Alright Sup Forums I got an hour to burn red pill me on climate change.
CLIMATE CHANGE REEEEEEEEE
no one knows, dont worry about it user.
>got an hour to burn
>hour to burn
soon, user. within your lifetime
It's a Jewish plan to warm Europe enough that all the nigs can move there without having to complain.
IF its true it will flood the coasts and solve the liberal menace problem. So either way its fine.
1. CO2 and other gasses trap heat in the atmosphere. This is a basic scientific fact. It is not "political" or "partisan", it is an objective statement about physical/chemical reality.
2. 97% of climate scientists, geologists, ecologists etc agree that human technology (i.e. pollution) has an effect on the climate. They are correct, and the data is very explicit and clear.
It blows my mind when Conservatives argue against the basic objective facts. It's not about your fucking feelings. It is chemistry and physics. Human being are ruining the planet, and we are actually modifying its climate because of how shitty we collectively are.
People who deny this are the reason there will be mass starvation this century as a result of not enough food, too many people.
Climate scientists fudged numbers to create misleading graphs in an effort to convince governments to keep giving them money.
There is no red pill for climate change, because it is real. There is no gain to be had from denying it.
I think it's the retarded ones who think it isn't actually happening.
What we do not really know is that whether it is man-made, whether it will be a problem, or whether or not the earth will self correct at some point.
Thanks for this
Liberal bullshit just like evolution and the round earth theory
its a zionist plot or something
basically its bad
Aliens have warned us about anthropocentric climate change. No joke.
*Tip tip* M'Brit
>Oh shit guys, we fucked up Venus
>Let's blame it on humans
If any of these climate change scientists come out with research that proves it's not man made or a problem, their funding will be cut. So, they have no reason to deny man made climate change even if its not true.
David Rockefeller (now dead, HAHA) said that global warming, I mean climate change was invented as a common enemy to corral the peoples of the world towards one global ideology.
Sorry Leaf, but people agree that smoking is unhealthy, this doesn't "corral the peoples of the world towards one global ideology". People just acknowledge that it's BAD. Terrible argument.
Well I have my window open in march. In northern Norway. You decide.
1994 Ruwa event
Climate change is quite possibly the Jewiest issue politicians can push. Its like trying to stop the rotation of the Earth, not going to happen. Same with stopping climate change. Its a fake issue used to shoe horn Liberal policies into play by using the stupidity of the Liberal masses in thinking that driving a smaller car or installing a fluorescent light bulb in any way saves the planet when at best it buys humanity a couple extra years worth of fossil fuels. Regardless of all this conservation and waste reduction the ultimate outcome will be the same, all the fuels will be used and the atmosphere will be filled with the same amount of greenhouse gases as time approaches infinity.
You realize that a simple resolution like changing the composition of hairspray can help the enviroment.
But wait, you have to be cucked by technology too.
The real red pil is : Climat Change is real, everybody on the right who is denying it is a coal/oil industry shill.
Exxon knew that Climate Change was real 40 years ago.
Climate change is real, man-made climate change is a government hoax to raise tax revenues.
I am a coal/oil industry shill btw.
>97% of climate scientists, geologists, ecologists etc agree that human technology (i.e. pollution) has an effect on the climate
It's hilarious how alarmists expect that '97%' meme to be taken seriously no matter how malleable it is. (97% of what/who? What do they assent to? Nobody knows or cares because everyone has a different version in their heads.) The AGW 'consensus' papers are complete trash.
Bullshit. If it was about balancing the budget, they'd let the free market operate and stop subsidizing fossil fuels out the ass.
Without those handouts, the fossil fuel industry would die and renewables would take over. Simple supply and demand. Renewables are cheaper now, without those subsidies offsetting the market equilibrium.
Its a drop in the bucket, the amount of VOC's being dumped into the atmosphere by natural methane clathrates is enormous in comparison. All these recent environmental initiatives are just pointless virtue signaling and back patting to feel better about living such decadent lifestyles. Just more regulations that close down factories in the West and ship them to Asia where they create 10 times the pollution they would have here.
