Discuss

Discuss.

Other urls found in this thread:

thegwpf.org/matt-ridley-global-warming-versus-global-greening/
nationalreview.com/article/427823/paris-climate-conference-crusades-fix-nonexistent-problem-deroy-murdock
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climatic_Research_Unit_email_controversy
thegatewaypundit.com/2016/10/wikileaks-clinton-campaign-fudged-climate-change-data-inflated-emission-numbers/
dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2420783/Worlds-climate-scientists-confess-Global-warming-just-QUARTER-thought--computers-got-effects-greenhouse-gases-wrong.html
principia-scientific.org/atmospheric-carbon-dioxide-lags-temperature-the-proof/
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientists_opposing_the_mainstream_scientific_assessment_of_global_warming
nationalreview.com/article/425232/climate-change-no-its-not-97-percent-consensus-ian-tuttle
pbl.nl/sites/default/files/cms/publicaties/pbl-2015-climate-science-survey-questions-and-responses_01731.pdf
heritage.org/research/reports/2016/10/the-climate-change-inquisition-an-abuse-of-power-that-offends-the-first-amendment-and-threatens-informed-debate
blog.dilbert.com/post/154082416051/the-non-expert-problem-and-climate-change-science
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

They can't defend this so the idiots on here are spewing garbage about how it's to prevent Trump from being "sabotaged from within"

As if it's more important to be wrong and in control than realizing that he's just a fucking tard.

False premise = false conclusion.

Cutting off funding =/= preventing scientists from informing you

Oppression isn't a legitimate concept.

Pretty sure journalists can freely use actual peer reviewed studies

Secondhand heresy and leaks are the definition of "fake news" if they aren't backed up by a paper

Denial of climate change isn't on the idea that CO2 increases global temperatures or that anthropocentric climate change is a thing. The question is to what degree do we effect it and are you willing to let millions of people die to reverse those changes.

No it's not hyperbole. We live in the first world so there are good alternatives to fossil fuels. Not so much in poolooville.

Then the left needs to acknowledge race science

Someone redpill me on climate change
I've read somewhere a long time ago that the climate's current direction isn't alarming at all compared to the earth's climate throughout it's history, but I'm not sure how true that is.

The average temperature of the earth has been increasing at an unprecedented rate since the introduction of fossil fuels, and it is continuing to accelerate.

Where's your negative control?

>unprecedented rate

kekkle my sheckles we got a real James Hansen over here.

Then don't give me "muh minorities are poor because of muh racism"

It's because they're stupider.

Funny how they go silent everytime Eugenics is brought up though

What's your stance on Net Neutrality and potentially having niche websites and smaller news outlets throttled into oblivion?

go call bernie and cry to him. oh wait he was a phony shill. i guess you're fucked libcuck

Climate change is real and it's happening. This is the scientific consensus.

The only ones who disagree are oil companies and their shills and absolute retards who say things like (((science))).

Thats actually true for Pro-Human Made Climate Change camp too.

Confirmation bias is strong on everyone

are you a dentist

It's unfortunate, but there's nothing wrong with it. I wouldn't mind if it took down some of the online spaces the left uses to organizes.

Still not going to pretend that the relationships between the groups involved can be adequately described with the term "oppression".

I seriously fucking hate that smug piece of shit. She has to be one of the dumbest people on science twitter, but for some reason all of my cuck scientist friends love her.

Fuck her.

scientific consensus built around a central pillar of data given out by an university caught falsifying the same data. Hmm.

Other studies reading data wrong and getting caught on it. Hmm.

Lists with scientists who agree with the truth having dead people, fictional people and people who have confirmed never being asked about the subject matter for the list or that do not share the view. Hmm

Zealous and utterly ruthless inquisition about any opposing studies, causing scientists to fear publishing or even doing research that would deny it. Hmm.

>Climate change is real and it's happening.

Then why has there been no change in global temperatures for nearly two decades?

Nah it's all bullshit. They just want to push the carbon tax laws.

Who asked about the planet? The Prime Directive matters

Do you have sources for all of this?

Consensus means jack in hard sciences. The physicist in the early 1900s had a consensus as well, that general relative was wrong. It only takes one scientist to disagree.

