retardeds on Sup Forums will defend this

> retardeds on Sup Forums will defend this

Other urls found in this thread:

blog.dilbert.com/post/145160928141/climate-change-and-trump
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientists_opposing_the_mainstream_scientific_assessment_of_global_warming
nasa.gov/feature/goddard/nasa-study-mass-gains-of-antarctic-ice-sheet-greater-than-losses
nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/
forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2015/05/19/updated-nasa-data-polar-ice-not-receding-after-all/#439f940f32da
youtube.com/watch?v=_ZHnjDJpkVc&ab_channel=Lindybeige
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

Can't both the Chinese and Trump be right?

It was a resonable guess on his part.

Global Warming/Climate Change is a substitute religion for lefty athiests.

As long as belief is a part of our genetic makeup, we will need religion.

And, leftists are exceptional for turning their causes into religion. Look no further than vegans for proof.

I don't believe in man-made climate change

he did kind of oversimplify it, but overall thats way closer than obama's version.

Hernie Sandals literally said that climate change caused terrorism.

You should research Agenda 21. It's horrible and tyrannical

Science is only a left vs right thing in the US though.

>global warming

literal meme

Pacing and leading. Look it up.

well, he's not wrong

>science is a leftist communist SJW plot to destroy good abrahamic values christian men!!!!

Sometimes I doubt Sup Forums is ironic, but I really hope it is.

Climate change is a natural phenomenon, holding your farts won't stop climate change. Enjoy this relatively hot age while it lasts, till the next glacial age.

>global warming
>relevant

pick one

or don't your response is also irrelevant

>daily mail

Science has been tied in with politics for years already, anyone who has ever done any sort of research knows it. If you go for anything that threatens something politically, you'll be stopped right away.

blog.dilbert.com/post/145160928141/climate-change-and-trump

They're not exceptional for turning their causes into a religion.
They're exceptional in their ability to claim they're not doing that, and actually believe their own lies.

i have one with al gore crying too if you want

>research
Define research.

>the chinese invented co2's ability to trap heat

You are retarded. There is no way around it.

>al gore

>we need to tax the shit out of American consumers because China, India, and Brazil won't stop polluting

Judging by his idiotic posts, I imagine his definition of research and science is reading "Recent study shows..." on online blogs.

What he should be saying is "bad science is bad", rather than "science is bad".
And bad science is used by all political movements, and all ideologies.
Like Sup Forums reposing the measuring of skull volume to determine intelligence.

>Like Sup Forums reposing the measuring of skull volume to determine intelligence.

When has this ever happened, you massive autist?

it's climate change now you cuck all that ice is going to kill us

Don't care.

Or using this "argument". Today being colder than yesterday doesn't disprove a trend in temperature.
This shit is measured over decades or centuries even. Oooooh last winter was warmer than this one, thus no global warming.

Now the idea that we must fight global warming, or that its unnatural, I don't subscribe to these. But we are due for an ice age some time soon.
I recommend we build more factories, and more coal plants, not less, so we can power our way though legit research and resources to prepare for the inevitable climate change, not trying to delay it by a few generations by intentionally handicapping our industry.

>the father of the modern global warming awareness movement is now blacklisted bc his Armageddon clock (which was backed by 90% of climate change scientists at the time) turned out to be bs

any credibility you people had was lost long ago

Multiple times per day, every day.
And when I mention how stupid it is, I get called a kike, a SJW, an idiot who doesn't understand scientific facts and so on.

>al gore
>being relevant to climate science ever
It's not my fault Americans only respond to "celebrities". Anthropogenic climate change was a legitimate field of scientific enquiry decades before the ego-fest of An Inconvenient Truth.

and those same scientists backed him internationally

1/10 you tried

Maybe that's because you are a goddamn idiot that sees what he wants to see and not what is actually there. Been here for years, haven't seen this bullshit you're spewing once.

If you're referring to the differing levels of average IQ distribution among races and you think that isn't based on facts, you really are a fucking moron.

This isn't reddit, if you have anything to say about my post, reply to it directly. There's no need to act like a faggot if you're posting anonymously.

And no, I mean actual research. In science, quality only goes as far as interest is concerned, you need support, money, and people who actually want that to happen. It's not as simple as "I showed convincing evidence, so they have to believe me!", you'll be questioned and guessed by a thousand other researchers whose interest might not meet with yours, and the only way to convince them is by providing actual undeniable proof, which usually takes years to acquire.

