Alright gentlemen...

Alright gentlemen, I'm hoping that some of you are capable of alleviating my fear about the state of the world's climate in the future.

To prelude, you aren't going to be able to convince me that climate change isn't real or that it isn't significantly exacerbated by human influences. I've worked projects that map the shifting permafrost structure in the arctic circle and range wide conservation plans attempting to mitigate the impacts of climate change on the southern great plains.

The climate is changing, the literature is established, it is largely do to human activities, and as one of the scientists actively doing climate work, I can tell you that none of us have the time or energy to indulge in some massive jew plot to fake our data in a conspiracy to undermine american coal.

So here is my problem: Trump's new EPA acts and executive order to put jobs above climate concerns is extremely concerning to me. We really are at the point now where every year we fail to address atmospheric CO2 levels will directly lead to years of hardship for developing countries and areas like western europe and california that are essential to global stability.

I feel that the economic, social, and societal concerns of the future far outweigh the "job" concerns president Trump has about the present. Am I completely off base or is there some factor I'm overlooking that will make everything okay?

Other urls found in this thread:

newsbusters.org/blogs/business/julia-seymour/2017/01/23/gore-rewrites-inconvenient-claim-about-nyc-flooding-sequel
xkcd.com/1732/
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Lindzen
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivar_Giaever
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Happer
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nir_Shaviv
ipcc.ch/pdf/unfccc/cop19/3_gregory13sbsta.pdf
geology.com/sea-level-rise/
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

even if global warming isnt real we still have
>automation causing mass unemployment which will realistically lead to mass poverty
>AI systems given so much control they could implode the economy instantly if even one tiny thing goes wrong
>international plane travel makes it inevitable that a viral pandemic will eventually kill large swathes of the human population
>terrorists who would love nothing more than to cause the above two things to happen or start a world war by nuking a city
>population growth overtaking food production causing famine and civil wars all over the planet

Why should we care about financially motivated scientific fraud?

define 'Human influence'

If it bothers you so much get behind nuclear power.

It generates a huge % of electrical power in France. They do fuel reprocessing.

That plus a large electric vehicle fleet will get you where you want to be plus remove American dependence on foreign oil.

>So here is my problem: Trump's new EPA acts and executive order to put jobs above climate concerns is extremely concerning to me.

You know actually that is your problem. We live in a representative democracy. Decisions are not handed down by some technocratic elite, (and when they are, they normally fuck things up pretty good).

The left, with a total disregard for you know, actual people, passed a bunch of regulations that fuck people over, as you note.

Now they/you are not in power. So I guess that means you need to find solutions that reduce CO2 and don't hurt people economically.

It isn't that hard to figure out.

We've been dealing with all of those things and climate change for the last decade with very little issues. Why have things suddenly changed? In fact, the issues are related in several cases. Declining climate condition will increase resource scarcity across much of the middle east, creating instability and exacerbating the terrorism issue. Diseases caused by bacteria and fungi also spreads more quickly in distressed ecosystems because the organisms thrives on the declining health of the affected animals. The same can be said for famine having a relation to climate conditions.

Describe the mechanism by which you believe this fraud is occurring. Who is paying me to lie?

The massive amount of carbon being removed from the earth's subterranean and surface reservoirs and being placed into the atmosphere, causing positive feedback loops that further increase concentrations of even more dangerous compounds like methane. This has been happening since the dawn of the industrial revolution at a rate faster than the earth is capable of re-absorbing the compounds back into the plants and rocks. We have created an imbalance in the carbon cycle on this planet.

The planet will be fine,dumbass.Its the humans who need to adapt or die.

Fuck off concern kike, climate change is nothing more than a global tax scheme

I am a full supporter of investing in nuclear technology for powering our country.

That in no way addresses the issue. It has been proven time and time again in history the the majority of people in a society are plenty capable of making foolish and short-sighted decisions as a collective. Your argument is that collective harm across the globe is acceptable as long as a majority of the people in a single society agree they don't care, which I believe you would have trouble supporting if you continued on this argument.

"Or die" is something most rational people would like to avoid. The fact that you have the extinction of our species as a nonconcerning outcome is baffling to me. Could you please explain why you care so little?

Thank you for your input. It has been noted and disregarded, especially considering that the information in your picture is nothing but ignorant and opinionated speculation with little to no basis in scientific reality.

