit communist "solutions."

>>132761110

This is 8th grader logic. Go read up on the arguments for and against reforms nationally and globally to combat climate change focusing on resource allocation and regulations. The Earth getting warmer is not the main point.

>>132769984
Do you work in NOAA's Office of High School dropouts?

>>132769453
The left and right both use fearmongering - the left/right are mirror images of themselves. They cannot exist without each other.

>>132761110
Can not be real. we emitted so much more late 1800's to early 1900's than we have since the 80's

>>132765562
H2O is a more "powerful" greenhouse gas than CO2. Don't mention chemistry when you know nothing of it.

>>132770524
Are you retarded like all other Britfags? You must be my mirror image.

>>132761530
It's not that the climate is going to change. It always changes. It is the speed at which it is going to change that is the kicker.

>>132770398
>CO2 is as stable as N2.
wew

File: low-information-voters-need-fairy-tales-help-them-understand-politics-1408129358.jpg (74KB, 640x1019px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 640x1019px

>there's a small chance that the Scientists are wrong and we wont all burn ourselves to death

I'LL TAKE IT IF IT MEANS I CAN CONTINUE DISAGREING WITH DEM LIBRULS

>>132770076
Thermometer*

>>132770398
>Look up what the black body temperature of the earth would be without any greenhouse effect whatsoever. Then come back and argue that changing greenhouse gas levels isn't going to have any effect on average temperatures.

The "black body temperature of the earth"? What has science become? You can fuck off with your hypotheticals, I want solid scientific evidence, not fear-mongering pseudo-scientific bullshit.

>>132770845
who are "the Scientists"?

File: 1446777201457.jpg (140KB, 1161x1024px) Image search: [Google]

140KB, 1161x1024px

CO2 meme BTFO

>>132770817
I never even implied that, jackass. In fact, if CO2 levels were as stable as N2 levels, why, then, are they changing?

>>132770679
Tell me how the right wing can exist without the left wing?

>>132770056

>our emissions are destabilizing the equilibrium of the carbon cycle

Citation? In fact, cite that there even is a discernible "balance." From what I saw in the course I did there are so many positive feedback loops ranging from surface albedo which changes with cloud cover and ice coverage to biological organisms producing methane to trees incorporating more carbon into their bodies when they are exposed to high levels of CO2 that the physicist who was teaching the course amounted the "climate" to basically being voodoo as to why it doesn't have runaway warming naturally. (protip: the numerical models they use ALWAYS diverge, if you simulate an atmosphere from 15,000 years ago and let it run with ANY model the warming will just keep going up, it's because the PDEs needed to be solved are nonlinear)

>local impacts are not global impacts

You need to become familiar with the statistical term "sample." I think the entire united states is a pretty decent sample space to determine global trends, don't you?

Don't worry, this argument's all going to be pointless waste of time when our living standards regress to hunting and gathering anywhere north of Italy and south of Indonesia

>>132761488
Anthropogenic climate change is unfalsifiable.

It's stupid to even talk about it since no matter how the climate changes there is no way to prove it was caused by CO2 without doing an experiment on a sample of Earths ( of which there is only one making this impossible ).

You would have to add CO2 to one set of Earths and not do that to the other sample.

It is not up to me to find a way for you to prove your unfalsifiable claim.

The Earth is like a human body. You might think drug X should do Y theoretically in a human body but you don't know until you try it in a controlled experiment. Even if you give drug X and patients with Y get cured you don't know what effected the cure without doing a controlled experiment.

>>132771030
Holy shit how retarded can you be to honestly ask that question?
Do you know anything about gaseous chemistry? Do you even study chemistry?

>>132770967
Black body radiation is the shit that allows thermal imaging to work. It is a concept that has been well understood since before your ass was alive.

>>132770845
Science comes from the Latin, to know. Why is it wrong to question a field that prides itself on reaching objective truth?
Why are you idiots inserting dogma into science??

>>132770972
99+ percent of experts in relevant fields of science

>>132771153
Quit misrepresenting what I'm saying, you dumb faggot.

File: Edita Vilkeviciute.jpg (103KB, 400x571px) Image search: [Google]

103KB, 400x571px

>>132761110
(((NASA)))

What does NASA MEAN IN JEWISH?
I'll do the work for all you NewFags:
Nasah Means: TO DECIEVE.

