"If anyone still wants to debate the viability of the scientific

You can quickly spot bad science when its adherents are extremely arrogant.

>>7779914
"Evolution is just a theory!"
"Gravity is just a theory!"
"The conservation of momentum is just a theory!"

Right... Totally an one sided thing there.

Ok let's go, you'll regret this OP

Show me one model for climate you think actually predicts anything accurately

>>7779957
still waiting

>>7780006
that showed him

>>7779890
Obama is self destructing right as his final term ends.

His house in dubai sure looks nice though.

>>7780046
This.

What?! house in dubai

As a devout Roman Catholic, I really think we need to step up the pace of awakening people to climate change.

>>7779919
>>7779941
Keep the memes coming boys!

>>7780046

Pretty much. His domestic policy is in the toilet and his foreign policy is burning down. Then there's the BRICS crash.

>>7779941
bretty gud

>>7780179
Pretty broad statements. What about the policies is bad?

>An important turning point in British history occurred in 1066, when William the Conqueror defeated King Harold II at the Battle of Hastings. Less well-known is that, when William landed, he occupied an old Roman fort now known as Pevensey Castle, which at the time was located on a small island in a harbor on England’s south coast. A draw bridge connected it to the mainland. Pevensey is infamous because unfortunate prisoners were thrown into this “Sea Gate,” so that their bodies would be washed away by the tide. Pevensey Castle is now a mile from the coast – further proof of a much higher sea level fewer than 1000 years ago.

>>7780209
If you check historical records from +1000 years ago, our sea levels were much much higher than now.

This is a fact - and I am not denying climate warming may be man made.

>>7780210
>This is a fact - and I am not denying climate warming may be man made.
so is this the new "I'm not racist, I have a black friend"?

Climate is changing and was changing since the dawn of time. I've yet to hear an argument on why it's somehow a problem and why we should do something about it.

>>7780239
implying we could do anything about it in the first place

>>7780239
It's about our impact on the environment, I thought that was obvious...

>>7780247
> our impact on the environment
which is ?

>>7780213
Well that would work wouldn't it ? racists don't have black friends

>>7779919
Didn't the emdrovw disprove cpnservation of momentuum?

>>7780256
Pollution, deforestation, ocean damage. Come on anon

>>7780209
>>7780210
Pevensky Castle is now a mile from the coast because of the process of longshore closed off a bay leaving behind marshes.

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

>>7780210
>>7780209
>>7780213


So explain where the water went?
Matter can't be destroyed.

>>7780260
but they do
I'm racist and I have tons of european friends

they're special enough to me to be my friends, but the general population is despicable at best.

>>7780319
Duh
It evaporated or retreated as they say, now the environment of that particular area can't produce those amounts of water, part of the reason being landscape changes and climate change of that area

>>7779919
Macroevolution is. General relativity is. Conservation of momentum is, particularly with the meme drive calling things into question. However, all of these things are backed by infinitely more experimental evidence than climate change.

Real scientists publish when they're 99% confident in their results. Shitty doomsayer climate scientists start shitting out models and papers as soon as they see a minor trend. The whole field isn't bad necessarily, but Global Warming is a pretty cancerous circlejerk.

>>7780322
> im racist against a certain race
> i have friends of the said race
does not compute.

>>7780330

Where did the water go?

There have been drouts for years and there is a HOLE in the ozone, which is less clouds which is water vapor. Unless you are saying it sent underground lol

>>7780338
then don't compute, you have cognitive issues

>>7780359
you fail to make an argument. your opinions are invalid

>>7780360
there is no argument to be made, I merely state facts from my own experience.

>>7780366
personal experiences are not objective facts anon...

>>7780370
but they are.
Those people are objectively my friends.
I objectively hate white people in general.
Those friends are objectively white.

What's wrong, are you cognitively limited anon? I don't think so, so move on.

