Is global warming real of fake?

is global warming real of fake?

Other urls found in this thread:

science.sciencemag.org/content/330/6002/356
geosociety.org/gsatoday/archive/14/3/pdf/i1052-5173-14-3-4.pdf
researchgate.net/profile/Syukuro_Manabe/publication/6051018_Transient_Climate_Response_to_Increasing_Atmospheric_Carbon_Dioxide/links/53fdfb170cf2dca800044067/Transient-Climate-Response-to-Increasing-Atmospheric-Carbon-Dioxide.pdf
pnas.org/content/111/12/4380.full
science.nasa.gov/science-news/news-articles/solar-minimum-is-coming
wnd.com/2017/07/study-blows-greenhouse-theory-out-of-the-water/
youtube.com/watch?v=L_861us8D9M
dailycaller.com/2017/06/18/germany-says-100-million-african-refugees-could-head-north/
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

it's real. bill nye said so.

No, climate change is very real though. The Earth's climate has never been stable. It's been going in and out of ice ages and hot periods for millions of years and will continue to do so.

Sauce on pic?

Jackie Lynn Thomas from Star Vs The Forces of Evil.

global climate change is real and natural process
manmade global warming is jewish bullshit

Climate change is real, but there's nothing we can realistically do other than reducing energy consumption smartly and working towards clean(er) energy. If you're really concerned about the environment, go find a creek and pick up any litter you see.

It is real, but over hyped. It is essentially the left's Satan. They are beginning to blame it for everything bad like the Christcucks blame Satan for everything bad.

I just wouldnt risk our only ozone layers.

Go back to 1980 when that was a political talking point.

There has been no meaningful warming outside of natural processes. Sea levels are stable (rising at the same rate as the last 300 years) and temperature is recovering from the "little ice age" slightly faster than would be expected -- likely due to human action, though CO2 would be a small part of that. Terraforming is the major factor.

The chances of catastrophic warming resulting in sea level rise and desertification on a large scale in the next 100 years are less than 2%, and that risk assessment is entirely solar.

Climate IS shifting, and we are seeing regional heating and cooling in different places. The spread of invasive insect species due to mild winters is a danger in some regions of the northern hemisphere.

Business as usual. Things change, it's exciting.

Global Warming as a narrative and an idea is entirely pseudo-science. Raw data is contra-indicative. Only by massaging raw data with theoretical assumptions can you make the warming seem real. This is reverse scientific method. Backwards logic.

Climate scientists on the money train mostly create data out of whole cloth. Look at any single small set of random data points that have been monitored consistently for 40 years, and you get nothing but noise. All self-respecting climatologists know this, few will risk saying it. It's politically incorrect.

This is almost mundane at this point. I've never met any climatologist who believed in AGW who wasn't buried up to their eyeballs in meta-data and coefficients and models. Most haven't taken a single set of measurements in their lives.

Ho hum. I give it another five years before the truth comes out. I don't expect much fallout. Most people will just move on to the next fake emergency.

people who think you can add 4 Watts of energy over every square meter and have nothing happen are just idiots. It's a waste of time to listen to them

And how high up do those meter square columns go? 300 miles? Adding 4 watts of energy per one meter x 300 miles is absolutely insignificant. You win retard of the day.

Wait, I just woke up from a coma I fell into in the 1970s. The Earth is cooling isn't it?
Also why do we still have gasoline, we were supposed to be out decades ago?

Global Warming is God's way of saving white people.

Trump is the messenger.

that's over the entire surface area of the planet
that's 510.100.000.000.000m2 times 4 is
2.040.400.000.000.000 Watts of Energy added to the planet

I think people can guess for themselves if that classifies as "absolutely insignificant" or not

>MUH CLIMATE CHANGE IS NATURAL REEEEE

Literally NOBODY says anything else. This is a pathetic argument from the deniers. The fact is that we are changing the climate at a dangerous speed, with our emissions and burning of fossil fuel.