/thread.

>>132771020
>we raise CO2 level by burning fuels
>made from liquefied or fossilised plant matter
>and all those plants lived in the past
>and there was so many of them that we can burn them for years to come and still not run out of fuel
>but somehow returning all that carbon will cause the end of the world
Right.

>>132771138
and being unfalsifiable makes it not science.

>>132771188
>relevant fields of science
I work in the scientific field of bullshit as a scientist. I claim that all food is bad for you and you must now eat soylent to be healthy.

Since 99%+ of the scientist agree, you must now ban all food stuffs.
>plebs trying to understand science
give it up

>>132771188
Got a list buddy?

>>132771330
Stop being a fucking retard and I'll stop pointing out how retarded you are. It's simple, really.

File: 1447739745469.png (134KB, 1181x889px) Image search: [Google]

134KB, 1181x889px

>>132771413

stupid goy pay your co2 tax

>>132771162
Chosing to not believe in the theory of gravity and acting on it is a poor bet if you're in a car with no breaks heading towards a cliff, bubba

>>132771157
It is a concept. Science cannot be truly objective because science is done by scientists, and scientists have a subjective perception.

File: Screenshot from 2017-07-07 14-37-13.png (155KB, 551x402px) Image search: [Google]

155KB, 551x402px

>>132770524
>The I'm a centrist so I'm above the fray meme.
Haven't seen this one in a while.
Also, make a decision for once in your life FFS.

>time axis starts >1500 AD

every time

>>132770056
>>132771051

https://www.express.co.uk/news/science/723481/Earth-ICE-AGE-big-freeze-solar-activity

>spend all day arguing about global warming
>freeze and starve to death in the meantime because the climate is beholden to uncontrollable factors far more than cow farts

>>132771503
Wow that was hard

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

>>132771566
But we aren't

Warming would be good if it was happening, but it isn't.

>>132770056
The end permian happened over 100,000 years. And was possibly caused by exceedingly high volcanic eruptions during that timespan. Certainly not analogous to

>>132771566
Gravity has more empirical evidence than climate change does.
The only empirical evidence that gravity exist was found a year or two ago, as gravitational waves. This is the only thing that supports the theory of gravity.
See how long it took to "confirm" the theory? Yet (((climate scientist))) claim their theory is solid with less than a decade of work.

>>132770524
>he fell for the centrist meme
just because your gf is a noncommital cunt doesn't mean you have to be too.

>>132771739
petitionproject.org

>>132771645
I'm not a "centrist" either - I don't identify myself with the left/right/center polical autistic political spectrum.

Humans are far more nuanced than that, therefore I refuse to identify with it.

>>132762008
"If it means advances in green energy tech"

Fuck off you fucking liberal shill.

>>132761110
>literally nothing

>>132771566
>Le gravity
You sound like you don't understand it yourself. Gravity is only a theory because we can't say definitively that objects with mass cause a gravitational pull. The fact that gravity exists as a force is measured and predictable to the point that we can send a fucking robot to Mars and predict how it will behave given those measurements.

Meanwhile climate scientists can't even predict trends 10 years down the road but claim to have a picture of 100 years down.

Explain it properly and stop acting like you have the answers. Perhaps answer my question about rectifying the inaccuracy of historic data measured by hand by people that weren't scientists versus the modern day tools that are highly actuate then putting those together to form a trend line. If the margin of error in historic measurements is anything higher than a single degree Celsius then it ruins the entire trend.

File: 1920px-The_Consensus_on_Anthropogenic_Global_Warming,_2017.jpg (185KB, 1920x1484px) Image search: [Google]

185KB, 1920x1484px

>>132771944
That website looks super legit and I've seen a few

>>132771529
You haven't actually addressed what I posted, you stupid faggot.

>>132762206
>creating millions & millions of refugees
since when do we call dead people refugees?

>>132772254
says the faggot that used wikipedia as a reference

kek

>muh records that cover less than 150 years

>>132771943
I'm the non-committal cunt. I will have a sexual relationship with a girl who does want a relationship but I will refuse to call her my girlfriend.

