What is Sup Forums's opinion on Climate Change?
On one hand, it just seems like a way for Governments to exert more control, and transfer more wealth to 3rd world shitholes and Solar Panel companies.
On the other hand, a warming climate could really cause some long term issues, and maybe even the extinction of man.
Well?
Other urls found in this thread:
climate.nasa.gov
beta.dmi.dk
phys.org
climate.nasa.gov
youtube.com
latimes.com
en.m.wikipedia.org
nature.com
climate.nasa.gov
climate.nasa.gov
youtube.com
twitter.com
>endangering humanities survival by refusing to give 3rd world countries and even China gibsmedats
Anyone who is stupid enough to take stock in images occupy democrats makes need to be executed.
By "conservatives" you mean "tumblrtards larping as Nazis on a Malaysian underwater basket weaving forum."
Aside from Trump tweeting about it, all the outrage came from her fellow liberals at CNN, along with all the real-world consequences (losing her job, being excommunicated from the Church of Social Justice, etc.)
I collect them and repost them when they apply to the Occupy Democrats themselves, for maximum impact.
Make them live by their own rules. This killed the Clinton Campaign.
Do people really think pulling out of the paris accord endangers all of humanity? How delusional can you be
Climate change is a real fucking issue. climate.nasa.gov
I read about climate scientists developing ptsd and depression like symptoms
It was a fucking scam to chain the US taxpayer to the rest of the world. They would collect billions, build one or two meme solar panels, and continue producing all the carbon emissions they could.
Fortunately I only have to demand that you live up to the rules created by your leaders to make you give up within days.
Meanwhile I continue to enjoy dry clothes and cars that I can repair with my own two hands.
...
>comparing beheading the POTUS to "muh climate change"
kill yourself shill rat
>occupy Wall Street because they're greedy and corrupt
>occupy democrats because they're greedy and corrupt
beta.dmi.dk
Climate is changing, tropical rain belt is shifting.
phys.org
But we are getting hotter, about to go into global cooling, look what the sun is doing, same thing as the maunder minimum.
Winter is coming.
Why dont we do it, but with out the treaty? why dont the other countries continue on with the treaty with out the US? Why is the treaty so magical?
Trump was smart to pull out of the treaty anyway. It was only going to reduce warming by less than a degree.
Reduce warming by 0.5 C which is a huge fucking deal you utter moron
The climate debate started when Zionists realised that if they cant controll the climate Israel will soon be under water becouse of earths natural climate cycles.
Climate change is more real than you cucks know
Trump is a greedy capitalist jew fuck who only cares about money and not about his own people. Kinda sad that he was still the best choice in the 2016 elections
Why was earth warmer in the past then it is now?
Explain this and i will listen to you rambeling.
Pretend like you're in high school again writing a report on climate change. Do the research, learn the facts, all from credible sources (I'll even let you use wikipedia on this) Learn what it will do to our energy supply, our food and agriculture, population, droughts, pandemic, pests. I suggest you start here: climate.nasa.gov
youtube.com
All will be revealed.
One thing's for certain, the third world population is rising and industrialising. The demand for air conditioning and other energy intensive activities will skyrocket.
If we are to be serious about slashing CO2 output, we have to cull humans.
Obviously, we would have to start with the area that's most likely to have the biggest C02 growth rate, and coincidentally contributes least to the rest of the planet.
My solution: nuke Africa.
Assuming all the projections are accurate, the models are using correct assumptions, and everyone follows through with the deal.
Climate change projectors have literally never been correct.
Models have always used poor assumptions.
Countries will fuck it up
All the paris accord would do is fuck over the people living in those countries. China is a huge contributor to emissions and they only agreed to "reach peak emission by 2030"- what the fuck kind of deal is that? Anything can happen in the next 12 years.
