How can people still deny climate change? The great majority of scientists, 97%, agree that it is caused by man. If you went to 100 doctors and 97 told you that you need a live saving brain surgery or else you die, and only 3 say you are fine, why believe the 3?
>inb4 da juuuws
>inb4 china
Other urls found in this thread:
youtube.com
forbes.com
forbes
archive.is
independent.co.uk
independent
archive.is
nationalreview.com
arstechnica.com
archive.4plebs.org
archive.is
alternet.org
alternet
archive.is
nature.com
populartechnology.net
twitter.com
Kill yourself
Good job voting a legit retard into the worlds most powerful office friendo
>appeal to authority
Kys kraut
TRUMP WILL NEVER WIN IN IOWA!!!!!
>Send out survey to scientists on global warming
>Get the information back and weed out people that disagree with you from the study
>Look guize 97% of scientists agree
the first ~10 or so minutes of this suck because it's just anecdotal shit that barely makes sense, but after that it gets interesting when he goes into detail about the falsification of major data sets
>hurr durrr me, someone who has no clue on the subject, knows better
You don't know better than people who have studied this stuff ALL THEIR FUCKING LIVES, just because you read some sceptics blog doesn't mean shit retard.
Give me one (1) reason why you rather believe some nutty sceptics than the scientific consensus
Who cares what the causes are? Everyone should realise that efforts towards cleaning our cities and protecting the environment are benificial to everyone.
It is real, but not the most important thing right now.
Oy vey!! The carbon!!
Instead of planting trees and protecting wild places, just shut down your entire manufacturing sector and outsource it to China (who totally doesn't pollute!!) Import millions of third worlders into your countries so they can destroy your natural places and breed like rats (because "racial justice" is a form of environmentalism, goy.) Make unilateral concessions to the advantage of third world shitholes filled with military ambition! It's the Kosher thing to do. Remember - it's not real environmentalism unless it negatively impacts the white working class.
Scientist are just people
They do not get some divine shit from above and always know the truth
Often they are wrong.
And more importantly everyone is biased. Scientist who don't support climate change likely lose funding. You really think they just have truth on their mind
Maybe in centuries we will look at Trump like we look at Columbus
The only one who knew the Earth was round and everyone around him was stupid thinking it was flat.
>this lie has been debunked but if we keep lying about it maybe the goyim just won't know
How many carbon credits will it take to offset all you lying kikes being stuffed into an oven?
forbes.com
>Maybe in centuries we will look at Trump like we look at Columbus
>The only one who knew the Earth was round and everyone around him was stupid thinking it was flat.
It was already a widely accepted conensus back then, what a shitty fucking anology.
The climate "scientists" have been wrong so many fucking times. Every prediction they have made has been wrong, ever since the 1970s. Scientists have become the new priest class, to disagree with them is heresy
Always archive. Thank you.
>forbes com/sites/alexepstein/2015/01/06/97-of-climate-scientists-agree-is-100-wrong
archive.is
1. The paris agreement would not fix it, and consensus or lack therof over the science is not why we pulled out
2. The evidence that recent warming is due to atmospheric chemistry is sketchy. The earth should be much hotter now if it were the case. While the greenhouse gas effect is absolutely real, its magnitide is unknown
3. Even if recent warming is due entire to atmospheric chemistry, lots of people just don't give a fuck. Lots of places have become more livable, not less, and agricultural output will dramatically increase in colder regions. CO2 reaching toxic levels would be required before the temperature caused a serious problem
go back to the donald jesus christ
We need to argue for a separation of Science and Appeals to Authority. That caliber of dogmatism is blatantly anti-science. The worst of the Christian Luddites in the late 90's and 00's could never have imagined doing this much damage to the Scientific Method.
>muh china boogeyman
>muh jews
give me a source how "every" prediction was wrong
if 99 people said that earth is flat and one said it isn't, which one would you believe?
The evidence.
>97%, agree that it is caused by man. If you went to 100 doctors and 97 told you that you need a live saving brain surgery or else you die
But that's not what the 97% agreement pertains to.