How can someone see the rise in CO2 levels since the industrial revolution, and think 'that is fine'?

Do you not understand the Greenhouse effect? It is basic physics that what we are doing is very dangerous.

Its like when leftists say 'europe has had refugees in the past so the current refugee crisis is fine'. Obviously that isn't true because previous refugee flows were a few thousand, not hundreds of thousands in a few months.

Real and mostly man-made. Completely irresponsible to ignore it now when we have the chance to stem it.

I think we are at a point now that no matter how much we do to stop emissions, we will be seeing significant changes in 100 years but that means that it is even more important that we prevent it from becoming even worse.

>white guilt, the map

Even if it is real it doesn't matter. It's a self correcting problem.

It's very easy to observe that the Earth is getting warmer. However, there is no evidence that this warming is the result of CO2 in the atmosphere, or human activity. All of that is propaganda to grease the skids for global government.

Did you notice?
>Holocaust denier
>Global warming denier

Here's a website organized by thousands of PhD scientists challenging the global warming narrative
PetitionProject.org

This isn't to say that human activity isn't destroying the natural ecosystems. That is definitely happening. Global warming just doesn't happen to be a result of those processes.

...

what about the fact that CO2 (and a few other weaker greenhouse gases) are the only factor large enough to explain the observed warming?
what about the fact that the stratosphere is cooling?
what about the fact that the warming is concentrated in the Arctic?
what about the fact that the diurnal minimum temperature is rising faster than the diurnal maximum temperature?

All those points are consistent with a GHG forcing and inconsistent with other plausible forcings.

Why don't we stretch that time period out a bit

>It's very easy to observe that the Earth is getting warmer. However, there is no evidence that this warming is the result of CO2 in the atmosphere, or human activity. All of that is propaganda to grease the skids for global government.


you really are depressingly stupid. I guess all those papers published in peer reviewed journals detailing the effects of increased CO2 on global temperature are wrong and blogs run by engineers are correct.

science.sciencemag.org/content/330/6002/356
geosociety.org/gsatoday/archive/14/3/pdf/i1052-5173-14-3-4.pdf
researchgate.net/profile/Syukuro_Manabe/publication/6051018_Transient_Climate_Response_to_Increasing_Atmospheric_Carbon_Dioxide/links/53fdfb170cf2dca800044067/Transient-Climate-Response-to-Increasing-Atmospheric-Carbon-Dioxide.pdf

and yes you are worse than a holocaust denier because the stupidity of climate deniers will kill billions of people.

>muh petition

Cool, nice appeal to authority. Where is the evidence against man causing the current change in climate? There isn't any that hasn't already been debunked 100 times over. Most of the people on that list have never published anything related to Climate Science.

This graph is not relevant. It does not disprove that

1. CO2 warms the planet
2. Humans are causing a rapid injection of CO2
3. Therefore humans are causing rapid warming

No climate scientist says CO2 is the only driver of warming in the history of earth

The fact that there are retards on Sup Forums who try to argue against it is the single worst thing aout the board. Literally more retarded than flat Earthers.

ok co2 causes warming? plant some fucking grees.
SOLVED. or would you rather tank the most powerful economy in the world so that china can take over? you fucking shitstain.

The final redpill is realizing global warming is real but it benefits white people

lol jesus christ are you fucking dumb?

1. Trees do not absorb that much CO2. Most of the CO2 emitted is absorbed by the oceans, which are warming rapidly and losing the ability to hold CO2. No number of trees can absorb the excess
2. Planting trees would have no impact outside of the tropics

Did you actually think that nobody had thought of this idea to plant trees?
I don't give a single fuck about the economy. By 2060 the planet will be 4 degrees warmer, hundreds of millions will die. The 'economy' won't fucking matter when methane starts exploding out of the Hydrates in Siberia causing mass death in every corner of the globe.

