CO2 concentration has crossed 410 ppm, just 2 years after it hit 400 ppm

Well Sup Forums? You think you're smarter than hundreds of scientists?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=lFabsRFnWy0
technologyreview.com/s/531346/can-sucking-co2-out-of-the-atmosphere-really-work/
sciencealert.com/a-canadian-start-up-is-removing-co2-from-the-air-and-turning-it-into-pellets
youtube.com/watch?v=D-m09lKtYT4&
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

Oh, I'm sure I'm smarter than more than just a couple hundred of them.

...

I don't care
Hillary For Prison 2020

...

I tend to think AGW is probably real and that we are all screwed. The only issue is the timeline of events. It might be rapid or it might be in 100 years. I just hope I'm on high enough ground to not lose my properties, although oxygen depletion will probably doom us

...

I want a new ice age to take place tbqh

If you gave a shit you'd kill yourself, carbon producing scum.

...

>APPLY ARTIFICIAL CORRECTION
Sorry OP. I can't trust (((data))) from (((scientists))) when their source code had functions with this as in the comments.

we all gonna die. I check the reports and it's over. We dead.

...

It's chinas fault

Scientists can only get as smart as their hippie university professors and their PBS. We are as smart as the internets. PRAISE KEK, MOTHERFUCKER.

100s of scientists whose careers only exist because of climate change?

That's like asking people why they disagree with tobacco scientists claiming cigarettes are safe.

>You think you're smarter than hundreds of scientists?
yes, grow hemp it will suck that co2 up like a fucking 1978 hoover upright.

>Sup Forums doesn't want an ice age

Culture always thrives under barren circumstances.

Holy fuck, with CO2 that high, it should be over 320 degrees today, but it's not. Really makes you think.

((( intelligent people )))

No one fucking cares

We need more co2 for a greener world.

Climate skeptics are retards, but at least they're not smug assholes on Reddit. That means they're objectively not the worst people ever.

>And I don't wanna talk to a scientist.
>Ya'll motherfuckers lying and be gettin' me pissed.

>mfw ICP was right the whole time

410? I sure am impressed now.

...

...

I'm only 21 and I need more than my two hands to count all the "HUMANITY IS CAUSING X AND WE'RE GONNA DIE BY Y"

Sorry if I don't really care anymore.

Because those "scientists" have been caught falsifying sensor data and colluding to prevent the publishing of contrary findings.

Skeptics know that (((climate change))) scientists have their agenda. History shows that the planet goes through cyclical climate change on its own. The problem is that they keep pushing that it is all due to man now, which is utterly bullshit.

>You think you're smarter than hundreds of scientists?
which ones?

A Romanian giving shit to Jews?

That's some serious fucking chutzpah.

...

>CO2 concentration has crossed 410 ppm, just 2 years after it hit 400 ppm

This is very good for plants. ~410 ppm is at the very low end of where CO2 levels have been -- Thousands of parts per million were not uncommon in the past. Also, it's important to remember that we are still officially still coming out of the last Ice Age; for the earth to have polar ice caps is actually not the norm.

Good thing I bought a winter coat

Here's Al Gore from his movie showing a graph of CO2 (red line) and temperature (blue line).

He makes the point that temperature tracks with CO2 for millions of years.

Then he shows that CO2 is ten times as high as it has ever been.

But he isn't bothered by the fact that temperature isn't ten times higher than it's ever been, which would follow from the assumed tracking of CO2 and temp.

That is a major inconsistency in that graph, and it's based on some faulty assumptions, though I don't know what they are.

I have never heard this addressed.

Anyone have the answer?

The left or whatever the hell this group of people are, are always wrong. Everything they push is the opposite of reality. From this we can assume lower CO2 levels would lead to the end of the world since they make the opposite claim. Leftists want death for the whole world.

Are you referring to the "hockey stick controversy"?

>Victor Cohn

Isn't Miami supposed to have been underwater dozens of times by now according to these scientists? And the surest way to combat climate change would be to nuke China and India and convert everyone else to nuclear energy. until they start advocating those things, I only believe they want to use the issue deliver power to the state.

youtube.com/watch?v=lFabsRFnWy0

I know I'm smarter than the scientists, but I'm definitely not smarter than reddit.

>You think you're smarter than hundreds of scientists?

we're not paid to say stuff,
so... yes.

Sounds to me like we just need to drink more carbonated beverages.

Good thing I moved back to sunny Florida before the shit gets cold,

You'd have to be a shit scientist to think CO2 somehow generates heat in the atmosphere. Which is what Al Gore is.

>.041%

OMG how will we ever survive???

Considering that science is the field of study that believes there to be more than two genders...

Yes, I am smarter than science.

I'm smarter than scientists who sit around watching co2 levels rise instead of using machines and technology readily available to collect the co2, separate it into carbon and oxygen and store the carbon.

They know how to fix it but they refuse to

I don't think so. From a quick skim of the Wikipedia on that, it refers specifically to the uptick in temperature in the last 50 years, possibly due to using proxy measures of temperature.

However, what I am talking about is not a change in either temp or CO2, but the correlation of the two.

According to Al Gore's graph, temp and CO2 always track, so ups go with ups and downs with downs.

However, according to his graph, there has been a huge increase in CO2, but not an huge increase in temperature, so all of a sudden the tracking that has existed for millions of years just stopped in the past 50 years.

There's something wrong with that. And I suspect it is because they switched from using proxy measures to using direct measures, and so the old and new measures are not even measuring the same thing, so it's no surprise you get a change.

Just look at the graph hereSee how the red and blue lines track together all the way from the left of the graph, but then all the way to the right, the red line goes way up but the blue one doesn't? All of a sudden the correlation between the two lines stopped.