Its more like 97% of doctors agree you have cancer, but they don't agree on what type you have, how long you have to live, and what sort of treatment plan should be pursued.
consensus doesn't mean jack shit you autistic kraut faggot kill yourself
The climate scientists would probably lose their jobs if there wasn't a cause for alarm.
man some people here are really ill, you user are one of them. its important to separate the average user from someone whom is suffering mental illness.
You're right I'd probably get the surgery. I think medicine is also much less politicized than climate science, by its very nature. Don't you at least find it interesting that 3% of climate scientists aren't part of the consensus ? Wouldn't you like to at least hear what they have to say ?
You are retarded
>The great majority of scientists, 97%, agree that it is caused by man
Blah blah blah polls, blah blah blah popular opinion.
>The HuffPost presidential forecast model gives Democrat Hillary Clinton a 98.2 percent chance of winning the presidency. Republican Donald Trump has essentially no path to an Electoral College victory.
>98.2%
Clinton’s win will be substantial, but not overwhelming. The model projects that she’ll garner 323 electoral votes to Trump’s 215.
>323
>Scientific Polling
Sound familiar ? When you control the media, you make science say what you want it to.
Not an argument
>97%
umm no sweetie
When you sheeple bri g up climate change, %80 of the time you are conflaiting 3 separate asserions.
1: climate is changing
>true although not at an extreme rate
2: Humans cause climate change
>not proven at all. Correlation is not causation. models based on CO2 levels have grossly over predicted trends.
3: slight heating and CO2 increase would be catastrophic.
>made up and not true. Grow more food at higher latitudes, warmer weather is nice.
Did you make it past the fifth grade faggot?
I know. I'm just stating a fact
Blah blah blah Ad Hominem because I have nothing.
And also the consensus is that the Earth is primarily getting hotter as the result of human activity. What about the consequences and how bad they are ? Is there a consensus on that ?
Inb4 muh polar bears and muh Marshall Islands
Study the history of the earth's climate, nigger.
Human action probably contributes some of the change in climate but how much it does is up in the air. We cannot fully control the climate, it will change no matter what we do.
Do you think you can stop Africa and China shitting everything up? US and Europe produce fractions of the amount those shitholes do. The cost of switching the entire world to more 'sustainable' energy would be astronomical, and then the climate still will change because guess what? The amount we affect the climate is not that significant. Saged.
>go to 3000 doctors
>97 tell you you need surgery
>3 say you're fine
>the rest tell you to fuck off and stop wasting their time
>He doesn't understand how climate "scientists" are set up and work
Climate Change is very real, even the retards here know it they just suckle up to their retard papa too much to actually admit that he (and them) are complete mouthbreathers
youre missing the central point.
perhaps man is responsible for this nearsighted rise in climate temperatures as is supported by science. no argument with that correlation.
the objection is to the solution. there is no evidence to suggest there is anything man can do to reverse the increased climate temperatures. and there is no convincing evidence to influence rational minds to jump on board with a "solution." it's all ooga booga green pussy bullshit.
You, only good leaf
>scientific consensus
yeah, except when the NOAA fucks with the data it ceases to be scientific fact.
Frankly, the main reason more scientists aren't speaking out about it is that their jobs are potentially on the line thanks to people like you believing that this is some sort of consensus or fact.
I wouldn't expect a german like you to understand the need for skepticsm though- it prevents shit like dictators rising to power from occurring
There's no such thing as a climate scientist, the climate is a complex thing.
If the planet warms it will mean we can grow crops in places we couldn't before, the displacement wouldn't be immediate or large enough to offset this alone.
Also the planet doesn't warm uniformly, rather the poles tend to get warmer than at the equator, meaning this will primarily affect places we cannot currently grow a lot of crops like Canada and Russia.
20,000 Years ago Natives crossed the bering straits because sea levels were 500m lower.
You fucking retards think it was because of industry ?
20,000 years is the blink of an eye in terms of the age of the planet.