>>7780381
Your experiences aren't false. Your assumption that you can deduce facts out of them are false. Because it's an oxymoron if you say "here is X. Hes my friend and I hate him"

File: 1450235067388.jpg (113KB, 650x632px) Image search: [Google]

113KB, 650x632px

>>7780196

>>7780386
You claim that racists cannot have friends of the race they hate. Yet anon claims that he has friends of the race he hates. Either he's lying, or your claim is false.

>>7780650
He is telling the truth, but his deduction is false.

>>7780076
>Pope of Rome jumps on a propaganda bandwagon
>1 billion legion pile on
Spooky!

>>7780678
It doesn't matter wether it's logically sound.

>>7780702
it does.

>>7780239
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permian%E2%80%93Triassic_extinction_event

>>7779890
>viability of the scientific arguments
>viability
wat

File: 1437695288200.jpg (6KB, 250x244px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 250x244px

>>7780918
Let me know when we're capable of producing as much co2 as thousands of years of constant volcanic eruptions.

>>7780338
>consider blacks inferior intellectually
>have a half black wife that's objectively more intelligent than me
>still hate blacks because I'm not an idiot that cherry picks examples from a general trend of dindus
Computes perfectly senpai.

>>7780239

This is dishonest on your part; of course you've heard "an argument". You could sketch a conventional environmentalist point of view on the subject right now (regardless of your disagreement with same) - and don't pretend you couldn't.

What you really mean to say is that you haven't heard what you have found to be a worthwhile or persuasive argument.

>>7780386

>Your assumption that you can deduce facts out of them (experiences) are false

I'm not either one of you tards having the tardfight. This is the dumbest thing I've read on /sci/ in over a month. I guess we can just pack up and stop pursuing all of the hard sciences then, especially physics. Anything that isn't pure math.

>>7780339
>Where did the water go?
The sea level will go down if the water gets trapped on land, as glaciers, lakes, inland seas, groundwater, or water and hydrogen content of biomass and fossil fuel.

For it to change on the scale of centuries, most of that change is likely explained by precipitation patterns and melt rates, although biomass could also be a factor.

>There have been drouts for years and there is a HOLE in the ozone, which is less clouds which is water vapor. Unless you are saying it sent underground lol
Even setting aside shallow groundwater and hydrate minerals, water can go underground. There's another ocean's worth already down there in the deep crust, and enough elemental hydrogen to burn all the oxygen out of the atmosphere. Water can also get split into hydrogen and oxygen, with the hydrogen escaping into space.

There has been limited investigation of deep water and deep hydrogen because of how hard it is to drill that deep.

The Earth's surface is not a closed system. Material escapes from the atmosphere into space, and is released from deep within the Earth, and material falls into the atmosphere from space and can be drawn into the depths.

"Heightened carbon emissions are causing a greenhouse effect and disrupting the global climate" makes sense.

"Dude shut down every factory and scrap every car and send trillions of dollars to Africa and Asia so they can build factories and cars instead lmao" makes no fucking sense.

If anything there's only a climate change "debate" because so many climate change PROPONENTS are arguing in bad faith when it turns out that whatever social democratic bullshit they've been arguing for over the last hundred years is *also* the solution to climate change.

It's kind of like when you listen to a dedicated Marxist tell you about how capitalism is responsible for disease, and capitalism is responsible for war, and capitalism is responsible for racism, and capitalism is responsible for climate change, and capitalism is responsible for intolerance, and capitalism is responsible for crime, and...

>>7779957
>predicts
Professor Peter Wadhams predicted ice free arctic within 2015. That will happen within -1 month.

File: image.jpg (47KB, 398x480px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 398x480px

>>7781072

"Heightened carbon emissions are causing a greenhouse effect and disrupting the global climate" is not made any less valid just because youre upset with a few social democratic anticapitalist.

I don't go blaming capitalism but I think were in an agreement on the simple statement "heightened carbon emissions are causing a green house effect"

I feel your anti-anti-capitalism stance is detracting from the real issue.