Shit tier faggotry.
-CO2 is 0.04% percent of the entire atmosphere. Unlike Venus, which is 96% CO2.
- "97% Survey" was junk. Google it.
- It was warmer a thousand years ago. Google 'medieval warm period.'
Of course its real, that's not my argument. My argument is that all this pointless posturing to make the environment better is a crock of shit that just moves pollution to different far away locations out of sight and mind while having no impact in the long run. We have to accept climate change as an unfixable issue and adapt accordingly.
Exxon knew that Climate Change was real 40 years ago, and spent millions of dollars lobbying to spread Climate Change denial.
Who stands to benefit? It sure isn't you and your family, or the planet.
the difference in percentage does not matter.
it's like asking whether an 1 inch wall blocks light batter than a 10 feet wall.
Both do it 100%.
Its never ever about the environment, its just two sides looking to profit in their own way. Both sides lie to make money.
It's called stop burning fossil fuels you dumb fuck. We could totally do it. We're already starting to do it, we just have to transition faster.
If we started mass-producing solar panels and wind turbines in America we could create jobs and save the environment in one move. We could modernize and de-centralize our energy system, and boost the quality of living of the entire country.
Yes, because government totally ever shrinks it size voluntarily. Give me a break. Government will grow and grow until it collapses. It has happened with every government in history, and will continue to happen.
let's say it's true and coastlines are going to flood and all that. Well even if we cut C02 emissions to NOTHING, NOW. It won't be reversed, sorry but people are going to have to lose their beach houses and migrate. That's just the way it is.
That's not true. This isn't some conspiracy so that Bill Nye can buy a yacht. There is a conspiracy to keep useful idiots like you repeating the nonsense that we can't do anything about Climate Change.
The Climate Warming is not happening, there are fluctuations like every few decades, but the big one deal isn't happening. How do we know that?
Because if it WERE HAPPENING, we would quickly see efforts to stop it efficiently, like culling world population or switching to nuclear energy. It doesn't happen though, instead we get some bogus shit like windmills installed in a few selected locations - it's just a show
It's what ruined Europe and the West.
>Climate change and overpopulation led to western families stagnating and decreasing
>this in turn does not work without our economic system as it relies on continuous growth
>rather than have children, take already existing people outside of Europe and bring them there in order to fix economic system
>this in turn again leads to even more clashes, with culture and low iq
This is just one part of the climate change issue.
>yfw hopping in your wind turbine car to your job at the solar panel factory
HA HA HA you just disproved your own argument.
If the amount doesn't matter, then why try to tax or control the production of it?
Oh, and good luck living on Earth with NO CO2. All the plants would die.
This would require a completely unified movement from every country on Earth. It will never happen though as its cheaper to just cheat the agreement and use fossil fuels. Making the West greener does nothing for the rest of the developing world which does not care about pollution.
>claim pollution is going to end the world
>Let businesses do it anyway if they pay a (((tax))))
>Cucked by the cuck meme
There is literally nothing you can do about it
We are likely past the tipping point
Permafrost is melting releasing methane
This has happened in the past, the PT mass extinction that killed ~90% of life on earth: en.wikipedia.org
It is a race to space user
Why does the oil industry need a fucking subsidy?
From what I've seen, the 97% survey is entirely legitimate.
>It was warmer a thousand years ago. Google 'medieval warm period.'
Global temperatures were, on average, cooler during the medieval warm period. In the areas where it was warm, we know why.
1. solar radiation was higher than average
2. less volcanic activity
You're dead wrong. The developing world is actually doing more to transition than the US is. Check out Morocco. Lots of African nations are investing in renewables.
It's only cheaper because of the subsidies. Wake the fuck up.
No. Beyond some percentage, it won't matter.
E.g. 1% CO2 will block 90% of infrared and 99% CO2 will block 100%. (values for illustration only)
It's some logarithmic function.
But going from 0.3% to 1.0% does matter.
Going from zero to 0.3% did matter even more.
