Global warming isn't rea-

>Global warming isn't rea-

Other urls found in this thread:

berkeleyearth.org/graphics/model-performance-against-berkeley-earth-data-set/
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proxy_(climate)
xkcd.com/1732/
ifa.hawaii.edu/UHNAI/NAIweb/presentations/26-Thorsteinsson-isotopeclimate.pdf
thegwpf.org/matt-ridley-global-warming-versus-global-greening
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

>OP posts quality threa-

now show the population curve

>user I-

>Look at that sourc-

you apparently dont get it. global warming must be denied so that it can keep going on. how are we going to get the great flooding if global warming is stopped? try to think. or maybe you're an anti-flooder which would be even worse.

your reminder that excessive CO2 causes earthquakes too

yeah just exclude the roman warmth period so it doesnt look stupid good idea

or maybe we just have better technology to measure earthquakes and the thing called internet to communicate such earthquakes

>maybe we just have better technology to measure earthquakes

couldn't the same be said for temps?

how is there any difference?

>industrial Rev had little effect dispite spitting tons of shit into the air.

Hummmmm.

And that change? 2 degrees average higher.

Hoax.

>leddit: the webcomic

exactly

>memes had no effect on the fact that it rained in jascksonville last tuesday

Hummmmmm

>xkcd

every single model suggested since the 70s that attempts to use CO2 as the basis for rising temperatures has been false so far, but yes let's just blindly trust """""the scientific community"""""

Extend that time frame back a bit. Unless these people are creationists then the world is a bit older than this graphic suggests.

and what happened in the 4.5 billion years before the 17th century?

>even the Jews call you out on your lies
wew

what is an ice age and why is it getting warmer as we exit one?

Why don't you come up with a better model then?

What is the dotted line supposed to represent and how is it being measured?

Leave it to a pseudo-intellectual, web-comic '''''artist''''' to make an unreadable graph with zero actual data.

thats not an argument

there are and quite alot of then, its just that those scientists that try to publish them either get ignored or have their carrere ruined just because the disagree with the "right" and "agreed upon" ideas

...

>couldn't the same be said for temps?
No.

There are proxies for temperature as well as atmospheric composition from forams, ice cores, etc. that give very precise temperature readings millions of years in the past. You can't say the same about earthquakes. Paleoseismology has very low temporal resolution and is generally much, much more difficult to get robust data out of than climate.

a good climate scientist would have revised that first data point

we're simply talking about the past 100 years

plz read

berkeleyearth.org/graphics/model-performance-against-berkeley-earth-data-set/

We need more pirates, lets make a tax subsidy to pay for them

But that's exactly what science is. If the existing theories fail to explain empirical observations, you try to come up with a better explanation.

That's not how science works. You get rich and famous in science by coming up with something that proves the old paradigm wrong. There is no conspiracy by scientists to uphold some "agreed upon” ideas.

so? 100 are a long timeframe for data that is constantly being measured differently. Also you cant make a good prognostic of anything if you dont know every possible factor and interaction between factors.

Your point being?

>Berkeley
>offer other models for climate change
>get called a racist nazi and punched in the face

yes but they dont come up with a new explanation.
>global cooling
it doesnt cool. fuck.
>global warming
it doesnt warm. fuck
>climate change
everything can be explained by it and that doesnt make it a redundant statement. You get a 1M € grant good work

>randall (((munroe)))

>Pirates have physically testable cooling effect

>graphic without the x scale

Into the trash it goes

>counter argument doesn't account for cycles in weather and ages.

Hummmmmmm.

>le everyone i dont le like is le rebbit meme
le XDDDD

>Thinks reliable weather recording goes back that far

A

FUCKING

THERMOMETER

>but they dont come up with a new explanation.
Sure they do. That's why it's called climate change now, because it more appropriately describes what is happening. Not sure what you're getting at.

