Global Warming Hoax

sooo... it's snowing (again) in Tokyo and it hasn't for like five years or so. this year it snowed quite a lot compared to the past few years. what concrete evidence is there that global warming isn't just a hoax? and what evidence do we have that we are indeed played?

My thought is that global warming is more of a natural thingy and the effect man has on it is minimal if any. Too bad it's impossible to ask about this topic without being labeled an anti science heathen, which is ironic because models are "real science"

they were basing all the simulations off the fact that
1. The world would keep growing as it it
2. The carbon emissions remain the same
3. The ozone would disappear
None of that happened, but they still use models from the 80's because they feel guilty for being white

Ayy.

that's exactly my point. there is nothing that suggests humans play any major part in this but (((science))) claims to know it all to the point where you can't even question it properly

temperature measurements across the globe point to a change. whether that change is from mankind is the question. we have had recent and substantial climate changes. those also did not end the world.

for example, during the roman occupation of britain, they were able to have vineyards as far north as york. by the end of the western roman empire, the climate had changed such that britain cant really make great wine anymore. (this also may have caused some of the migrations/invasions).

so, saying that it has to stay the same is retarded. saying that we cannot change the climate is retarded. we sure as fuck can with a concentrated effort. the main question is the cost.

what is more important, a short term improvement to pollution or more cash for your company. the lowered amount of pollution can be offset by regulations or just changes in technology that make the older more pollution heavy technology and industry obsolete.

going forward, our problem will be growing industries in china, india, and africa. these guys only care about making quick cash, so they will say fuck everything and pollute as much as possible.

here is where i think that climate change has its best use. we mandate clean energy and industry to hamstring the industries of these developing countries.

>1. The world would keep growing as it it
>2. The carbon emissions remain the same
>3. The ozone would disappear
what did suggests such things in the 80s anyway? was it just because it was an otherwise careless decade?

you don't understand that global warming is what they decided to call it for the media and when their projections hadn't been advanced enough to understand that there would be extreme temperatures all year round in all climate zones. There was a theory around 2006ish that it'd cause another ice age because of the flows of extremely cold water and air emanating from the arctic after melting but also in general the idea that there'd be more snow and hail, freak thunderstorms, hurricanes, flooding, has existed for a while nip

inb4 someone actually thinks this obese-oid weeb english teacher is an actual japanese person

fuck off leaf. contribute or get your faggot ass out of the thread

When it gets cold its Climate Change when it gets Hot its Global Warming. This is one of those things that can't be falsified so it disqualifies itself as "Science". Climate change is PSEUDO SCIENCE.

Meanwhile in australia (it's summer here)

This is all bad news. Colder world is a less food producing world. How will I get my Cheetoes supplies with all this snowy nonsense?

kill off the niggers and enslaving what is left to make Africa the breadbasket of the world?

Youtube 'Adapt2030'. He destroys the AGW theory. We are entering a multidecade cold period starting this year/ Winter, then a brief return to normal before potentially a multi hundred year cooling period.

>which is ironic because models are "real science"
Climate change isn't predicted because of some models.
It's because of the well established physical fact that CO2 absorbs different wavelengths differently. From there on it's just conservation of energy.
And climate change isn't just a wacky prediction, we can actually measure that the earth gets warmer and despite looking a lot we haven't found another reason for that to happen.

Theories are just that. We have no real proof that humans can do a thing to alter the global temperature. We do have the climate of TRUTH. global warming is TRUE climate change is TRUE. To question this scientifically is LIES.

Theories need to be constantly tested until they are proven into law. We are not allowed to question climate change theory.

>pic related

>When it gets cold its Climate Change when it gets Hot its Global Warming.
Bullshit. "Global Warming" is something the media made up. I don't thinik anyone science uses that term.

>there is nothing that suggests humans play any major part in this
Yes, there is. CO2 doesn't transmit infrared radiation very well, so when the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere increases it will keep more heat trapped.
And we know perfectly well how much fossil carbon stuff we are burning every year and we also know how much CO2 increases in the atmosphere. That's perfectly simple to calculate, you can do it yourself in one minute.

There's no global Warming. It's all about creating 'a one world government'.

