Is Sup Forums full of climate change deniers?

Is Sup Forums full of climate change deniers?

Other urls found in this thread:

theregister.co.uk/2016/07/03/mri_software_bugs_could_upend_years_of_research/
scientificamerican.com/article/scientists-engineer-bacteria-to-make-fuel-from-co2/
theguardian.com/environment/2006/feb/02/energy.comment.
twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/294894996279148544
xkcd.com/1321/
strawpoll.me/10626982
web.archive.org/web/20080213042858/http://www.skepticalscience.com/page.php?p=3
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

Climate change deniers are gay niggers.

Don't worry, sweetheart.
There are plenty of True Believers here preaching the gospel of Climate Change™.

Ehh, as long as green, renewable energe its compatible with National Socialism, i'm all for it cuz

there's too much money in it for it to be clear desu. both sides have a lot to lose/gain.

Do you FUCKING LOVE SCIENCE BRUH????

theregister.co.uk/2016/07/03/mri_software_bugs_could_upend_years_of_research/

>completely reliable and trustworthy people over there senpai

>just fallow the others don't think too hard I am a doctor after all

Its not full of deniers
its full of people who believe its happening, but that its natural, and that we have no idea what effect we actually have, as can be demonstrated by the estimates these scientists make, and have made, thoughout the years

Personally I am a conservationist and I will happily push for "green" things
but it has to be the right things

>climate change deniers
Define it please. The meaning has changed alot.

if you don't want to preserve our god given nature you are simply not white

simple as that

this is true

we do need to protect, conserve, and promote the natural world in all its beauty.

I jsut don't want to give the government more tax money for shit that doesn't fucking work
(ie fucking wind turbines)

I think it's happening and it's manmade, but it won't be catastrophic. And the focus on climate change take time and money away from real environmental issues.

It's mostly believers in fairy Godfather myths that deny science and pollution because it doesn't support their twisted narrative.

These things are not possible in a technologically advanced society.

>warm year
>"LOOK, IT'S PROOF OF CLIMATE CHANGE!"
>cold year
>"LOOK, IT'S PROOF OF CLIMATE CHANGE!"
>average year
>"LOOK, IT'S PROOF OF CLIMATE CHANGE!"

When every outcome is proof of a theory then you have a tautology, not a theory.

It's just like the patriarchy.

>government funded """science"""
>another excuse to raise taxes
>more government regulations on businesses
>if you are against this you are a horrible person

>what if it's an hoax created solely to push new taxes and restrictions on companies and citizens?

FTFY

>make everyone poorer
>better world

communism, folks

>destroying the western way of life so China can continue to burn every vaguely coalish rock they pull out of the ground is "a better world"

I don't get why conservatives are so angry about the thought of climate change and environmentalism. It makes them so angry hearing people who support environmental stewardship.

Why are they so angry? The very word "conservative" implies conservation of resources and the planet. many conservatives of the past like Teddy Roosevelt believed in environmental conservation. And the Bible has many passages on environmental care.

It is real, but none of the actions we are taking do anything about the problem, which leads me to question the motives behind them.

Do yourself a favor. Figure out how much the latest Paris treaty will reduce global warming. When you find out it is scientifically close to zero, ask yourself what the point of the treaty is.

1. Global warming is real.
2. All climate change laws, treaties, and regulations the US has done or agreed to will change global temperature rise by approximately 0.
3. The USA could completely stop producing all greenhouse gases--impossible to actually do--and global temperature would still rise almost the same amount.

1-3 are true. Why are we signing these treaties? From a climate change perspective they do nothing. From a business perspective they turn American competitiveness (especially in manufacturing).

Why are we doing it?

Give me a good answer.

I love the study where they say 99% of all scientist agree, yet they only asked 70 something scientist about the issues.

Silly cartoon.
>we could spend money on X
>therefore we must spend money on X

like half of those points in the picture only make sense if youre already assuming manmade climate change is real.
like why are "green jobs" important if we cant affect the climate anyway

Well one of those is giving up meat.