> we

and there we have it..theres no we about it mate and thats why your argument stinks.

write to the multi national corporations, write them a cute letter and see how many fucks they give.

there is no we about it - the average human does not have a carbon footprint so stop trying to pass the buck please, it makes you seem incredibly jewish (for want of a better word)

maybe i want a clathrate gun extinction event

If youre a climate scientist can I get a cogent explanation for the past 5 climate optimums since the beginning of the Holocene, most of which were warmer than modern times and some of which appeared and peaked as fast as modern warming? Ive literally never gotten one.

>That in no way addresses the issue.

That is the fucking issue man. How do you address this potentially severe problem within our established political and economic systems?

Everything you want has been tried and now discarded for political reasons. You want to give up and die you big pussy?

The only solution is going to be technological. It will be embraced because it is better in every way than the previous systems. 40% efficient solar with a cost of $0.50/watt. yeppers that would probably do it. Fusion. yep. Super advance Fission with waste reprocessing and disposal figured out? sure.

Fucking people over by driving up the cost of energy so they consume less? Nope. You can't piss on people and tell them its raining.

Better get property in Russia.

this
Fuck a significant majority of life on Earth.

That was a classic logical fallacy in which you forced false meaning on an otherwise meaningless colloquialism and failed to address a single argument in the response.

There is a "we". "We" in this case refers to the United States government, its military and economic allies, and the citizens that are involved or have a stake in the stability of climate condition or the other global issues mentioned in the post. To say "There is no we" is laughably false. Deferring blame or actor capability to corporations is also not a value argument, its just excusism.

1.please stop speaking like your fucking shakespeare

>There is a "we". "We" in this case refers to the United States government

then like i said before. go and talk to them you tit.
there is no we about it.

your notion of 'excuses' is a farce.
you are 'excusing' governments and corps and implying that the change must come from the 'we' or the people.

this is irony 101 you shilly cunt

>hat the information in your picture is nothing but ignorant and opinionated speculation with little to no basis in scientific reality.
Which part isnt true? The part where the models are shit? Or the part where they tax me for existing? I see both in reality.

There are explanations for each of them that involve a mixture of conditions such as solar output, the earth's orbit, albedo effects, plant composition and cover, ocean temperature, and currents. These all result in fairly predictable global trends with regard to climate, all of which have been modeled and accounted for. The difference here is that your assertion that these changes "peaked as fast as modern warming" is incorrect. Modern warming has not peaked and arguably is still just beginning. and the rate of CO2 increase is something that has never been seen on this earth with the possible exception of supervolcano eruptions.

Basically, the earth's climate is variable and our current variation cannot be accounted for unless you include anthropogenic factors like human's increasing atmospheric CO2 levels.

Your opinion has been noted and disregarded as insane.

Both parts are not true.

>factors like human's increasing atmospheric CO2 levels.
>humans

see, there you go again.
this won't wash with us mate.

I'm pretty sure it methane that comes out of my arse and Im going to continue breathing if thats ok with you?
I only have small lungs, promise

>The part where the models are shit?

This too. Didn't Al Gore swear up and down that NY would be under water by now? Muh hurricanes were going to get bigger and more powerful and sweep us away! (just before we got a huge lull)

Global warming gave way to 'climate change'.

The public struggle to explain away the pause in the rise of temperatures.

The climate change cohort looks like a bunch of asshats, and their solutions look mostly like a system for enriching themselves and or dictating the lives of others. Ex: Carbon taxes? Pfff,. yeah somebody is going to make billions on that on the backs of everyone.

Some European user described how their governments passed a bunch of green power regulations. Just before the regulations passed their legislature members all purchased a bunch of green company stocks. Solendra ?sp? A green scam done here, all justified in the name of muh planet.

With friends like this, Mr. Green OP, who needs enemies.

>There are explanations for each of them that involve a mixture of conditions such as solar output, the earth's orbit, albedo effects, plant composition and cover, ocean temperature, and currents.
And these factors are insufficient to explain modern warming why?
> These all result in fairly predictable global trends with regard to climate
and incidentally we happen to be right on time in terms of the expected occurrence of a climate optimum, with between 2 and 6 centuries or so between every one, and the last one ending about 400 years before the beginning of modern warming, which incidentally began prior to the acceleration of the Industrial Revolution.
> These all result in fairly predictable global trends with regard to climate, all of which have been modeled and accounted for.
> all of which have been modeled and accounted for.
> modeled and accounted for.
>modeled
I dunno why, but something just rubs me the wrong fucking way about climate models which predict accelerated warming. Cant quite put my finger on it... It might have something to do with pic related, hard to say.