Rather than taxing regular people to possibly fix a problem that is not caused by regular people, the governments of these countries should be pooling money together to invest in new technologies that can actually solve the problem.
there are some observations that are cause for cautious optimism. For example, in the last few years you might have heard about a "cold blob" in the eastern sub-polar North Atlantic, that was interpreted as an early sign of AMOC shutdown. If this were correct, it would be several decades ahead of model projections. However, there are signs in in both the sea density and temperature anomalies of that region that show a reversal to some extent, which suggests that that cold blob was more associated with a negatively phased NAO rather than a change in overturning circulation.
But there are other segments that over time turned out to be much worse than even the worst-case scenarios. Arctic sea ice is declining in volume and extent extremely rapidly and we will likely have a ice-free Arctic ocean sometime in the mid 2020s. That would be an unprecedented event for all of human civilization and what that would mean for weather patterns in the Northern Hemisphere is anyone's guess. Similarly, the mass loss that is observed in Greenland is catching up to the mass loss of the worlds GIC very rapidly (with 217 Gt/year), something that wasn't expected to happen until the middle of the 21st century.
Paris accords are fucking useless no matter your opinion on the science. Non binding trash.
Hail, brother. Kanye for POTUS. Better to wear the helmet of the red army than eat hamburgers in Brooklyn.
the question at hand isn't climate change in general, it's the Paris deal
if you want a redpill on what a shit deal it was, read this:
latimes.com
it really was a shit deal. In fact, it was so shit I remember leftie activist groups protesting us in Paris for pretending to solve it and celebrating it like we'd really achieved something
I'll never respect these lefty environmental activists again, they really are dumb as bricks. Being seen as opposing trump is more important to them than the cause their organization is supposed to be for
T. EU climate negotiator
1 year doesn't make a trend
If anyone's really serious about climate change, we'll be talking about dropping boots on the world's forests and industrial concentrations.
Signing and wasting billions of dollars to a non-binding treaty won't be anything more than virtue signalling.
If the effects of climate change is really world-threatening as they say, let them save the world with their own funds.
Its since 1981, all years are included in the grey belt.
Neither do 10. Try some millions.
Theese facts you are talking about. Who created them.
There are also studies that "prooves" that everyone is bisexual. Im not.
There are also proofs that say everyone is from africa. This was debunked a month ago.
I could make the "scientists say list" a mile long. But i will stop here.
Climate cycles are real. The dinosaurs pooped more gasses combined then the industries does.
>muh powerplants are bad
No. Nucelar fission are found in nature to.
en.m.wikipedia.org
Volcanos are also a good example. They have always been a part of earth and they where alot more of the in the past
I know that but you were drawing attention to the fact that the 2016-2017 line was on the upper end of that 1981-2010 mean, were you not?
...
but youre right, this is the year that all changes. Look at solar sun spots, in 2021-2024, lowest sunspots sinse maunder minimum, sun and earth magnetic fields are getting weak as fuck, auroras are getting new colours (white/blue), heaps of new particles and UVs hitting the earth, stay out of the sun, hits about to hit the fan.
fucking love this picture
This. If it's such an issue then it's good those fuckers live on this rock too.
what would the ice extent millions of years ago tell us about what is happening in the Arctic right now?
It's vastly overhyped for leftie reasons to have a goal.
It's obvious however that endless industriousness is bad for the environment, even be it only local.
Take a look at Chinese cities and tell me you think that shit's good for nature.
I'm fine with some restrictions on pollutions but my motivation wouldn't be the liberal conception of climate change.
If they're right, it'd be dealt with anyways.
>refusing to give shekels to globalist kike con-men and China/India who aren't actually bound to reduce their pollution ANY (in fact they can still continue to ramp it up) is now endangering humanity
oi vey it's anudda shoah
drumpf is LITERALLY hitler
Corporations NEED their pollution-producing slave factories in China because americans are 2dumb 2do those jerbs!
It's a fucking scam and it sucks that only right wing americans question it. Pretty much every other group of people buys into it.
we had some solar panel battery start up in my region, they went bankrupt using the tax payers dime.
Climate change is inevitable and regardless of its cause it is an absurd suggestion that mankind can freeze the climate in it's current state.
Protection of the environment and nature are fundamental responsibilities of mankind and are in no way up for debate when we discuss climate change.
