Global Warming Redpill

Can someone give me some red pills on "global warming". Im tired of hearing leftists assume that the end of the world is coming

Other urls found in this thread:

xkcd.com/1732/
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

>Can someone give me some red pills on "global warming"
It is as exagerated as the Holocaust

The redpill version is just "lol do your research faggot, it's so obviously fake". It's literally just the other side of the same coin.

>Anyone want a Coke?

It turns out that if you actually look at the temp numbers they are within the margin of error every year. But the leftists all yell "Its the hottest year on record!!"

It was removed from the White House webpage, so it is no longer an issue.

the ice caps are melting yes, due to the rising bodyheat every year due to both increasing obesity abroad and unbridled rage from the liberal sphere inside the united states

at its current rate of expansion the temperature of the world is expected to increase tenfold and marginally increase the melting until the fish people dethaw and come to reclaim atlantis

leftists are right on this one. I have no idea how anyone on this board can still deny global warming. It really makes me question your intelligence. We're shitting out absurd levels of gases that are quantifiably known to trap heat, this is something anyone with basic lab equipment can test for themselves. And the amounts of these gases in the atmosphere are rising just as much as we'd expect from estimations of how much of them we produce. And the amount of heat the earth retains is increasing by just as much as we'd expect from the increased level of greenhouse gases. And the increased heat encourages the release of more greenhouse gases through things like warming up frozen tundra enough to allow millions of years worth of dead plants to start rotting. All of these things are basic facts of chemistry verifiable by anyone with labs or simple testing equipment, and many of them have, independently, with nothing to gain one way or the other by lying about it, and the only groups who say nothing is wrong are the ones employed by companies that profit from the sale of greenhouse gas producing chemical fuels.
Denying climate change is a flat earth level of retarded.

As with any other issue, i take the side of the scientific majority while keeping an open mind. I hold those scientist in higher regard than the holocaust denying, anti-intellectual NEETS of Sup Forums.

...

...

...

what say you leaf? pic related

Global climates changing. Not the end of the world. Natural disasters will continually get worse. Certain areas will desertify or have bad droughts. People are going to starve. It may result in some large wars. Population will curb off within the next decade, maybe two.

Eventually we will hit a point where "environmentally friendly" technologies will be more profitable and efficient. The shift to this tech will be rapid because money. Eventually we will be at a point where it's cheaper to siphon carbon dioxide off stacks and convert it back into fuel than it is to actually go take oil out of the ground. People underestimate technology.

starting to believe it desu. it's january and above 0 in Winnipeg. this is not supposed to happen

Can i get a source of these graphs? I mean is that it? Are you the enlightened one and all the majority of climate scientists are retarded because they have not had the good grace to see three unsourced charts on a Sup Forums thread? Did these charts really convince you the entire thing is a hoax?

Anyone that thinks "global" warming is possibly real is a Godless faggot. Only a Godless faggot could think God isn't in control of the world he created. I'm pretty sure the Book of Revelation doesn't end with a flood.

It's was 6 degrees in Prince george and has been above zero for days. We don't even have a snow pack anymore.

Remember that God promised Noah that he would NEVER FLOOD THE EARTH AGAIN. That is the symbolic meaning of the rainbow.

Best timeline

Greatest 'scientific' hoax of all time. Excuse me, I meant to say greatest 'political' hoax of all time. There's no science involved. If you have to adjust the data, it ain't science. The temperature records have not only been adjusted, they have been fabricated in many cases. Crawl back into you hole, dumbshit.

what do you think user?

Last year there were -28, this year -24
I'm really worried about it

>strawmans vs exaggerations
cmon

>right click
>search google for this image

wow that was hard, moron

they both seem equally likely to me senpai just because ive seen how weak and cowardly many academics are and how scared they are to go against the grain and question the prevailing scientific consensus. ive also heard the "90% of scientists" stat is bullshit. What like all scientiests? biologists? really only climate scientists are relevant on this point.

Where I live, the climate really has gotten more volatile in the last 5 or 6 years, alternating warmer than average summers with colder than average periods in winter. From what I understand, climate science projected changes in our environment will actually increase crop yield, not decrease it. If we can prevent the flood of South American, Indian, and SEA migrants, I'm sure that the 2030s and 2040s could be great decades for Canada, or at least, rural Canada. The urbanites will get their autistic screech on when "nonforprofit" millionaire CEOs air their footage of little black kids starving on television though. I strongly believe that leftist (especially NDP) support will ease off when the generation whose livelihoods rely on government checks die off and less white people watch television.

im enjoying the nice weather. us leafs gonna be relaxing on the beach for more than 2 months a year now!

What caused the climate and temperature to change before humans created industry? Climate change isn't exactly a new thing.

I didn't get anything, only 'diagram'. But i'm sure the poster is a well established scientist and understands the context of those graphs instead of blindly pasting them after copying them from another clueless Sup Forumslock.

When the USA gets fucked we'll have a good grill

It's a political wedge issue. Who does it benefit? Well, it benefits big government leftists and their politicians who clamor for greater government control over every aspect of people's lives. It benefits "scientists" who rely on government grants and money to justify their existence. It benefits the green energy industry and their cronies. It's shilled for in the media hardcore to further damage conservative ideology to make them look like they are on the wrong side of history; further chipping away at their voting base. Data is either blatantly manipulated or they use the "lying by omission" technique. Most of the graphs they use that show the temperature rising conveniently start at the end of the little ice age and end at present day to further exaggerate the effects.