>if I pretend to have no sense of humor itll make me seem smarter

I have a question. Why are the other planets in the solar system warming at roughly the same rate?

user I think you might be retarded

holy shit sauce pls

Global warming is fake and gay, just like your mother.

Even if it were true, what is the problem with a few meters sea level rise and warmer poles? It only means more land for humans. Only we matter. Fuck the rest.

More CO2 = faster plant growth = feed more people. A warmer planet will be good for the economy because it makes it go faster, just like the color red.

By the way, we will never run out of oil. After all, it is made in the crust by lizard men.

Fuck you alarmist idiots.

Sorry no time at work

fuk u fagit

please, be my guest and
explain yourself

No, Al Gore did not swear up and down that New York would be underwater by now. That type of hyperbole was introduced by critics attempting to discredit the importance of climate change by lowering the bar. Just because Florida is still above water right now doesn't mean it is not imperiled. There are several cities in Florida actively petitioning the government for funding to build infrastructure and pumps to address rising seas levels precisely as Al Gore predicted would happen.

Global warming gave way to climate change as our understanding of the global effects improved. The reality is that climate change still has an overall warming effect and I don't understand why you consider increasing our understanding of the subject to be a reason to disregard current science.

The public struggles to explain a lot of things, like the moon landing and basic concepts in physics. That doesn't mean there isn't a mountain of literature explaining why there is not a pause in the rise in temperature like you think there is. The answer to your question is because the oceans are capable of absorbing carbon at a faster rate than older models anticipated.

Your random tangent about politicians making money is an attempt to...? Discredit the movement with anecdotal accusations? The largest advocates of a carbon tax believe the money should be re-invested into welfare and alternative energy. Virtually no one involved in the process makes money off of it, so your attack is irrelevant and doesn't address the effectiveness of the measure in any way.

>the money should be re-invested into welfare
this will help fight AGC somehow, Im sure. Its totally not just another form of bread at the expense of society at large, right?

>The largest advocates of a carbon tax believe the money should be re-invested into welfare

yeah we dont really like welfare much around here either.
you're in the wrong place to be peddling this mate.
try a liberal forum, you will surely gain more than the 0% success rate you are currently hovering around.

come back here and post results :)

also
>There are several cities in Florida actively petitioning the government for funding to build infrastructure and pumps to address rising seas levels precisely as Al Gore predicted would happen.
>the world is warming
>humans contribute
>ergo humanity is the primary cause
rock solid logic bucko

4 explosive dirt on the climate swindle check out...The Valentine's Day Surprise - PR Newswire

OP on suicide watch

1. He was not "speaking like fucking shakespeare", he's speaking plain english. That's numbered "1" because it's the first reason I suspect you might have mild retardation.
2. It's entirely irrelevant to anything OP has said that he decided to describe major polluters and emitters as "we". I happen to agree with you, as I'm sure OP does, that it's the responsibility of policy makers and corporations to not pollute the oceans or the atmosphere, and the impact of individual humans (even 7 billion of them) is utterly negligible in comparison except to the extent that our collective consumption of electrical and agricultural products is what drives policymakers and corporations to pollute. But we still make up a part of the net contribution and "we" is more convenient to write than "policymakers and corporations" when everyone understands what is meant by "we". I numbered this 2 because it's the second reason I think you might be retarded, and because when you start a numbered list to distinguish between different points, you should use more than one number.

>some factor I'm overlooking
Yes, got milk?
>that will make everything okay?
Nightmare scenario already let along the shady power grab by a global fascist agenda. Religion masquerading as science is a bad omen, dark ages incoming literally. Lights out for most by 2050.

Al gore is a self-interested cunt exploiting people and fear-mongering using developing science.

newsbusters.org/blogs/business/julia-seymour/2017/01/23/gore-rewrites-inconvenient-claim-about-nyc-flooding-sequel

>> increasing our understanding of the subject to be a reason to disregard current science.

You fucking illiterate cunt, I do no such thing. Science is great. Research into potential climate effects is good.

Causing massive economic dislocations for people based on theoretical maybes is a perversion of science.

>>The largest advocates of a carbon tax believe the money should be re-invested into welfare and ..

tldr. it's a scam. A scam that needs selling, now involving muh gibs.

