You heard it on the radio. You retweeted it to your classmates. You ebigally upboated le based climate scientist.
>But you couldn't stop the climate from changing.
There's a lot of climate change propaganda going on atm, in big MSM, in trends, in conversation; Why?
What are """"they""" pushing this time?
>Global warming BTFO
>Carbon Credits BTFO
>Fracking BTFO
what's next?
Other urls found in this thread:
archive.is
telegraph.co.uk
archive.is
theguardian.com
archive.is
dailysignal.com
archive.is
dailycaller.com
polarbearscience.com
foxnews.com
independentsentinel.com
washingtonexaminer.com
archive.is
un.org
mofb.org
westernfarmpress.com
theguardian.com
archive.is
archive.4plebs.org
twitter.com
They want us to thank them while they "depopulate" us.
>disrupt the carbon cycle on a global scale
>believe coal & gas megacorps telling you "it's nothing to worry about"
"redpilled"
Climate posting is basically feelsposting
SJW have destroyed any rational debate on clomplex dynamic climatic systems
by reducing the debate to veganism, pacific islanders and patriarchy, with their heads inn the sand.
the ridiculous neologism
>Climate Denier
is parallel to the designation of alt-right, or simply alternative viewpoints as being factually wrong. morally and in totality unacceptable.
whereas those "climate deniers" will probably offer the most nuanced, evidence based and pragmatic arguments to move the debate forward.
can we kick this climate feelsposting?
see how all protest melts at the first sign of climate evidence
want to know where those papers come from? search for this: Antarctica Treaty, Comission of Environmental Protection (CEP) and TheSecretariat. It's a big hoax they are pulling off to justify certain agendas. Whatever paper you need, the Secretariat will hand our those needed. TheS also works as a clearinghouse on the parties' activities in and around the antarctica.
Bruh. Al Gore released a sequel to his shit movie.
If anything this is marketing.
hod someone verbally feelspost me on climate for 10 minutes
ended with a blackpill
>we're all fuckin dead in 20 years so let's dye our hair etc.
climate change is a much bigger and more difficult problem than anything else human civilization had to face so far
nuclear war for example can be avoided by everyone just sitting around, doing nothing in particular
sitting around and doing nothing in regard to climate change however would lead to disaster. And the climate is also a system characterized by a delayed response, which means there is a possibility of totally losing control and locking in consequences that are irreversible on any human time scale
>trying to stop a phenomenon as natural as continental drift
"redpilled"
>>Global warming BTFO
>>Carbon Credits BTFO
>>Fracking BTFO
Did you know that typing something out and then adding BTFO to the end automatically makes the thing you typed untrue? It's true! Meme magic LOL praise kek!!!
meh
>losing control
are you implying that humans can control the global climate system? i think you've taken the globalist pill too deeply. we can't control shit, more often, our efforts to quell climate based problems follow the law of indirect consequence and can exacerbate the problem.
yes, and yes.
i await your rebuttal rather than your ad hominem preamble
(((Climate change))) is part of the planet's natural heating and cooling cycle. There's nothing we should do about it and if we could do something we would probably fuck the planet forever.
humans have become the dominant factor in the climate system as it exists right now
the forcing from various human sources (CO2, methane, nitrous oxide, CFCs, aerosols/soot, ...) is an entire order of magnitude greater than the forcing from 'natural' sources (CO2 from volcanoes, variations in solar irradiance,...)
what is this heating and cooling cycle you speak of and what reasons do you have for thinking that it is in operation right now?
affect does not equal control
I piss in this ocean of piss everyday, doesn't mean I move the ocean.
lol, looks like you're the "climate denier"
How the fuck can you not know that shit?
I think this is a rather pointless splitting of hairs
the bottom line is that humans are the dominant factor, which implicitly burdens us with a responsibility to shield this system from any significant perturbation
also not sure how asking what someone else is talking about makes me the climate denier
know what? I'm asking for clarification
>not trying to stop a phenomenon being amplified to the point where the entire planet becomes as barren and devoid of intelligent life as the middle east.
"""human"""
>humans are the dominant factor
so humans are hotter than the sun, thicker than the athmosphere, more important than Earth's orbit around the sun etc.
>shield this system from any significant perturbation
that's a very conservative perspective, "maintain status quo"
seeing as you don't seem to grasp what the base level of climatology is ()
you're probably not worth debating
however, your flag and lack of understanding, perfectly exemplifies my point
>SJW cimate changers BTFO
>SJW climate changers are being manipulated
>the bottom line is that humans are the dominant factor, which implicitly burdens us with a responsibility
Na
Its volcanos.
