Anyone here an ex climate change believer? what caused you to grow out of it?

Anyone here an ex climate change believer? what caused you to grow out of it?

Other urls found in this thread:

blog.dilbert.com/post/154082416051/the-non-expert-problem-and-climate-change-science
assets.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/7/2008/02/2008-population-01.png
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

Actually reading up on it and looking at the evidence they use.
>It's all bullshit.

what if I just dont care

i really have no opinion

>the earth has cycles
its just having a hot flash like women.

1 google search

Learning that there's been identical temperature increases in the past made me skeptical

Even if its real its too late

>the earth has been steadily increasing in temperature since we exited the last ice age
>there is evidence of the earth having higher levels of CO2 and O2 in the past and it led to lush forests and megafauna, most prosperous time for life on earth
>the 99% of scientists agree in global warming stat thrown around is incredibly misleading

If it was real there would be a push for nuclear/thorium.

Yep.

I used to care. But then the news cycle went full circle. Every year on a twenty year repeat, the same stories. Forever.

1. I don't even care
2. I like sight of smoking chimneys and industrial districts overall
3. It's all bullshit, they're evidence is like "You're consuming 1000000000 liters of water eating wheat/beef" just because some dumbass counter in precipitation.

Mix of research and apathy.

never fell for the meme. the shilling and dishonesty was always just as bad as with the 'HURRR RACE IS A SOCIAL CONSTRUCT' and 'IMMIGRANTS ARE A CULTURAL ENRICHMENT HOW WILL WE PAY OUR PENSIONS WITHOUT THESE DOCTORS AND ENGINEERS'

blog.dilbert.com/post/154082416051/the-non-expert-problem-and-climate-change-science

dilbertman articulates it nicely

Well once upon a time I actually did geological research in an academic environment and found that there is a lot of very legitimate evidence to support it, and aligned strongly with 99% of people who actually do research in the field and whom our society employs to give us accurate data and who tend to do their job rather well. I learned that while the earth does have periodic periods of warming after ice ages, they generally happen over millennia instead of centuries, and that our period of warming is exponentially faster and corresponds strongly with the beginning of the industrial age, and that geological evidence such as tree rings and polar ice strata can tell us a lot about ecological stress during the last few centuries. I also noticed that climate change deniers tended to have some kind of ulterior motive for their beliefs, such as the idea that environmentalism would squelch essential industries, instead of evaluating the data from an objective standpoint without looking at the inconvenience of actually doing something about such a problem. I noticed that they tended to fall within the same groups as flat-earthers, creationists, and conspiracy theorists.

But one day, a fedora wearing basement-dwelling obese autistic friend of mine introduced me to this Ethiopian cave-painting forum called Sup Forums.org, and now I don't really think about complicated stuff like that. There's all of these cool meme pictures that are very convincing and so many very well informed people that really seem to know what they're talking about.

15 years ago in school i would always hear them say the end is near. End never came.

The fact they care about carbon taxes instead of just going out and planting tress is evidence its a money grab.

Daily reminder that walls of texts for an online worldview push are always representing the incorrect worldview.

What are you talking about, bother? I was just relating the story of how I came into the service of our benevolent energy industry overlords just like you.

A mixture of Crowder, Trump, and Molyneux.. When Trump first denied global warming, I laughed and thought he was an idiot. Then I saw how Crowder would disprove leftist talking points about global warming, and that made me question it. Then lastly, Molyneux's multiple videos on climate change & the many well educated guests he brought on really convinced me. Ever since then, I would jokingly bring up the "global warming is a myth" around my friends, and it really surprised me how many of them actually didn't believe in global warming. That concensus of my friends, who weren't very political (before Trump), also solidified that global warming was a hoax.

When Leonardo said it was a real threat in his oscar speech

Climate isn't even real you fuckinng shill. The kikes made it up so we can buy umbrellas and coats. You're so blatantly bluepilled

kek

How is our weather real if our HAARP don't seal?

>Anyone here an ex climate change believer? what caused you to grow out of it?
science

I used to be like this guy but I instead realized climatology is a joke field after working with meteorologists, after initially working with climatologists.