OP, I have a question. Is it depressing for you, as a scientifically literate person and a person who has spent a large portion of their life conducting original research into climate change, to see scientifically illiterate people congratulating each other on making counter arguments that take two or three sentences to post but entire paragraphs to convincingly rebut?

top kek.
thats you isn't it

> "we" is more convenient to write than "policymakers and corporations"

yeah i bet it is lol

thats my entire fucking point you well spoken dim wit.

what i meant by not speaking like shakespear is that if as the late great Charles Bukowski said (and orwell for that matter)

'if you can't say it with simplicity then you shouldn't be saying it at all"

anyway thanks for playing, lad.
better luck nest time huh

>I feel that the economic, social, and societal concerns of the future far outweigh the "job" concerns

Too bad Trump and the 9 billionaires in his cabinet don't feel the same way.

Pure greed rules in Trump's government and the working people need to lube up, bend over, and prepare for the greatest fisting in American history

Tell that to china, the number one country in carbon dioxide emissions, theresno turning back even if USA made 0.01% of emission. You major consurn should be china and india if you stop them you can100% asure you stop Trump passing those.
PS The climate is changing but we have litle to nothng to do with it, its nature, it has always changed during earths life.

But that's exactly my point, retard. This is being said simply. Just because you're at a 6th grade reading level doesn't mean everyone else is. What of OP's posts haven't you understood thanks to his writing?
>anyway thanks for playing, lad.
>anyway now that i've been exposed i'm going to pretend like i'm too good for this retarded conversation i started

>Talk to me like I am retarded, please.

i understood everything you and your faggot mate said, thank you.
every fucking word.. ok?

you're the fucking retard mate. i promise you.
it must suck trying THIS hard and getting nowhere

yes please.
i have no time for ponces and pseudo intellect

>The climate is changing but we have litle to nothng to do with it, its nature, it has always changed during earths life.
That's an extraordinary claim that's contrary to an awful lot of scientific literature, yet you don't seem very interested in posting evidence. Why is that?
ok

>ok

good, glad we got there in the end you absolute melt

Medieval ice age. Qed

Why are you a trip fag? Fuck you're new.

its probably OP

>and incidentally we happen to be right on time in terms of the expected occurrence of a climate optimum, with between 2 and 6 centuries or so between every one, and the last one ending about 400 years before the beginning of modern warming, which incidentally began prior to the acceleration of the Industrial Revolution.

Yeah and maybe if you paid some attention to the fact that CO2 and even the clouds in the atmosphere trap heat, you'd realize that we vastly accelerate the rate of heating of the Earth. The Earth IS warming by itself, ok? I know you guys preach that we don't cause it and you are pretty much right. We accelerate it and like OP said, it creates a positive feed back loop. Have you ever played a tycoon game? It is sort of like that but the human race and almost the entirety of all livings things are at stake if we don't kick our asses and the rest of the world's asses into gear.

>That's an extraordinary claim that's contrary to an awful lot of scientific literature, yet you don't seem very interested in posting evidence.
On the contrary, Im pretty sure its an entirely ordinary claim that the climate changes regularly independent of human activities, else it wouldnt have changed much at all prior to the year 1850. Now that would be an extraordinary claim. And is it happens theres quite a bit of literature that claims, and proves, the climate has been wildly varied through geological history, up to and including the current epoch.

>the climate fluctuated for a short while in one part of the world 1000 years ago, so there's a strong analogy with the current state of climate change and we can exclude "human intervention" as an explanation
Brilliant.
I've posted on this website since 2009 and had a tripcode since 2011. The only newfag here is you. You want anonymity? Go back to Sup Forums.

> The fact that you have the extinction of our species as a nonconcerning outcome is baffling to me.

t. Climate alarmist

If so he is bored as shit to be bouncing off a proxy.

The earths temperature is easily regulatable by spraying the upper atmosphere for the cost of millions. The problem is the liberals don't want global warming to be solved.

I can tell you that claiming that 98% of scientist believe due to research climate change is real is not evidence of anything, science is not democratic

>I've posted on this website since 2009 and had a tripcode since 2011. The only newfag here is you. You want anonymity? Go back to Sup Forums.


gotcha. A self-important douche. On an anonymous Mongolian flower collection board.

whew.

Semi-Liberal here.

IF THIS DOESN'T GET SOLVED WE'RE ALL FUCKED OK?

seems that way.
seems like he gassed the OP and had to switch to Australia, then I suggested he was talking like a faggot and now he's not using big words any more.

probably wrong but its a hunch, lol

>hey Sup Forums, Im scared of the future
>I won't believe anything you say, but tell me everything will be okay
why did you make this thread?