Al Gore predicted no more polar ice caps by 2015. Guess what? 2015 was a record in terms of arctic ice amount.

If anything, even if "global warming" was a real issue, people should be happy that the world is warming rather than cooling. Civilization has thrived during warm periods, while cool periods are marked by mass death and starvation.

Nobody denies that the climate fluctuates, but it's obviously a natural process and is more influenced by solar activity than fractions of a percentage in fluctuation of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Dinosaur times had far more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and the world didn't burn up.

These leftist cock suckers don't even realize that the anti-fossil fuel policies they want to implement would hurt the third world brown people that they claim they love far more than it would hurt privileged white males who they hate.

>governments
>limited budgets

xkcd.com/1732/

This explains it in a very simple way.

>scientists only care about the TRUTH
>they certainly don't make their living on whatever is popular at the time

Scientist worship is as bad as god worship, stop letting other people tell you what to think. Side note: if you doctor tells you to take a medication, look into for yourself before you do it. They don't give a fuck about you, and neither do "climatologists"

>Can someone give me some red pills on "global warming"
sure, it's a hoax.

Anthropocentric climate change is real.

The issue is that it's occurring very slowly, but also very irreversibly.

It not so much like a car driving towards a cliff as a train heading into a forest fire. The train goes in slowly, and it keeps getting hotter and hotter as you get deeper inside. By the time you decide to pull the breaks the train's momentum keeps carrying you further inside. There is no reverse.

That's the issue.

Oy vey goy, buy those green products! If not you are the problem!

The problem is we have a culture based on buying products. Stop building products that are designed to break in two fucking years.

>90% of world scientists
>citing a study that surveyed ~3,000 scientists around the world
>and picked a grand total of 73 of the responses they got back
>from which they created the ~90% consensus.

You can debate over the best solutions to the problem, but the nature of the problem is as I described.

For both physical reasons, as well as economic reasons, it's very hard to slow down climate change even after people decide to make a concerted effort to effect change. You realize you're screwed maybe 100 years before the the consequences pile up into to something opaquely noticeable, but you're already 100 years too late to stop them.

It's also a tragedy of the commons problem, because the rewards from using polluting industries are concentrated in the nation's economy using them, but the costs are diffuse to all nations. If you had a magic button that would give you $1,000, but cause 2,000 people to lose a dollar each, it's in your personal best interest to press it. The problem is when everything has that button and they all decide to press it, they all end up losing a net of a dollar.

Here's the red pill. Global warming is obviously real. Making it a political issue is stupid. Average temperatures are getting higher across the globe, warmest year on record for the past three years, human activity adding lots of greenhouse gasses to the atmosphere, the vast majority of scientists and scientific papers conclude that anthropogenic global climate change is real. Why debate it? It makes you look like a moron.

Climate change is real. The temperature will increase by 1-3 degrees centigrade over the next hundred years. There is very little we can do to stop it. Greenhouse gas emissions treaties and proposals suggest limiting the rate at which emissions are increasing - obviously emissions are already too much, and making sure they don't increase further too quickly will be of limited value.

Even if we wanted to limit greenhouse emissions, we wouldn't be able to because the developing world (China and India) won't want to. China is being somewhat good about green energy for the future, but they still a major contributor of pollution and growing all the time. India is China with no one-child policy - they are about to start to take off and they have awful pollution problems already.

Climate change is real, it's going to get a lot worse, even if we wanted to cripple our economy to limit the rate at which global climate change is happening, we wouldn't be able to. Our route ahead is to work on technologies that will allow us to mitigate or reverse the effects. These technologies are things like factory produced meat (reduce energy use in farming, reduce methane from cattle herds), better nuclear and green energy sources, geo engineering projects to remove carbon from the atmosphere or add clouds to increase the reflectivity of the Earth and lower the temperature).

DAILY REMINDER

* A doubling of preindustrial CO2, absent any feedbacks, would result in a maximum forcing of +1.2C.

* The General Circulation Models, and the IPCC, predict 2-8C of warming because AGW theory assumes a positive H2O feedback. They assume that if CO2 causes a little warming, the atmosphere will hold more water vapor which will lead to a lot of warming.

* The warming predictions cover such a large range because everyone assumes a different average H2O feedback rate.

* Every GCM based on this assumption has failed to model temperatures for the past 17 years. They are all trending too high.

* In the late 1990's the modelers themselves stated that if they missed their predictions for more then a decade that would falsify AGW theory.

* There is no data to suggest a +H2O feedback either now or in Earth's past.

* If there is no +H2O feedback then we literally have nothing to worry about.

* The average climate change believer knows none of this. Politicians, citizens, activists, surprisingly even a lot of scientists are literally ignorant of the theory and the math. In their mind it's simply "CO2 = bad" and "experts say we're warming faster then ever."

>absurd levels of gasses
>0.04% of Earth's atmosphere is CO2.
>for comparison, Earth's atmosphere is roughly 1% Argon.

I agree that denying climate change is flat level earth level retarded, though. Climate change is real, the problem for climate scientists is that it's been happening for 3 billion years. Earth has been much hotter, much colder, and has bounced back and forth between the two extremes for literally billions of years.

Humans did not create climate change and we likely don't even have a non-negligible effect on it. The idea that Earth could end up in a runaway greenhouse effect similar to Venus is ridiculous. The Venusian atmosphere is 97% CO2. We could burn all the fossil fuel on Earth and we wouldn't even get CO2 up to 1% of Earth's atmosphere.

The sun and volcanic activity are the prime drivers of climate change; always have been.

This