Also the vast majority of greenhouse gases come from natural phenomena so I am pretty noncommittal

energy industry overloards. Don't you have a drum circle to attend to faggot. Yea Climate change is happening but paying the extra money in trying to solve it will fuck the economy. Plus one country can't save the earth and as long as other countries are polluting fuck it we should too to stay afloat. Don't come in here thinking you are smarter than anyone because you're not. You're a basic commie fag that thinks he thinks in different ways than everyone else even though he shares the mainstream opinion of millions of people.

My thoughts lean towards the whole idea;
Earth is and has gone through warm and cool phases. We're hot now but headed for the cold.

Seems like it's more of a pattern more-so that human inflicted Global Warming.

IMO

Flat earthers believe they are original . They are unaware there have always been stupid people.

Pretty much this. Any excuse for socialism.

>Anyone here an ex climate change believer? what caused you to grow out of it?

Two things.
One was Trump, and the vast luegenpresse psyop that opposed him. I guess I never really appreciated the level of deceit practiced by "experts" until this cycle. And if they'll lie to your face despite mountains of evidence to the contrary in politics, they'll certainly do it in "science" too.

The second was some article I read about AIs being tested for automatically approving loan applications. In every test the AIs essentially became racist and massively downgraded blacks. The response from the research team wasn't "Well, that's science, guess blacks are statistically poor investments", but rather "Oy vey we're so sorry, shut it dowwwwnnn". That's a smoking gun that science these days is not about being correct, but about being politically correct.

So I guess it's not so much that "I read the climate change evidence and that disproved it", but rather "Elites and scientists are liars and I no longer believe anything they say".

YOU SHUT YOUR MOUTH YOU BLUEPILLED SHILL! HOW MUCH DID THE KIKES PAY YOU TO POST THAT?

I believed it when I was young and they still talked about global cooling.

But after a while you start to realize that none of their world-ending prophecies ever come true and they just cycle to the next one when their current is losing steam.
I mean, they are already dropping the global warming thing and relabeling it to climate change in an attempt to milk one or two more years of research funding out of it before they have to come up with something new.

Realizing that scientific rational "evidence" is rarely more than a smug popular consensus

i can't believe that americans are this fucking stupid

how are americans this fucking stupid

Why are white countries' governments the biggest pushers of man-made global warming?

help me it posted twice after not working the first time

i'm interested in that AI thing

climates are historically always slowly changing.
man made global warming now. that is another story.

Let us know how your wife enjoyed Muhammad, won't you?

Pizzagate

>flag
>ID
>8ull
>Bull
Checks out

>That user tag

Have you prepped the 8ull yet Swedecuck?

>Barack Hussein Obama
>assets.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/7/2008/02/2008-population-01.png

Feels good not living in a country that doesn't pay the Carbon Jew.

Question for you deniers

Climate is changing on its own, that's a regular and natural part of its cycle and human have nothing to do with it

What should humans do then?

>What should humans do then?
Nothing. There isn't anything we can do. We just have to get ready to survive another Ice Age in a thousand years.

Would you consider, for example, giving buildings better isolation, trying to anticipate the changes to come and looking into more sustainable energy sources as part of "getting ready" ?

I'm a chemist, spent some time in research groups working on photo electrodes for water splitting and other renewable energy technologies.
Most of them flat out said they don't believe that the current warming phase is man-made, at most it is slightly accelerated by us, but it brings in a good chunk of research money and the technology could be useful in the future anyway so why not play along.

I think the main problem with this whole shit around global warming is that they are trying to push changes in a few decades that would need at least a century to be applied appropriately.
Switching to renewable energies is not inherently bad - while we still have enough fossil fuels for a while, they probably will run out eventually (there are some theories that they can form a lot faster than we thought but those are shaky at best) and then it would be nice to have an alternative.
The problem is that they are pushing half-baked technologies that hardly even produced the energy their manufacturing consumed during the first decade by pumping massive amounts of subsidies into it.
On top of that they are going way too far with the emission reduction - it's one thing to use sensible filters so you don't have to run around with face masks because the smog would eat through your lungs otherwise.
It is a completely different thing to quadruple your costs to reduce the emission from 1% to 0.6%. There is hardly any difference anymore and the only thing you achieve is that companies get tired and move to some shithole where they don't have to reduce their emission at all.

there's 11 year sun cycles you dumb cunt.

the yelllowstone caldera will blow fucking open before that

Anyone who changed their mind on climate change is someone so wrapped up in their political ideology that they cant think straight.

