1) Is global warming real? 2) Should the government fuck up

>>8649959
>1) Is global warming real?
>2) Should the government fuck up the economy to deal with it?
No, and no.

>>8649959
How many of these threads do we fucking need on this board at one time? Search the fucking catalog next time.

>>8649959
The real /sci/ browsers have no interest in your /pol/ tier bullshit. The other day an anon came in and absolutely eviscerated some fake bullshit graphs some idiot on /pol/ made and then screencapped, consult the archives for the answer to your first question.


Have fun making an echo chamber of retardation though.

>>8649959
1) Loaded question
2) Loaded question

>>8649959
I don't care. I'm 60, have no kids. I won't be around when the fire hits the hay, no-one I care about will either.

>>8649974
Aren't you the least bit interested in how the physical processes of the world works? You're on a board dedicated to science and you're comfortable just not understanding things?

1. No
2. Yes

>>8649959
1) Yes
2) No
You don't have to fuck up the economy to deal with it.

File: 5d5.jpg (80KB, 600x1057px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 600x1057px

>>8649959
2.)

why don't we just take the jobs in fossil fuels,

and move them to alternative fuels?

>>8649986
But how will the poor fossil fuel industry make money? :'(

>>8649959
>>>/pol/

>>8649959
>Is global warming real?
Yes.

>Should the government fuck up the economy to deal with it?
In the long run, dealing with it will be significantly less expensive than ignoring it.

>>8649990
BMW didn't start out making cars. They originally made airplane engines, but were forced to change to something else after WW2. There was a point where they were making things like pots and pans before they really settled in and focused on cars. And they've made quite a bit of money doing that. Businesses can change and still make tons of money if they're willing to put in the effort.

>>8651002
But effort is hard. Can't we just ignore this global warming thing and force our kids to take care of it? Why should I put in effort just so some shitty post-millenials can enjoy their lives more?

>>8649959
>Should th'govermint fuck up th'economy
already done it

>>8649959
*Should we fuck up the economy to deal with it?

Since the government is the representative of the people.

>>8649974
A middle-aged white man turns out to be retarded. Surprise surprise.

>>8651018

What is it about discussing the temperature of the room that brings out the absolute worst in you people?
It's so fucking petty. Can you imagine Thomas Jefferson talking about a scientific topic like this?

Science and politics do not belong in the same room together.

>>8651037
Good point, let's get science out of politics so we can return to the good old days of christian sharia law.

>>8651037
It's not the temperature of the room that's of concern, it's the temperature of the wheat fields.
But either way, you're still young enough to die of heat stroke.

>>8651006
Guess how I can tell you don't have kids

>>8651196
He is being sarcastic

>>8651045
Good point but let's get the neo-Pagan out of man made climate change and not turn the lights off so quickly here. There is time to ponder this...why history always repeats.

>>8649959
>1) Is global warming real?
depends on the time span you look at
>2) Should the government fuck up the economy to deal with it?
of course not

global warming would be beneficial for mankind

>>8649959
Back to the containment board with you
>>>/pol/

>>8651514
All that melting ice in Greenland, who cares, amirite? Yeah, SLR is totally beneficial to all our coastal cities, can't wait for them to be inundated with meters of SLR in the next few centuries so that millions of people have to migrate elsewhere! Can't wait to lose important ports and cultural landmarks to tidal inundation! All that flooding Miami is having and the billions in mitigation they're already financing is great!

Oh, what about all the benefits it will have on our agriculture, stable crops like wheat and cereal grains which have decreased yields at higher temperatures, that will be great for humanity! Less food? Who cares, we don't need it! Nah, we don't need agriculture in the lower latitudes right? Let's let the everyone in the tropics starve to death, not like they're going to be clamoring to migrate north when this happens, right? Build that wall!