1. If they were all being paid millions upon millions of dollars to tell me that, I'd be skeptical.
2. If most of the 97% weren't neurosurgeons I also would be skeptical.
Daily Remind
>Global warming will cause fewer hurricanes
>Anyone ever said this
Daily Remind you're a retard
its always germcucks, they're the only real millenials on pol, they all believe what obama told them desu
The great majority thought Hillary would win too. Mass agreement doesn't equal truth.
anyone pushing the "muh 97%" is a shill - that's been debunked many times
>sunny days
>rainy days
>muh climate change
I deny man-made global warming
literally took google less than a second to show you are a dumbass
independent.co.uk
Arkivert
>independent co uk/environment/climate-change/global-warming-is-causing-more-hurricanes-8212584.html
archive.is
Please tell me you're trolling and not this ignorant.
But just in case, I'll bite...
1. Science is not about consensus. It is about facts. Trying to get scientists to arrive at a common consensus is antithetical to what scientists do. The consensus thing is pure propaganda. Just one sample (work the google and you'll find so many articles and reports of how this "consensus" has been debunked)...
nationalreview.com
2. The "science is finished" tagline is utter bullshit. This is an even deeper level of ignorance and propaganda. When you're talking about climate, which is a problem of huge, slow moving data with a tremendous amount of variables, the science is never finished.
3. "Global warming" was re-branded to "climate change" when the results of all of the models failed to reach the doomsday apocalypse levels climate "scientists" predicted. Subtle, but another effective propaganda technique on useful idiots.
4. The climate gate email leak scandal from 2009 has been quietly swept under the rug. Remember that many so-called scientists were busted for massaging data and pushing agendas to further fuel the global warming hysteria.
But our scientists are pure and good, right?
Our politicians and business leaders are looking out for the interests of our citizens and mother earth, right?
I don't know what's more disgusting; that so many people are naive and ignorant to have swallowed the hysterics hook-line-and-sinker or that powerful figures and the "scientific" community have worked so hard at building one of the most powerful propaganda engines in recorded history.
Grow the fuck up.
Global warming means fewer—but more powerful—hurricanes
arstechnica.com
You were saying retard ?
What legitimate downside is there to outsourcing production to China? We get cheaper shit without polluting our country
and millions of slants get poisoned, so it's a win-win
whoops, 99% of climate temperature models are wrong
but let's go ahead and destroy Western economies only, while letting the biggest polluters (China and India) keep polluting
tTHE ONLY RETARDS IN THE WORLD WHO DESBELIEF CLIMATE CHANGE ARE THE SHEEP FROM USA BUT THEY ALSO BELIEVE THAT THEY ARE GOING TO WAR IN SYRIA . AFGHANISTAN IRAQ LIBYA TO LIBERATE THE PEOPLE SO....
where did people get that 97% from. got any source on that?
Of course climate change exists, climate changes every day.
> BUT THE POLITICIANS SAID IT WAS GOING TO FIX THE CLIMATE'S BOO BOO AND NOW KRONALD BRAMPF IS DESTROYING THE WORLD
Yeah... because the Paris agreement was *totally* about saving the world rather than being a really fucking huge money grab if you actually sat down and took in the details of what it was going to 'fix'.
If the average person did their part on an individual level we would already be more effective than the "100 trillion dollar to delay warming by 8 months over 100 years" meme agreement. But that idea is well above and beyond you isn't it? Actually doing something to fix the problem and not having a massive cry. Nothing is more pathetic than some eurocuck sucking the dick of authority for the sake of it and not questioning anything. The U.S isn't going to be the ATM of Eurodindustan anymore. Too bad. It's not like this shit even matters for you guys anyway, the native populations of your continent are probably going to be violently genocided by Islam within the next few generations desu senpai. Good riddance.
>appeal to authority instead of evidence
Classic leaf
Germans don't understand anything.
"Scientists" have literally zero liability for being wrong, and every financial and political motivation to lie.
By contrast, the doctor gets his license revoked and sued into oblivion for forcing an unnecessary treatment for you.
Better question: When using lefties' OWN MODELS OF PREDICTION, even if all of the western countries had their carbon emissions at zero tomorrow, it literally wouldn't matter with how China, Africa, and India pump out CO2. Why is it only white people's job to save the world from the crappy decisions of nonwhites?