>>132770489
Goy you don't understand we need trillions to prevent another degree, that will fix it!

>>132772223
Gravity is more supported than climate change now, thanks to gravitational waves.
>>132772255
Why the fuck would I address what an uneducated nog posts on an anonymous mongoloid knitting forum?
Maybe write your post in such a way that doesn't show how ignorant you are, and I might entertain you.

>>132772223
Their overwhelming consensus is that we will meet with a horrible calamity. Where do you peg the chances everything will be dandy, and what do you base it on? Since you're pretty much betting the world on it

>>132772537
>Their overwhelming consensus is that we will meet with a horrible calamity.
How is this any different from tribal religions praying to the god of the week when their crops fail?
Oh wait, it isn't. Keep worshiping, peasant.

>>132772537
The sky is falling! , the sky is falling!

>>132772405
>/pol/ memes are legit arguments when the future of civilized society is literally at stake

>>132772516
In other words, you have no argument. You are a stupid fuck who doesn't like the conclusion, so you are going to throw shit like a monkey at a zoo.

>>132772717
>not an argument

>>132771645
Do I misunderstand the entire point of centrism? I've always understood is as taking everything issue by issue as a standalone. I'm pro-gun, pro choice, vehemently and aggressively anti immigration, pro gay marriage but anti adoption for gay's, I believe in a secular government but think tradition should be upheld. Any issue that would put me left or right is almost certainly counterbalanced by some other political opinion I have. I'm probably more right of center due to those stances that I'm more rigid on (I ain't riot if gay's can't marry or can adopt, but I will never willingly give up my guns). It isn't as if I'm not passionate about my positions, they just tend to not all group up into one wing of the political spectrum. Where did the notion of centrism being the same as having easy swayed ideas start? Is it just an autistic strawman? Should I just screech LEAAAFF at the poster in response?

>>132772223

Dude they can't even predict whether it'll rain within a week with 50% accuracy yet. Most of the people spouting off about "muh warming" don't have any concept of the complexity and difficulty of solving the kind of PDEs involved numerically that you need to solve to simulate the climate. Nonlinear equations, especially climate-related ones, are extraordinarily sensitive to initial conditions. We can't simultaneously measure every point on Earth so what do they do? Data smoothing, so they can present the simulation with a well-posed problem to solve. Issue is, straight away they've got an error that will cause MASSIVE divergences from the ACTUAL solution in a very short time frame, not to mention the error introduced from the accuracy of the measurements themselves. Then you've got grid resolution, global numerical simulations currently use surface level grid spacings of around 300km, way too large to be sensitive to effects induced by landscapes such as mountain ranges that aren't the size of whole nations. Then they use only around 70-something vertical layers (with ever increasing grid spacing due to the spherical nature of the Earth) to try and predict the future state of the whole atmosphere, pathetic!

File: file.png (2KB, 197x85px) Image search: [Google]

2KB, 197x85px

Wow! It's Fucking Nothing

>>132772750
Still waiting for this argument you seem to have not typed up.
Just admit that you have no fucking clue what you are talking about. How do you reason that CO2 is a dangerous green house gas, when H2O has the ability to hold A LOT more energy than CO2, thus making it an even stronger greenhouse gas?

Are we to stop breathing? You know we exhale quite a lot of moisture (H2O).
Go study chemistry before you pretend to understand these things. You just make yourself look like a fool.

>>132772537
I'm not betting anything. I'm some guy on an anime forum discussing and interesting topic. My feelings about it change nothing. But nobody seems to be able to answer a simple question. You're the third person to dance around that question.

If a guy in 1880 uses a thermometer with 5 degree Celsius increments to measure the temperature of a bucket of sea water, how do you rectify that with highly accurate instruments of the modern day then try to draw a trend line between the two. All while ignoring historic fossil data that shows an overall trend since the end of the ice age? Starting at the beginning of the industrial revolution creates a convenient narrative despite there being data points prior to that which were just as accurate of those inaccurate points.

>>132772677
Science is obviously the polar opposite of primitive jungle monkeys praying to a rain god, for the non insane. Meming to Kek and hoping for the best is doing it like the jungle monkey :-) If I remind you that science was invented by White Man, will you stop acting retarded on this?