I should have taken a closer look earlier but I just realized that your graph is actually about accumulated mass. It's actually precisely predicted (as well as observed) that accumulation will increase with time, for the simple reason that warmer air can hold more water vapor. So this is perfectly consistent with expectation
>cause human extinction
Fucking good. I don't have kids. I have zero sense of community or country to belong to now. Liberals ruined society to the point where i have no skin in the game. So fuck it. Humanity can go extinct for all i care.
>ENDANGERING HUMANITY'S SURVIVAL
Even the most extreme predictions of what might global warming might do show the sea level rising one inch in a hundred years.
If these pretty boys were really interested in fucking doing something about pollution, they would cull the third word. Relax motherfuckers: More pressing issues are at hand.
I no longer care about the future of the human race.
Also, taxing the middle class to mitigate it is straight up thievery.
Paris treaty is literally useless and pathetic and one sided towards USA. Also, I bet most of the people who complain about it don't even know the summary of it. Democrats play this slight of hand all the time, where they would name a crappy policy with an overly positive name and when republicans oppose that, they just say "So you are against affordable care act?". In reality, affordable care act was a disaster and needed to be replaced. Most idiots don't read deep into these policies and take it for their title value. Obama did this too with " Paris climate change treaty"
but in order to have accumulation you have to have sub zero temps, more or less. Ice is ice.
p.s, check this out. good read.
Look into Steve Goddard's work. tl;dr it's bullshit.
>never respect these lefty environmental activists again
Remember, user. This is the party/ideology of Meyrem Almaci, who starts to yap about smog in Beijing when asked about the Paris agreement's effect on CO2. Of Kristof Calvo who begins mewling about our nuclear powerplants and acid rain in South America when asked the same question.
Of people who did not think to question glyphosate for 30 years, until the patent expired in 2000, when it miraculously became a problem, doubling their efforts when Monsanto had a new patent ready to go.
These stooges should never have been respected.
Here's kike Shapiro's to-the- point analysis of the agreement.
STOP MAKING IT A POLITICAL ISSUE YOU FUCKING DUMB LARDASSES
...
>strawmans
>generalisations
pretty good propaganda desu
Everytime a new occupy image comes out I have to try harder and harder not to murder everyone.
>the climate change is real!
t. African intellectuals
I believe in Climate change... but government should not restrict or penalize free market for that... we must find alternative solutions to protect the environment...
People thinking they can control weather, or especially regional climate, is sheer arrogance.
What else should it be, bitchtits?
Stop typing like a fag.
why?
Racists will never tell you this because it isn't true.
STFU Faggot!
It is exactly a way for the UN to transfer wealth from the Western World to the dictatorship run shithole world. It's also a way for a small handful of globalists like Al Gore to get super rich by running carbon credit/offset exchanges.
The guy who invented the idea of "global warming" with his original paper on the subject retracted it after Al Gore went wild with it cautioning that the data did not show mankind was responsible for the increase in temperatures after he studied 10 years worth of sat weather data.
All the warning signs are there:
- alarmist nutjobs
- a demand for money to be paid to somebody else
- a corrupt exchange setup that benefits a few
- nobody can agree on the data
- pro climate change outfits sponsor said data
>not giving jamal in uganda a solar panel endangers humanity
ok
The fact that everyone treats it as solid indisputable fact is, quite frankly, an insult to science.
It's bullshit created by people who want to control every aspect of our lives.
That picture is an insult to science
>Because current temperatures aren't literally higher than they've ever been in the history of earth it can't be humans
Even though its completely incorrect even suggesting that is the pinnacle of correlation without causation.
A causal link just needs to be established with CO2 and temperature and then with humans and CO2 and then you have an established causal link between humans and temperature
>prefers rapid cooling to warming
Fuck off op. Sage
Cuz it will change regardless. Dinosaurs didn't die because they drove around in SUVs. The ice age didn't happen because mammoths burned too much fossil fuels in their factories. 50 years after the last person on earth dies, there will hardly be a trace of our impact on the environment at all. And a few hundred years, other than dilapidated buildings and garbage, hardly any trace of us at all
>pulling out of the Paris Accord is bad
>ignores the fact that individual states and corporations who would actually follow the Accord are still doing so voluntarily without a federal mandate or wasting billions of taxpayer dollars.
