Who should I believe on climate change?
97-100% of scientists across the globe who dedicate their lives to studying our planet, armed with scores of empirical and experimental data...
Or some right wing conspiracy theorists backed only by handful of "studies" funded by Shell, BP and ExxonMobil?
Hmmm.
already past the point of no return. so what's the fucking point?
Actually its not too late to improve things for future generations by clearing up our act now.
But as always, right wingers behave like spoilt children who can only think in the short term and don't care about future children.
> HURR DURR I WANNA DRIVE MAH TRUCK, FUCK THE FUTURE GENERATIONS!
fucking pathetic, you are our downfall and will be looked back on as scum
Only way to combat climate change is if every climate change believer does not have kids.
Global warming is fake news.
you mean people on the globalist one world gov't promoting gravy train.
even if humans had absolutely 0 impact on the climate even if we dumped as much co2 into the atmosphere as we pleased, we're still causing pollution and we'd have a better quality of life if we reduced that
only cucks allow international jewish corporations to pollute their environment. protect your land white man
>everything that doesn't fit into my twisted worldview is fake news
Right wing logic, everyone
who the hell cares?
>debunked statistic
kys, kike
Nice digital blackface there you piece of shit
>armed with scores of empirical and experimental data...
Proofs?
>7 studies
>hehe your singular statistic is debunked
Not sure if trolling or just completely retarded
>scientists across the globe who dedicate their lives to studying climate change and would lose funding and be out of a job if there wasnt a issue Agree there is a issue
You dont say
Also no i dont follow studies done by oil companies either, i go by the fact 'Climate' scientist change their mind every few years
>We all agree then, there's something critical to investigate
Gonna need a few billion in the budget for my department to figure this thing out
>Me too!
Me too!
>Mine too!
It's absurd to suggest that humans aren't impacting the climate, this is what the 97% number represents.
You are a presenting a situation that doesn't exist.
Have my (you).
>scientists well paid to produce doom porn
Nope, rather not.
>right wingers only think in short term
This is now a thread about niggers.
This. Global warming is pushed by the Jew because it feels like bullshit (maybe because it is) and because it distracts from other pollution, which is so obviously bad that it is indefensible and best kept hidden.
Yeah goy gib me all your shit and I'll fight climate change for you.
>giving money to arab nations for oil
I don't understand why people who hate muslims and powerful wealthy elites like the Koch bros. don't want to see the source of their wealth become irrelevant. Self sufficiency is huge part of the nationalist and non-interventionist mentality, but solar power and clean energy aren't championed by the same people.
Make me think.
so we have been warming for more than 100 years, and the climate is just lovely. no worries.
ps, climatology is not a sicence.
we're not the ones putting our kids into debt slavery
Link to debunk please
Climate science is /ourscience/, lads. It's never going to be able to do anything to its religion's bogeymen without completely restructuring science, ecobomy, and then society. You know what that means!
Global warming will save us all
In the Future they will invent time travel and siphon the heat, pumping it back in time
This ends the Ice Age and allows Humans to thrive
So without global warming, Humans would be extinct, checkmate Libshits
How about all the omissions that are never brought up. Man-made climate change is a hoax.
this. The 97% comes from a single survey sent to people who were not even climate scientists, who were asked if humans had any effect on the global climate. Ask any climate scientist if humans are having a noticeable impact on the planets climate and they will tell you it is so insignificant that you cannot measure it with any tools we have today. The polar ice caps are also expanding at a fairly rapid rate if you look at pictures and charts, pic related.
I think a mixture of both sides is probably right.
Man made global warming is real, but overall insignificant.
I seriously doubt we can prevent actual global warming even if we switch to completely green energy sources.
We are currently in the end phase of an ice age and like it or not the ice caps on the north and south poles will melt eventually.
Still agree that we should get rid of oil dependence and expand our options.
Oil companies, particularly BP, are some of the biggest climate change shills there are. Also I don't believe it's getting any warmer, but if it were I would support it as it's the only viable means of genociding the blacks.
Tell that to the victims of hurricane harvey you soulless piece of shit
I hope you and your cardboard house get swallowed up by a tornado
The last time the atmosphere had the present composition was during the Pliocene, when sea level was 22 m higher than today. This implies that the CO2 concentration of 400ppm is the critical threshold for collapse of the marine-based Antarctic sectors, since even the complete disintegration of Greenland raises sea level only by little over 7 m.
The geologic record also shows that rapid large-magnitude perturbations of the carbon cycle are accompanied by extinction and floral and faunal turnover. When talking about extinction, most people think about asteroids, but this scenario is actually the odd-one-out. By far the biggest mass extinction (251 million years ago) is correctly characterized as an apocalyptic global warming event.
It seems like the question whether governments will continue to allow or even promote the development of fossil fuels may determine the fate of humanity.
do you really think our governments will sit by and let all those poor innocent blacks die if their countries become inhabitable? of course not, they'll flood our fucking countries even more than they already are
Wether or not you believe it, we have an answer to the problem but lot of people refuse to believe it.
Nuclear energy, if the US got on nuclear energy we would decrease our imissions to the point of negligible. What pisses me off though are people who think climate change is real but are against nuclear because of "much waste". They are the worst Humans. The claim that since backs climate change but ignore the science that shows nuclear is safe. Because of that I vote we burn.
even a tornado is better than a swarm of Ahmeds
How about this one?
So carbon dioxide isn't increasing the temperature based on their first developed by Arrenhius in the 19th century or corroborated by massive amounts of instrument data in the 20th.
This is your conclusion?
This year expedition to the Union glaciar was cancelled, 800 people went to do all sort of scientific research there, and a couple of important climate research was done there.
Now that climate change it's "a liberal research subject" all science must be stoped cause there's no enough resources for it.