Our impact is exaggerated. The media perspective is the result of studies by researchers funded by globalists

You expect me to believe the theoretical models you've constructed from 50-100 years of accurate data, taking millions of variables into account can predict our future climate using hypothetical trends based on extrapolation thousands of years into the past? No thanks, nobody who has a science education beyond high school level should buy that.

It's a meme. Energy-wise Solar is a meme in 80% of the planet, wind is a meme in 90%. Neither will ever be a replacement for fossil or nuclear, not even when capacitor technology catches up.

Suffice it to say I am skeptical.

this

We could solve climate change by supporting biological engineering projects.

scientificamerican.com/article/scientists-engineer-bacteria-to-make-fuel-from-co2/

>By breathing in carbon dioxide and hydrogen, an engineered version of the bacterium Ralstonia eutropha produced branched alcohols, compounds that can be blended with gasoline or serve as an energy source on their own. This could help repurpose carbon emissions in a way that can generate money.

Globalists want more regulations because it gives them more power, but we could simply give the National Science Foundation 50 billion dollars or so to solve this problem by figuring out how to make carbon emission conversion profitable.

If there is one shill boilerplate segment that justifies toasting babies, it is this fake bafflement that follows a refusal to do any research or listen to anything that would relieve the confusion.

theguardian.com/environment/2006/feb/02/energy.comment.

better than being a race denier

or one of those idiot holocaust believers

It's real but the lefties have shitty solutions

...

Good goy listen to the elite gobble up their junk science propaganda, raising taxes will surely enable them to control nature.....

The expansion of international oversight is certainly one angle. Another is income redistribution from rich countries to poor countries. It is cheaper to do things dirty.

They actually asked 10,000. About 5,000 responded. It was a 2 question survey:
1) Is the climate changing?
2) Is many partly responsible?

Of the 5,000 who responded, it was about 50-50. So, they picked out the 77 who identified as climate scientists - and 74 agreed to those 2 weak questions. So, out of 10,000 questionnaires, 74 people said that the climate is changing, and man is partly responsible. Only in lib land is 74 out of 5,000 who responded called a 97% consensus.

Climate change?

I doubt that exists. Floods, storms, droughts, all that shit existed long before the industrial revolution.

But there is no fucking reason not to build energy saving electronics and solar panels onto the roof of your house, if you can make the investment.

Reducing plastic would be nice too, don't need to buy everything wrapped twice into plastic.
And fucking seperate the trash. Is it that difficult?

Maybe advance the research of cold fusion instead of giving money to dindus and peaceful terrorist. Now that would be great.

We're mad because you are trying to rob us. Try to take what I have earned, and I'll put a bullet through your fucking forehead.

If anyone actually cared about climate science we'd be switching over to nuclear.

Muon catalyzed fusion is theoretical at best

>Is Sup Forums full of climate change deniers?
I don't deny climate change but the "solutions" are often purely theoretical and incredibly expensive. Especially for developing countries like mine.

I've never seen a scientific article claiming a single year's weather as proof of climate change. Hell even the past year, which has been abnormally warm, is attributed to el nino among the scientific community. In contrast it's usually the deniers that cry out about it being fake whenever it gets cold out.

twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/294894996279148544
xkcd.com/1321/

sure, but if you throw more money at it it certainly won't hurt development
considering the benefits, I think it's a worthy cause even if there's only a small chance that it'll ever work
a ton of innovations come about as accidents even though the real goal was something completely unrelated
matches, for example

The whole point of resisting the leftist agenda on this issue is not that we don't want a better, greener future. It's that we don't want to ruin the economy in the process, especially if we do it for nothing. Many leftist policies are harmful for the economy. If they can find a way to make the world greener without fucking the economy then go for it. Right now, many of the leftists are degenerate idealists who think they should be able to fuck up anything they want in pursuit of their ideals.

Everything is at some point theoretical until hard facts can proof that it's possible or not.

Landing on the moon was just theoretical. Took a bunch of maniacs and tons of money to proove it actually works.

Internet was just theoretical.
Took some nerds and tons of money to proove that it actually works.

Cultural Marxism was just theoretical.
Look the fuck arround man see how much of a theory it is?

