Daily Reminder

that if you shill anthropogenic climate change or believe it without questioning the data that you're a fucking tool that's gagging to death on blue pills and you need to
>fuck off
back to
>rrreddit
where you faggots belong.

telegraph.co.uk/science/2017/09/18/immediacy-threat-climate-change-exaggerated-faulty-models/
The models have been wrong since the beginning, and there are articles about this and about corrupt scientists manipulating their data to support this blatant political issue EVERY SINGLE DAY.

If you don't agree with these facts, get the fuck off my board shills.

Humans want to think they are so important and powerful.

The earth doesn't give a fuck. Even in their wildest imaginings let's say it's five degrees warmer in a hundred years.

So what? It doesn't matter.

It just doesn't fucking matter

>my board
nope

>It doesn't matter.
You are correct. It doesn't matter to the Earth.
It will matter to humans though. An Earth that is 5 degrees C warmer than today will not support human life to the extent the Earth does today.

Yeah. When it's 15 degrees outside and I walk into a room that's 20 I almost collapse. I start bleeding from my anus and simply can't adapt. Very sad

Fuck humans

Have a free bump.
Also,
Kill yourself then mate.

Global warming shills are the antithesis of what Sup Forums is about. They are the kool-aid drinking cancer retards vomiting blue pills all over and making this board look fucking stupid.

Sup Forums is always right, and global warming shills are wrong, hence:
>my board

anthropogenic climate change is real, but we aren't effect weather in anyway that splits significantly from past "natural shifts" in earth's climate. The "extreme weather fluctuations" and "sea levels rising and wiping out Florida" beliefs border on religious dogma.

That being said you'd have to be a complete moron not to notice the effects of pollution in our atmosphere and the direct correlation to average global temperature increases.

t. what is an average?

only ones that don't poo in loos, the rest are ok

Bump

>97 percent of climate scientists are corrupt
>oil companies are telling us the truth about climate change

lol how much of a moron are you

Nice meme flag.
It's getting warmer. No one disagrees. It's not getting warmer at the rate 97% of climate scientists say it is. The increase is not from human interference. 97% of climate scientists are either editing raw climate data, complicit in the editing of raw data, or are unfortunate enough to believe their colleagues.
Clear some stuff up for you?

i like this comic because it portrays climate denialists as children that don't understand the simple difference between climate and weather

you can do better climate science than 97 percent of climate scientists?

I don't like using authority as an argument, but when it comes to science it really isn't hard to relegate authority to people who actually study the field

again 97 percent of climate scientists are editing data for what purpose ? to make the big bad oil industry look bad?

>points out his own fallacy
Wows. You're aware of the holes in your argument but maintain it anyway. Can you answer the question of why the narrative has changed so many times then? I've lived long enough to have been warned against both ice ages and 'heat death' of the earth in public media.

because it's not an actual fallacy when it comes to science

science is a method and these people are the best at it, so listening to them is not a dumb thing to do

dumb thing to do would be to listen to people who are in the oil industry and have financial motive to keep doing what they are doing regardless of facts (facts that they knew way back in the day and simply didn't publish)

I'll answer, just tell me how you personally can do climate science better than climate scientists

>Science never changes
Is it possible to ban scientifically illiterate people from Politics? Fags like OP genuinely want to kill us all. Even if you're against climate change, surely you'd agree that air pollution is bad.

It's a fallacy that holds true for all arguments. That's how a fallacy works mate.
Not to dodge the question but do you really think climate scientists have no financial motive to publish favorable results to whoever gave them a grant? Are you at all familiar with how the grant system works?

I wouldn't say I can do climate science better than an actual climate scientist. However, I can interpret their findings just fine.

>and have financial motive to keep doing what they are doing regardless of facts
Do you really think that climate scientists don't have a financial motive to keep doing what they are doing regardless of facts? You know what would happen if they all publicly came to the conclusion that humans had no effect on the climate and what happens is completely out of our hands? All of those climate scientists would become unemployed. The entire reason that their job/field exists would disappear. And you say they have no reason to lie.

ive been in scientific academia for going on 8 years now. been to at least 2 dozen conferences and listened to countless other professors talk about their science. very few scientists care about the truth anymore, and a much higher majority care about earning research funding and pushing an agenda. this is in biochemistry folks, something that should be data-driven instead of agenda-driven. rip science, rip future, rip my love of questioning the world objectively. but, my actual point is that it's entirely possible climate scientists are pulling some bullshit because they want funding and a job and don't give a fuck about the truth.

This holy shit, the only two things Academic's I've seen, heard of, or met seem to care about is either getting tenure (if they don't have it already), publishing as many articles as quickly as possible, currying favor with other academics, or sucking enough cock to get a new grant.

Youre a fuckin retard M8. Of course your skin can handle 5 degree change. The weather patterns and ice volume would change with 5 degrees. Causing effects on O2 and Co2 levels in our atmosphere.

Now i dont believe in the mass hysteria that is climate change. But that is what the scare is, not whether your dumb ass could survive simple temperature change.

I would like to inform you that the highest percentage of Co2 in the Earth's atmosphere was ten times as high as it currently is now, and at that point in time Earth was just as lush as it is now, moreso in fact because plant life will flourish in such a food saturated environment. Humans as master environment creators and manipulators will easily survive even if the temperature goes up significantly.

Of course they do, but after they discover that climate science reaches the conclusion that the earth is warming they move on
when the oil industry finds out that the earth is warming through climate scientists in general or their own studies (yes they did fund studies on climate change)
they don't move on, it is in their best interest to either lie or at least confuse people to retard action against climate change

you can interpret their data and conclusions, but due to your lack of training in the field I wouldn't say you can interpret it better than they can

like I said above after they find out that the earth climate is changing they can move onto other climate studies or continue to expand on their studies
financial incentive of climate scientists would be in the what? millions
while financial incentive for the oil industry and older technologies would be in the trillions

Im not arguing that. Im saying the fear mongering is not simply based on the temp change. Its based on the effects on earth caused by the temp change. Of course we can survive temp change.

Some very powerful families sold out of the oil industry in the 70s and after realizing the trillions that they would lose have been funding climate research to try and destroy the oil companies for out jewing them. This whole debate is just the rich and powerful trying to influence public opinion in order to make more shekels. Both sides are most likely massaging the data in this regard.

"real" scientists think that about 5% of scientific talks are worth listening to. because the majority of speakers are absolutely terrible communicators and their science is just as bad. the reason why they are shit communicators is that they don't give any fucks about their science and basically do it to confuse everybody. it's an absolutely appalling state of science right now and it's only going to get worse

Are all Americans this dumb?

Great find. Sent it to an ardent climate change friend who is against trump solely for his lack of belief in climate change. Phrased it as “found a piece of good new for you today.” Instead of saying “see? You fucking idiot!! No global warming and Paris accords pullout meant nothing but saving billions”

>it's impossible because less money is involved

Is this really the basis of your argument? Come on.

Our climate is by our current knowledge the only confimerd system capable of sustaining life and you wish to fucking gamble whether this shit is caused by us or not?
Besides protecting nature, ecology & climate can in no form be a negative thing, those are the things passed down to the future generations of mankind.

That being said, all these trash countries like China, India are for some retarded reason held to a lower standard than the U.S for example.
We need global effort that are EQUALLY harsh on all the parties who partake in such deal.
No more unfairly harsh treatment of U.S & Europe because "M-muh 1st world countries".


Also ending colonization was a mistake, most of the sub-humans left taking care of the countries are too dumb to value our nature.