Should the God Emperor change his pants? What's your stance on global warming, Sup Forums?

Should the God Emperor change his pants? What's your stance on global warming, Sup Forums?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=L_861us8D9M
snopes.com/ice-caps-melt-gore-2014/
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

bump

global warming is real and all the retards who suggest the opposite are either big corps shill or ignorant amerimongrels brainwashed by the koch brothers propaganda

HAARP isn't HAARP, Doppler is HAARP. Doppler doesn't predict the weather, it creates it. Every meteorologist is in on the hoax. Better get control of it before we're all blackmailed with it.

Regardless of whether its real or fake, big corps like global warming because it forces companies and countries to use expensive renewables which drive small businesses out.

this is why you need to pay more carbon taxes goy
even if the temperatures aren't rising it doesn't mean we are in the wrong
it only means you are not paying enough

Global Warming isn't an accurate description of what is happening, Climate Change is.

>Is global warming real?
Yes.
>Is it caused by man?
Partly.
>Is the man-made part caused by CO2?
Partly.
>Would Kyoto have done shit?
No.
>Would Paris have done shit?
No.
>Is there anything we can do, barring new technology or going back to the stone age?
No.

So the Earth is fucked? Between global warming, resource exhaustion, pollution, inevitable fiat collapse and rising hostilities throughout the world, it seems like we don't stand much of a chance.

A completely natural occurrence that we are probably accelerating. Humanity has benefited greatly by this warming so greatly civilization itself was produced by it.

There is no way to "fix" or "reverse" it short of causing humanity so much economic damage it decreases the planets carrying capacity.

It's being used as a substitute religion, beat stick, and trust fund by leftists. A perpetual unsolvable "problem" to threw barrels of money for (((them))) to oversee.

Nah, the Earth will be fine. Humanity is fucked.

The Earth will go on without us

Humans are very tough creatures and we have already made a base decentralized entity that can survive a nuclear apocalypses.

And it is called the internet. Wikipedia alone has ensured that we cannot slide back below solid state transistors in tech.

its why they officially no longer use the term "warming" but "change"
which makes the whole intend behind stopping it even more questionable

>decreases the planets carrying capacity
this is whats also bothering me
that all those "preventive measures" to stop something which is supposed to happen are causing more harm than good ecologically and economically
but i have yet to see anybody conducting research on this, guess it just isn't a hot topic selling well enough

...

Japan is cooling down. coldest day in century
Germany also record low's currently

"Peer Reviewed"

>Shitlibs hate him! Learn how Area Man destroyed their arguments with this one neat simple old trick.

Global Warming and Global Cooling has been happening since long before humans. Currently their is no hard evidence that anything is wrong.

Ice Caps haven't actually changed when you research it.

Temperatures are .3 degrees warmer now than they where 15 years ago, it used to be .4 but then it went down .1.


Is it bad to dump tons of carbon and chemicals into our air? Yes.

If we outlaw a lot of it here in the US will it stop it from happening? No, china will just make money of it and we will buy from them. Also energy costs will rise in the US.

Anyone who defends the Paris climate agreement has no fucking clue what it is.

>conflating climatology with meteorology
No one is this stupid.

...

...

I really wouldn't put much stock in comparing temps of every Sept 19th...
Tokyo's average temps have soared over the years, but you would expect that, with the urban heat effect.

Global warming/climate change is a total scam. It's not real.

>if i call them dumb i win!

climate scientists are lowering (correcting) their estimates every year.

It's extremely exaggerated. I'd say it's a slightly bigger issue then y2k(for anyone old enough to remember how they hyped that).

Temperatures are going down for 100 years now.

Global warming is Jewry conspiracy bullshit to brainwash Americans into shipping jobs overseas so we can pay for their resources.

>y2k
at 03:14:08 UTC on 19 January 2038 they will attack

Fuck the government putting these charges on us for the environment yet refuse to do anything about the obviously more serious problem of overpopulation

If you're american, fuck all the sustainability shit the world pushes onto you until something is done about overpopulation

no, urban heat would cause it to go up, but temps are going down.
Winter is coming.

>Currently their is

Uneducated swine

inconvenient stats

People can reasonably form opinions based on past experiences and observations. Many people choose not to believe in global warming as this has been a subject that's been going on for decades and the narrative changes very little; 'experts agree that the planet is getting hotter/cooler/both, it's man kind's fault, and the govt needs to do something to fix it.'

The average compassionate librul will also add that 'you're an anti-science moron' if you disagree, stating that 'the science has been updated' if you reference previous failures of the climate change prognostications. This is also part of the pattern, where as predictions made 5-10 years ago invariably end up being false, it provides them an easy out to keep from having to challenge their faith in their preferred experts. This has been going on at least since the 60's, and the pattern is generally: horrifying prediction > failure > updated science > horrifying prediction > etc.