How stupid would you have to be to use this as a retort to what he just explained

I assume she's talking about 'climate change' which is supported by as many scientists as it is opposed by, and even fewer support the idea that humans are causing it.

I used to believe in man made climate change. I still do up to a point, but after reading testimonies by people who were part of the IPCC and scientists who've switches sides, I no longer believe it can be called a scientific consensus. The incredibly dirty deals and misinformation they've presented, and the way the report was put together as a political piece rather than a scientific report, just leaves a dirty taste in my mouth.

Like most people, I thought the climate change deniers were just crazy conspiracy theorists, but all the criticism leveled at the IPCC actually checks out and is well documented.

I still think climate change is an important field to research, but they need to drop the senstionalist IPCC, who are doing more harm than good.

I'm not a client scientist, but I've worked with them at a prestigious government lab. There's no reason to doubt that global warming is real and caused at least in part by humans. But no serious scholar believes it's a danger to humanity any time soon.

Anybody who tells you some dumbass shit about carbon credits or electric cars should be punched in the head. If you want to stop global warming, go vegan and build several thousand nuclear power plants. And also demand China do the same (~kyoto now~ lol).

100% of climate scientists (even the oil shills) would disagree with you

So you think because, the word consensus is used it means something. In science it has no meaning. If even one scientist disagrees with the conclusion, it must be looked at again.
Sorry for taking over your head.

Not an argument.

See geocentrism

Citation required

Climate change - the earth warming up due to the use of fossil fuels - is probably true, but the Waterworld-style apocalyptic pronouncements of imminent Biblical Floods are wildly overblown.

The bad consequences will be localised to a few nigger pacific islands; for Europe, North America, and Siberia, warmer temperatures and higher CO2 will inprove crop yields and help reforestation.

A good entry-level talk and transcript on the non-terrifying nature of global warming is here: thegwpf.org/matt-ridley-global-warming-versus-global-greening/

Global warming alarmism is supported by scientists due to perverse incentives. You write a research paper that says "OH MY GOD WE ARE ALL GOING TO DIE BECAUSE MUH EBIL OIL COMPANIES", then it'll get waved through peer review and all your 'Tfw too intelligent to vote for Drumpf' colleagues will buy you a beer (and give you more funding) for agreeing with their hivemind prejudices and confirmation bias. Write a paper against global warming and they'll spit on you as a heretic for disagreeing with the group gestalt. Scientists are exactly as tribal and emotional as your average burger voter: all education does is gives you better ways of dissimulating your biases.

t. Scientist

I have no idea who this person is, but apparently I'm blocked

Global warming isn't real. End of story. Hopefully Trump scraps the EPA and BTFOs the Hippie cunts too

It's suppression, not oppression.
Dumb bitches can only think in terms of oppression.

nationalreview.com/article/427823/paris-climate-conference-crusades-fix-nonexistent-problem-deroy-murdock

oops.

Only 32% of the climate scientists they asked actually agreed. That is not a consensus. 66% refused to sign it, either because it was inconclusive or because they weren't convinced by the report.

They aren't being suppressed, either, it looks like they just had their funding cut. Having not looked into it at all, I'd bet $20 and a stick of gum that there was a reduction in the rate of budget growth for whatever agency the cunt in the OP is kvetching about.

This, I am babby climate scientist, working on my PhD and the general conclusion is: we don't have enough data to say it's a bad thing. But we are causing a warming of the planet.

Scientists have been warning us about climate change for decades. At first the right tried dragging out "scientists" that denied climate change to muddy the waters. Then it was the issue needed "further study". Now a lot say it's real but not that serious an issue and an over reaction by the left. Science continues to say it is real and serious and could be catastrophic.

This is what happens when you politicize a scientific issue and you have a misinformed and often indifferent electorate.

Because everyone knows Eugenics is objectively a perfect idea

Why does government have anything to do with scientific research? If these people care so much about climate change and want to make a difference why don't they donate their own money to organizations that are doing the research they like? They just got a tax break after all.