FUCK THE ECONOMY, IT DOESNT MATTER.

Please post your fear mongering propaganda somewhere else. Muh dangerous CO2 is going to fry everyone on the planet.

climatologists don't just look at the temperature of the past, they can also take a look at what caused temperature changes and what the effects were. And greenhouse gases like CO2 were absolutely crucial.

One of the things they've found is that CO2 concentration and ice sheet volume are extremely tightly coupled and even minor changes in concentration can result in sea level rise of several meters. With larger concentrations (above 450ppm), there's even a danger that the planet will return to the ice-free state (which would mean a SLR of 70 to 80 meters), because that was the E-O boundary threshold for glaciation in East Antarctica.

How does this help your side, I wonder.

>European
>Buying the doomsday climate change bullshit

Clathrate gun hypothesis is just that, a hypothesis.

You're all operating under the assumption that CO2 actually causes warming when the data shows otherwise. The fact is, warming trends do not correlate with the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere. This has been proven in densely smog-ed cities over the years.

I think everyone on this planet right now really does underestimate the power of our sun to cause warming.

It's real but it's not a big deal.
Climate has been changing since forever and lifeforms have been adapting to it since forever.

Let's simplify your question to...

>is climate change real or fake?

The answer is "Yes."

Both the Earth is warming. It is not man made.

I wish I could find the one webcomic. It was two people arguing over climate change and in all the panels the sun was overemphasized in the background.

when you take a look at the irradiance of the sun, you find that the last solar cycle (Cycle 24) was exceptionally weak. Yet, temperatures have continued to increase.

It's almost as if there is something else pushing them up.

>Herr derr correlation must equal causation
The total number of Apples consumed has increased and so has the Earth's temperature. Apples must cause global warming.

Where'd you get that chart?

is there a physical relationship between the number of consumed apples and globally averaged temperature that can be observed in a laboratory, whose mechanism is explained by known physical principles and whose effect are apparent in the paleoclimate record?

I'm aware. Check this out.
pnas.org/content/111/12/4380.full

Columbia University

And how exactly does carbon tax help?
Did you know that plants and algae thrive when there's more CO2?

The greenhouse effect isent dangerous. It makes the planet warmer, sure. But why do I care?

If it was actually a problem, we'd be planting massive forests ect to filter out the CO2, but we dont. The people get taxed, and nothing gets done. Its a scam.

that's for geologic time scales, it has no relationship to the present.
And it's actually rather simple to show that the added CO2 can't be coming from volcanoes, because it's isotopically lighter (which is consistent with biogenic carbon from the burning of fossil fuels)

>is global warming real of fake?

The warming part is real

What ((they)) are telling you should do because of it however is completely nonsensical.

>This graph is not relevant.
>2. Humans are causing a rapid injection of CO2
>3. Therefore humans are causing rapid warming

Hello what is the ice age?

>global warming
Bullshit, which is why most people stopped using the term.
>climate change
Real
>is it happening at a natural rate?
Debatable
>is it being accelerated by human activities and atmospheric pollution?
Nobody knows for certain. All we have is a correlation between them. The amount of time we've been studying climate change is a drop in the bucket of the Earth's existence.

You haven't really shown me anything to substantiate your claims, so I'm forced to continue to believe what I believe. And that is, even when we are in a solar minimum, the sun still has untold effects on our planet.

Consider the effects that sunspots and the like could have on our magnetosphere, and how that could possibly effect warming.

science.nasa.gov/science-news/news-articles/solar-minimum-is-coming

so you're just going to ignore that your preferred explanation is inconsistent with observations?
And that's just from direct measurement of the solar forcing. The sun is also inconsistent as a prime driver with the spatial pattern of the warming.
If the sun were to blame, we would expect warming to be concentrated around the Equator and decreasing in strength with latitude.
If the sun were to blame, we would expect the Stratosphere to warm.
If the sun were to blame, we would expect the diurnal maximum temperature to rise faster than the diurnal minimum temperature.