There used to be butt tonnes of CO2. Dinosaurs and shit were so huge because of how little O2 there was compared to CO2. There was no grass back then.

>appeal to authority

You'd think so but not according to deep earth samples

>There was no grass back then.

That would not come until the Stoner Age.

...

>instead of using machines and technology readily available to collect the co2, separate it into carbon and oxygen and store the carbon
American education, everybody.

...

Refute it, don't just be an asshole. Anyone can be an asshole

>1220-1294 AD
>Genghis Khans horde decimates the world resulting in huge population drop and massive amounts of farmland across the conquered territories left untended
>farmland starts to grow back into forest
>CO2 levels drop worldwide
>the little ice age starts in early 1300s, resulting in famines due to crop failures across europe, furthering the population loss

tl;dr: CO2 is good, retard.

It's things like this that make me so confused as to why people are so baffled by climate change skeptics

"We've only cried wolf like 500 times, why do you doubt they're telling you the truth this time?"

>mfw a leaf thinks he's special because he can photosynthesize
The day is coming when your technology is obsolete, plant.

Global warming scientists should put monuments in places that they think will be underwater in 50 years that say...

>This monument will be underwater by the year 2070, according to the scientists listed below...

Then list all the scientists who agree below that.

That way, when the monument isn't underwater in 2070, all of those scientists will look like jackasses.

And knowing this, scientists will not want to put their name on such a monument, and thus they will be called out for not really believing their own theories.

I don't plan on having kids, why should my tax dollars be wasted to save the environment of other people's kids?

>Refute the existence of this mystical machine that could realistically do this on a large scale.

I have a genie lamp in my basement. Trust me.

...

Bitch I've planted 20 trees this year. What have you done to decrease the CO2 concentration apart from shitposting on Sup Forums. The faggots who cut down the rainforests for industrial purposes obviously have to pay.

technologyreview.com/s/531346/can-sucking-co2-out-of-the-atmosphere-really-work/

sciencealert.com/a-canadian-start-up-is-removing-co2-from-the-air-and-turning-it-into-pellets

Oh look, Canadians doing something other than smoking weed

Me? No, but there have been many others before me who were, like Galileo and his heliocentric solar system or Oppenheimer and nuclear fission

>Czech education

>gloom and doom at the hands of global warming
Are there actually any scientists that are predicting doom at the hands of global warming? Or more specifically doom within our life time?

I've only ever seen the media or Al Gore pretend like climate change is an immediate threat to humans, as opposed to a long term issue that we should start taking steps to prevent. People like Al Gore hurt the acceptance of climate change by the general public more than anyone IMO.

>Then he shows that CO2 is ten times as high as it has ever been.

Say that again.

...

The effect is sluggish. CO2 levels have risen exponentially in such a short period of time, it is only natural for the temperature to follow suit soon, which it already is

Good, plant food!
Increase of staple crop yields by 40% for every doubling of CO2, and increase drought resistance.

When will you realize that CO2 is not dangerous you unbelievable faggot...

It's real.

It's also completely fucking impossible to stop through CO2 caps without a mass culling of the Earth's human population and an agreement to keep some countries at a completely pre-industrial standard of living. Why should that burden fall on us?

If you don't like CO2 stop breathing then.

You don't know science.
Scientists can be very very stupid, especially if they spend their whole life on "research" of just one single thing.

And some other scientists just tell some shit so that they get government money.
A scientist who would be unemployed without gibs for environmental research isn't very trustworthy.

Exactly this. Anybody who claims to be against climate change and doesn't support the destruction of India and especially China is just an idiot.

The main damage climate change is going to cause is a refugee crisis and agricultural troubles. We're in for a wild ride the next few decades, but it won't kill humanity. It'll probably kill a few billion though.

...

...

...

Where the fuck did you get that graph? That is not what the ice cores look like at all.

These are the greenland GISP-2 ice cores. As you can see, the greenhouse gases (and estimated temperature as a result) fluctuate wildly over the course of even 100 years. We have actually been in a bizarrely cool climate for quite a while, and we have been watching it raise back to normal.

...

That's a good question though. Why DO scientists support catastrophic man-made climate change?

Whoops forgot the pic

The effects of global warming are already irreversible and cannot be stopped

Literally nothing the west does will change co2 emissions becuase we already have decent environmental laws. The only reason CO2 is skyrocketing is bc of India, China, and other massive population, rapidly industrializing nations who give absoluteley zero fucks about the environment or other human life.
Prove me wrong

...

The effects on your brain from being an unbelievable faggot for all those years is already irreversible and cannot be stopped.
youtube.com/watch?v=D-m09lKtYT4&

inb4 some lazy rambling Sup Forums answer like the Jews or george soros with no sources or concrete connections

The margin for error on that sampling and that CO2 is just a small percentage of the atmosphere and small contributor to greenhouse gas makes those measurements meaningless. not to mention you can smell the globalist taint coming off a mile away.

Like OK already, just make a global fossil fuel tax but drop the plastic virtue signaling.

>have decent environmental laws
No it isn't. Not unless the West has already transferred to at least 50% renewable energy

So you will start militantly enforcing one child or less policies on non white populations the world over?

Of course you won't. So quit being upset about CO2 production when you won't stop non white people from breeding.

You don't know that more mouths to feed means more industry needed to feed people? Then you are too stupid to understand solutions to problems.

fucking this

finally someone says it

>mystical machine that could realistically do this on a large scale.
Pic related is that machine, it exists longer than humanity.

I am totally sure that humanity is smart enough to be able to build a machine which is able to do photosynthesise.

...

continued funding.

>410 ppm

Man made, nature produces alot more.

Not an argument

Being a small precentage doesn't matter. CO2 level has always been this low on Earth and not on Venus-levels. The trend of it rising is worrying coz greenhouse effect will rise with it