0.2's make dollars.. eventually

>We accelerate it and like OP said, it creates a positive feed back loop.
convenient sidestep except for the fact that CO2 has diminshing returns on its effect on albedo, and is an incredibly impotent GHG. Water vapor is more potent.

Your theory is that increased carbon emissions will create a positive feedback loop. But has it yet? Have we, up until this point, between the early 19th century and now, seen warming, ANY WARMING AT ALL, that could attributed to a positive feedback loop? I dont wanna hear about "models" or "predictions". I wanna know if right now, at this exact moment in time, any modern warming can be attributed to the theoretical positive feedback loop that we should apparently expect?

Interesting chart. I've read that Russia is 100% pro climate change as they feel potentially being able to grow crops in Siberia is a win beyond all measure.

You're off base because none of it matters anymore. We're all going to die in an extinction level event we have no control over -the melting permafrost and the gasses it contains being released- and worrying about it will only decrease the quality of our lives. Mass hysteria and panic lead to ruin that way. I think it is better for us all to come to terms with it, accept it, and await it with wonder and joy. I imagine it will be a truly awe-inspoiring sight, the entire atmosphere exploding. Probably happens in large pockets related to pressure or something. Maybe I'll be lucky enough to live near the edge of one. Anyway, I'm really looking forward to it with fascination honestly. Statistically speaking, the chances of you being born in time to witness an extinction level event were incredibly low. You won a sort of incarnation lottery being born in these times, user. Rejoice, and await the cleansing holy fire with me brother.

>a short while in one part of the world 1000 years ago
Try again fucknut

Oz like Cancuckistan has been bombarded with more AGW dogma than most countries as they have been primary targets of carbon taxation.

>awful lot of scientific literature
History repeats, the church responded to the invention of the printing press by simply printing more dogma. With their vast wealth bought more presses than anyone else. The presses of independent thought and critical thinking had been almost completely squashed until the invention of Al Gores internets.

The only science being exercised to push the AGW agenda is social science. Most of the "scientific literature" consists of garbage in garbage out computer simulations of ridiculous dimensions, questionable data, suspect sources and with an obvious built in bias. In the end, climate prophecy. Let's try and get the weather predictions right 2 weeks out first before attempting a forecast of 2 years or in some laughable cases of 20 years or longer. End of Days is a popular concept but seriously, call a spade a spade here.

Yes, the ocean especially has warmed, so have air temperatures.

...

No, these are the mechanisms of the supposed feedback loop, their warming is not in and of itself a part of it. Show me, scientifically, what portion of modern warming can be objectively attributed to the feedback loop. I dont recall asking for vagueries and assertions. I asked evidence.

Don't care, not now not ever. Climate change reform is the new socialism.

if the climate changes on the scale its expected to, you will have collapse on a civillizational scale. Ocean levels rise so people are displaced and you create climate refugees, who drive up population density and fuck up allocation of resources like food and energy and housing. You think europe in 2017 is a disaster zone? Wait until you see australia 20 years from now when kiribati's underwter.

And heat! The temperature will go up. Did you know most riots in the US occur between 27 and 32 degrees celsius? When you push the temperature up a few degrees so autumn feels like spring and spring feels like summer, the world you don't want to be in is a densely packed, socially incohesive melting pot.
Of course it's not. and correlation doesn't imply causation, in the strict mathematical sense of "imply".

But it does elbow you in the ribs and waggle its eyebrows in a particular direction.

98% of scientists believing X is not proof of X. But it strongly suggests X is the case. And the 98% figure is about the cause of climate change, not the question of climate change being real.
xkcd.com/1732/

>largely do to human activities
>do

Stopped reading there. If you don't have proper grammar then I don't trust anything a (((scientist))) says.

>half an hour without a reply
op is kill
press f

so what are you doing about it?

lets pretend for a mo that you're NOT a complete gimp.

give us your top 5 things we should all be doing to combat faggot change.
top 3 if 5 is to much

And if one doesn't care for the fate of anyone outside of countries wealthy and sophisticated enough to handle the fallout by technological means? The world would be better off if the entire population of Africa disappeared.

I think everyone views climate change the wrong way. It shouldn't be a question of whether Earth is warming or not, instead it should be "can we adapt to any climate variation?".

>2000 BC
>Start
you wanna know how I know you have no fucking clue what youre talking about?

No, It's the new religion, and the new mechanism of control.