>so humans are hotter than the sun, thicker than the athmosphere, more important than Earth's orbit around the sun etc.
if we overlook the weird phrasing of that sentence, the answer is yes on all points. The human-induced increase of well-mixed greenhouse gases strongly overshadows changes in solar irradiance and modulations in the orbital elements
as for the second point:
just name this unspecified cycle, so everyone knows what you are talking about
Instead of whining about how stupid everyone else is, why don't you just take that energy and at least type out the name of this cycle?
too bad that explanation is neither consistent with isotopic evidence, nor modern observations, nor the paleoclimate record
>Day after tomorrow could become a reality
Well that's good because Al Gore used footage from it as if it was reality a decade ago
>Technical charts only a scientist specialisng in it could understand
What's your point homo?
What's up with liberals and big words?
talk simple, I'm a soldier.
For young newfags that don't remember all of the leaked emails that came out years ago by the (((scientists))) who pushed this ClimateHoax, ill link a few articles for you. They purposefully withheld information to support their claim.
archive.is
>telegraph.co.uk
archive.is
>theguardian.com
archive.is
>dailysignal.com
archive.is
>dailycaller.com
This Global Warming/Climate Change nonsense has been going on since the 90s and the UN is heavily involved because it supports their globalization projects of Agenda 21, Agenda 2030, Vision 2050 and other goals. ClimateHoax is a huge part of their plans of globalization that billions of $$ has gone into already, so they're going to fight back every chance they get. Don't fall for Climate memes.
>muh polar bears
nice selective evidence there. a graph with no source that claims
>anthropogenic component
is some exponentially booming variable.
probably made up of """trusted climate scientistical calulations for the effect of ebil human fart gases x100""""
that's exactly the problem with your argument
LGBT has blinded you to real evidence, in favour of general claims, with the intention of spreading a general sense of guilt.
re: your demand for names for the global climate cycle try searching
>El Nino Southern Oscillation
looks like he took the word paleoclimate from the OP pic for the day after tomorrow
>Paleoclimatologist
cheers buddy
All the media headlines (e.g. The Guardian) have followed the press release lead and focused on the extent of the decline. However, it’s the recovery portion of the study that’s the real news, as it’s based on new data. Such a recovery is similar to one documented in the late 1970s after a significant decline occurred in 1974-1976 that was caused by thick spring ice conditions.
>Polar bears suffer when the ice is too thick.
El Nino is a mode of interannual variability
it can't produce a consistent ~1°C warming over several decades
so if that, and a handful of ludicrous, fallacious attempts at ridicule ("ebil human fart gases") are all you got to challenge 100 years of climatology, then I'm sure climate scientists are *really* scared about all the powerful evidence you can bring to the table.
This seems rather pathetic and I also pick up a slight tinge of desperation in all of this
>~1 degree warming over several decades
sounds a lot like
>variation in global temperature over several centuries
sounds a lot like
>the normal state of Earth's climate
to me
>100 years of climatology
desperate plea to authority to back you up.
I can tell you're a real SJW, are you being paid or are you just stoned and alone?
if you have 100 years of climatology to back you up, why can't you post simple statistics that prove your point?
> I'm sure climate scientists are *really* scared
i'm not trying to scare anyone, that's being done by the powers that are forcing this blackpill climate change argument, where you are not allowed to have a dissenting opinion, you must buy muh carbon credits, you are racist for drowning pacific islanders with your carbon emissions (inb4 cows are worse than cars become vegan, and why not intersexual while you're at it?)
also please address this post
Adding more info for the young newfags.
>independentsentinel.com
Scientists who were critical of the data that supported the ClimateHoax were being fired and blacklisted from the scientific community. If the data on ClimateHoax was true (which leaked emails proved they suppressed data to further an agenda) then it would stand up to criticism. Instead, they decided to silence their critics (other scientists). And we're not talking about a handful of scientists hired by the Tea Party either, we're talking 1000s and 1000s. Similarly, this pattern has been happening with GMO foods as well but that's another topic.
>ebil human fart gasses
I think the latest is they've been blaming cow farts. I could be wrong though. Have they went back to humans again and dropped the cows?
Would you like me to get into the EPA and its impact on businesses, or have you tapped out? I'll leave this here in case you want to go down that rabbit hole because the EPA was destroying American businesses and as a result, businesses started to fudge their reports because the regulations were set so high that they were impossible to reach. It was either lie or go out of business (which was their goal).
i think ze quit
anyway
(here's an archive for that clickbait > archive.is
i'd like to know more about who and why there's gaslighting / coverup, to such a high degree, in the climate sector
>why did the EPA want to harm business?