If you want to see it clearly, check out the researches done on passive smoking, they're a perfect case. All are badly done, they only exceed at not being applicable to reality.

WTF

The problem with haing this notion of "pure" good science is that it ignores the reality of human behavior and bias.

No science is done conclusively without heavy funding, heavy funding always comes from a source that has its own goals and agendas. If the universe is a puzzle scientists are paid to look at specific pieces and make conclusions that more often than not serve an ideological goal, whether the fact is objectively true or not is only a smokescreen to defend any number of socio-political agendas because inevitably the same researches or at the very least the commenting (((academia))) will use it to dogwhistle towards the narrative of their choice.

Going "muh pure search of truth" reeks of leftist religiosity on par with "if the will of God was TRULY being passed on to society everything would be better!"

t. atheist Christian

>ur dumb, also here is a strawman

Nice argument.

What "same scientists"? What are you even talking about? Science doesn't happen on TV, you know. Have you ever even read a research paper?

What, do you believe in santa too? Sup Forums is really retarded today

The CONCEPT OF climate change. In context, the meaning is that while western industrial countries take it upon themselves to limit CO2 emissions, thus limiting their own productivity and competetiveness on the market through regulations and such, countries like China just don't give a fuck about the climate and this gives them an extra edge when competing, since they don't have to spend money and time worrying about their factories spewing harmful emissions. The Chinese and other such countries would be all too happy to support green movements in the West, however - to put it in Sup Forums terms, the Chinese are climate jews.
A probably poorly worded tweet(140 char. limit) from 2012. Trump himself doesn't really give a fuck about the concept of climate change and global warming and all the major enviromental protection agencies and so on, but he has expressed normal concern for having clean air and water.

>i have no idea how research funding actually works
OK?

Yeah, fucking chinese with their evil enviromentalists who keep murrica down

Hell, just by NOT doing some studies over others the gap in data can lead people to their own conclusion, a shining example being how any research into racial disparity between humans especially as it pertains to behavior and IQs being completely quashed and ridiculed before its even attempted. The limited amount of studies that actually managed to squeak by is full of excuses and caveats because the political nature cannot be divorced from the implications of the data. Like that study that showed African niggers are too stupid to pass the mirror test as old as 6 years. The researcher himself gives some bullshit justification of "cultural differences" without a shred of data to support that.

>while western industrial countries take it upon themselves to limit CO2 emissions
They haven't.
>China doesn't care about the climate
It does.

really makes you chink

Your argument is basically "bad science exists, thus all science is bad".
You should reconsider your stance.

Prove it isn't a plot from the Chinese to drastically restrict the west's ability to manufacture goods due to "climate" restrictions/taxes

Explain to me the funding sources of 80% of scientific research and how its completely unbiased, as well as the journals and peer-review vanguards and how they themselves are equally unbiased and apolitical.

>racial disparity between humans especially as it pertains to behavior and IQs
Every. Single. Time.

Wow, commies reaping the benefits of commie policy being pushed on non-commie nations... Who could have seen it coming?

False dichotomy. It doesn't need to be completely unbiased and purely apolitical for it to not be "leftist religiosity".
You are simply taking two things you for some reason dislike, and are assuming they must form an evil coalition against you and things you like.

China has been outproducing the West for decades without any "climate restrictions" on the West. Production isn't the problem of the Chinese economy, consumption is.

>Retardeds

Nice word you just made up you giant fucking retard

>pretend something that's incredibly rare if it has even occurred is common experience
>fail to link the numerous archives to support your statements
>get butt-flustered when someone calls you out on your shit
>continue to live as an uneducated village retard no matter how far you may ever get in the shithole that you call a country
Sad.

the 80% of climate change scientists who backed his thesis on global warming

did you just completely forget about that inconvenient truth?

this is pretty much been the standard for climate change scientists since the 50s

>make bold claim including a time frame
>time passes, nothing happens
>"w-well NEXT time its going to be REALLY bad"

another one just predicted the world will be uninhabitable in 30 years

glad to know ill still be alive to see them btfo yet again

>Explain my strawman
No.

If you really wanted to learn something, there are sources online that explain things like grants and peer review. You know how to Google, right?

That's amusing coming from someone who just complained about a strawman. You and the britfuck have been ignoring and distorting anything said to fit your argumentation, try arguing sometime instead of bending every word.

now who's strawmaning? I neveer once said "all science is bad" I myself believe the scientific process to be the greatest advent of western society and want it to continue.