It is real at least in Russia. Winter temperatures now are 10° degrees higher than 20 years ago. It's raining now, in February, ot was impossible when I was a kid. Summer is the same so mean temperature is slightly higher.

>le (((meme)))

Or maybe we just have better technology to record and convey weather information

>You never thought of this

>what are proxies
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proxy_(climate)

Stick that hockey stick up your ass tree hugger.

>create temperature formula that turns all data entered into roughly the same shape graph.

ITT: Everyone is a professor on the internet.

Now tell me carbon dating is accurate and life came from Africa.

You were saying?

xkcd.com/1732/

>global warming isnt real

cognitive dissonance at its finest.

So taking more temperature measurements make the mean temperature go up?

That's not how data collection works.

Who is Candlejack anywa-

Seriously. I wasn't expecting a fucking leaf to tell me to read tree rings.

You're a fucking moron if you think that's anything even close to the sophisticated technology that we've gained in under 50 years. Kill yourself immediately, there is no future for you, sub 70 IQ half retarded hopeful.

ifa.hawaii.edu/UHNAI/NAIweb/presentations/26-Thorsteinsson-isotopeclimate.pdf

400,000 years of data
I wonder if you can spot a trend

>carbon dating
Reasonably accurate up to a few dozen thousand years.

>life came from Africa
Life came from the sea.

No. Taking measurements more frequently in more locations with reliable tools does. Kill yourself.

>starts from last ice age
>modern humans are around 200,000 years old
>earth is 4.5 billion years old

And what does this prove?

but it doesnt its now a argument that cant be argued with because the climate will change one way or another which makes the thesis pointless. The main argument isnt about if the climate will change its about if its caused by CO2 which they conclude even though lab tests have shown CO2 has a effect on warming but is one of diminishing returnst which they argue away with "but in the real world is an expenentional effect - because that confirmes our thesis"

>Carbon dating
>Accurate
>Something under 100 years old could register as thousands of years old

>Life came from the sea
Like I said, half retarded. If you believe in evolution, you should seriously consider suicide to give humanity hope for a future that you clearly don't have.

thats funny that a canadian would say that. do you know how and where canada measures its mean temperature?`there are about 5 stations in the cold regions and x00 stations in the south

Ahh, yes, the belief that an invisible sky wizard created everything is clearly the reasonable one.

They're called Milankovitch cycles that has to do with periodical variations in the Earth's orbit. However, the changes from these cycles diverge from actual temperature readings starting from the 1970s to 1980s. The pace of warming significantly outpaces what can be expected from orbital variations alone, meaning that some other climate forcing mechanism must be at work. Current popular opinion is that it is anthropologically driven.

Daily reminder that xkcd exposed themselves as shills.

That said Global Warming is still real. Even Osama bin Laden realized it was the biggest threat to humanity aside from the jewish shadow government

>One taken in winter, The other is taken in summer.
Wow amazing snow melts in the warmer months... Really makes you think

They acted as a global heat sink.

as reasonable as anything else. the likelyness is a different story

why do people here actually deny climate change

yes the climate is changing, why are you against the scientific community forming this consensus

How likely is my scenario?

Glaciers don't retreat that far between winter and summer. In order to have a net retreat year over year, there must be a consistent warming trend over the years.

>entire (((scientific community))) forces a consensus
>any attempt to debunk this theory is met with massive media shilling and total exclusion

Hmmm, I wonder why...

Forgot pic

Okay

>the jews say the climate is changing

AND? How can they jew you from here? Carbon credits? eh....

LOL @ these 2008 predictions

The data is something like that. Though as time gets more recent, the uncertainty becomes less and less due to improved temporal resolution. It's impossible to deny there is currently a strong warming trend though.

>Implying I don't believe in evolution
>I said he was HALF retarded to give him credit for believing in evolution
Hilarious shitposting, ash-hole.

Let me explain how you're being retarded, since you're too stupid to realize it.