Disruption of normal weather patterns is totally a great thing as well, larger more powerful storm systems due to higher ocean temperatures is also a great benefit to humanity! Think of all those dead coral reefs from warmer water, and think of all those sensitive sea organisms that are more vulnerable due to ocean acidification, that's great for humanity! Having the basis of our fisheries in peril is certainly a great benefit no?

What about a disruption of thermohaline ciruculation in the future, and a slowdown in deepwater formation, that's really going to benefit Europe right! Think of the colder winters they'll have and the harsher climates that will develop as a result of this! Great for Europe! Think about the more powerful storm systems that will develop in the Atlantic because of that! More Hurricane Sandys for everyone!

Oh yeah, not to forget all that Methane and clathrates trapped in the permafrost / seabed that could be released increasingly with warmer arctic temperatures, that's nothing to be worried about, stupid warmists!

>>8651954
this post is so full of unproven claims and dipshitting its not even worth replying to

>>8651967
Like what? I've sturdied this extensively and it all sounds like what's expected to come. What are you having issues with because I've got plenty of sources.

>>8651975
studied*

>>8651975
like everything

You have to go back

>>>/pol/

>>8651987
I don't have time to tutor such a massive subject to you. Sorry but you'll have to put in the legwork yourself, here's some starting material.
http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL82yk73N8eoX-Xobr_TfHsWPfAIyI7VAP

File: 1480771033310.jpg (230KB, 1132x657px) Image search: [Google]

230KB, 1132x657px

>>8652005
I think you dont fucking understand you idiot

here an example
>Think of all those dead coral reefs from warmer water

here a pic of all coral reefs

File: 1478328945294.gif (950KB, 2000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

950KB, 2000x1000px

>>8652010
here a map of sea surface temperature

notice an overlap?

File: 1469056706278.gif (338KB, 1688x1122px) Image search: [Google]

338KB, 1688x1122px

>>8652013
now look at bio diversity

hmmmmmm really maeks me thingk

File: 1479695025616.png (156KB, 829x493px) Image search: [Google]

156KB, 829x493px

>>8652015
now lets continue with

>>8651954
>All that melting ice in Greenland, who cares, amirite
yeah because greenland is called GREEN LAND because it was always covered in ice!

>>8651967
>Unproven claims
AMOC shutdown in the future from greenland meltwater, studying previous AMOC shutdown events in the last interglaicial:
http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/2015/20150704_IceMelt.pdf
>Regional and Global sea-surface temperatures during the last interglaciation:
http://science.sciencemag.org/content/355/6322/276
>Extinction Risk from Climate Change:
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v427/n6970/full/nature02121.html

Crop failures due to climate change:
>Increased crop failure due to climate change: assessing adaptation options using models and socio-economic data for wheat in China
http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/5/3/034012/meta
>The potential impacts of climate change on maize production in Africa and Latin America in 2055
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959378002000900

>>8652010
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/31080009_Coral_Reefs_Present_Problems_and_Future_Concerns_Resulting_from_Anthropogenic_Disturbance

File: 1475601072707.png (19KB, 526x359px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 526x359px

>>8652022
aaand here sea level

>>8651954
>Yeah, SLR is totally beneficial to all our coastal cities, can't wait for them to be inundated with meters of SLR in the next few centuries so that millions of people have to migrate elsewhere! Can't wait to lose important ports and cultural landmarks to tidal inundation! All that flooding Miami is having and the billions in mitigation they're already financing is great!
sea level is slower than it has been in a long time! ohh no, an increas of 20-30cm per century! how will we possibly deal with this? it's not like we can build a tiny little dam if these cities really are as valuable as you claim

ohhh wait I bet you believe al gore who said that arctic is gone by 2012 and sea level rises by >10m this century. pro tip: al gore has already been proven to be wrong by reality

>>8652022
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenland#Etymology

>>8652015
See those parts with minimal biodiversity around the equator we call deserts? Those are getting much larger.

>>8652031
>timescale of thousand years when we're talking about 150 years of rapid change
Now I know you're just trolling.