In that same light, if women have such a problem with federal funding being pulled from planned parenthood, what's stopping them from donating to it themselves? They now have more money in their pockets, why do they need the government to allocate those resources?

ceo of enron met with gov arnold schwarzenegger
to discuss carbon credits in 2001
its just a way to make money from a new financial instrument

algore get the FUCK off my board.

good to see they're speaking out about all the suppression of science showing neurological differences between men and women

oh wait, that's not it?

Because "scientists" and women are lazy entitled shits.

Climate Change is a fucking joke and always has been. The planet's just fine, keep drilling I say
But it's not real and has never been real. It's a fucking money making scheme

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climatic_Research_Unit_email_controversy
thegatewaypundit.com/2016/10/wikileaks-clinton-campaign-fudged-climate-change-data-inflated-emission-numbers/
dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2420783/Worlds-climate-scientists-confess-Global-warming-just-QUARTER-thought--computers-got-effects-greenhouse-gases-wrong.html
principia-scientific.org/atmospheric-carbon-dioxide-lags-temperature-the-proof/
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientists_opposing_the_mainstream_scientific_assessment_of_global_warming
nationalreview.com/article/425232/climate-change-no-its-not-97-percent-consensus-ian-tuttle
pbl.nl/sites/default/files/cms/publicaties/pbl-2015-climate-science-survey-questions-and-responses_01731.pdf
heritage.org/research/reports/2016/10/the-climate-change-inquisition-an-abuse-of-power-that-offends-the-first-amendment-and-threatens-informed-debate
blog.dilbert.com/post/154082416051/the-non-expert-problem-and-climate-change-science

I recommend everyone to investigate both sides of any argument before committing themselves.

They government funded people are not longer allowed to publish the studies they are producing, the research has been halted

Climate change is happening but it would be cheaper to colonize Mars than to fight it with the methods we are currently using.

And nothing of value was lost by investigating a non-issue

Fuck modern science. If your inventions and findings are only benefitting erudite kikes, you should be disregarded. Money and war are not good things to use science for, now go back to lab you faggot sperg genius wannabe, you'll never be the next Newton because you don't have an IQ of 190. Deal with it.

say climate change is real, WTF do you want people to do about? throw money at some shady organization

The last sentence was sort of: "use google"

Hahahahahah. "Science" by "consensus." If you need a consensus, it's not science. Science is the explanation of repeatable, predictable phenomena.

Not..."it's getting warmer" (when it isn't)

This. Only thing Science is good for is making the newest phone or computer. Environmentalism is a cancer, and thankfully based God Emperor is the chemo. First the ESA, then the EPA, take it all down

>implying that the EPA is made up of scientists rather than red tape-weaving bureaucrats bent on expanding the power of the federal government

Isn't he the guy that said that the world would end by this year?

I love climate change. I think it is real, but I am not sure about the human contribution. I hope we are speeding it way the fuck up.

Every day this rock gets hotter, Saudi Arabia gets closer to being a giant fucking frying pan.

I hope to see 200F in my lifetime. I love global warming.

Remove EPA. It's worthless

LMAO LIBERAL FAGGOTS ARE LOOOOOOOSING AND THEY WILL LOSE AND LOSE

And they will say please mr president we are tired of losing, can't you let us win a little? And Trump will say nooo we have to keep winning

I'm at the point where I would rather trash the planet than live on it with liberal faggots

>t-that's not real science you misogynist

When I grow up I want to be like you

It's only fair if it's Laissez-faire

Half truths aren't science cuck.
Man made global warming isn't important.

>Man made global warming isn't important.
More like it doesn't exist

First of all, since you already have cancer you can smoke all you want now

Second, science isn't based on consensus

Third, you're wrong

So when?

It's easy, stop giving a shit. Unless you are the 1% there is absolutely nothing you are going to do to change anything, about anything.

I remember hearing last decade that if we didn't do anything by 2012 it would be irreversible.
You can't keep pushing the "OMG IT'S TOO LATE" threshold every time you are wrong and expect me to believe you

It exists but it's super tiny. Like how your mother literally has her own gravity field.

Hi. I studied statistics in the climate-science context for a while. I no longer work in climate science, so I'm hoping I can provide some unbiased opinions.