>>132772867
Phone posting burger grammar

>>132773035
>worshiping science is different than worshiping a monkey jungle god
No, it isn't. It is still mindless worship, and that is not what science is about.
Science is about PROVING things, beyond any reasonable doubt. The fact that you faggots are here trying to shame "doubters" into silence just shows how unscientific your "side" is.

Go get a fucking education, faggot.

>>132772677
Fucking morons like you who can't understand the difference between shamanism and the scientific method are going to doom the planet.

>>132763926
....
what is geology?

>I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot. So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth. (Revelation 3:15,16)

Climate advocates hearts are in the right place but they have been lied to. Even if it was true the "solutions" involve giving money to hand rubbing merchants to stave off like .5 degrees Fahrenheit. At least the people who have been lied to have resolve though, centrists are barely human.

>>132772867
>vehemently and aggressively anti immigration

If your country went to shit economically and socially, would you emigrate to another country or would you stay and struggle to survive?

File: n9QqC.jpg (59KB, 500x377px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 500x377px

>>132772986
>I have no agency, I dont matter, I cannot change anything

You have, you do, you are. Right now you're embracing your horrible fate, or rather covering your eyes and pretending it isnt there

>>132773214
>he says, as he worships Science as a neo-shamanistic force
The scientific method requires a hypothesis before an experiment, and explicitly disallows reaching conclusions before these two steps.

Climate "scientist" do not follow the scientific method. If they did, all of these questions would have answers, yet they don't.

>>132773035
Science wasn't invented by the white man who was invented by the Hindu 60000 years ago

>>132770187
Again, for me it comes down to the source studies. Which I would like to peruse before commenting further on the matter.
I'm a simple guy. I see a graph I ask for the source or the study.

>>132773225
Good question, what is geology? Just a fucking concept.

>>132773187
It's not mindless worship, but people like you would rather ignore the complexities and reduce it down to LCD nonsense like this. Just because the average person who trusts in science don't necessarily understand the 100% ins-and-outs of all scientific achievement doesn't mean scientist's conclusions are any less valid.

>>132771774
>warming would be good if it was happening, but it isn't
is this the version of the holocaust didn't happen, but I wish it did?
Not only is warming occuring, but it's leading to migrants fleeing their countries due to droughts. Look at how the crisis in Syria started you mongoloid.

>>132773333
>People who actually devoted their lives to studying climate, and actually know what they are talkng about, are all wrong
>but you, a anonymous high-school dropout, knows everything!

This is why no one takes you seriously

/pol/tards made me become each time more lefty

>>132773358
Don't meme on me. Just answer the question. Square that circle.

File: i.imgur_.com_BeLl1e8.jpg (38KB, 650x341px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 650x341px

>>132762206
Human civilizations have been consumed by the Earth for thousands of years. Why are liberals suddenly so arrogant that they believe they can preserve their cities from the wrath of an ever-changing planet? Continents are moving, and entire countries will be ripped apart, and you're worried about a few inches sea level rise over a hundred years?

>>132761110
Hey mayne, hokie pokie okie dokie but if if if if idk hol'up?

>>132761110
Disregard contrails goyim. You're destroying the Earth. We can save it if you give us your shekels though.

>>132773503
>would rather ignore the complexities
The fucking irony in this statement is that you vastly underestimate the complexity of our planet, and everything involved therein. Including climate change, and ocean currents, and man's influence on them.
>science worshippers can't even talk without showing how much of a fool they are.

>>132773592
>Appeal to authority. Make a real argument to explain why they are correct.

>>132773344
Of course that depends on circumstance doesn't it? If there's rioting and violence in the street to the extent my afformentioned guns couldn't guarantee safety, I'd definitely find a safer place for my wife and child, preferably within my country as I hate the idea of my kid growing up anywhere else. But if that failed then I'd ship them somewhere else and so my best to improve things I'm my homeland. I wouldn't skip country just because of some depression if that's what your asking.

>>132772982
Because CO2 has a much longer half life in the atmosphere. All that I'm arguing is that more CO2 in the atmosphere means more energy trapped in the atmosphere due to absorption and reradiation in random directions in certain wavelengths of the electromagnetic spectrum. Water vapor can be both a greenhouse gas, and it can also raise albedo via becoming clouds on top of that.