It's not a conspiracy, it's called politics and if you get swept up supporting one side or the other you're just a useful idiot pushing someone else's profits. Either big oil wins or big green wins, but in both cases you lose.
Are you one of the retards that thinks you can feel climate change? I am legitimately curious, as I have watched global warming go from a legit theory to pleb tier trash in about 20 years time. Because some of what you say is true, but I can almost guarantee you jump to wild conclusions from there just like every other global warming worshiper.
>red pill me on climate change.
OK. Human caused climate change will be a serious threat to our existence in the near future.
Renewables will always represent a fraction of power generation for all economies as long as cheap hydrocarbon fuels are available regardless of how much of your money gets taken away from you and given to green energy companies. Once again its just more pretend to care PR to make money.
Not only that, but Europe possesses no capability to stop mass migration of tens of millions of people. If countries like India and China start to really struggle, we're going to see the rise of extremist ideologies and governments, ones that possess nuclear weapons and won't be afraid to use them as bargaining chips to ensure the survival of their people.
>From what I've seen, the 97% survey is entirely legitimate.
Look someplace besides Vox.kom
>>It was warmer a thousand years ago. Google 'medieval warm period.'
>Global temperatures were, on average, cooler during the medieval warm period.
>In the areas where it was warm, we know why.
>1. solar radiation was higher than average
Do you even think? Solar energy cannot be 'higher' on certain parts of a globe that is being lit by a FUCKING STAR.
>2. less volcanic activity
So medieval English were warming their crops with VOLCANOS???
Dude, go back to Soros and ask for better troll material.
>I don't know how resource intensive and polluting the solar industry is
>I don't know that smelting all the ore for wind turbines will outstrip its energy cost.
>I don't know that cargo ships are responsible for more pollution than all the automobiles in the US combined.
>I know how to ship massive amounts of freight inland without using fuel
>Batteries also trump fossil fuels in energy density
Because we would probably be using alcohol right now if they didn't. It was Fords fuel of choice before prohibition after all. Big oil has been sabotaging shit for ages.
>red pill me on climate change
pool is OPEN for NIGGERS
Seriously, nuclear is the only way to really replace fossil fuels. Stop this solar and wind nonsense, it's just not feasible at scale.
>CO2 and other gasses trap heat in the atmosphere.
Disproven. The atmosphere releases more as the concentration increases. The heat trapping effect doesn't work anywhere near as much as you all claim it does. If mechanisms weren't in place that cancel that shit out then we would all have melted long ago because of volcanic activity that puts up more CO2 and other shit than the entire industrial revolution in a single pop. Oh, and that tends to have a cooling effect for a long time on the environment because of outright blocking solar energy, so it does literally the opposite of what you seem to think it does.
>2. 97% of climate scientists, geologists, ecologists etc agree that human technology (i.e. pollution) has an effect on the climate. They are correct, and the data is very explicit and clear.
Why is it always 97%? And why does what they agree to change every time? This doesn't even mention global warming and I'd hope 100% of scientists believed that pollution was a thing.
Solar/wind is never replacing conventional power plants because solar/wind isn't dispatchable. This is a basic fatal flaw in solar/wind that anybody touting it should know.
are you fucking retarded :DDD
You made the claim, provide the source.
While the northern hemisphere was warmer, regions like the tropical pacifics were significantly cooler, you can find this for yourself.
>Do you even think? Solar energy cannot be 'higher' on certain parts of a globe that is being lit by a FUCKING STAR.
>So medieval English were warming their crops with VOLCANOS???
Just because you don't have the mental capacity to understand science it doesn't make it false.
Living in the first country to drown, I worry more about mass migration than about climate change.
I feel that because both sides of the argument have so much to gain, nobody can be fully trusted.
Also, I think that if the earth had been cooling down, it would've been linked to human activity as well, just warning us for a new ice age.
Just move to Belgique. They have lower taxes there. It's nice.
Heard of Wallonia?
well meme'd sir
Fair point, but that really only applies in a grid-based system. If every home had the ability to autonomously generate energy, that wouldn't matter.