>why is gore still shilling, just carbon credits?
the climate change hoax was covered up, to what end?
clearly big players like oil and plastics industry depend on hiding the extent of pollution, but why not just show the ambivalent "truth" about the climate. rather than push the "climate-pocalypse" perspective
- is it to disarm people, make them feel helpless to change, helpless to stop driving cars and eating from plastic wrappers?
pic related, I think we've got decent alternatives, it's the adoption curve for new technologies we should be looking at.
why, despite the option of alternatives, and the impetus of the 'green/eco movement', does change seem grindingly slow?
It's a resource power grab. They use buzzwords like "sustainable" to imply that it's good, but what they don't mean is SELF sustainable like the 2nd pic in your image. Read the UN's goals and follow the money to see what major corporations are benefiting from it, especially the ones who are selling to KANGZ in Africa right now.
>un.org
I'd like to offer an infographic or something more easily digestible but I'm not there yet. We do have decent alternatives and we should work on what to do with our waste products, but what organizations like the UN, EPA, Al Gore, King Nigger and the rest of them have done is twisted it in their own favor. They don't care about the environment, they want your shekels. I honestly feel pity for the poor saps that believe in it and can't see past SAVE THE PLANET. I think they're heart and mind are in the right place, but they're being duped.
Why be a faggot when you can be a gaggot. Lololhgehjfsrhjkkekdddfcckekvrtyvgswjgfrukek.
>global cooling
>global warming
>climate change
Only solar maximum and minimum are real.
I sort of agree with the resource grab point
it's easy to grab the control of resources (particularly off poor countries) under the guise of anti-climate-change
lets get those infographs going, we need to breach a better understanding of climate
the way it's going atm allows big corps to get away with "literal" murder, whilst the moaning class (twitterati / sjw) spout more hot air on climate change and achieve absolute zero meaningful change.
i agree too on the green activists point. heart in the right place, facts from the wrong place
>extracting several hundred gigatons of hydrocarbons from the Earth's crust is a natural process and will not impact the carbon cycle
I'm not gonna go through those but aren't they the same emails that every dumbass read out of context and completely misunderstood the scientific terminology? Especially the ones where a specific researcher had a problem with the way the data was presented, and wrote a public rebuttal paper that everyone with a brain already knew about, but the conservative media thought it was a conspiracy when they saw it being discussed in the emails?
Specifically, could you quote the part where you think they said they were withholding information?
Take farming for instance which has been getting BTFO by big corporations for decades now. EPA regulations through (((climate change scientists))) have only caused more damage.
>mofb.org
>westernfarmpress.com
I find it ironic that the people who believe in Climate Change and EPA regulations are typically the same people who believe in supporting local businesses and farmers markets, eating organic, etc.... but there's actually a contradiction there because the regulations are actually killing local businesses and local farmers as cited in links above. Pic related is what has been done to organic agriculture as an example (may or may not be related to (((cc))) more research to do) and eventually, the rest will get bought up too if small businesses can't keep up with the costs associated with regulations. I'm sure the bigger companies have been affected as well, but they can afford a few years of higher costs if it means getting rid of competition. Kind of like how Walmart is a lobbyist for higher minimum wages.
>lets get those infographs going
I won't have anything done today because I have to head out soon and it's a complex web that needs to be unraveled.
Forgot image
>I'm not gonna go through those
Opinion discarded
>This in itself has become a major scandal, not least Dr Jones's refusal to release the basic data from which the CRU derives its hugely influential temperature record, which culminated last summer in his startling claim that much of the data from all over the world had simply got "lost". Most incriminating of all are the emails in which scientists are advised to delete large chunks of data, which, when this is done after receipt of a freedom of information request, is a criminal offense.
That's enough hand holding for you. I'm leaving for work so go ahead and have the last word. Please link sources if you want to be taken seriously.
You quoted an article. I requested a quote from the emails. Do you honestly believe what you read in the news without factchecking? Anyway, all that data he was withholding was released shortly thereafter, and separate studies on the same topic were performed, long ago in the distant time of 2010, after the entire world shat on that guy for trying to be secretive, including internally by his colleagues (this does not match your view of a conspiracy). It didn't change much of anything about the data in climate science, because the data he was withholding he just wanted out of the blogs that would discard the majority of his research in favor of quote mining and misrepresenting the data within, and the conclusions his researched reach were proven true by the studies following it.
Since you take the news at face value, a news story should suffice as the source you desire:
theguardian.com
>climate change
Nice theories you have there, (((scientists))). Haven't seen conclusive evidence or data proving it.
Profit denial
archive.is
Climate is always changing & has Cycles. It has nothing to do with Man. Environmentalism is important however.
The "Climate Change" Agenda is part of UN Agenda 21/24, mass Eugenics, De-Industrialization & Global Government.
The only "Man-Made Climate Change" is Geo-Engineering/Warfare, which also includes Terraforming.
Western Nations are being Social Engineered into suicide/genocide themselves to "Save the Planet".