>What is Sup Forums's opinion on Climate Change?
Really looking forward to it. End this horrible ice age already and give us an enormous forest all over Antarctica to hug.
At least try to answer the fucking question nigger. Dont tell him to go read about biased sources who are only in existence and make $$$ off of the climate change theory.
First all, I don't think you're correct about the time a human impact will last. Something like 20% of the CO2 we emit will remain in the atmosphere for 400.000 years or so. Human civilization will probably be preserved in a very sharp horizon in the geologic record, which shows increased species extinction, genera turnover, massive erosion and every imaginable signature (oxygen isotopes, carbon isotopes, radiogenic nuclides, metal content,...) going absolutely crazy. The thing that will be preserved the longest will probably be deep boreholes, which will persist for billions of years, though tectonically deformed.
But the second thing is much more important. Nothing in what you wrote would lead one to the conclusion that it's arrogant to think that industrial civilization can't has a discernible impact on the climate.
It'd be retarded to deny it. There's on overwhelming amount of evidence supporting global warming but whenever you provide the sources, Sup Forums claims it's not credible
What they think is credible are retarded statements from a few rogue scientists backed by fossil oil companies
>>Hurr fuck trends over millions of years I live in a bubble durrr ooga booga
if the big gov and msm says it, then I don't believe it
So, you're saying 50% of white people are smarter than the smartest black people? That's pretty "R A C I S T."
look I'm not saying that looking in the past isn't important. After all, much of what we know about the behavior of ice sheets comes from looking at the paleoclimate record. I'm just wondering how you think our understanding of Greenland in the present is fundamentally changed by looking at Greenland millions of years ago? How is the observation that Greenland is undergoing rapid ice loss by increased meltwater runoff (due to increased atmospheric and marine temperature) changed by that?
>A causal link just needs to be established
So it hasnt been established? So it isnt a fact yet?
It's real, too bad people can't handle unfortunate facts. At any rate as action will be taken when it's way too late.
The Paris accords wouldn't have done much in the long run and is yet another European agreement to have rich countries throw money at third world problems.
>wondering how you think our understanding of Greenland in the present is fundamentally changed by looking at Greenland millions of years ago?
Because this could be the normal cycle of that specific landmass
>What is Sup Forums's opinion on Climate Change?
It's mid-June and I had to wear a sweater yesterday. Now, granted, I'm hypothyroid and feel colder faster, but come on.
Not that the last summers were any good either.
Good goy, don't believe scientists. Only trust your friendly Arab oil manufacturers
>pulls out of climate agreement where india and china had agreed not to cut their carbon emissions for a decade
>meanwhile US is forced to pay them both money every year, even for the first decade where they aren't cutting emissions
>even though india and china are both countries that have a chance to surpass us economically
yeah, no. every time i have an argument about this with a liberal i ask, "how does china and india not cutting emissions for a decade help the environment?" and they always have no answer
No it has been established I was just outlining the criteria
>scientists
listen the Experts, goy
What does dis show? I wonder
Climate has always changed, Co2 levels used to be 700% higher in the distant past- yet it didn't lead to runaway warming, co2 is not a problem. Not one nickel of carbon tax will be spent planting trees or hemp which would absorb co2 (the supposed problem)
Carbon is the most common element in the universe, we are carbon-based life forms. A carbon tax is just a huge $ grab, it won't stop the slow death of mother earth. Try taxing plutonium and mercury for starters, that might help.
> people who decide not to believe in global warming
> people who decide to be outraged by Kathy Griffen
All I can really say to you idiots, is that life is shorter than you think.
Climate change is a scam, period. It doesn't exist.
Solar luminosity changes over time
so is your political affiliation
Happens 4 times a year.