File: 1466673019406.png (11KB, 589x547px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 589x547px

>>8652031
aand lets proceed

>>8651954
>Oh, what about all the benefits it will have on our agriculture, stable crops like wheat and cereal grains which have decreased yields at higher temperatures, that will be great for humanity
yeah because we plant our crops in the antarctic! no, increase in CO2 means faster growth and higher yield, increase in temperature means more arable land, longer growing seasons and so on! you don't import your veggies and fruits from sweden, you get them from spain, brazil, california, italy!

>>8652024
>http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/2015/20150704_IceMelt.pdf
okay they claim that sea level rise quickly accelerates. where is the evidence for that? it hasn't occured. they also express a political agenda. into the trash it goes
>http://science.sciencemag.org/content/355/6322/276
pay wall, I dont wanna log in via uni so post an available alternative
>http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v427/n6970/full/nature02121.html
a fucking model. this is not science, this is a prediction. climate change has always occured and yet there was very high biodiversity. wanna know what kills the animals? humans do, not the climate

>http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/5/3/034012/meta
>The simulations show crop failure rates increasing under climate change
again simulation! climate change has already been happening for so long and your supposed global warming has been occuring pretty much since industrialisation. if any of this were true, deliver actual evidence not lmao (((simulations)))

>http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959378002000900
ohh yeah an other simulation how nice. they can't predict the weather next week or the climate next year but they pretend they can predict the climate in 50 years

File: 1480006735502.jpg (173KB, 960x864px) Image search: [Google]

173KB, 960x864px

>>8652025
an other pay wall. of course acidification is a stress factor on corals but this is compensated by an increase in water temperature which actually increases their rate of growth

what kills corals is dumping waste and fertilizer into the ocean. thus, the only coral reefs that take significant damage are those near populated areas

but you wouldnt care about pollution. all you care about is muuhhh climate concern virtue signalling

>>8652057
not an argument. typical climate fearmonger talk: "look how our climate has changed in the past 20 years! but don't you dare go farther back than 20 years!"
reminds me of this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uif1NwcUgMU

>>8652070
>whines about sources and simulations and extrapolating data
>posts unsourced chart of world production of coarse grain obtained through approximations and simulations while expecting us to trust that it's going to extrapolate upwards on blind faith
kek

File: 1469829404015.gif (173KB, 657x594px) Image search: [Google]

173KB, 657x594px

>>8652081
climate pseudoscientists tampering with data

>>8652082
the source is in the chart you fucktard

FAO learn to read, all data publicly available, you can download the data sheets

typical climate fearmonger stupidity cant even read

>>8650894
This

Oh look, it's the same faggot from all the previous threads once again. Can mods permaban this faggot already, as well as anyone that makes these shitty threads?

File: 1484194366616.png (75KB, 1280x765px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 1280x765px

>>8652090
now here is a good one

global warming would save human lives! but climate fearmongers don't care about human lives, they only care about patting themselves on the back while doing absolutely nothing to combat the supposed climate apocalypse

>>8652090
Loving the ad hominems, really makes your argument look strong buddy, keep it up.

>>8652097
Gotta love those strawmen, go on call me a hippie dippie commie next, this shit is great.

File: 1485889265301.jpg (47KB, 885x516px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 885x516px

>>8652101
>he doesnt know the difference between ad hominem and name calling
you are an idiot. yes I insult other people but I provide actual facts and data while all you do is make unproven claims and cry

hmm I wonder who could make big profits off of this fradulent pseudo science

>>8652108
>facts
Woah now I thought facts were propaganda? Are you telling me that your charts made in excel are better than scientific articles and well established laws of physics? Interesting.

>>8649959
>1) Is global warming real?
Yes, faggot. it happens is that you live in the first world, so you don't feel the effects of global warming. In my fucked country the weather is worsen.

