Ok Sup Forums so let's talk climate change

Ok Sup Forums so let's talk climate change.

I don't understand why there's such a big backash on Greta Thunberg, even though her parents are rich, her speeches are scripted. Somebody has to have a popular public face on climate change topic in regard of the younger population. At least that's Greta's idea - to portray hopelesness of the yough facing the uncertain future. She server her purpose, she became a meme, she triggered countless discussions on this very important topic.

It's already almost middle of the january, and there was only 3 or 4 little bit colder days, all other days it was raining or you can almost go out with a light jacket. Back when I was a kid, we used to build snow forts, snow fights, now it just looks like there is no winter anymore. Even some fucking flowers bloomed in some places.

So what? I m not afraid to die anymore. I don't see any future for myself or humanity, because humanity will do jack shit about it. Why? Because there are mometary profits that have to be taken right now in somebody's pocket, fuck the consequences.

Im 27, married and I have at least 10 more years window to produce offspring, and all I can think of is what kind of insane person would allow yet another human life to come to futureless shit world like ours is becoming right now.

What keeps me sane, is to live in the present ant not thinking about future at all. I recycle almost all my household waste, I drive very ecological car, I don't overfeast on meat, I ride a bicycle everywhere I can, I don't fly. Yet, this does absolutely nothing to global state of things of grand capitalism, only in the mind of my own, at least I do something rather than nothing.

Sorry for my language, not native english speaker.

So what does Sup Forums think about climate change?

Attached: 1576138359997.jpg (2000x1333, 413K)

Other urls found in this thread:

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29459727
pnas.org/content/107/48/20762.short
ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007Sci...315..612B/abstract
ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014GBioC..28.1044L/abstract
sci-hub.se/https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S000925410300247X?via=ihub
youtu.be/Fb6nlViDcWw
climatism.blog/2019/12/05/team-greta-admits-climate-change-has-nothing-to-do-with-the-environment/
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

Fuck off. The same was said in 2000 about 2012. What makes you any different this time huh?

Uhm. That there's no signs of normal winter, it's sort of like late autumn that lasts for 4months. Back in 2000 things were different.

>huh?

Attached: 1468062040330.jpg (184x214, 7K)

popular opinion of climate change is important, but only secondarily. regardless of how many people quit using straws, or quit eating meat, or bike to work, the incredible majority of carbon emissions come from non-individual sources.
if you stand to make a lot of fucking money through petroleum, you're going to make sure that the guys making the rules are going to treat you favorably.
since, ultimately, the lawmakers are decided by the public, nothing is going to change until "the public" gives enough of a shit to implement those changes.

i'm not worried about us armageddoning ourselves or anything, but the problem is that climate change is a positive feedback loop. as an example, methane deposits in siberia are trapped in permafrost. if those get released by raising temperatures, that's going to be a much more expensive problem to fix than if it doesn't happen. it's very hard to predict what things could happen which accelerate the problem. it's not going to just fizzle itself out, however. it's going to take a lot of fucking money, and many decades of work to even slow it down.

In your life there has been no perceptible climate change. As you get older you’ll realise every year is different. The climate, if it’s changing, is doing it very slowly.

>I don't understand why there's such a big backash on Greta Thunberg
She's a literal kid who thinks she knows something the rest of the world doesn't.
Nobody likes a smartass, especially one who hasn't even graduated from school.

i don't really understand this sentiment. if a meteor was hurtling toward the earth, and there's a 50/50 chance of it hitting us, you're not going to just say "eh fuck it it's nature let it take its course". we put a fuckin man on the moon, erased diseases, eradicated species. we are not beholden to the roll of the dice.

>climate change is a positive feedback loop
>that's going to be a much more expensive problem to fix
>it's going to take a lot of fucking money, and many decades of work to even slow it down.

Well exactly, and you know what, the problem is going to be adressed only after it happens, and it's gonna be too late then.

>In your life there has been no perceptible climate change.

You mean, raining through all winter without snow and consecutive intense heat waves, during the last 15years (in my location) is not percetible enough to say it's changed?

The few reasons I dislike her are mainly
She is allied to the media and swedish politicians.
The Greta thing(when it was just the school strike) ramped up and died down according to increases in voilence and problems in swedish society.
The bait and switch of needing to save the world to rather rid the world of Western society and implement social programs.
When they lost sight on target I lost interest

Yeh, she's an undergraduate smartass kid. But she has triggered the so much needed discussions.

January
"winter"

Attached: photo_2020-01-08_02-25-49.jpg (591x1280, 73K)

Thats what I am talking about my fellow human Sup Forumsean

>The bait and switch of needing to save the world to rather rid the world of Western society and implement social programs.

How is going greener related to eradicating western society?

>the problem is going to be adressed only after it happens, and it's gonna be too late then.
my man this is a thing that will go on for centuries. it's not like we're going to have a mad max society in 50 years time. even if we continue what we are doing for CENTURIES, it's not going to reach some tipping point where the world turns into an inferno.

what will happen, though, is that quality of life for the majority of humans will suck more and more. access to luxuries and disposable goods will decrease. disease, war, severe weather, famine, insect population-- all increase.

for the middle class dude in america, you'll be fine, sincerely, for the rest of your current life. hundreds of years down the road though, people are going to have an incredible mess to clean up, and humanity on the whole will have to suffer for the choices we have made previously, are making today, and will make tomorrow.

>i mean if it's global warming then you know how come it's so cold!
ice is frozen at 31.5 degrees, and it's water at 32.5.
a 10 degree increase in temperature is a doubling of reaction rate, in chemistry. food spoils twice as fast, when kept 10 degrees hotter. one degree of difference is a big fucking deal.