>>132761369
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OJ6Z04VJDco

>>132773503
>Just because the average person who trusts in science don't necessarily understand the 100% ins-and-outs of all scientific achievement doesn't mean scientist's conclusions are any less valid.
Scientific discoveries do not care how many people "support" them or not. If the science is sound, that is all that is required.
That there exist people who "trust science without knowing the ins and outs" is horrible, as that is exactly how religions are formed. Stop worshiping science you ignorant fuck.

>>132773612
>Human civilizations have been consumed by the Earth for thousands of years. Why are liberals so arrogant in trying to preserve our civilization? Things will change eventually man, lol.
Fuck off you retarded nihilistic hippy.

>>132770524
>>132771043
You're right that the right is a reaction to the left. If the Enlightenment and the new political philosophies had never came into being there would be no liberals, and no necessity to oppose liberalism. Liberalism is a political force that seeks to change human organizational structures, first to affirm explicit rights that were not historically or in actuality recognized, and increasingly today to attempt to completely stamp out all "injustice" (as perceived by the left) through use of the state. So the people on the right are... anyone who might have a reason to oppose the left and the liberal death march to utopia.

>>132773789
>Because CO2 has a much longer half life in the atmosphere
Until it gets used in a reaction. Perhaps plantlife could use it?

Tell me, how do you rationalize humans having such an influence on the climate, yet plants have no where near the influence? You do realize plant matter vastly outnumbers animal matter, right?
>brainlets, everywhere

>>132773409
it's hard to find the study. All i see are sources from places like the gaurdian saying "no, the noaa didn't falsify data"

File: 2yCZr49.gif (125KB, 720x480px) Image search: [Google]

125KB, 720x480px

>>132761110
jesus christ you reddit faggots are such fucking cancer
keep your retarded drivel on your shitty circlejerk site and get the fuck off our mongolian goat herding forum

>>132773677
They are correct because people who actually know what they are talking about already tried to dispute it, with the support of multi-billion industries.

The planet is warming up. Fact. Humanity has a direct hand in it. Fact. Now the extent of the responsibility that humans have is questionable.

File: 415k-year-temp-graph.jpg (63KB, 720x468px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 720x468px

>>132761110
Your data set is too small to be scientifically conclusive. You need to look at a larger range. As you can see here, global temperatures have fluctuated since the beginning of the earth and will be doing so long after man has come and gone. The recent "trend" that your graphic suggests is irrelevant, as much greater warming periods have occurred in the past, it is folly to assume that the current one is caused by anything man has done, or that there is anything man can to do stop temperature change from occurring.

>guns couldn't guarantee safety

How do guns guarantee your safety when other people have them?

>I hate the idea of my kid growing up anywhere else.

>I hate the idea of my kid growing up anywhere else

Is that based on rationality or emotion?

>I'd ship them somewhere else

You'd turn them into immigrants? I thought you hated them?

File: WP_dailysanctuary-com_2015_03_rare026.jpg (49KB, 650x538px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 650x538px

>>132773856
Or how about you learn to fucking adapt?
>OH NO MY TOES ARE WET!
[ten years later]
>OH NO MY ANKLES ARE WET!
[ten years later]
>OH NO MY KNEES ARE WET!
[ten years later]
>OH NO MY BALLS ARE WET!
[ten years later]
>OH NO MY TITS ARE WET!
[ten years later]
>glub glub

Or how about you just fucking move?

>>132761110
So you're saying that, in 120 years, the temperature has increased 1 degree. Holy shit dude... wow.

For you newfags out there, the climate change bullshit is the reason the flat earther meme and the fluoride meme came about, as they both rely on the same misunderstanding of SCALE.
>we cannot see the curvature of the earth, therefore it is flat
No, you are SMALL
>Fluoride is a highly reactive chemical, and this can't be good for us!
No, you are BIG.

It is almost like life, and the understanding of it, is dependent on relativity. If you don't understand nor respect the scale you are working at, you will never find facts or truths.

>>132773480
nevermind
Just God putting layers of stuff in the ground to test our faith

>>132774158
I'm not disputing those and my question is more about rectifying a single degree of change when based on historic data that has a margin of error LARGER than a degree?
Anyone?