>2) Should the government fuck up the economy to deal with it?
The government and industries already have a plan when the planet will be on the edge of the abyss

>>8652113
>muhh fradulent articles
go ahead then. post empirical evidence that sea level rise is accelerating at an exponential rate. post empirical evidence that crop yields are declining due to temperature rise. don't just post your worthless models and simulations which cant even reproduce the past

but no, instead you will make the fallacies that you wrongly accuse me of. straw man (claims I said something which I did not) and ad hominem (charts are not legitimate)

>>8652125
Already did but you cried about it being behind a paywall, a clear indication that you aren't even a part of the scientific community but claim to know better than the scientists miraculously. Maybe you should submit a paper to them, get it published, and then share it with us?

This guy literally posts the same images in every thread, despite multiple people debunking each image every single time he posts them, he continues to post.
I used to actually bother responding to this guy, but it's clearly pointless when his belief of science is that anything that is modeled / projected is useless, despite that being the purpose of science.

I guess all astronomy models are also useless and invalid in their projections? What about models in physics, chemistry and biology, are they all useless as well? Same old bullshit every single thread.

>>8652108
>hmm I wonder who could make big profits off of this fraudulent pseudo science
Are you referring to climate change denial? I can think of quite a few multi-national entities that stand to make trillions of dollars if there are no regulations on fossil fuel emissions, and have dumped hundreds of millions into climate change denial over the past few decades. But no, it's those damn evil solar subsidies and that gosh darn green energy industry!
I can already see that this thread is devolving into another /x/-tier conspiracy garbage dump, hopefully mods can just come and delete it like they have the previous threads in the past few days. Make /sci/ great again pls.

>>8652143
>>8652095
are you talking about me?

most of my images have never been posted before on this board

https://warosu.org/sci/image/nK7of0BMAGiNPUrIQBu6bg
https://warosu.org/sci/image/PZY-NyAFEH8aPaS7UwHlOw
https://warosu.org/sci/image/50WORur4ZxvjMX6bDrbv2g
https://warosu.org/sci/image/GnF-A6s0knMuUFEIAVYZjw
https://warosu.org/sci/image/PoYBckHyisKn-5f6u0Rvkw

these ones have almost never been posted before
https://warosu.org/sci/image/nWxXu0UPZ1gjTamcP06k7g
https://warosu.org/sci/image/-s6_q0brsiwvCLcAJBjr7g
https://warosu.org/sci/image/bJ_U1IIbBZ0kMaTwYW4jUw

but you idiots don't care about facts and truth and reality. you NEVER admit it when you have been wrong about something

apparently this is how science works nowadays: no empirical evidence needed, only opinions and everyone who disagrees is literally worse than an hitler

people like you are a huge threat to the scientific method as well as scientific credibility

>>8652133
not an argument. zero evidence, only fallacies

>>8652152
>hundreds of millions into climate change denial over the past few decades
evidence

what about the tens of billions that went to climate fearmongers?

yeah, don't use reason and facts and evidence. EVERYONE WHO DISAGREES WITH MY OPINIONS MUST BE SILENCED AND BANNED

geez what's up with all these dumb kiddies on /sci/ nowadays

>>8649959
>1) Is global warming real?
>2) Should the government fuck up the economy to deal with it?
If #2 is False, the answer to #1 is irrelevant.

Its like a reverse Moore's wager.