Oh wow, a guy 40 years ago said we had 5-10 years to figure out how this works or global temperatures will rise 1-3 degrees. Remember when that happened guys? It was fucking crazy, which is why it's 10 degrees warmer now than back then. Oh wait, maybe they just didn't understand what the fuck they were doing so anything they say is really pointless.
Al Gore has promised us that we would all be dead in 5-10 years for the last 30, and fuck all has happened. Doomsaying is just doomsaying unless you actually understand what is going on, which nobody really does because the climate is extremely complicated. Obviously there are changes happening to the environment, there always are. The how and the what of the mechanisms controlling this are as important to understand as the effects it will cause, and somehow they want me to believe they know with certainty how the environment will be in 10 years when we literally can't predict the weather farther out than a few days AND none of their models or predictions for the past 40 years have had any shred of reality to them.
This is the actual answer
I will red pill you. The weather does in fact change even if you tax people you don't like.
Yeah of course there's an opportunity cost you cunt. By transitioning to renewables we get rid of a lot of sunk investment into fossil fuels. But it pays for itself in the long term when we DON'T destroy the planet lol.
Or Norway. You guys seem to have your shit together pretty nicely, and girls are very pretty.
That would just put the financial burden of energy storage on every homeowner. Because again, solar/wind isn't dispatchable.
7 out of 10 people on the planet live on less than $10 US per day. It's not going to happen. Cheap coal and oil will continue to be used until its long gone.
Muh rising sea level won't hurt Canada one bit.
Then by your argument we should simply invest on improving the efficiency of renewables so that they can bypass the demand for non-renewables.
This is the red pill. The red pill is climate change is happening, it's caused by man, and it's going to completely devastate the earth.
To quote the great film, Twelve Monkeys:
"Dr. Peters: I think, Dr. Railly, you have given your "alarmists" a bad name. Surely there is very real and very convincing data that the planet cannot survive the excesses of the human race: proliferation of atomic devices, uncontrolled breeding habits, the rape of the environment, the pollution of land, sea, and air. In this context, isn't it obvious that "Chicken Little" represents the sane vision and that Homo Sapiens' motto, "Let's go shopping!" is the cry of the true lunatic?"
>Arguing climate science
>Brings up Al Gore
Not an argument. I can look out of the Bus window on my way to work and visibly confirm the existence of pollution by watching fumes from exhaust pipes. It is disgusting that there are people who can live in major cities, much less people who deny that these cities are all toxic cancerous shitholes... Just look at Beijing... LA... NYC... Literally cancer... Of zero value to the planet.
>Disproven. The atmosphere releases more as the concentration increases. The heat trapping effect doesn't work anywhere near as much as you all claim it does.
What the fuck, this is an outright falsehood. You can do experiments at home to demonstrate that CO2 has an effect on warming.
>volcanic activity that puts up more CO2 and other shit than the entire industrial revolution in a single pop
Sure, that's true. The natural cycle output of CO2 is vastly higher than human emissions, but it also removes it at an equal pace. Our CO2 emissions (about 2% more) puts a tilt on that. And over a period of time, 2% more year after year builds up very quickly.
I'll start walking everywhere when you do.
a warming planet is a world with more leafensraum
Sure. We are certainly not overpopulated, like western europe is getting. I've noticed in recent years that a lot of belgians, and dutch people especially, and some germans and even some americans and canadians have moved here. And I live in a rural municipality in northern norway.
It's nice to have white immigration of skilled high-iq people. But the problem is that most of them get government jobs (public sector jobs) so they drain more from the tax base than contribute. What we need in Norway from our immigrants is that they actually pay taxes. Most european and other western immigrants usually get municipal jobs, schools, health etc... but not in construction, or other private industries.
That would work if every country on Earth was filled with caring White people working hard to overcome a global issue all as one. But that's not how the world works globally. The large upfront cost for a renewable energy system is unobtainable by most people on the planet who have too many problems as it is, taking care of the planet is far from the top of that list.
Nigger can't swim and they would migrate north. gg leaf.
