Know those screens people put on their cars so their kids don't

Thats what atmosphere does. It would be much hotter without one. If you put additional screen - it will become colder, dunno if it fits your definition of fucking up climate.

>>9165233
>It would be much hotter without one
No

Forbidden Science

The people controlling science and climate change messaging hate any solution that does not include suffering and reduction in economy. Stop bringing up any solution that doesn't fit the narrative.

>>9165243
>The people controlling science and climate change messaging hate any solution that does not include suffering and reduction in economy. Stop bringing up any solution that doesn't fit the narrative.

Precisely... the only "Solution" to climate change they are EVER willing to discuss... is "Give more sheckels"

>>9165240
it would be, since you can't dissipate heat effectively in a vacuum, thus, heating up even more. the iss has massive heatsinks because they cant really get rid of the heat. your pc heatsink would be the size of your desk to be as effective in a vacuum than in the earth's atmosphere. you need a medium to transport heat away from a body, a hard vacuum is not a medium. thats why a thermos flask can keep the heat longer , since its surrounded internally by a vacuum.

>>9165283
Geoengineering is forbidden by the powers that be. Climate Change is a major ideological tool.

The paris climate accord should be understood for what it really was. An attempt by globalists to try and wrest credit from the hands of scientists and engineers.

No, it is not the technical progress of solar panel technology. It is not the continued reduction in cost of wind power.

It was the international political movements that saved the world. Globalism and the powers that be saved us.

It wasn't scientists and engineers improving efficiency of solar power, batteries, etc. It was politicians and international frameworks of elites.

Obama, UN, or some other symbol saved us.

The reason the globalists got so mad about trump pulling out of paris climate accord wasn't because of fears of anything. It was because they wanted the credit. If USA pulls out and still achieves the goals because technology and science is advancing it destroys the narrative they want. The narrative that gives them credibility and power.

If the truth, that these institutions did nothing but hinder and hurt progress came out it would necessarily create less power for them.

>>9165233
exactly the opposite

https://youtu.be/6VUPIX7yEOM?t=1m

>>9165299
oh blow it out off your ass pol/tard

>>9165338
>oh blow it out off your ass pol/tard

Because politics don't effect science, huh?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heliocentrism#1616_ban_against_Copernicanism

>>9165296
Ah, now I see. That's why it is so hot on the Moon.

>>9165350
fuck off to /reddit/

>>9165391
fuck off to /pol/

>>9165391
>fuck off to /reddit/

Are you saying that politics doesn't effect science?

>>9165350
Science is settled on Climate Change. Deal with it.

>>9165338
If you bring up pol you know the power of attribution.
>pol got trump elected
There is tons of power in falsely taking credit for things. Hence why politicians and others constantly take credit for what science and engineering does.

There is a reason every neocon and neolib takes credit for all advancement as if it was their ideology that invented or created anything besides some wars.

>>9165418
There was 0 (zero) evidence for heliocentrism in the 1600s

>>9165217
What about putting it at the larange point between earth and the sun. It could have solar panels to power ion drives to keep it in place. Prob have to do it sooner or later because the sun is heating up.

>>9165327
yeah. the atmosphere gives us about 30oC of greenhouse effect that we actually NEED. pumpiing gases up there that warm the planet even more is prob not helpful though. CO" is over rated as a green house gas btw. Most of the effect is due to H2O

>>9165299
Agree. Its a political whip. Is just used as a weapon to keep people in line. CO2 is a rubbish greenhouse gas BTW. Most green house effect (and we get about 30oC from it and we NEED that or the planet would become a big snowball) comes from water vapour. There is more ARGON in the air than CO2.

>>9165338
No denying CO2 has a (albeit weak) greenhouse effect, just saying it is a political tool. Its used to frighten libtards.

>>9165388
When the sun bakes it its very hot, but in the dark its very cold. duhhh

>>9165393
fuck off to somewhere else

>>9165449
Not how much through. Show me a proper cross section report with the CO2 contribution. HA! They won't do that because CO2 has minimal effect and they know it. All the data is lying around, IR absorption spectrum’s and the like. I dare you, I double dare you! Find a cross section report that significantly points to CO2 being a culprit!

>>9165233
wrong! the atmosphere has a greenhouse effect (that we need) that ads about 30oC to average global temperature.

File: maxresdefault.jpg (203KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

203KB, 1280x720px

>>9165217
I thought of doing that over areas where hurricanes generate in order to disrupt their formation. However, it may make things worse in the surrounding areas, triggering even more hurricanes outside that area.