>>8652163
>but you idiots don't care about facts and truth and reality. you NEVER admit it when you have been wrong about something
Man you are projecting so much here.
>apparently this is how science works nowadays: no empirical evidence needed
Pottery, simply pottery. I'm continually amazed at the level of cognitive dissonance from people like yourself. Empirical evidence exists, you refuse to study or learn, it's easier for you to maintain ignorance on a topic that you have little understanding of.
>only opinions
Coincidentally, that's all you have, emotions and opinions, no scientific basis or evidence for your conspiracies, or for your claims. Only pseudo-science and denial blogs. You reject actual science.
>not an argument
Back to >>>/pol/ please. Stop shitting up my board.
>what about the tens of billions that went to climate fearmongers?
WHATABOUTISM
Meanwhile, all your organizations like CEI, CFACT, Heartland, George C. Marshall, Cato, Americans for Prosperity, Doctors for Disaster Preparedness, Heritage, IER and ALEC.
All those same organizations where all of the climate denial "experts" come from, where all of them go and give talks at their conferences each year, it's one gigantic revolving door, they're all connected to the same entities and they all participate in the same circles, it's amazing how you can't see this, or choose to be willfully ignorant of it.
http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/solutions/fight-misinformation/global-warming-skeptic.html
http://www.exxonsecrets.org/html/index.php
https://www.desmogblog.com/2015/05/12/exclusive-major-climate-science-denial-funders-donors-trust-and-donors-capital-fund-handled-479-million-untraceable
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/mar/25/fossil-fuel-firms-are-still-bankrolling-climate-denial-lobby-groups
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jun/13/peabody-energy-coal-mining-climate-change-denial-funding
http://conservativetransparency.org/

>>8652211
I'm starting to think they use /sci/ as a testing grounds and share results about what does and doesn't work here at their meetings. It's the only thing I can think of to explain why the same guy makes these threads every single day.

>>8652227
or /pol/tards are called tards for a reason.
yes they really are this stupid

>>8652171
What's funny about this is that runaway warming could turn Earth into Venus.

>>8652236
Is there any actual evidence of this? I can't see it happening, even in the worst-case scenarios in which methane release adds to the Greenhouse effect. Venus is in a runaway greenhouse effect because it has no tectonic activity, and thus no way to recycle the CO2 in its atmosphere into the lithosphere. Earth will recover from climate change, it has in the past and will again in the future, the thing that concerns me is that humans won't be able to adapt our civilization or survive in the short term.

>>8649959
>the government
>the economy
Who are you referring to you autist and 90% of the world manages to aim themselves towards dealing with it whilst not damaging any economies and actually most of the time generating industry and stimulating economy.

>>8652070
> increase in CO2 means faster growth and higher yield
Only under greenhouse conditions. On a farm other factors limit growth.

>increase in temperature means more arable land, longer growing seasons and so on!
Uh, no.

>a fucking model. this is not science, this is a prediction.
I don't think you understand what science is.

>climate change has always occured and yet there was very high biodiversity. wanna know
what kills the animals? humans do, not the climate
Normally, climatic changes occur over very long time-scales. Do you know what happens when the climate changes rapidly? Mass extinctions.

>(((simulations)))
This is too stupid for words.

>they can't predict the weather next week or the climate next year but they pretend they can predict the climate in 50 years
If you don't know what the climate even IS, you shouldn't be trying to throw doubt on climatologist's understand of it.

>>8652081
>of course acidification is a stress factor on corals but this is compensated by an increase in water temperature which actually increases their rate of growth
Thermal stress is generally considered to be the largest factor in coral death. If you have information suggesting otherwise, post it.

>but you wouldnt care about pollution. all you care about is muuhhh climate concern virtue signalling
Just stop.

>"look how our climate has changed in the past 20 years! but don't you dare go farther back than 20 years!"
Directly comparing different trends on different time-scales isn't all that helpful.

>Pic
That things been pretty thoroughly discredited by Gavin Schmidt already. I'd post a link, but RC's search doesn't seem to be helping.

>>8652090
You've posted that image dozens of times, and never once managed to actually support your claims that the modifications are ill-intentioned.

>>8652097
>global warming would save human lives!
That's highly unlikely.

>>8652236
>What's funny about this is that runaway warming could turn Earth into Venus.
Not really.

>>8652227
No, it's just this same guy that comes into every thread (and probably makes them as well) and posts the same infographics and the same arguments. Always posting about once per day, at around the same time, always makes multiple posts instead of compiling everything into one or two. He's either legitimately retarded or just doesn't give a fuck, because he always gets BTFO.