>mfw you actually used 'muh car' as an argument
There's a giant ball of nukes called the sun that has a thing or two to do with weather I heard. it's round like the earth.
Climate change is real, let's keep feeding the niggers until they multiply by a factor of 4 though!!!!!
The climate changes. All alarmist models have been wrong time and time again because they only sample a few decades instead of the hundreds of thousands of years necessary to predict significant temperature change. the average temperature of the Earth IIRC is around 25 degrees C and I think what alarmists are claiming is that the current global average is around 16 degrees C.
Spikes in temperatures are because the temperature of the sea has only recently started to be taken and is now added onto the rest of the data whereas the older data lacks this ad so shows a disparity.
Half of all the temperature monitoring equipment which judges the average temperature of the earth is within the northern temperate band, between the Arctic band and the equatorial band, meaning there is a much larger sample of only one area. Events such as the little ice age and the medieval/Roman warm periods show that changes in climate can be isolated to certain areas of the globe making global averages redundant.
Toronto will be in one of the most advantageous positions on Earth. It practically sits on a peninsula surrounded by fresh water, and is too far from the coast to be threatened by category 5 hurricanes. Also has massive oceans and Trump's wall separating it from the easy reaches of the global south.
The sun can vary in amount and type of radiation and heat.
Most assume the sun is always a certain temperature. Biggest danger is a solar storm hitting Earth and knocking out the electric grid.
Why can't climate change deniers debate the SCIENCE? I doubt you can find a scientific paper that stated temperatures will rise "1-3 degrees and we only have 5-10 year to figure it out" You always go after the media (which we have no control over)
>The how and the what of the mechanisms controlling this are as important to understand as the effects it will cause, and somehow they want me to believe they know with certainty how the environment will be in 10 years when we literally can't predict the weather farther out than a few days AND none of their models or predictions for the past 40 years have had any shred of reality to them.
More bullshit, models have correctly predicted temperatures since the 1900s land, air, and sea. Also weather forecasting is completely different from climate science. The weather is a short-term phenomena, with lots of different variables affecting it. Climate science deals with long term trends and, counter-intuitively, doesn't have as many variables.
Big Oil, Gas and Coal may very well be propagating climate change alarmisim in order to get their smaller competitors squeezed out of the market by government regulation which they ultimately control. These big energy businesses have been known to refuse to publish findings showing that fraking didn't cause any dangerous environmental damage because they only sent the team in to find confirmation of there preconceived rhetoric.
I may be wrong on this last point, but I believe Nitrogen, which we produce in much larger quantities, is a much more potent greenhouse gas than CO2 and yet there is no Nitrogen tax.
Even if there is such a thing as global warming on the scale at which we are lead to believe by the MSM, then the best way to fight it is to embrace CO2 emitting industries. Only by allowing reinvestment into these industries will they find more efficient and cleaner methods themselves in order to compete against each other. If we simply go cold turkey on CO2 emitting things, ignoring the millions of deaths as a result, China will simply fill the economic demand we leave. It is no coincidence that Chinese businesses fund western university environmental departments.
The great earthquake will spread mixed blood all throughout Canada and the USA. It is the great concern of the children of your future.
STRATOSPHERIC AEROSOL GEOENGINEERING
STRATOSPHERIC AEROSOL INJECTION
SOLAR RADIATION MANAGEMENT
US MILITARY: "OWNING THE WEATHER IN 2025"
HARVARD'S DAVID KEITH
That's just the blue pilled exterior you are droning on about. The true red pill is this, it's all about fossil fuel control in a depletion scenario set to unfold over the next 50 years.
Like all things globalist, these inbred elites will make a complete mess out of their power grab, but it's nothing compared to the mess of modern civilization depleting fossil fuels, particularly oil and gas will cause.
It's a substitute for religion. Turns out even libshits need one.
Co2 is only one of the major reasons for global climate change. The earth has passed through many of these warming and cooling events.
Our schools focus on intelligentsia instead of science. The world's religions tell stories, and they are likely all true, however the interpretation of how things occur are different.
It's a Test of cognitive dissonance.