Billions of overbreeding Mexicans Chinese and Muslims are the problem.

Overpopulation causes global warming, war, famine and disease

This. God bless renewable energy. We don't want to give anymore money to Arabs

If we all believed and literally gave all of our money to politicians would that stop climate change?

No.

So fuck yourself in the ass with a sword and then blow your fucking brains out.

When will this meme die

>Is Sup Forums full of climate change deniers?

I conducted a poll a while back about what SJW causes/issues have the most merit out of a list and Climate Change won 64% of all posted issues.

strawpoll.me/10626982

The Left and the Global Establishment: We must fight global warming! It is going to be catastrophic! All nations must make sacrifices. The Paris treaty is an incredible accomplishment.
Reasonable skeptics: How much will the treaty reduce global warming? You have models that say it will change X-Y%, so now that we will enact these changes, what is X1-Y1%?
The Left and the Global Establishment: ... We are saving the world! The glaciers are melting we need to do something!
Reasonable skeptics: X1-Y1%?
The Left and the Global Establishment: YOUR A GLOBAL WARMING DENIER! CONSPIRACY THEORIST!
Reasonable skeptics: Oh, I just plugged the new numbers back it your model and the changed is basically 0. What is your real motive?
The Left and the Global Establishment: YOUR A GLOBAL WARMING DENIER! CONSPIRACY THEORIST! RACIST! YOU PROBABLY THINK THIS IS A JEWISH CONSPIRACY!

Because Sup Forums is full of christcucks who I assume believe god is regulating the climate so there's no way there could be anything wrong. This is also why conservachristcucks are so against it like in your image, because they have no concept of 'better future for future generations', because their end game is 'when you die you live in sky paradise anyway so who cares?'

So over 2 thirds of scientists aren't sure?

>I don't get why conservatives are so angry about the thought of climate change and environmentalism. It makes them so angry hearing people who support environmental stewardship.


That didn't used to be the case. Conservatives used to support environmentalism before it went off the deep end into pseudoscience Green socialism.

Why are liberals afraid of nuclear power?

>This many people caring about native americans.

/Thread

>God given nature
>God gives man ability to reason
Having a rational skeptical opinion on the matter is logical faggot

The unbearable heat right now should shut them up

Well, you have to admit of all the people that bitch and complain, they are the ones with a point.

I don't even see them bitching all that much.

97% believe humans cause global warming....
Google even knows better than a "scientist"
Methane produced by cattle is 25 times more damaging to our atmosphere than co2 is
It's funny
And they want to tax us for that. It's Monsanto
It always is and will be. The agriculture business in America and beyond is the root of all of this

If we want to preserve the worlds climates we need to first nuke China's climate into ash.

Otherwise it will never change.

They've got their multi billion dollar casino industry and fire water. I think they'll be fine.

Global warming with make everything burn.
The hell will come to earth because christians are not humble, caring and sharing like Jesus wanted.

Use this for your next thread, it was posted in your last one.

Climate change is happening, the degree to which humanity is impacting it is debatable.

With all that said, I would rather not toss the die and risk massive loss of agricultural land.

The problem is the west is not the ones causing the damage, poor and emerging nations are doing far more damaging things than western nations. Taxing carbon output or hobbling companies operating in the west is just going to drive them to south-east Asia and have no net impact on climate change.

Also, nuclear is the only solution. Solar/wind/tidal a shit. Fusion is too far away and may not ever be practical.

>agriculture
>not big energy, oil, and coal which literally serve no purpose, funds disinfo campaigns, has been financially connected to both sides, refused to fix our energy grid because it would cut into their temporary profits even though this leaves us incredibly vulnerable to terrorism, are responsible for stunting science, and are comprised mostly of kikes and kebabs.
Monsato is jewy as fuck but their jewy is mostly health problems, not the environment.

Climate changes whole all the time :^) Giving you're money to Al Gore won't make change. Stop the sun and galaxy to change climate!