>>8652924
/Pol/ is very dumb. You have to understand this fact, once you do their behavior makes sense. They're dumb, but they think they're smart. They'll cry about Jews but support Trump, an extremely pro-Israel POTUS. It's full of this kind of doublethink.

>>8652236

>venus
No, not that bad, but just a 6C rise will be bad enough.

https://youtu.be/Mc_4Z1oiXhY?t=48m40s

tropical: 0 - 23.5°
subtropical: 23.5° - 40°
temperate: 40° - 66.5°

>>8652950
It's very ironic that you talk about them as if they were one person. Are you by any chance autistic? Do you know what a joke is?

File: the-banality-of-climate-change1.jpg (206KB, 700x751px) Image search: [Google]

206KB, 700x751px

>>8652250
>recover from climate change

climate change is not an event, it is the permanent state of a nonlinear climate system in self-regulating interglacial mode on a water planet. there's nothing to recover from.

Even the Mythbusters proved it

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPRd5GT0v0I

>>8649959
1) yes
2) global warming is already fucking up the economy all by itself. The question is should the government fuck up the economy in the short term to still have an economy at all in 200 years.

>>8653308
What?

>>8653358
>the comments to that videos
americans, you are retarded

>>8653308
It's never changed so fast. We are computing the derivative and working it into the temperature - taxation models factored against the climate heretics to plot against the rise of climate zealots for a long term trending analysis which will juxtapose over the global economic austerity measures to save earth, the heretics and the zealots from themselves.

>>8651002
And look at all the poison that's come out of the vw ceo whore's ass. Maybe think about your analogies before babbling mindlessly and uselessly.

>>8652070
>yeah because we plant our crops in the antarctic! no, increase in CO2 means faster growth and higher yield, increase in temperature means more arable land, longer growing seasons and so on! you don't import your veggies and fruits from sweden, you get them from spain, brazil, california, italy!

But crop yields have been flat for the past two decades.

http://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms3918

>>8649986
such as plant based? i hope not they pollute more.

>1) Is global warming real?
Yes

>2) Should the government fuck up the economy to deal with it?
How do you fuck up the economy just by switching to renewable energy and electric vehicles?
The taxes on these things are pretty insignificant.

>>8651195
>Not how rising global temperatures work.

>>8654187
Volkswagen's CEO says dumb stuff, so BMW isn't an example of a company transitioning from one product to another? How do you figure that? They're two different companies.

>>8654943
Plant-based will be carbon neutral, as long as they are growing their fuel. They will just be releasing the CO2 that was incorporated into their plants when they were grown.

>>8649959
1) yes, after cold comes warm, always did
2) no need, after warm comes cold, always did

peak fuel = peak co2 what now anthropowarmists

>>8652022
As I understand it, Greenland was so named because the viking chieftains that settled it wanted a name that would attract new settlers. It's been covered in ice for millenia now.

>>8649959
Yes and unfortunately yes.

Also go back to /pol/ you retarded brainlet

>>8655339
The Vikings were very skilled climate changers. They melted the costal glaciers and did agriculture. When they had enough they started the little ice age and moved on.

>>8649959
Yes

Green technology and industry will massively help the economy by creating jobs
>muh subsides
Fossil fuel companies already get billions of dollars of subsidies and tax breaks
Shifting those to renewable energy sources won't break the world, but will help fix it

>>8652143
There's only one criteria to rate a model: try to predict the future and then compare. Or try to predict recent past by using older data.

>>8649959
>1) Is global warming real?
Probably yes. But there's literally no proof that it was caused by humans. Also warming rate is not really high, so there's nothing to worry about.