You're right that publication culture is kind of toxic, but I'd ask you to consider the alternative: that so many papers are getting published because this is a looming -- and uncertain -- threat. Ultimately, all a scientist can do is publish more papers and try to understand the scenario even better. That's one of the reasons why you're seeing so many publications.

Please consider: many of these scientists are not circlejerking each other, but they're trying to ring the alarm bells as loudly as they can. It's easy for that to look like a circlejerk, though.

About potential consequences of climate change: you don't need to worry about Waterworld or countries on fire. The bad effects are largely that natural disasters (think hurricanes, floods, forest fires, etc.) become *far* more common. You can think about this like shifting a bell-curve: if you move the average temperature a little bit, the rare, once-in-a-hundred-year type events become much more common.

The consequences of such natural disasters are mostly political: the world's most populated regions and economically productive cities are all in areas that are easily affected by such disasters. Imagine NYC getting hit by a Hurricane once a year. Markets go down, industries stall, hundreds of billions of dollars are lost.

Or take Bangladesh. These people are fucked. They're barely above sea level. It's a country the size of a postage stamp with 150 million people. As the planet warms, they'll get hit by natural disasters over and over again, more and more frequently. Of course they'll move. You're looking at millions of desolate migrants leaving their country. I think that it's very likely that we'll see wars fought because of changing climate. That stuff has knock-on effects of course (refugee crises, etc.) which will hurt the West.

Then it doesn't matter. Stop putting money into "protecting the environment" when you don't really have to. Same goes for shit like the Endangered Species Act. Who cares if some rare bird in who gives a fuck Park goes extinct?
>Bangladesh
Literally who cares? That's Asia's problem, not ours

Obligatory

If it's true, then nothing's going to happen to fix it. China and India don't give a shit. Socialist regulations are shit. You may as well just enjoy the ride.

>Please consider: many of these scientists are not circlejerking each other, but they're trying to ring the alarm bells as loudly as they can
Then go preach it to the chinks and poo-in-loos.
If you were remotely consistent and not full of shit up to your ears you would be in favour of sterilising North Africa, the entire subcontinent and all of Southeast Asia and mainland China.
You're not (quite the opposite) which is why you're so transparent as fuck and why no one is falling for your drivel.

And Jew York should get hit by a hurricane every year. Drown those Leftists

This has interesting theological implications.

I wonder if this Katie is able and willing to reflect on them.

...

"heh, well you also deny some science so you're just as bad so lets just agree we can all deny science lel"

Not an argument

Climate deniers BTFO

>le 98% meme

>muh desastars

(You)
>Bangladesh
Literally who cares? That's Asia's problem, not ours

Again, you're looking at millions of desolate migrants leaving their countries and heading to India/Pakistan/etc. If you look at what happened in Syria, it stands to reason that this could lead to war: this could get very nasty because India and Pakistan both have nukes and a long-running feud. Destabilizing that situation could put the world at risk.

Years ago you could have reversed the effects of climate change by investing in turning US into the first renewable energy super power. Once energy costs pennies on the dollar and is bloodless, it would turn the US into a mecca of engineers and scientific research around the world. Suddenly things like energy limits cease becoming a factor in agriculture and we could begin to become a post-scarcity planet.

But no, the government is so cucked by oil it kills the scientific advancement of man kind.

Also climate change is anthroprogenetic, we've known this for decades, but again, cucked by oil.

>Muh 98%

so tell me again about eugenics

...

>actually at the end of an ice age

>blacks cause more crime
>THATS RACYST

Yeh no, can't have it both ways

science is theory's, nothing concrete.

>scientists

these aren't scientists though, these are worthless hacks who couldn't get a real job so they suckle on the teet of the government as they've done their entire lives, through student loans, pell grants, etc...

Real scientists don't fucking work for grants, they work in real facilities doing real jobs and fixing real fucking problems, not pushing politcal agendas like these butthurt libtard "scientists"

No its believing "scientific evidence" and making judgements on them.

Like why do we let mexicans in with science like this saying we shouldn't.

Actually there is a natural warming/cooling cycle triggered by volcanic activity (ash obfuscates the sky, bringing down global temperatures considerably every so often)

He says the same thing EVERY year.