Factor in that the average person is not a scientist by trade and could not develop an educated question concerning current science on the matter if their lives depended on it, and it reveals that the average discussion on climate change is generally between 2 people who aren't scientists, one who puts his faith in a growing list of life-long observations and experiences, and another who possesses a deep, unshakeable faith in an authority.

What the average lib fails to ask- or has no interest in knowing- is whether a person can reasonably form an opinion based on previous experiences and observations. If that answer is yes, then he will understand why people choose not to by climate change at face value. Many of us are content to let future science nullify present science, yet again.

youtube.com/watch?v=L_861us8D9M

>global warming suggests the earth is getting warmer and warmer
>snows in a desert
Checkmate Atheist

Trump says it's a hoax so it's a hoax. What do you not understand?

CO2 has an upper limit on the amount of heating it can cause. We hit that limit a decade ago.

Global warming is a scapegoat so you won't look at egregious environmental abuses we can actually fix.
It's real but you need to basically restructure the entire industrial system in order to do enough to stop it.

I like (You)

The only thing that can be done is to continue on the course we are and allow technology to develop and we may find solutions to problems in the future. Any form of intervention by governments or non profits will only cement our demise by slowing innovation. All proposed solutions always assume that nothing will change, and that will become a self fulfilling prophecy if we let it.

Global warming is a total hoax. Even if they show you an upward skewing trendline, simple statistical trend analysis will tell you that the difference can be completely explained within random variation. It's all bullshit.

I'm not fully behind global warming but we should be working to switching away from oil so those Saudi shits can rot.

scientists warn about global cooling
for decades

Fossil fuel is a shit form of energy anyway, now that technology is better

>microeconomics is the same as macroeconomics
retarded

Modeling the global temperature is impossible. Changing the temperature is also impossible.

There is no god, you're all animals, the Earth will die, the sun will die, the universe will die, get over it and move on.

Global Warming / Climate Change is real and in a large part man made. We are changing the chemical composition of our atmosphere every second of every day and we know without any doubt what various elements do in regards to heating and cooling. Only a dumb cuck believes climate change is a hoax.

This 2bh.
Climate science is a religion spouted by leftists who don't even understand the scripture.

>Fossil fuel is a shit form of energy
hands of my R6 and V8

Sources on ice caps please. Have liberal friend that uneducates themselves with Netflix documentaries.

Fake news he changes his pants everyday

without mass ethnic cleansings of the third world and strict reforestation of the land that 3rd worlders have destroyed and exploited for their own gain, it will not get any better.

That's a pretty localised sample, don'tcha think?

Overpopulation is a shit meme also

If I thought for one second that man could actually affect global warming then I would do everything I could to bring it in because...fuck the cold

> land that 3rd worlders have destroyed and exploited for their own gain

Even you yourself must be able to see the irony in this

No, it's just that people don't agree on what "too many people" means.
I always hear that meme saying "we could all live in texas alone, as long as it was at the population density of NYC".
Yeah, we could. But why would we want to?
I have no idea what the Earth's true carrying capacity is, and neither do you. So we're left with personal preference. How crowded do you like to be?

Methane is doing far more damage than CO2

No a person cannot reasonably form an opinion on climate change based on past / current experience. The problem is too big and too outside the realm of personal observation. Are flat Earth folks just making reasonable observations? I would suggest that it's completely unreasonable to not accept the limitations of ones observations. Yes the climate models have been changing over time but this is exactly how science is done. It is continually critiquing itself in light of new information. To then dismiss all of it as a hoax is brazenly irresponsible.

Hence the 'partly'. Methane's huge. So is deforestation and concrete jungles.

>On 10 December 2007, in his Nobel prize acceptance speech, Gore said:
>Last September 21, as the Northern Hemisphere tilted away from the sun, scientists reported with unprecedented distress that the North Polar ice cap is “falling off a cliff.” One study estimated that it could be completely gone during summer in less than 22 years. Another new study, to be presented by U.S. Navy researchers later this week, warns it could happen in as little as 7 years. (2017)

snopes.com/ice-caps-melt-gore-2014/

Why do so many people "know" global warming is real just because the TV tells them that's the """scientific concensus""". Unless you're a meteorologist, or you have a sound argument for global warming conceived from multiple sources, you don't "know" anything. It's embarrassing how people screeching about people who argue against the popular narrative are stupid, such as theists, antivaxers, anti global warmingers, flat earthers, anti moon landers, pro-Trumpers, etc., are actually just screeching "NOOO THAT GOES AGAINST THE NARRATIVE REEEEE." How any such people can exist on this board can only be a consequence of racists who mistakenly believe they're in good company.

