Is there any evidence against the existence of climate change

>>135124116
The effect CO2 emissions will have on the climate are dubious. And the world can not combat such things without one world government. USA is obviously to much of a pussy to become one, hence the disdain for USA.
>a propaganda tool
Everything is a propaganda in someones hands.

>>135124116
caring about climate change whether or not it's occurring is the mistake.

>>135124116
Humans create climate change. Specifically over population like south asia and the carribean.

This i assume is why USA and Europe must take in more people but fuck the propoganda.

Just nuke China.

>>135124567
there is uncertainty about some of the details but the overall effect of CO2 is anything but 'dubious'.

The effect of CO2 on the global average surface temperature is detectable in several independent lines of evidence - everything from simple theory, modern observations, climate modeling and paleoclimate.

>>135124116
Of course climate change is real,the question is if it is cause by humans.

>>135124116
the earth overall is warming(even though it cooled off a bit in the last 20 years) , there's no doubt about that

There are so many variables that you can't even be 10% to say it is man-made

>>135124116
No there isn't. You can directly calculate how much more Energy from the sun is absorbed rather than reflected with increasing numbers of CO2.

I just think that panicking and crippling our economy because of it is incredibly dumb. In the history of the planet we are in one of the coldest periods. Wouldn't it be nice if Antarctica were free of ice and we can effectively use it for resources?

>>135125985
Better yet. If the globe got hotter England would stop fucking raining and Germans can welxome their desert back.

>>135124116
To be honest, like "overpopulation", it's both.
Burning fossil fuels does deplete resources faster than they refill, and it does put a higher burden on the environment than if you didn't.
But western ideologists do not see it for what it is. They make it anti-white and anti-first world.

>>135125985
>In the history of the planet we are in one of the coldest periods
that's not true at all.

File: All_palaeotemps.svg.png (76KB, 1000x291px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 1000x291px

>>135126139
Alright, alright not quite. But looking at this graph the average temperature seems to have a relatively high frequency oscillation to it (~60k years), so there is no reason this won't continue long after we are gone.

File: nature16494-f3.jpg (151KB, 600x549px) Image search: [Google]

151KB, 600x549px

>>135126499
it's more like 100k-yrs for the late pleistocene and 41k-yrs for the early pleistocene.
There is at least one scientific paper looking at the CO2-insolation threshold for glacial inception, that comes to the conclusion that conditions for another major glaciation wont be met for at least another 100 000 years.

>>135124116
climate refugees will soon become a thing

>>135127254
of course!

Soros programs will push HARD on this

and many westeners will cave as usuals:
>I-I-I gg-guess they're right..... I r-really did burn quite a lot of fossil fuels... it is my fault...

>>135126761
>Major glaciation in 100k years
I don't know how far ahead it still makes sense to make plans for our civilization, but most of Europe being covered in ice is probably much worse than the effects of global warming we are currently facing.

Besides, dinosaurs are evidence that Earth supported life that is much bigger and consumes a lot more resources than the average human with much higher average temperatures than there are today. I'm confident that we will be able to adapt, if we finally manage to close our borders and won't be overrun by niggers that is.

>>135127709
they say
>Our simulations demonstrate that under
natural conditions alone the Earth system would be expected to remain in the present delicately balanced interglacial climate state, steering clear of both large-scale glaciation of the Northern Hemisphere and its complete deglaciation, for an unusually long time.
(long time means 50,000 years in this case)

The problem with current climate change is that it is happening significantly faster than any natural process in the past.
Even the most extreme examples of rapid warming in the paleoclimate record happened an order of magnitude slower, allowing warm-bodied animals to respond with transient dwarfism. The pace of the current warming will allow animals only little opportunity to cope.

>>135124116
the world legit looks fucking retarded upside down. damn can you imagine if north was south and south was north?

not aesthetic at all for some reason.

File: gistemp.png (70KB, 1130x600px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 1130x600px

>>135125885
>even though it cooled off a bit in the last 20 years
That's simply not true.

>>135129508
So how long does it have to continue without a drop for anthropomorphic climate change turn into a plausibility to near-certainty ?

>>135129508
well it obviously depends on the region,europe for example has been cooling(or to say better: not warming at the same exponential rate) in those last decades.

If a region cools another one gets hotter(not necessarily)... people forget to think about the earth like a living organism, it "balances" itself out, at weird as that may sound for some people

The only regions who have global warming problems are literally china and other industrial-crowded areas

>>135124116
it is both m8. It is real but it is being used as a propaganda tool by the anti white globalist left elite.

>>135124116
No. There is no evidence against the idea that the existence of climate change is a propaganda tool.