What I don't agree with is blind faith in the clergymen of science and swallowing whatever narrative just because they had guys in white lab coats doing PROOFS. Might as well be the pope going into a dark room and talking to God.

Now, completely transparent studies were we have access to the same data and can investigate into the methods used ect I am all for, but I don't think we should ever believe authority without criticism just because they hide behind the curtain of "truth".

Basically we should be skeptical of ALL claims no matter the source. Doubly so if there is a political implication tied to the research.

Stop getting your science from popular media. Like I said, science doesn't happen on TV.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientists_opposing_the_mainstream_scientific_assessment_of_global_warming

Stop being so dramatic.

Climate Change has become a religion to the left, and it's as silly as young earth creationists are to the right.

I'm old. I remember when the same type of people were screeching that industrial society would plunge the world into a new ice age by the year 2000.

The sky is always falling.

I find it far more interesting that people who reject traditional deism still find a way to have religion.

Belief is an evolutionary advantage. And as long as we have belief, we will have religion, in one form or another.

We got a meltdown-in-denial over here.

>Doubly so if there is a political implication tied to the research.
The "political implications" of science are almost entirely exclusive to the US, see e.g. climate change, evolution etc.

If your sources are of such unquestionable quality, then why don't you provide them?

>Shills will think we care

>Basically we should be skeptical of ALL claims no matter the source. Doubly so if there is a political implication tied to the research.

Yet you aren't skeptical of ALL claims. When you see a claim that supports your views, you are quick to accept it.
If you were equally skeptical of all claims, and only looked at facts, you would realize that we are due for an ice age, the climate will change, and developed countries should prepare for it.
There is nothing political about this statement, either. The political part is deciding how to prepare. Thats where interests may lie, and conflicts may arise.

Also bad science gets weeded out over time. The reason you have so many examples of it to throw around is because it gets debunked all the time.
If bad science was treated as fact by the scientific community, and we kept using it as if it were fact, you wouldn't know its bad in the first place.

>Every. Single. Time.

Wow you really blew my argument right out of the water.

>lol what a racist clearly I now don't have to engage in an actual argument because your poven yourself to be a BAD GUY

This is proof of what I am talking about. Because you assume the lack of accepted studies of race are bogus/non-existent you dismiss out of hand the fact that its a scientific question worthy of the same "truth" that you advocate for when it suits YOUR political narrative.

>If your sources are of such unquestionable quality
Never said they were.
>then why don't you provide them?
The IPCC does a great job of listing references to and summarizing scientific research into the climate. I would suggest starting with the latest report.

>the same scientists writing the current research papers you're jacking off to are the ones who were agreeing with gore

wut?

that doesn't even make sense, they were the SAME people who are now saying X will lead to environmental disaster

Just because they have made new studies based on 5 more years of "research" doesn't mean their bold claims have any more validity than their previous ones

ever hear about the boy who cried wolf?

The boy who cried wolf was right the third time. There were in fact wolves.

Here you go. The Ice is actually growing.
nasa.gov/feature/goddard/nasa-study-mass-gains-of-antarctic-ice-sheet-greater-than-losses

nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/

forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2015/05/19/updated-nasa-data-polar-ice-not-receding-after-all/#439f940f32da

I honestly have no idea what you're talking about, why are you so obsessed with Gore?

>Americans in charge of knowing the difference between the Arctic and the Antarctic

climate changed a degree better levvy a tax on basic element of life and kill off a portion of population for Gaia

>tfw you remember the general scientific consensus in 2000 was that if we didn't stop polluting the ice caps would be gone by 2014 and the entire east coast would be under water

this is the gift that keeps giving

these people are ALWAYS wrong

>Never said they were

You implied so, and now you want to back off on it. Either you provide your reliable, non-televised sources, or you're shitposting.

This is simple, it's a mere confirmation of what you've been saying.

>the general scientific consensus

Among weekday morning news talk shows guests? Maybe. Among actual scientists? No.

>tfw you remember the general scientific consensus in 2000 was that if we didn't stop polluting the ice caps would be gone by 2014 and the entire east coast would be under water
It wasn't. Again, stop watching TV, start reading research.

>When you see a claim that supports your views, you are quick to accept it.
Strawman much? You don't know me or what science I accept.

Your language reeks of how you lump "us" and "them" to mean the people who won't drink your koolade and blindly accept your narrative of reality. Just like the dogmatic theists you are.