Fucking idiot , doesent know how it works. A real american educated

I'm not entirely sure my having to pay a 3% energy tax to David deRothchild is actually helping combat climate change even if it is happening?

Nor can I easily forget the hacked emails from UEA in which the lead global scientists flat out consipred to conceal results to keep the cheques rolling in.

Between the two all I can say is that the powers that be are taking this vast threat to humanity very lazily indeed, almost as if there wasn't a problem at all, and it's all a taxpayer shakedown.

Show us the goddamn empirical evidence. It's not a big ask.

It depends on our consumption, waste and utilization of resources.

You have a point. I wouldn't want to live like the bangkokians in their shitty small high rises, but we also have a ton of lowly populated land.

Global warming is irrelevant in the discussion until viable alternatives are made that won't result in the deaths of millions due to inconsistent power supply or shitty materials. The alternatives also cannot cost the GDP of a small country to implement. Once these two boxes are checked, no one will argue against green alternatives. And no, fucking solar power meme is not a viable alternative. Combined with the fact "green" (((environmentalists))) refuse to accept realities such as the fact that wind cannot function as anything but a supplement to power. Additionally, people would start taking them seriously if they stopped blocking every viable alternative such as nuclear and hydro to promote fucking solar panels and random bullshit

Yeah, sauce on the ice caps, please?Because you said so?
How so? To me it seems obvious that with our finited resources, we should stick to smaller population sizes, at least until science advances far enough to solve the resource problem. 7bln faggots consume a lot over time.
Probably the best response here. Have a (You).

This.

Says the third world illerate stfu faggot and suck my red,white, and blue dick.

Market forces will handle it user. In 50 years the west will have automated and electric taxis that are recharged by robotic charging bays.

People in cities will not own their own vehicles and automated electric semis will deliver their products.

Exactly. I hate all these limosine liberals telling us to give them more money will magically solve the problem. Damn the jewish mind trickery.

My take on the issue:

Climate Change might be real.
Should we let big government fix it? Definetly no.
You as an individual make better choices for your conscious, ie. less or better consumption.
And pollution is a more drastic matter. Change yourself and influence your community/family/friends. That's how change happens, not with government intervention/regulations etc.
So Trump did good.

>More extreme weather every year
>guys it's COLDER how can global WARMING be right xD
jesus

>a person cannot reasonably form an opinion on climate change based on past / current experience
That's not the argument. Keep up.

They're basing it on the experts/authority of the science, not the science itself. Most people are not scientists by trade, but they can tell when the authorities on the matter are wrong over, over, and over again.

They can also tell when pushers of the movement exploit tax payers in the form of govt scams, like solindra. They can also determine that liberal efforts to deplatform opposing views is a sign of weakness in the position, and dishonesty on the subject.

>flat earth comparison
False equivalency. The average person can reasonably rely on the information supplied on this; there are even streaming videos from nasa satellites as they orbit the globe. Regardless, 'round earthers' haven't been making shit predictions about the roundness of the globe since the 60's that have ended up being false.

>that's how science is done... it's currently critiquing itself
So, people make observations and change their opinions based on new events as they unfold? Sounds familiar.

What you fail to understand is that most people are not scientists and are incapable of critiquing these hypotheses. Even the people who 'argue the science' are just repeating what they've been told by the experts. Fundamentally, they have a faith in the experts- they have no fucking clue if they've been lied to, and don't have the understanding of the subject to truly question them. Hence what I mentioned before, most people could not form an educated question on the science if their fucking lives depended on it.

Ultimately the only thing people have is faith in the experts on the science, and they've done plenty to lose that faith. That is, fundamentally, the discussion. Can the scientists be trusted?

George!

I've heard that prediction numerous times. It was to happen by 2007, then 2012, then 2014.

Now the pop apocalypse is that earth will look like mars by the time my hypothetical grandchildren are alive. I'm content to watch that one fade away, too.

You can be sure whoever unironically likes this meme voted for trump.

>Nor can I easily forget the hacked emails from UEA in which the lead global scientists flat out consipred to conceal results to keep the cheques rolling in.

Oh yeah, I remember that. Those hacked emails from the University of East Anglia iirc.

Those ranged from them wishing that reality would just conform to their theories to justify the predictions to discussing ways to destroy people's careers who kept poking holes in their theories.

But I guess it's 'unscientific' to allow information like this to influence your beliefs. Might as well be.

climate change is real

climate change doomsday is fake