Something that you cannot see, hear, or taste is going to kill you. You can avoid this fate by remaining pious and doing these simple things and giving money to the owners of the temple.

You don't need to understand what is going on. The 'scientists' and 'politicians' will tell you all that you need to know. You should fear the happening, but trust in the 'scientists' and 'politicians' that they will do what is best for you.

F
he was mere vapour by post 20
gone too soon.
another casualty of the great meme war
F

More CO2 = Healthier, faster growing plants = less desertification, also = more food. More Plants = less earth heating up and less CO2. At 220ppm, the plants werd starving, under 200ppm is critical. If anything, we saved the world from mass dying of forests. Checkmate faggot

USG operating contrary to the will of its people is treason and grounds for violently extinguishing those who saw fit to appropriate it for their own purposes.

The world has gone through climate change many times before. Even if we go into full-blown Carboniferous Era warming the earth will be fine. Global warming is actually a good thing for whites, we'll move to the newly temperate poles while the kikes and shitskins starve in the equitorial desert.

>you aren't going to be able to convince me that climate change isn't real
>because my job is to convince you that its real

has there ever been a more pathetic OP in recent history?

>The largest advocates of a carbon tax believe the money should be re-invested into welfare and alternative energy.

Welfare is vote buying and unrelated - just theft. As for alternative energy, I wonder how many of these advocates have investments in alternative energy...

I just don't get it. I'm not a scientist. I'm a lawyer. I don't study science, I don't read journal articles, I have a bit of scientific literacy left over from high school and from doing a lot of research into nutrition, but I acknowledge that I

You lot, on the other hand, seem upset that scientists who spend their entire lives talking about and thinking about and writing about climate science, and doing fieldwork, and conducting experiments, and conferring with colleagues who do the same, aren't deferring to your gut instincts and obvious distortions of scientific evidence. What other areas of science do you take this approach to? Are you suspicious about medical scientists assuring people that vaccinations are safe?
What's your point? You can't do anything therefore we might as well disbelieve experts? All individuals can do is vote with their feet. You could partake in direct actions, make it harder for mining companies to work, lobby investors to divest from fossil fuel industries, etc etc. at my school we got the governing board of the university to divest over 1 billion dollars from oil and gas by making it hard for them to do their jobs and embarrassing them on social media. That was a few years ago but I'm proud to say that woodside petroleum is one billion dollars worse off now.

Believing experts. That's something you could do. This populist rhetoric that's grown enormously in the past 2-3 years that we shouldn't trust experts because they're agenda driven, and we should trust people who present simpler views even if they also have an agenda just because it's easier and more reassuring to believe them HAS to stop at some point because it just encourages policymakers to make policies that have no recourse to truth i.e. trump gutting climate regulations.

...

>living in Denmark
>Unconcerned by sea level rises

Youre right, Ive been convinced. I mean, whose on our side really? No one but these literal retards
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Lindzen
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivar_Giaever
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Happer
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nir_Shaviv

>you will have collapse on a civillizational scale. Ocean levels rise so people are displaced and you create climate refugees, who drive up population density and fuck up allocation of resources like food and energy and housing. You think europe in 2017 is a disaster zone? Wait until you see australia 20 years from now when kiribati's underwter.

t. Climate alarmist

Projections of sea level rising is 0.8 m at most, now lets take a look at the map

ipcc.ch/pdf/unfccc/cop19/3_gregory13sbsta.pdf

geology.com/sea-level-rise/

Hardly much change at all at 1m, and this is all by 2100. Kiribati loses some land, but not all and there is plenty of time for migration. Yet, you think it's going to be underwater in 20 years?

>set it to 60m for lulz
>its fucking nothing
wtf I hate ice now

...

you dont belong here user.
your entire post made me want to vomit

>Believing (((experts))). That's something you could do

>at my school we got...
oh so this is where your brain tumor developed, no surprises there and honestly I dont blame you, thats not your fault.

>making it hard for them to do their jobs and embarrassing them on social media.

literally SJW tier cancer, you should be ashamed of yourself - its pathetic

anyway, thats about all. I hope you will lurk more in future
you're the most unironically naive user I have ever come across, ever.
best of luck with that mate!

Resource shortage will be a much bigger program. Conventional oil will run out in a couple of decades and then shit will hit the fan. Food production will fail hard.

I took 1 billion dollars out of the oil industry that wouldn't otherwise have been divested. What have you done, for anyone, ever?

nah because when the arctic ice melts, it will be easier to extract oil from there