Hey, Sup Forums

Hey, Sup Forums
I'm an actual scientist working climate-change-related topics.
I have a pretty unbiased point of view on the subject.

Ask me anything

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning–Kruger_effect
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

What does cum taste like, faggit?

I feel like there is a direct correlation between womens right to vote and climate change. How do we dig deeper into this?

We get rid of all of them and see if shit cools down

What is the real scientific view on climate change being brought about by the industrial age? From my point of view, we had smoking chimneys for 200 years now, but it seems the climate only got warmer in the last 30 years. And we cant be worse to the atmosphere than the hundreds of active volcanos, right? So this is just left green alarmists talking?

Why is it appropriate to eliminate data points which suggest pre-industrial climatic events (eg: the medieval warming period, the little ice age)?

Before ~1940 because the mass of GHG emitted over the whole globe wasn't that high. You can easily get some data on that.

Plus, the main thing here is that, while it takes little time to release, let's say, a few tons of co2 in the atmosphere, it takes literally decades for the same amount of co2 to be absorbed by the land and ocean. So it's a cumulative process that's been gaining momentum since 200 ago.

It's not. These things are well taken into account. Read about milankovitch cycles and you'll that it's a very separate phenomenon than the current global warming.

Could more celestial events like rotation of the earth, wind currents or bernoulli's principle with the expansion or contraction of the atmosphere have anything to do with climate change or are they researched at all?

celestial events are basically what the milankovitch cycles are for (with the exception that we can't consider unpredictable things like supernovas, coronal mass ejections and shit like)

And wind (and ocean) currents and atmospheric (and again, oceanic) contraction and expansion are the basis of our climate models. So, again, they're well taken into account.

Geoengineering when? Seems like the only way to avoid worst case scenarios is to take the climate by it's balls and fuck it in it's bucci untill it starts behaving like a good little bitch.

Are you a scientist?

I feel as though the largest skeptics of this stuff are people who do not give enough credit to the scientific community. Those have all been used as the "well have you thought about _______ or _______" to which (me not being a scientist) will say something along the lines of how could people who devote their lives to the study of something have not thought of some bullshit you just pulled out your ass? Like what do you think these people do? That isn't even counting all the studies colleges are doing and all the studients coming up with unique ideas constantly

>Sup Forums
>actual scientist
>implying anyone here has an IQ outside of the single digits

If climate change is real and it will everyone of us in the end, why the fuck does no one do against it?

I mean sure, money rules everything, but who cares about money when there won't be any life on this earth?

Human caused climate change is a pseudoscience. There is no hard evidence that the fossil fuels we use cause climate change. Proof me wrong

Bullshit. Just 50 years ago you all warned us of the dangers of global cooling and how we were about to go into an ice age. You can't take 200 years of data (most of which is unreliable due to poor technology) out of 4.5 BILLION years of climate and make an accurate conclusion. People like Al Gore told us the ice caps would be gone by now. They have actually increased in total mass. It's all a money making scare tactic.

the only way to accomplish this is for us gay men to convert all the straight men to our lifestyle

>ugh science is hard

trump says it isnt real so it is real

retart

For any given alteration, in the climate in this case, one could expect a variety of impacts -- some beneficial, some detrimental. Why do we only hear discussion of negative consequences of AGW?

wow, a fellow intellectual

we're such a rare breed this days.

I see your point. More broadly, this is why: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning–Kruger_effect

Prove yourself right and go get famous, bait-fucker

We have 200 years or directly collected data. But we also have about 1 billion years or indirectly collected data. And about 3 billion years of data if you consider moderate-uncertainty proxies). So get informed and actually look at the data before you say hillbilly comments like that, pig-fucker

Sauce on your webm?

who that bitch tho

What's your opinion on the revealed falsification of national climate data?

is math related to science?

You're very right. We in the scientific community also discuss the positive impacts. It's just that when people talk about climate change for the broad audience they tend to leave out the good things, which is a position I don't agree with.

An example: a lot of tropical climate crops will be much easier to grow in about 10+ years.

But the thing is that the negative impacts are certainly larger in number and often more important. For example, there are several studies that suggest that in a few decades bees might become extinct. And that kind fucks it all up, including the previous benefit about the crops.

Of course, those are just two examples.

What's going on at Antarctica? Why the extreme secrecy.

Also, glad you like asian chicks

>This

The last one I've heard about was fake, meaning that in the end there was no falsification. But give me the source for yours and I'll comment on it

Don't have sauce, but I certainly have similar

I have a shitload more webms like that, but they're all >2MB

antarctica and ice sheets are the part I know the least about, but in short there are a bunch parts of the ice that are about to break off. If that happen it'll rapidly accelerate their melting (because of larger surface area, bla bla bla). And that's something our models don't model very well, so people aren't very sure of what's gonna happen.