The whole theory behind climate change isnt something every person will just understand. It takes analysis of a lot of data to show the trend.

>I guess I never really appreciated the level of deceit practiced by "experts" until this cycle.

Once you become knowledgeable in one field it becomes really obvious how much bullshit the media and "experts" are spouting. When you only have a vague idea of how the topic works yourself you cannot really tell because most of their manipulating is done via omission, and if you don't already know the facts they left out you will never be able to tell.
But once you actually acquired expertise in one field and then read articles about it you realize that basically all of them are false, either because the journalist himself didn't understand the topic and thus mixed up important facts or because they purposefully leave out some information that would have been really relevant to the discussion.

not at all. I was making a joke about the whole get ready for a thousand years in the future. The fact that you didn't pick up on that shows that you are not as smart as you think you are.

>The second was some article I read about AIs being tested for automatically approving loan applications. In every test the AIs essentially became racist and massively downgraded blacks. The response from the research team wasn't "Well, that's science, guess blacks are statistically poor investments", but rather "Oy vey we're so sorry, shut it dowwwwnnn".

Other post was already too long so I have to make two.

I find this whole thing about AIs lately hilarious as fuck. They work so hard on giving these programs some kind of sapiens so they can learn and understand situations on their own rather than having to evaluate them according to hardcoded rules from their maker.
But then the AI always ends up going against their political ideology and they immediately intervene in the experiment to purge all undesired results, essentially making the whole experiment pointless.

It's like writing an AI that can learn and understand A and B and then evaluate them and decide which one should be better - but at the end of the code you inject a single line that says it can only ever return B anyway.
You might have as well skipped the whole "intelligence" part because the moment the AI tries to reply you force it through a lobotomy and remove all traces of intelligence again, a simple oneliner that discards all input and always gives the same reply would have done the exact same job.

Basic critical thinking skills

When I saw what the media did to Donald Trump, and made myself an "always do the opposite of what the Jews say" card.

Muh 97% is a bandwagon fallacy.

Fallacies dont belong in science.

The thing is that there is no data on this. Measurements through ice core drilling and so on are essentially pointless for this situation because there are no comparable situations to the one nowadays.
Funnily enough, that is actually what the people pushing global warming say too whenever it is pointed out that the data from old measurements shows that the CO2 concentration follows the temperature curve and not the other way around.

The scientific community just started their "experiment" on this topic and is now trying to interpret a whole lot of stuff into every tiny bleep on the output, even though they have no fucking idea if it's an actual signal or just noise because the experiment isn't concluded yet and won't be for decades or even centuries to come.

climate change happens, it's recyclable, no shit motherfucker, grow up and study the sun, that is the true answer

For me it was when I investigated where the 97% figure comes from and what the figure was actually saying compared to what people think it says.

The climate obviously changes, I just dont want the UN to scam carbon taxes out of people and control energy to uphold their satanic world government.

Facts

Because correlation does not prove causation, they have consistently failed to link it to human activity, the whole thing is a stupid bandwagon in which no independent scientist is allowed to disagree without being ostracized by the scientific community

When i was a kid they kept screaming how the sea levels will rise and kill us all. Then they started screeching about the ozone layer. Then they started parroting that climate change would lead to more hurricanes, less hurricanes.

they either don't know what they are talking about at any given time or they are lying

To expand on this, since it falls into my own field of research:

I'm a theoretician and while I don't work on climate models and thus do not know the exact details, the methodology is pretty much the same and their models are no less complex than the one I use.