>>132774158
>Humanity has a direct hand in it
>Fact

That is not a fact. Facts are things that can be proven true, not just eluded to by coincidental data sets.

>>132774408
So do those layers come with timestamps? Or do the timestamps have to be
>interpreted
I swear, statistics should be a mandatory High School course.

File: soildegredation.jpg (82KB, 1140x536px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 1140x536px

>>132774022
One problem with letting the plants use it: Agriculture. Current and past agricultural practices have fucked up the terrestrial carbon cycle across huge swaths of the land. The middle east used to be a lot greener. So did the Loess Plateau in China. If this wasn't the case, the planet could probably handle our CO2 emissions.

File: 1479501685290.jpg (57KB, 450x450px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 450x450px

>>132761110
>deleting all data sets from Russia, the largest nation on earth.

>>132771645
Centrists are such cancer...

>>132774196
>I have no actual counterarguments so I'll ask retarded questions trying to sound smart and maybe nobody will notice.

>>132772867
>I've always understood is as taking everything issue by issue as a standalone
Yes you do misunderstand. Everyone should take every issue as a standalone. If you are on the right side of the majority, You are not a centrist. Diddo for left side. If you are all over the map, you are likely confused because most of the issues are moralistically connected.
You sound libertarian by your description. Small government, minimal interference, this can put you on either side of social issues simply because your prerogative is to let people do whatever they want. Normally, if you are on the right economically, you are against government handouts, like welfare and foodstamps for the same reason you are against paying for someones abortion or fat reduction surgery. If you are on the right socially, you are also against abortion and handouts but for different reasons.

Your core values usually end up connecting a series of issues but being "dead centre" is almost impossible since being against welfare but for health care is somewhat contradictory from a moral perspective since they are both based on a collectively paid social safety net.

>>132761110
zoom out.

File: Cmip5TropoModelFailure.png (55KB, 1440x1080px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 1440x1080px

>>132761488
>what would you consider proof?
A better question is what would YOU consider DISPROOF. If you understood the first fucking think about the scientific method, you would know that theories are never PROVEN, only DISPROVEN, and your AGW models have been disproven. When will you acknowledge that they were all wrong?

>>132774497
>humans pump billions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere every year
>humans dindu nuffin

>>132774523
>The middle east used to be a lot greener. So did the Loess Plateau in China
Yeah, before Everest came to be. Do you not understand why the Sahara exist? Think about it
>earth rotates in ONE DIRECTION
>winds are influenced by such ONE DIRECTIONAL ROTATION
>moisture cannot exist beyond a certain elevation, turns to ice/snow
>mountain peaks are higher than this "certain elevation"
>moisture in the air, gathered from the sea, can not make it past these mountains
And then it gets really, really dry. This same phenomena can be seen in North America with the rockies. In fact, it is one of the reasons the highland plains are technically a desert. The misunderstanding of this is what caused the dust bowl.

Would one of you fucks just answer my God damn question?

How do we rectify a single degree of change over 140 years given historic data points measured with tools that have a margin of error LARGER than a single degree Celsius??

It's a simple question and everyone refuses to answer. Not even trying to be antagonistic. It's a genuine question.

>>132774839
>volcanic eruptions pump many times more CO2 into the air than humans have since the industrial revolution every time they erupt

>>132761913
>We know the earth is getting warmer since about a hundred years
>We know the industry became huge about a hundred years ago
We also know earth was getting warmer long before the industrial age. We know that during the most recent warming period, blacks were being given more rights.

So why do you deny the historical record, and the possibility that giving niggers rights is destroying the earth?

>>132761249
Fpbp

>>132774994
They don't answer because they don't understand statistics, which is a caveat these reports rely on when they misrepresent said statistics on the report.

>>132773996
>Liberalism is a political force that seeks to change human organizational structures, first to affirm explicit rights that were not historically or in actuality recognized

So for a right to be a right, it must be historically recognised? Democracy wasn't always recognised as a right historically, so why do we recognise it as one now?

>and increasingly today to attempt to completely stamp out all "injustice" (as perceived by the left) through use of the state.

Yes they are fascistic in nature, and so is the right wing.