File: image.jpg (34KB, 490x347px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 490x347px

>>7779957
no model necessary because its a really simple concept. honestly tell me what is wrong with the following:

1. carbon is the main waste product of our modern human civilization
2. carbon is an element that can contain the thermal radiation coming from the earth surface.

what will you debate? carbon isnt the waste product of our civilization? thermal radiation passes through carbon just fine? venus is hot "just because" and not because of its greenhouse effect? you dont believe the mechanism of greenhouse effect? you dont believe literal greenhouses ie for plants actually work?

>>7780974
CO and CO2 released by the volcanoes are absorbed back by the natural carbon sinks (forests and oceans).

Due to deforestation and oceanic damage, these carbon sinks are being destroyed as well.

Please think next time.

>>7781072
Why does pol keep coming here.

>>7781005
>extant reality is cherry-picking
I hope you're getting c ucked

>>7781767
why do communists like you ?

>>7781797
K buddy

>there is no climate change. it's all just a liberal scare tactic,

later
>ok, climate is changing. but it surely isn't man made. that's up to god, you commie.

too late
>well, seems kinda we kinda were responsible for the climate change. but we couldn't have done anything about it anyway with all those assholes around.

File: 386d845f_00da_404a_81c8_4d45cb235c07.png (728KB, 859x960px) Image search: [Google]

728KB, 859x960px

>>7782701
I just would like to see some actual papers written on the subject, but all I can find is a slew of shit articles written on the topic by retards that work for sites like buzzfeed.

>>7782807
that is the dankest meme i have ever seen

>>7780336
>Macroevolution is.
fuck off. fuck off for even using that term.

>>7781336
The argument is not the existence, but the extent that human activity has on the greenhouse effect. Water vapour is also a greenhouse gas

>>7782911
>Water vapour is also a greenhouse gas

It is, but water vapor persists in the atmosphere for a few days, while CO2 persists for a hundred years. The long persistence is the reason why CO2 is especially important. But it's true that it really shouldn't be the only greenhouse gas we talk about. For example, methane matters too.

File: 1434189893259.jpg (15KB, 453x557px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 453x557px

You know what I read on leddit today?

>Science Proves Human Climate Change Has Prevented Ice Age

This is like claiming we can stop earthquakes or control tornados.

It was a lie all along.
A big ass lie the entire scientific community bought.

>>7782911

Onset of the industrial revolution correlates with rapid increases in atmospheric carbon as measured by Greenland and Antarctic ice cores.

Ice cores have a very good temporal resolution (+/- a couple years). Marker beds can be traced back to known events, like volcanic particulates/sulphur isotopes from the Krakatoa eruption.

>>7780339
>hole in the ozone
lol

The hole in the ozone layer in antartica is seasonal and natural, it was just another environmental doomsday thing. The levels of ozone replenished far before they could have been effected by a CFCs ban. They are still banned and the ozone layer continues to have a baseline that it fluctuates around. The dangerous part of increased uvb never occurred with ozone at its lowest levels. We are fucking ants. The idea that we can effect the planet in these manners is arrogant.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/12/11/at-agu-nasa-says-cfc-reduction-is-not-shrinking-the-ozone-hole-yet/

http://ozonewatch.gsfc.nasa.gov

Remember when the banning of cfs did fuck all after scientists realized they were measuring the Ozone incorrectly?

>/pol/ consistently proving they are a better politically-charged [insert hot topic science field here] discussion board than /sci/

>>7783303
That's because /pol/ is usually on the right of things, and the right is usually correct on most issues, despite what retarded lolberals want you to believe.

>>7783303

>Citing a random dude's blog for scientific information

lol okay

There is a great deal of money to be made through the spectre of climate change, carbon credits are basically a ponzi scheme.
If people gave a shit about the environment we would be talking about cleaning up our oceans and heavy metal waste...the problem is those things are expensive and have actual measurable results so its harder for organizational bodies to pocket the money and walk away.

I have a comment.
Underneath the arctic ice are US, Russian and UK submarines full of nuclear weapons pointing at each other.
If the ice cap melts, then the submarine deterrant/threat ends. Period.
Global warming will prevent nuclear holocaust - delicious irony.