Penis!
you lose millions of jobs and you lose a manufacturing capability that is strategically important
protip: before all the jobs were outsourced, the cost of goods was still reasonable - you're not gaining much by throwing away entire industries only to save a couple of bucks
Look up global greening
>research global greening
Look up global greening
>research global greening
>inb4 china
>ctrl+F "China"
>7 results
notice how americans can't make an argument without using China as their scapegoat
most burgers on this board are rural and suburban retards
Being correct is pretty big financial and political motivation.
nice argument you blithering faggot
American inferiority complex confirmed?
Climate is always Changing. Humans haven't made any impacts on the Cycles.
Geo-Engineering/Warfare is "Man Made Climate Change".
The CC Agenda is connected to Agenda 21/24 & is used to de-industrialize & de-populate places.
archive.4plebs.org
the burgers have been real ass blasted eversince drumpf pulled out of the paris treaty, attacking literally anyone with an eu flag
lmao
>Global Greening by actual climate scientists
Greening of the Earth and its drivers
Overall, climate change has dominant contributions to the greening trend over 28.4% of the global vegetated area(Fig. 3c,d). Positive effects of climate change in the northern high latitudes and the Tibetan Plateau are attributed to rising temperature, which enhances photosynthesis and lengthens the growing season, whereas the greening of the Sahel and South Africa are primarily driven by increasing precipitation
(Supplementary Fig. 13). South America is the only continent where negative climate effects were statistically significant
(Supplementary Figs 10 and 11b). This is particularly important owing to the role of the Amazon forests in the global carbon cycle 19,20
. Ecosystem models may tend to overestimate the responses of vegetation growth to precipitation 12 (Supplementary Section 10), which is one of the reasons why the fate of the Amazon forests continues to be debated.
>climate change has dominant contributions to the greening trend over 28.4% of the global vegetated are
Ya, who cares if this will make 100s millions humans and animals suffer. Plants will prosper.
>The master of lies
>The master of lies
>The master of lies
You Germans said it best back when you were red-pilled
>smogposting
youre arguing with ideologues that are so blinded by their own that even entertaining criticism is something that is beyond them.
your attempts here are appreciated, but will mostly fall on deaf ears. thanks anyways.
Doctors are wrong 69% on the initial diagnosis. But I bet you Germans believe them 100% of the time.
alternet.org
Here's the archive
>alternet org/story/88515/the_startling_truth_about_doctors_and_diagnostic_errors
archive.is
Source one document that states the Earth was round from before Columbus
>100s millions humans and animals suffer
>The great majority of scientists, 97%, agree that it is caused by man
Fake news
populartechnology.net
who is trying to sell us the global carbon tax/credits system?
it's the MSM, it's Hollywood, it's the giant bilderberg corporations, it's the corrupt Rockefeller founded UN, and most importantly it's the big banks
that's enough for anyone to figure out that even if anthropogenic climate change were as dire as they claim, the solutions being offered are total shit (yet another tax on the people) and won't solve anything, other than handing control of our economies to criminal banks
Not at all. Lefty media's constantly and almost exclusively wrong -- Russia, smearing Trump for being "anti-gay, racist" etc. -- and make buckets of money doing it. "Scientists" are now asserting that gender isn't biological, even, and are making themselves and governments TONS more money, not to mention more control over populations.
So, no, you're incredibly wrong.
Yes, an abundant food supply and more habitable surface area will certainly be animals undoing.
KYS you fucking sheep
You idiot they did not have records before Christopher Columbus.
>200 years of measuring temperatures on Earth. >Trying to use this to say something about a planet that is 4,6 billion years old
ITT ignorant shitheads hating our erath
Hey Frank, when is the next KB bro
What are books ?
>The great majority of kike-funded scientists, 97%, agree that it is caused by man.
The 97% fraud doesn't ask the question of whether it is man made or what contribution we are making.
97% believe the climate changes. I can buy that.
>The great majority of scientists, 97%, agree that it is caused by man
Fake news
only like 35% believe its caused by man, the vast majority of scientists haven't attributed it to a cause yet.
