Today I was singled out and called names by some liberals for saying climate change is not real and that we are just near the end of the Ice Age - same ice melting that helped us during the Middle Ages....... Why do leftists want to push this climate change none sense so much? They claim in the news headlines that 97% of actively publishing climate scientists agree its real.... problem is when I go and research them I find they are funded by leftist institutions. What is the Sup Forums opinion on this?
Today I was singled out and called names by some liberals for saying climate change is not real and that we are just...
Anthony Brown
Other urls found in this thread:
scientificamerican.com
wattsupwiththat.com
dailycaller.com
climatechangedispatch.com
twitter.com
Leo Miller
I didn't understand anything that you just wrote
Angel King
Typical. Did they do anything else than calling you names or laugh? It's proof that they don't have good arguments
On the hole climate change thing I don't know. Neither does most of these liberals screaming on top of their lungs.
Nathan Bennett
They would recite news headlines and when I wanted to have in-depth discussions about it they called me and idiot and would say generic comments like "How are we even having this conversation in 2017?"
Adrian Powell
>current year meme
Fuck sake these people
Lincoln Smith
Don't Worry - NASA says that a regional nuclear war could reverse global warming. Trump will solve all the worlds problems ahead of schedule and under budget by Nuking North Korea - intern halting global warming for a couple of years.
That volcano in Europe was enough for them to not have a summer. The cool thing about liberals is that most of them are lazy and only want to hear themselves talk
Henry Walker
the end of an ice age directly implies that climate change is real, retard.
Jaxson Sanders
There is no real consensus on this here, but we agree that larping with hemp bags and e-scooters is fucking stupid
Jose Gomez
I've had this happen back in graduate school. The fear of social appropriation set in when the very next thought in my head was "Man, these idiots are Physics Phd candidates..."
Matthew Nguyen
The 97% figure is skewed by the way. More accurate situation is
2012 poll of American Meteorological Society members
>Of the 1,862 members who responded (a quarter of the organization), 59 percent stated that human activity was the primary cause of global warming, and 11 percent attributed the phenomenon to human activity and natural causes in about equal measure, while just under a quarter (23 percent) said enough is not yet known to make any determination. Seventy-six percent said that warming over the next century would be “very” or “somewhat” harmful, but of those, only 22 percent thought that “all” or a “large” amount of the harm could be prevented “through mitigation and adaptation measures.”
The 97% figure includes the opinion of scientists out of the field - not climate researches. So it's sort of circular reasoning to cite the validity of a common belief by asking about the common belief.
Camden Evans
The 97% meme people are doing psychologial tricks on the people.
>In a laboratory experiment, scientists interviewed 90 people in Perth, Australia, and asked them to estimate the scientific consensus on global warming. The subjects said that only 70 percent of scientists agreed on climate change. The scientists then informed the subjects that the consensus was closer to 97 percent.
The funny thing is, the common folk was very spot on about the numbers, but now they feel like they are wrong and they have to accept what the proponents of this study call "climate action".
>source
>scientificamerican.com
Gabriel Hernandez
More light on the skewed 97% consensus meme:
wattsupwiththat.com
as we can see, not only did the vast majority of those polled never return the survey, but almost none of them were climate scientists.
Grayson Ross
Climate change is real you fucking autist. The point of contention is what's causing it.
Brayden Garcia
>A paper by five leading climatologists published in the journal Science and Education found only 41 out of the 11,944 published climate studies examined in Cook’s study explicitly stated mankind has caused most of the warming since 1950 — meaning the actual consensus is 0.3 percent.
dailycaller.com
Kevin Mitchell
Research Wikileaks and East Anglia - funded by us to prove Al Gore - (you know the "scientist" who won a Nobel Prize in Science) was "right" about global warming. It proves it was a scam by 4 institutions of other "scientists" to lie to start the whole carbon credit scheme. That will give you ammunition to keep em quiet for awhile.
Aaron Carter
And so is the Trump Russia collusion - the mainstream media says both are true, and the MSM never lies. HAHAHAHA Dumb fuck - I want you to know everyday I go spray aerosal and fluoracarbons in the air - hope that pisses you off.