That's why most solar physicists say that the sun can account for AT MOST 30% of the observed warming.
Do none of these sway you in any way?

I'm just not convinced. If scientists claim that at most the sun can cause is 30% increase in temperate, and it were even possible for the Stratosphere to warm, than the Stratosphere should by all means warm.

yes, the Stratosphere should warm.
But in fact, it's cooling in the real world.
That's inconsistent with a solar forcing and absolutely consistent with greenhouse gases

>If the sun were to blame, we would expect the Stratosphere to warm.

Wikipedia on stratosphere:

>The stratosphere (/ˈstrætəˌsfJər, -toʊ-/[3][4]) is the second major layer of Earth's atmosphere, just above the troposphere, and below the mesosphere. About 20% of the atmosphere's mass is contained in the stratosphere. The stratosphere is stratified in temperature, with warmer layers higher and cooler layers closer to the Earth.

>The increase of temperature with altitude is a result of the absorption of the Sun's ultraviolet radiation by the ozone.

From what I gathered, there isn't all that much to warm up in the stratosphere in the first place and secondly what warms up doesn't get affected unless ultraviolet output by sun gets intensified as well

GW is fake, 0.5°K, half a point change in a century, that's pretty much stable, changes in temperatures they are talking about are in fractions of one degree

peak oil, peak fossil fuels is the true story behind Global Warming, Climate change, and CO2

the purpose of the GW narrative is transition to new forms of energy because fossil fuels are finite and we are running out of them pretty quickly

politicians can't admit that the end to oil and coal is few decades away, it would cause global panic and wars for resources, so they push this CO2 narrative and act stupid

>From what I gathered, there isn't all that much to warm up in the stratosphere
it's completely irrelevant if the effected mass is big or small

>what warms up doesn't get affected unless ultraviolet output by sun gets intensified as well
that's right, an increased output by the sun would warm the Stratosphere. But as I have said 3 or 4 times now: the Stratosphere is cooling with time.

>Global Warming is God's way of saving white people.
By forcing millions of niggers and sandniggers to migrate to the west.
Praise be to him.

You can't have an increase of 30% max by the sun in temperature and see no affect in the Stratosphere -.- It has become painfully obvious to me that you have an agenda.

wnd.com/2017/07/study-blows-greenhouse-theory-out-of-the-water/

You're a shill, but just in case...
> pic related

first of all, you misunderstood what I said:
the sun hasn't increased temperatures by 30%.
The sun can explain at most 30% of the observed temperature increase since the pre-industrial. There's a world of difference between these two.

And secondly, the fact that the Stratosphere is cooling and not warming, must mean that solar effects are strongly drowned out by the forcing of GHGs.

What's so hard to understand about that?

Global warming is fake, climate CHANGE doesn't.
youtube.com/watch?v=L_861us8D9M

By that logic, the GHGs should be reflecting the sun's radiation away from earth.

no they shouldn't.
What makes you think that?

Or maybe not reflecting, but absorbing it, and not letting it fully impact the earth.

>wnd.com/2017/07/study-blows-greenhouse-theory-out-of-the-water/

nice study, makes sense that density, i.e. pressure is the main thing behind heat capacity, it's consistent with thermodynamic models for gases

you're wrong
the fact that the stratosphere is cooling is because radiative transfer by CO2 gets more efficient with height, so CO2 can radiate MORE to space, not less. This is because the stratosphere has a positive lapse rate.

Please stop speculating.

Outer space or inner space?

outer space

>Real of fake

/Thread

This has gotten a bit complicated for me. I don't have all that I need to continue this concussion.

discussion lol.

>I don't have all that I need to continue this concussion.
headless.jpg

ITS FUCKIN FAKE

dailycaller.com/2017/06/18/germany-says-100-million-african-refugees-could-head-north/


whites are stupid