This it's how we go back to the dark ages, because science challenged the market.
You're thinking of the survey of "scientists" who disagreed with the original 97% figure, misinformation disseminated by paid shills for corporations, the consensus of scientists was reaffirmed recently at something like 95%.
The people who sow doubt about this shit literally will tell you what they did and how, after the fact. Watch the film "Merchants of Doubt".
One can only hope. Something has to be done, they're breeding like rabbits.
Let me know when you convince 2 billion Asians that they can’t keep modernizing because in 100 years some people will lose their beach houses to erosion
I’m sure they’ll understand
>I AM SILLY!
>Ask any climate scientist
Nigga you dumb
When did I say any of that?
I said we can't stop climate change best we can do is slow it down, but the earth will eventually come out of this ice age.
So whats the solution and the answer is not carbon taxes.
So glad that the left actually believes your comic. Keep handing us those free electoral victories.
Your (((consensus))) narrative is falling quick shill. Many areas of the world are experiencing severe cold weather beating all time low records, over here in NY a couple of years ago we had one of our worst winters ever recorded.
I don't actually deny global warming. I simply don't think it's some global catastrophe that we must hand over control of our energy to international committees to overt.
Renewable energy will be cheaper than fossil fuels in 20-30 years time. Then we will move on to the next big approaching catastrophe.
how about an actual link to the (((source))) those pie charts are from. Can't debunk something we don't even know exists.
The time to lean back, wait until renewables become cheaper than fossil fuels and then start to expand just isn't there.
We haven't even seen the full effect the gases that are already in the atmosphere and when you take into account the sulphate aerosol forcing, the internationally agreed guardrail of 2°C above pre-industrial may in fact already be geophysically impossible. And that's concerning, even if you think that 2°C is a safe limit, for which there is a serious argument that it is already dangerous.
Letting the system evolve in response to a perturbation like that could very well knock major sectors of the Earth system into a new equilibrium, lead to unexpected and escalating responses of ice sheets and the oceanic/terrestrial biosphere.
Well you could start by realizing that “mankind” only produces a small fraction of those gases you claim are causing global warming and that completely eliminating man’s contribution would hardly bump the needle on climate.
Of course, that would require you to actually think.
>Trumps disambles EPA and other enviromental agencies.
>Climate change denyers flood Sup Forums like they usually do because they fear the greens more than the SJW.
Hey fuckhead, how was Germany's carbon footprint after switching to those touted wind and solar?
HIGHER. It's not the solution to your problem, and I have seen no other options presented by your side of the argument. Without offering a solution you are WASTING YOUR AND EVERYONE ELSE'S TIME. Meanwhile there are other explanations for a changing climate, and they don't point to a catastrophic failure you seem to be predicting, At worst people need to move a bit further in land and away from very low areas. (Which is expensive property for the most part anyway)
>Keep handing us those free electoral victories.
>Implying Sup Forums is a republican board
>Implying Republicans actually achieve anything, and are not just placeholders for the liberal oligarchy.
That's neither true nor particularly relevant.
Germany's carbon emissions have decreased very slightly since 2011 - but the emissions of my home country are completely immaterial to everything I wrote so far. Furthermore, I don't have to present any solutions in order to describe the scope of the problem, which I have attempted to do so far. I can give you my opinion on solutions but there is not too much of a point to that when talking to people who don't even make the first step of accepting that there is a problem to be solved in the first place.
How is he "voting against his interests"?
Does not wanting Jamal to be able to afford an Escalade on Welfare "voting against his interests"?
Here's a good one OP, plz respond
Your chart literally doesn't say anything about extinction events. Have a (you) for effort.
This is the well known 2009 Zimmerman & Doran article
onlinelibrary.wiley.com
A lot a climate-change deniers already tried their best to twist the statistical results to fit their agenda but nothing convincing so far.
Wanna try?
Let them be, they barely paid them enough to eat, you can't expect them to read.
Minimal wage for online shill¡¡¡
All those freighters used to get your precious chinese water bottles do more damage in one trip than anyone could do in a lifetime.
maybe because I can only post 1 image with the post?
the red horizontal bar is the calculated critical carbon flux threshold associated with mass extinctions (together with 2 sigmal uncertainty envelope) and different emissions scenarios.
>studies
I never got this argument.
Science isn't supposed to be settled on ad populum consensus. The real discoveries have come out from contrarians that set out to disprove the claims from the masses.
Actually, climate change is the only subject where the debate is still open and you aren't told to leave.
cleantechnica.com
cleanenergywire.org
>Hurr-Durr examples of countries using 'clean' energy and still not changing anything are irrelevant to my point.
Dude you're retarded.
>battery tech is still shit, absurdly low energy densities
>batteries are fucking expensive
>batteries are fucking heavy
As a engineer, I love EV's, but they're just not ready to be the car of the masses.
Things like the Chevy bolt give me hope though.
what part of anything I wrote hinges on that?
I'm saying that the phenomenon is far to broad in scope and scale for current ideas of renewable energy development, emissions trading schemes and offsets. So in what way do you think you're contradicting me by screaming about how little effect the Energiewende in Germany had?
maybe you should look up the list of "mysterious death" scientists that allowed the statistics to rise to 97%
Its almost like all the ones who didnt agree had an accident and died, weird! We've never seen that happen in politics before.
(((modern science)))
OP's image looks like green pac-man
This.
>Not too late to improve things.
It's not a question of whether it's "too late", or whether we "should". We ain't gonna, take that to the bank. The people are incapable of amassing the necessary political power necessary to fight the moneyed corporate interests who will successfully quash or de-fang any proposal to actually "clean up".
TimeToGiveUp.jpg
Glad-that-I-Didn't-Have-Kids.jpg
Also, this.
"your science must be faulty, it means less money for me!"
The money will win every time.