Cameron Cook
climatechangedispatch.com
Summary: Cook et al. (2013) attempted to categorize 11,944 abstracts of papers (not entire papers) to their level of endorsement of AGW and found 7930 (66%) held no position on AGW. While only 65 papers (0.5%) explicitly endorsed and quantified AGW as +50% (Humans are the primary cause). Their methodology was so fatally flawed that they falsely classified skeptic papers as endorsing AGW, apparently believing to know more about the papers than their authors. Cook et al.’s author self-ratings simply confirmed the worthlessness of their methodology, as they were not representative of the sample since only 4% of the authors (1189 of 29,083) rated their own papers and of these 63% disagreed with their abstract ratings.
Brayden Robinson
To suggest that the earth doesn't naturally warm and cool over time is retarded. I'm saying, it might be happening naturally, or humans might be causing it, either way climate change does happen. Stop being autistic kid, seriously.
Luke Collins
>First, they searched the abstracts of 11,944 articles in peer-reviewed journals from the years 1991 to 2011 which included the terms ‘global climate change’ or ‘global warming’.
>Second, they sorted the abstracts into four piles: no position on anthropogenic global warming, endorsement, rejection and uncertainty. The biggest pile (66.4 per cent) was no position. Of the smaller piles which did express an opinion, 97.1 per cent ‘endorsed the consensus position that humans are causing global warming’.
>This already sounds a bit odd. This is not what the public understands by a consensus. Mr and Mrs Average are entitled to imagine that 97.1 per cent agreement means that 97.1 per cent of scientists voted on a ballot proposal. But no one ever voted. Instead, volunteers recruited from the Skeptical Science website winnowed the articles and interpreted the often arcane language of scientific abstracts. Since the slogan of this website is ‘rebutting global warming misinformation’, the volunteers’ interpretations were bound to be skewed in favour of the ‘consensus’.
>Aware of this problem, Cook et al sought the opinions of the authors themselves. This could be construed as a kind of ballot measure. There were 29,083 authors listed on the 11,944 papers. Of these, only 8,547 were sent an email asking for their opinion. Of these, only 1,189 responded. Using this method, Cook and his team found that an even higher proportion of them agreed that climate change was real and man-caused – 97.2 per cent. But notice that only four per cent of the authors ‘voted’. A ballot measure with a four per cent turnout is not what Mr and Mrs Average mean by a ‘consensus’.
Ryan Kelly
>Why do leftists want to push this climate change none sense so much?
Two reasons come to mind pretty quickly:
1. More shekels funnelled into leftist-infested shit like "green" energy and climate research (never mind the bullshit wealth redistribution where we're supposed to fund the shitskins to clean up their act)
2. Ever notice how they're demanding that power be handed over to them because they supposedly know better and we're too stupid to look after ourselves? It's a power grab too - best leave the important decisions to a leftist because you're stupid and will destroy the planet
probably more to it but at the core it looks to be a money and power grab at the top with all the dumb cunts sucked in by the hysteria and feels
the climate is changing but that doesn't mean we're responsible for it or that the planet is doomed
Grayson Sanders
The climate is constantly changing, I think everyone can pretty much agree on that but the argument generally comes from what the primary contributor to the change is. Thank fuck for the ice in scotland melting 10,000 years ago or we would still be joined to france.
Jack Williams
I've had people tell me I'm no better than a creationist after saying I believe in global warming but I don't think it's as alarming as people make it out to be. They said that 2017 was the worst year for hurricanes EVER and that it was proof of how bad things are getting, I said that the last 10 years were some of the quietest hurricane seasons on record and they got so upset and started yelling at me.
Cameron Morgan
That 97% number is BS. I don't remember exactly how, but they pulled some shady shit in a small survey to get that astronomical number.
Look it up
Jeremiah Cooper
>yfw the EU are trying to start a new ice age so the calais jungle can simply walk into blighty
Owen Howard
>ancap
>retarded
Here's your (You).
Ryan Gray
they are religious and believe they are saving the planet for the future or some gay shit. were all going to die from niggers and chinks clogging up the oceans with their trash but they keep with the blame whitey narrative