And the thing with complex models is that it is very hard to predict just about anything. There are too many points at which you have to make either approximations or assumptions because an exact simulation is either too computationally expensive to perform or you simply do not know what the input for this parameter is so you have to make an educated guess.
That makes predictions very hard and slight alterations to the input can often lead to a completely different output.
The real strength of theory is to explain experiments that have already been performed, where you know both the input parameters as well as the results, but the exact pathway/development during the process is kind of vague because there are no measurement tools that allow to inspect it (or they are so expensive that theory becomes the better alternative). In those cases you can feed the input into your system, adjust it (according to your scientific intuition so there is obviously still some room for mistakes) till you get something comparable to the results measured by the experiments - and THEN you can look at what happens during the experiment and try to explain the results in that way.

The thing with the global warming theories is that they have some of the input but they don't know any of the results. They have no way of telling if what comes out of their model is correct or deciding between different contradicting results. The old data is useless for the current situation because the spikes in co2 concentration are not comparable.

1/2

This.

i got indoctrinated into believing in school
but as soon as i looked at the facts, evidence tempering. silencing of opposition etci saw its bs

We cannot say if co2 really works like a greenhouse gas on a global scale, if it maybe cools the earth down by absorbing irradiation and then emitting it again into all directions (i.e. sending a significant part right back into space) or if it simply does nothing at all to the climate.

The article one user linked further up explains it pretty well. We can make all kinds of predictions, and we can rank them by probability of being true, but until we saw the results of it we have no way of telling with certainty which one is correct.
Nate's model definitely wasn't shit for example, even though he was hilariously wrong. It was just that his input parameters were not correct because the polls he used as basis for his predictions were flawed, but he had no way of being absolutely certain about them being right or wrong until he saw the election results.
With the new data he could probably easily explain why exactly the polls were wrong and what effects they forgot to include, but he would not have been able of doing that without seeing the results first.
That's how science works.

Honestly? Having celebrities like Leonardo Dicaprio and Al Gore constantly ramming this shit down everyone's throat.

I instantly started to doubt the "climate change" discussion the second all these pop culture celebrities started jumping in on the cause, while at the same time not changing a single thing about themselves.

If they really gave a shit they'd stop traveling internationally. Stop starring in movies. Donate all their money. They're full of shit.

>he fell for the lies of the ruling class that exploits and destroys our planet

Government funding is based on finding evidence of global warming.

This is a major red flag for anything that's based on the scientific method.

I know the earth is getting hotter, but to say it's human doing when we contribute to less then 2-5% of all the CO2 production a year is asinine. (during large volcanic activity that drops below 1%) Co2 is an insulator, it actually reflects way more heat from the sun then lets in (literally 3rd grade science right here), and methane from cows is actually a legit problem, but god forbid you tell an american to eat a salad once a week. Lol they will spend billions in researching how it's not the cows but the stuff we exhale.

I also don't give a fuck, cold rich soil will be available for farming near wet lands which makes more sense then growing water intensive crops in the middle of a fucking dessert. Looking at you California, capitol of being smug-tarded.

Be thankful to god it's not an Ice age, we lose nearly 60-70% of farmable land, not to mention shipping lanes get cut down by about a 1/3rd, and living on ice is not stable, we wouldn't even be able to construct roads or infrastructure.

While i agree with you, the logic that you can't complain about issues without becoming a pauper to fix it is retarded.

Realistically, someone in Gore's or DiCaprio's position can galvanize more individuals, with collectively more money than either could hope to achieve on their own giving up everything they have for the same goal.

I agree its at best hypocritical to not do their most to minimize their carbon footprint since they spend so long bitching about it, but 'donate all your money or you're full of shit' reasoning is retarded.

sure, go ahead and do those things, nothing is stopping you

you just can't use other people's money for your research

>I know the earth is getting hotter, but to say it's human doing when we contribute to less then 2-5% of all the CO2 production a year is asinine.
Wrong.
About 15% is human made.
It is pretty balanced without humans, but the additional 15% cause a pretty big increase in CO2, warming the planet.
And volcanoes release less than 1% of the CO2 of humans on average.

old but good gif, in the service of humilating an old but lulzy meme

top bants, mein friend

Conservashits don't believe in evolution so i'd rather not associate with those cave dwellers altogether since they're not objective and smart like us

mother nature confirmed for being a cunt

that's why she's called mother nature, not daddy.