>CO2 is gunna kills us all!!!
>Regulate Coal out of business
>Expand Oil and Natural Gas drilling by 10,000%
>Oil Exec hand rubbing intensifies
Ya'll be dumb niggers getting played by BP and Exxon. Also, lack of scientific proofs for man-made climate change. Decades of theoretical models constantly BTFO. But w/e.

>biggest defense contractor 15 years away from practical microfusion
Who needs regulation?
Oil and coal are doomed.

>Energy Independence
This is possibly a good, but no matter how expensive those sand niggers make oil, clean energy is still more expensive. Furthermore, the only problem with not being independent is having our foreign policy determined by oil availability. Otherwise, it's a protectionist sentiment to think we should get all our energy from our own country.

>Rainforests
Not really related to stopping global warming

>Sustainability
This is the most important, but as oil becomes more scarce, prices will naturally rise, which will result in a real incentive to look for more sustainable energy sources.

>Green Jobs
Stemming from an absurd desire of full-employment. The worth of a job to an economy is the surplus value created by the employee, the extra consumption they can do for their own benefit, and the extent to which they won't have to rely on welfare. This ignored the fact that jobs will be eliminated by less of a reliance on fossil fuels.

>Livable Cities
I think this might apply to smog, which is really only a problem for a small portion of cities. This is still probably an objective benefit, however.

>Renewables
Virtually every resource can be gathered more cheaply than it is to recycle. Also not strongly related to global warming

>Clean Water
Not really related to global warming

>Think of the children
Fuck off. Nothing to do with global warming

>etc. etc.
More bullshit, I guess.

What's wrong with nuclear power? Oh, I guess it's those three or four meltdown that have happened in the entire history of humanity and the vague threat of terrorism.

>Literally ~250 years of temperature tracking
>OMG WE ARE ALL GOING TO DIE THESE PAST 12 YEARS HAVE BEEN HOT

I am sure global warming exists, and that even we may be causing it. But to pretend we know what will happen to the environment and humanity as a whole is stupid and lacks any sort of evidence outside of our meager measurements in the 30k year history of humanity. We will be fine, and we should punish businesses and the working man for it, while at the same time sending shit to china and india where we have no control pollution-wise at all.

>they are the ones with a point.
They really fucking aren't. Consider how many lang changes in the rest of the world that have occurred in the time they lost their land and how other people have gotten over it and actually made something of themselves, not to mention how many immigrants have made new lives for themselves in other countries. They have no excuse whatsoever for being the biggest fucking losers in the country.

Because if do nothing, changes to our environment will be greater and will have greater negative effects on economy and society as whole. On both national level in individual countries and on global level.

Climate change is inherently connected to other really big environmental problem. Population growth in third world countries.

should stop punishing* oops

Because it doesn't proceed from a desire to help the environment, but a hatred of technology and capitalism.

you don't have to deny something that is always wrong. maybe tell them to do real science and come to real conclusions.

This. Of course the climate is changing but its literally nothing to worry about. The climate has been changing in a heart beat pattern for the entire history of the earth (pic related is just human history) Climatologists have been unable to predict trends because the climate is complicated as fuck. CO2 and man certainly make a contribution, but not alot. All the "solutions" are run by the government and energy special interests to centralize power.

I'd be fine with climate change if they were building nuclear reactors but wind turbines and solar panels are unsustainable. Their policies are also running coal out of business which puts alot of pressure on the economy to support the unemployed

Sorry, Australia, but Canadians have taken your crown of shitpost kings. Nice try, though.

From the skeptical science website, ran by the great Australian scientist John Cook:

>This site was created by John Cook. I'm not a climatologist or a scientist but a self employed cartoonist and web programmer by trade

web.archive.org/web/20080213042858/http://www.skepticalscience.com/page.php?p=3

>Internet was just theoretical.
>Took some nerds and tons of money to proove that it actually works.

Internet is in many ways accidental invention that came out as side effect of making subsystems of fighter aircraft communicate with each other. The fact that it started as publicly funded and not patented protocol allowed it spread without limitations that come with corporate controlled intellectual property.

It can be ruled out that current changes in climate aren't caused by sun.

Sure we could get a proper celestial climate change with gamma ray burst or something. It would be epic.