>>132761369
Retard

File: mlady.jpg (174KB, 504x604px) Image search: [Google]

174KB, 504x604px

>>132761110
>tfw you lose your libel suit because you can't prove you're right
It hurts doesn't it? http://principia-scientific.org/breaking-fatal-courtroom-act-ruins-michael-hockey-stick-mann/

File: 2000_Year_Temperature_Comparison.png (39KB, 600x443px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 600x443px

>>132775019
There is no scientific proof of nigger rights causing global warming.

>>132773592
Did I say anything about my qualifications? You are as retarded as your fallacious "argument". I have a bachelor's but education doesnt equal intelligence especially when white papers are widely available you troglodyte.

>>132775116
>there are people on this board who think that "having faith in science" makes them smart, and as such use that to establish their worth over others
The hilarious thing is that you fucks are worse than those you pretend to be above.

>>132774840
Those places used to be greener and much of those greener parts were ruined by human agriculture. The Loess Plateau was where what is the probably the largest ethnic group in the world, the Han Chinese, came from for fuck's sake. Overgrazing and not always keeping a living root in the soil turned them into barren wastelands. Or, perhaps, you haven't heard of the Cedars of Lebanon?

>>132761730
this
>>132770056
rekt

>>132774607
I have no actual counter arguments so I will make an arrogant quip trying to sound smart and maybe nobody will notice I'm not answering the simple questions put forth.

>>132774159
You are trying so hard to sound informed. "It's a natural cycle" meme was among the very first things said about global warming. Do you really think that it's true? After all these years, after all the information online?

People will never change.

>>132765011
>But just what do you have against clean/renewable tech?
That is doesn't fucking work. The money for this bullshit comes from taxpayers (which I understand doesn't include you, so you don't care, but those of us who aren't worthless parasites do care). Solar is a dead end. Wind is a dead end. They are ridiculously expensive per watt produced. They are undependable. They are incapable of meeting demand. Fossil fuels and nuclear are our only real options here.

>>132773592
And if random people on pol questioning merchant schemes are turning you left youre a spineless goy.

>>132775015
https://www.skepticalscience.com/volcanoes-and-global-warming-basic.htm

>>132761110
>this year cooler than last year
kek

>>132774839
>humans pump billions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere every year
And where is the proof that has caused a change in global temperature that wouldn't have occurred without it?

File: 1496417396846.jpg (128KB, 896x1102px) Image search: [Google]

128KB, 896x1102px

>>132761110
>140 years

Fuck off

>>132774503
>So do those layers come with timestamps?
Sadly, no.
>interpreted
Luckily, there are perfectly legit dating methods safely covering the past 50 000 years
>statistics should be a mandatory High School course
What good are stats if you don't know how to use them. It's really easy to use random stats to make a point and support your dumb ideology but it's not science.
I think you could use a couple high school level science classes

>>132775302
You are correct in that pasture grazing can lead to arid conditions if said pasture animals are allowed to graze at will.
This is only an issue in areas that exist on the "boundary" of larger climate zones, such as North Africa.

However, the scale at which this effect happens is not as large as you seem to be saying. Not nearly enough to cause an entire region to become a desert.
How big of an area are we talking here?

>>132761110
there was a minor spike in the 1940's due to all the jew being burned

>>132765562
>Also, CO2 emissions only have an effect on the climate years after due to the laws of thermodynamics.
Really? Tell us which laws of thermodynamics you are referring to, and show the equations that prove your bullshit statement.

>>132765728
>Ever heard of a battery you absolute mongoloid?
Apparently you're too stupid to be aware that the CO2 produced in manufacturing just one electric car battery equals the CO2 output from a typical gasoline engine OVER A PERIOD OF EIGHT FUCKING YEARS.

Way to cut down on CO2, retard!

>>132775107
I'm realizing that but I hate it because it means the data is worthless for any points prior to anything measured with a thermogun. Ie it's all bullshit. I'm trying to give the idea the benefit of the doubt but all I'm getting is ad hom and question dodging.

Someone please answer it.