You're literally saying guess work and eyeballing tree rings is an accurate way of measuring the climate of the past. It's a good way to get a ballpark idea but you can't know how accurate it is when carbon dating was hailed as incredibly accurate but that was debunked decades ago.

My case and point is this - you are saying eyeball guess work is as effective a tool as a satellite that could watch your mother fuck a refugee through the bedroom window in HD.

And for the record, fucking a puppy is both bestiality AND pedophilia, so if you're hoping to get your money worth. Have at it.

I just want to know what sort of fucking sad excuse for a mulch bag that you fell out of. Were you lucky to evade the wood chipper or was being a huge failure at life all a part of your master plan?

We should have keped the northwest passage closed! Fucking fools.

Global Warming is real.

It's fixing it that's fake news and fake science.

Global warming then doesn't matter because it's a basic prerequisite of having a cushy modern life with cars and grocery stores and whatnot.

Thermodynamics always takes its toll.

>gives a decent counter argument
>counter argument is "but I'm scared"

>seriously can't understand how fear-mongering on an international scale can't be exploited

You need to expand your horizons, friend.

*** GLOBAL GREENING **

There's actually a lot of debate over just about everything in climate science. Scientists are constantly trying to debunk each other and there are A LOT of published studies that call out older studies for flawed methodology, bad math, etc.That's why you constantly see stories that say something like "new study suggest what we previously thought was wrong!".

Took me a second to realize you mean the actual Osama bin Laden and not Obama

but if you look at the big picture you see that the temperature was never as stable as you claim

I'm gonna get midevil on that warm period

Only video you guys will ever have to watch about co2 ever again.

thegwpf.org/matt-ridley-global-warming-versus-global-greening

And also it's literally the opposite. The only people who have an interest in denying climate change are the big corporations and guess who runs those.

isn't that really bad? rivers changing course, winter roads turn into car-swallowing trenches, biblical plagues of golfball-sized black flies, that kind of stuff?

But usually it's either:

>APOCALYPTIC GLOBAL WARMING PROBLEMS EVEN WORSE THAN THOUGH

or

>APOCALYPTIC GLOBAL WARMING PREDICTION WHICH UTTERLY FAILED TO MATERIALIZE SIMPLY DELAYED X YEARS

Anyone else who publishes a challenge gets attacked for being a heretic and blasphemer.

>Ice age is seen as perfectly normal
>it gets 15 degrees warmer for a few years and everyone loses their fucking minds
I am so done with this. I don't deny the world is getting warmer but this fucking doom saying bullshit is retarded as fuck. There is no arguing since everyone is apparently a flat earth xeno worshipping heretic if they have any sort of critical thinking.

When did I ever claim the temperature was stable? I'm saying that climate is diverging from the usual expected variations, and there must be another forcing mechanism responsible.

Fucking hivemind. Someone else sees it. Thank you.

My point is that the world is billions of years old and we can't accurately know what weather was like, outside of "guess work". But they see a trend within a few hundred years that was measured via guess work and the fucking sky is falling.

How can it be exploited exactly

Yes. The actual Osama bin Laden. In his final letter before he was killed he called young Americans to revolution to save themselves from the jewish oppression and to save the planet from the greenhouse gases that will doom humanity.

businessinsider.com/heres-osama-bin-ladens-letter-to-the-american-people-2016-3?client=ms-android-samsung

>nb4 Co2 is causing climate change

> xkcd
OPINION DISCARDED

I know right, especially with all those people driving cars back then.

How much money is being spent and made on "Renewable" "Energy" that is actually neither renewable nor a source of energy?

How much money did al gore make on his carbon credit scam after his propaganda piece?

Fear is the grease that moves the world.

Scientists SHOULD be critical and skeptical of other scientists. Otherwise it would just turn into a circlejerk and no progress gets made.

>But they see a trend within a few hundred years that was measured via guess work and the fucking sky is falling.

And their solution is... probably worse than the problem.