>"Global Warming" is something the media made up. I don't thinik anyone science uses that term
It's always incredibly easy to tell when someone is posting who has no clue what he's talking about. This term is constantly used in the scientific literature, it's just that who haven't payed attention

Climate change is real, except it's natural and happens regardless of what we do. There is literally nothing to be concerned about; they're just weaponizing it as a means to control the masses. Sometimes we go through periods of "global warming," and other times we go through periods of "global cooling."

they call it climate change now
assume for a moment that when one place gets hotter it makes other places colder
it is just as Johann Joachim Becher predicted

>five years of drought
>tfw heat wave one month ago
>100 year + old record high temperatures exceeded

You have a huge land mass to few hundred miles to the west of Japan a cold land mass and then the jet stream is blowing that cold in your direction

So your entire argument is based on Co2 levels however the Co2
Levels where 10,000% higher thousands of years ago before humans even existed. So show me the scientific researched facts that the Co2 levels (that are microscopically low compared to the past) are A: being raised strictly by mandkind B:Current Co2 levels are worse than the past billions years of earth having much higher Co2 levels C:the current Co2 levels/trends are not the earths naturual climate changing like it has for billions of years. D: Humans are solely responsible for the climate that has been changing for billions of years besides being on earth for .00001% of the earths life. If you can’t provide irrafutable scientific data to prove your case against every thing I mentioned, THEN YOU HAVE ZERO FUCKING CASE AND SCIENCE IS NOT ON YOUR SIDE. Politics,fake news, brainwashing, and retardation are on your side.

I only saw a bit of snow in my city. Perhaps there is an imbalance resulting in many places becoming hotter while a few experience what you're describing at times. Concrete evidence may be, are you willing to spend countless hours making up the mumbo jumbo in scientific papers?

A: the d-13C signature of atmospheric CO2 points towards a source with a highly negative isotopic composition, which is consistent with the signature of fossil fuels (and inconsistent with, say, volcanic outgassing). Furthermore, the current speed of carbon injection exceeds all past analogues from the geologic record that can be checked by an entire order of magnitude.

B: Take a specific example. If 5000 Pg of carbon will be burned (the full fossil fuel inventory is likely more than twice that), atmospheric CO2 concentration would peak at 2000ppm or higher. There is an emerging view in paleoclimatology that CO2 concentrations this high are extremely rare in the post-Early Triassic world. If ever, these concentrations were only reached two times, once during the Triassic-Jurassic boundary (200 million years ago) and once during the Paleocene-Eocene boundary (55 million years ago). Both of these events were associated with major biotic turnover, extinction, large-scale reorganization of animal assemblages, ocean acidification, anoxia etc. etc. Given that current carbon injection is preceding much faster than those events - and add all the other ways in which the human enterprise is eroding the capabilites of the planet to support the current level of biodiversity - and you have a very ominous trajectory.

>it's just that who haven't payed attention
It's true, I'm not a climate scientist. I'm a physicist so I've got a grasp of the principles of how it works.

> Co2 Levels where 10,000% higher thousands of years ago before humans even existed
Well, it's more like 1000% but other than that you're correct.

>So show me the scientific researched facts that the Co2 levels are being raised strictly by mandkind
Just google how much barrels of oil and coal are produced each year, then calculate how much CO2 these produce when they are burned and compare it to the rise of CO2 in the atmosphere. You'll get into the right ballpark number. A lot of the CO2 also goes into the oceans. A small part into additional plant growth iirc.

>B:Current Co2 levels are worse than the past billions years of earth having much higher Co2 levels
Yes, that's correct. CO2 was way higher a millions of yars ago. More than 10 times higher. Noone denies that.
>pic related

>C:the current Co2 levels/trends are not the earths naturual climate changing like it has for billions of years.
Also correct. The earth's climate changed a lot over its lifetime. I never denied that.

>D: Humans are solely responsible for the climate that has been changing for billions of years besides being on earth for .00001% of the earths life.
Because we can't find another mechanism other than the additional CO2 in our atmosphere that gives us an explanation for the rapid change in temperature. It fits the general predictions made a 50 years ago quite well:
Northern Hemisphere warms quicker than the southern hemisphere. Different layers of it are changing temperature at different rates and so on.


The climate changes in the past were induced due to the earth's direction of spin wobbling and the landmass and the oceans got more energy. This led to an outgassing of the oceans, and therefore the CO2 levels changed, reinforcing the warming due to the greenhouse effect.

forgot pic

>It fits the general predictions made a 50 years ago quite well
if I remember correctly in the late 70s and 80s it was common consensus that by the time now the complete north pol would be gone. saying the predictions were "kinda right" you basically make a fool of yourself as it is not really significant at all

>in the late 70s and 80s it was common consensus that by the time now the complete north pol would be gone
No, it wasn't.

Citation?

how did Jacques Cousteau not predict the jellyfish menace ?
nitrate run off feeding Algal bloom has de-oxygenated the water and emboldened this surge of the sea

You see, user. The fact that it isn't what we expected is proof that global warming is real. If we expected it to rain and instead we just get a cloudy day, that is proof that the planet has been warming. If it snowed in Tokyo today and it hadn't snowed in Tokyo two years ago, then that is also proof, because the climate isn't the way we predicted it to be therefore it has changed.