>bad science gets weeded out over time
Thats a bold assertion, ideally yes but I can easily see how shit could get perpetually pushed under the rug and bad science propped up for reason X Y Z with nothing being done about it. I mean nutritional science STILL claims that dietary fat and calories and exercise is the "scientific" solution for why people are fat despite the nation getting FATTER with this very data since the 80s.

What strawman? Either refute the point about average IQ being different for different races, or admit to yourself that you are, indeed, a fucking SJW idiot kike.

yeah i agree, climate change could become relevant in a couple hundred more years of aggressive pollution

in the mean time the american economy and growing muslim extremism seem like a larger issue

so excuse me for not giving a fuck

>Your language reeks of how you lump "us" and "them" to mean the people who won't drink your koolade and blindly accept your narrative of reality. Just like the dogmatic theists you are.
Sutely you see the irony here?

You would think what happens to one effects the other, since the earth is a sphere. I am no scientist but "global warming" seems like a scam. Heck 20-30 years ago they said we would be frozen under a new ice age.

Whoops, cropping killed my image there. Anyway, its from University of California, Berkeley.

>belief is a part of our genetic makeup, we will need a religion

Ah yes, who can forget those genes: Jesus gene, Mohammad gene, Aristotle gene, Locke gene. Most people only think about the genes that determine our aesthetic and biological makeup, but they forget about the genes that make up our mentality.
Even worse, some people think our beliefs and culture come from the beliefs and culture instilled in us by our surroundings, and not our genes. How stupid.

What I'm saying is that China virtually has a monopoly in worldwide manufacturing, in which the US/EU companies outsource in order to keep labor costs down while maintaining/raising prices on goods. So what if in order to maintain that monopoly and prevent anyone from starting up manufacturing in the west they concocted "global warming" to make the govt pass carbon taxes in order to make it impossible to start up business here without having to pay more taxes

>I mean nutritional science STILL claims that dietary fat and calories and exercise is the "scientific" solution for why people are fat despite the nation getting FATTER with this very data since the 80s.

Your nation is getting fatter because you don't use this information.
This system can e used to explain why you are fat, since you eat much and don't exercise much.
You being lazy doesn't disprove it.

>Berkeley
topkek

>Just accept the science, goy. Who cares if the results has already been bought and paid for. Its still SCIENCE after all and science is goooooooood.

I want reddit to an hero when Bernie drops out. I am sick of this infestation.

1 poster, Drive by shitpost confirmed. This should be a bannable offense in Sup Forums. Atleast be active in your own shit bro.

>You would think what happens to one effects the other, since the earth is a sphere.
One's a huge continent, the other isn't.
>I am no scientist but "global warming" seems like a scam.
As you said, you're not a scientist. Though that should not matter that much, you can still examine the research itself for yourself.
> Heck 20-30 years ago they said we would be frozen under a new ice age. No. Again, no science on TV.

They don't need global warming, they can just treat the workers like shit and they won't do anything about it.

climate change is real
but he is right that china benefits most from it.
And he is even more right about the fact that our economy is forced under restrictions to make the industry more environment friendly while the chinese smoke it away.
In that perspective yes global warming is manufactured towards giving china an advantage

>the six leading climate change experts in the world backed gores claim that "we have 10 years to save the planet" in 2006

either you trust these people or you don't

pick one faggots

You aren't arguing the article, or its sources. You are just crying JEWWW JEWWWW at me.
For someone who is meant to be skeptical about everything, you sure aren't skeptical about the "all science is jew kikery" meme, and are quick to adopt it without analyzing the content.

For one they don't need to do that, as evidenced by their unchallenged monopoly spanning decadea now , and secondly if that really was their plan, they're doing a shit job at it. Where are the carbon taxes? Even the carbon credits in the EU are worthless due to overabundance.

>the six leading climate change experts

According to whom? Self described, or tv show host described as such?
I don't remember the scientific community electing any such six leading experts.

>Your nation is getting fatter because you don't use this information.

Source please? I myself don't have the data onhand but I am positive Americans on average work out more now than any other time in history. We also have been on a low-calorie low-fat diet trend since the 1980s that consumption data will also show.

Although I don't actually have the burdon of proof, YOU made the baseless assumption that

"HUR WELL YOU GUYS AREN'T FOLLOWING THE SCIENCE-GOD SO YOU ARE FAT"

Fucking show your work, faggot. Saying that we are still fat therefor thats why your dogma isn't working is a tautology.

who cares? if trump doesnt win we will have more to worry about than fucking polar bears you cuck

youtube.com/watch?v=_ZHnjDJpkVc&ab_channel=Lindybeige