>>9165449
Science by definition is literally never settled.

>>9165283
>>9165243

>free market capitalism is the only solution to any problem
>scientific solutions that cost money to implement

and the flaw is exposed and the economic system is revealed for the bullshit scheme that it is.

>>9165487
nearly all of science is a political tool

even new agers and other spiritual retards use quantum mechanics to justify their insanity.

Simpsons did it

>>9165217
I remember this things as a kid. They always had a horrible smell because they would sit and bake in the heat all day. Probably gives more damage from all the plastic byproducts which are off gassing than anything some sunlight would do.

>>9165388
it is, the difference between areas in the sun and areas in the shadow on the moon is +200 to -200 degrees. its so hot in fact that astronauts A7L suits had to use a 3 layer water-cooled cooling and ventilation undergarment to get rid of the heat and keep the astronaut comfortable, the outer material was a special teflon cloth, made from teflon coated silica fiber, aluminized kapton and aluminized mylar, so the suits won't just lose their outer layer from the heat.

>>9166497
thats celsius btw, or in retard units +390 to -330 degrees F

>>9165217
This idea is only about as stupid as believing in Climate Change itself. Well done anon.

>>9165296
>it would be, since you can't dissipate heat effectively in a vacuum
What is blackbody radiation?

>>9165477
>tries to explain why the Earth is rapidly warming
>instead explains why it was warm before the warming
/pol/tards, everyone.

File: climate-forcing-figure2-2016.png (71KB, 928x630px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 928x630px

>>9165493
>Not how much through.
Nope that's settled too:

https://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/

>Show me a proper cross section report with the CO2 contribution.
Oh look, another idiot engineer who denies basic science. Aren't you late for a 9/11 truth rally?

>>9165583
Stop pretending to understand science, Ken Ham.

>>9165217
What are chemtrails.

>>9166497
That's only because of the sun's direct isolation. If planets couldn't dissipate heat in a vacuum the moon would not get cold at night, let alone -200.

>>9165217
Yes great, you solved global warming but now you are killing agriculture and oxygen production. We need the same amount of sunlight but less infrared heat.

>>9165217
solar mirrors are are absolutely a possible tool to use in terraforming

>>9165296
>the iss has massive heatsinks because they cant really get rid of the heat
Not entirely correct.
It has massive heatsinks because you need lots of insulation as well. The heat sinks are needed because you need to regulate the temperature inside the station as well as the outside, and also on parts of the station facing the sun when it is in direct sunlight.

Having a medium like air does make it more effective though.

we should do geoengineering.
if we can spend 1 bln to avoid 100 bln in damage, then I don't get why not.
(side effects may include inland droughts from lack of rain)

>>9165217
>cause too much of a temperature shift and fuck up the climate?
oh silly anon, everyone knows that human caused climate change doesn't exist. There's no way physically blocking energy from being added to Earth's ecosystem would actually reduce the total energy of the system. Humans are special because nothing they do affects basic physics at all.

> if the climate changes it's your fault

It's 3 degrees colder today is that because of hitler????

File: 473153924_182b7a84ab_o.jpg (42KB, 465x473px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 465x473px

>>9165388
>tfw you whip out a snappy retort and only succeed in make yourself look even more retarded

>>9165217
Holy shit, I haven't seen these things in a while.

so i was thinking the world is heating up right

well what if everyone in the world has to bring their fridge outside and leave the door open for an entire day?

then the world would become colder, right?

hand me my nobel

>>9165243
So you would destroy the environment just for some shekels? In the long term, it is not worth it.

>>9165299
Given that we already know they are engaging in geoengineering I would take it in the opposite direction.
They are using geoengineering to warm the earth and promote their carbon taxes.

>>9170160
There is no basis for the massive assumption that any human action short of return to the stone age will result in environmental collapse. I have always been puzzled by the enormous confidence the warmers display in their hypotheses and in denying new proposals even though they have hardly had much time to give it a thorough analysis.

>>9165338
Are you denying that China wanted carbon credits?

And do you really believe China is entirely open about their pollution??

>>9166814
The contentious part is that we already had CO2 and some claim the CO2 window was already so closed that extra CO2 did not matter much. How much this difference is remains controversial.

The second part of the controversy is that methane was originally not part of the atmosphere (after the oxygen catastrophe of course) so any methane seen is due to human activity, specifically agriculture. More specifically this is to a substantial degree due to rice farming in Asia, and that makes it too controversial to touch even with a barge pole.