>2) Should the government fuck up the economy to deal with it?
No. Maybe "green energy" causes less pollution in developed countries, but the producing of rare-earth elements used in solar panels causes a lot of pollution in 3rd world countries. Also it's not economically profitable to produce reliable panels, so be ready to buy new ones every 3-5 years. Planned obsolescence is a bitch.

If we go deeper into conspiracy, I'd assume that 1st world will profit from turning to renewable because of lesser expenses on healthcare. Therefore government have a legit reason to support and subsidize renewables.

>>8654187
What are you even trying to say? Are you on crack or something?

>>8649959
The question you should be asking is weither or not Fossil Fuels should be abolished; since the FFI is under heavy scrutiny from the environmental groups, and did everything in their power to remain in business.

>>8649959
1) Yes - but it's not as immediate or serious of a threat as the Al Gore 'sky is falling' camp would have you believe. There is clear evidence of increasing mean temperatures and this will, in the long term, have a deleterious on the Earth's climate. What it does not mean is that New York and Miami are going to be underwater twenty years from now.

2) No, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be doing anything. We need to deal with global warming in a meaningful way. That means cutting emissions, that means turning towards alternative power sources like wind, solar, and more importantly nuclear fission. Ignoring the problem entirely won't make it go away, but neither will bullshit half-measures like taxes, regulations, or 'carbon credits'.

>>8656308
Parts of Miami are already flooding due to SLR. Add to the fact that you can't build levees / dikes there because of porous limestone being the city's foundation and you have a crisis in the making, this is just one city.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-JbzypWJk64&feature=youtu.be

As for Al Gore and it not being a serious threat, you're just plain wrong. It's very easy to have this mindset when you don't care about the future of human civilization, but you cannot underestimate the impacts these changes will have on the basis of our civilization. Conflicts will undoubtably break out in the future over resource scarcity and mass migrations from poor areas in the tropics. Africa especially, the mass migration occurring in Europe right now is just a taste of what we can probably expect globally in the future.

>>8656308
>There is clear evidence of increasing mean temperatures

Willing to accept this statement

> and this will, in the long term, have a deleterious on the Earth's climate.

This is conjectural and subjective. "Deleterious" implies the change is "bad," but what is bad for you may be great for somebody else. And changes will likely be complex, some "good" from your point of view, some "bad."

>>8656418
>Parts of Miami are already flooding due to SLR.

Miamian here. You are in error.

But if you have evidence other than a "documentary" made by activists, I'd be interested in seeing it.

>>8656515
https://gisweb.miamidade.gov/floodzone/

>>8650894
Nice evidence provided.

>>8649959
1. Probably
2. No, letting the coastal cities drown and West Africans starve while the first world gets a longer growing season is a net positive.

>>8656558
Yes, Miami is low lying and prone to flooding. I was looking for your source that this has anything to do with AGW.

>>8656560
https://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://mudancasclimaticas.cptec.inpe.br/~rmclima/pdfs/destaques/sternreview_report_complete.pdf&ved=0ahUKEwiqurnEzvzRAhUp_IMKHQtKAYAQFghZMAc&usg=AFQjCNFFmJMSu0en0pplIr5kIHqbzrRKsA

>>8656582
>sea level rising and Miami flooding
>no proof of Miami flooding
>give proof of Miami flooding
>yeah well this isn't proof sea levels are rising
Whatever conspiracy nut.

>>8656582
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2014EF000272/full

>>8656582
The flooding is due to tidal forces, which is exacerbated by decades of SLR from thermal expansion of the ocean + glacial meltwater in the arctic. These type of events are becoming more and more common each year, when they weren't in the past, especially when the tides are strongest. Basically what's happening is because the whole region is so close to sea level, when the tides come rushing in, water travels up through drainage / sewer pipes and starts flooding the most vulnerable areas. They are starting to raise streets and whatnot across Miami beach to remedy this, but it's only a temporary solution as it's only going to get worse in the coming decades.

>>8656560
Go read the IPCC reports, the have a nice long list of citations for you to look at.