>>132774196
You're being a strawmanning fag and not answering my original point but I'll bite because in on the shitter. Unless there's violence on the scale and organization that multiple armed people are arriving on my property (in which case I'd would have already left) then guns would be an upstanding detergent to social unrest. The average looter or burglar isn't going to continue if he hears gunshots the moment he breaks a window. Both my children can shoot and my wife is more than adept at it. But if you're referring to some absurd absolute social collapse where cartoonish gangs are roving the land then, again, I'd have already bailed for my families sake. As for the idea of wanting my young to grow up in their own homeland being based on emotion or reason, you're a swindling kyke with no sense of patriotism, and its both sections and rational. And lastly, I didn't say I was against (actual) refugees, they should absolutely be limited in number and kept in specific locations (I'd be fine with camps). It would absolutely be temporary and they'd be returning as soon as some part of the US was made habitable for citizens. In the event that I was unable to settle my family ANYWHERE on the Usa, due to apparent mad Max like upheaval, and the time I spent working to repair whatever economic disaster had damaged my country was shown to be in vain for any given foreseeable future, then yeah, is guess they'd have to be immigrants while I died working for fighting for my nation. I guess when the entire USA gets bombed to the stoneage you can say you told me so.

>>132775526
>What good are stats if you don't know how to use them.
Understanding how statistics can be manipulated is invaluable in today's society where convincing people of "facts" is more important than discovering said facts.

All psuedo-science relies on ignorance of statistics to be taken seriously, including "climate change". It is exceptionally obvious considering none of the graphs EVER differentiate real temperature reading with core temperature readings. If they did, their papers would look a lot less convincing and "sciency".

>>132774503
>I swear, statistics should be a mandatory High School course.
>implying you know any statistics

>>132761110

>climate change is a shoah

ftfy

>>132775487
>CO2 in the atmosphere traps heat
>humans are releasing monstrous amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere
>The earth is getting warmer

Hmm, really makes me think. I guess it's a jewish trick!

>>132761110
(((GISS))) not UAH or RSS. Kek

>t. atmos science phd student

File: IMG_9430.png (572KB, 1334x750px) Image search: [Google]

572KB, 1334x750px

>>132761110
Witnessed cloud seeding/bombing a couple of hours ago. Too far but it looked like an Apache bombing. There was fire and smoke.
Why would they do this over a major city is beyond me.
Pic related: bottom right..

>>132761110
>naw bruh you see cuz its not like, you know, man made
>I know cuz we wuz scientists and shiet

>>132773592

>high school dropout

This is how I know you aren't a /pol/ack. You're talking to a bunch of bitter twenty-somethings who bought the STEM meme and now have literally no job prospects whatsoever. Any job we can get with our degrees actually related to our fields are either teaching or pseudo-managerial positions telling factory workers what to do while putting checks into boxes, the former is paid poorly and has few openings and the latter is occupied by Indians.

File: UshcnTemperatureAdjustmentsCO2COrrelationAgwFraud.png (9KB, 480x420px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 480x420px

>>132766162
>Data manipulation by who? NASA? Multiple government agencies around the world?
Right, because government agencies never lie, especially when their funding depends on making the public believe there is a crisis only they can study and solve. Attached picture shows that they have been adjusting the raw data upward to try to force temperature to match CO2, then telling the public CO2 predicts temperature. Shouldn't this be a serious crime? Don't you find it odd they justify this?
>Why can't you just accept what is being said by the experts? That's an appeal to authority.

>>132775875
kek, look at this one
>>132764645

>>132775372
>after all the information online
You mean all the information that draws no legitimate conclusion, but merely makes an assumption based off of coincidence?

nasa and noaa just actively fabricate temperature records now by way of (((adjustments))). At least use hadcrut, or satellite measurements

>>132775744
It isn't exactly bullshit, as there are methods that exist that can be used to predict accurately. The thing is, each method has flaws and areas where they are not accurate.
The error comes when "scientist" use these methods, and then theorize based on the flaws of such methods they use.

Think of how we represent the globe on flat maps. No projection is perfectly accurate on 2D, and as such either the poles or the equator becomes distorted.
This same idea applies to statistics, and statistical methods. A flawed understanding of these methods leads to flawed research.

>>132775019
haha nice one

>disregarding common sense because muh "logical fallacy"
>defending science but making fun of the scientific method when it hurts your feelings

what is wrong with you people?
conspiretards are the worse

>>132776010

When I say "teaching related" I don't mean high school either