>But she has triggered the so much needed discussions
No she hasn't. The discussion has been going on for decades. She just used it to get famous.

>middle class dude in america
Do I look like some kind of ameritard? Nah, Baltic states master race! Decent living standards, no floods, hurricanes, no shitskins, no forced divercity SJW bullshit.

>even if we continue what we are doing for CENTURIES
Based on what evidence? Because it looks like with current situation the change is going to take way quicker than centuries.

They are simply using global warming as an instrument to implement their ideas and ideal.
AOC does this too.
Here's a screenshot of GND

Attached: Screenshot_20200101-211600.jpg (1080x2340, 851K)

Don't you think it's all related?
The same people pushing muh global warming are the progenitors of all cultural marxism

>her speeches are scripted
are you retarded?

>The same people pushing muh global warming are the progenitors of all cultural marxism
I think it's paranoia thats talking. Shifting the attention from a real problem to a tinfoil conspiracy, just to deny yourself incoming doom.

Yes, I have clinical retardadtion, how did you know?

>the change
"the change"
what are you imagining? wheres the end point? I'm saying that human extinction level warming would take an incredibly long time. humans are very resilient. there will be widespread famine, war, etc., but "last man on earth" sort of scenario is far off, climate wise.

all that being said though, do not misunderstand what I am saying. anthropogenic climate change is a real thing, and even if it's not, we should still do everything within our power to slow the heating of the earth, because it's going to be really fucking expensive in both money and lives if we do not. "ounce of prevention" style.

Attached: scenariotempgraph_0.jpg (1111x952, 360K)

the only thing that annoyes me is when i was in her age, i wasnt even allowed to have my own opininion on topics like climate change or politics because
>a 15/16 year old is to young to understand it
and should not talk back to a grown ub even if thy are only a couple years older
best case scenario was being ignored worst case was being expelled from school

this brat gets praised like a messiah and blames a generation Millennials for problems that we have the same concernes about but we where (and are) ignored by boomer

why are teens allowed to raise there voice and have an opinions?
why did i get an F and later expelled in 2004 for telling my teacher fucking climate change is real and politicians do what the money wants not what the people want?

Attached: TrumpGreta.jpg (718x411, 91K)

We should be focusing on a geoengineering process called "Enhanced Weathering".

It mimics Earths natural processes to upregulate every natural system on earth that is capable of sequestering carbon - with the added side effect of producing more and more nutritious food, healthy coral reefs, richer and more vibrant ecosystems, all while employing lots of people. A lot of big countries are positioned to take advantage of this potential huge trend, the nordic countries in particular, but any country that quarries or can quarry Basalt(the rock).

Big research funding is being allocated at University of Sheffield in the UK and University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign in the US and other research institutions around the world.

It involves the crushing of mineral-rich rock (Basalt) and its application to farmland and other ecosystems. It replicates the natural process(tectonic, volcanic) that replenish natural mineral sources which serve as the foundation of every ecosystem. It's a fertilizer that doesn't cause massive algae blooms and dead zones, and instead promotes life forms with calcium carbonate back bones(coral, clams, oysters, diatoms) by providing ample ca/mg/si to complement higher atmospheric co2.

... pt1/2

>a 15/16 year old is to young to understand it
i'm not disagreeing with you, most kids are idiots, but it doesn't take mario fuckin einstein to comprehend a graph of temperature vs time.
if it was a kid campaigning to say "people need to exercise more and eat less garbage" or "smoking is a problem and we need to fix it", them being a kid doesn't mean that the core argument is somehow wrong, or that they are incapable of grasping the idea.

>here will be widespread famine, war, etc.,
Thats what we don't want to happen but it will.

>going to be really fucking expensive
Yeah, for us, not for old farts who are on the top 1%, so who cares.

>Basalt
>10% iron by mass
>doesn't cause massive algae blooms

Attached: cring.gif (500x500, 1.33M)

>We should be focusing on a geoengineering process called "Enhanced Weathering".

So is the seaweed farming carbon capture. Or scatering sulphur in the atmosphere. Or closed carbon cycle. Nothing is being done or developed in large scales and probably will never be. Because muh profits.

>Yeah, for us,
if you live in a place with access to the internet, you're going to be fine for the rest of your life. i promise you that. regardless, you're going to be fine. folks in africa, south america, east asia-- those guys are going to die off in enormous numbers. you're not going to be inconvenienced in any significant way.

Good

Let us all COOK

Fucking more C02 I will drive around every fucking day knowing how it's torturing every living being...

Fuck it all..

>africa, south america, east asia
What will stop them from migrating to places like my country, in large groups?

>no signs
Bitch, it's 25°F outside rn.
Also, you can always find an anomalous weather condition wherever you look in the world.
Also also, remember when they tried to convince us polar bears couldn't swim?

>I don't remember the weather being this warm in winter during the last 20 years
I can remember back 45 years. It has been this warm during the winter many times. I had just as many green Christmases during the 70s and 80s as I am having now in the new millennium.

you're going to have to do a lot of driving, my man. probably going to have to outsource the driving work to a lot of people if you want to make a dent.

how is your country going to support them? i don't know where you live, but many places don't have literal open borders. they have maximums for how many people can come in annually.

I don't get it?

Do people have the Mandela effect about this or something?

Attached: 16543e0f2f65f5bd450665d96bdbe8c1~2.jpg (236x216, 20K)

propably

god i wish it was cold

Attached: Global warming.png (651x453, 18K)

if you have evidence that the weathering of Basalt (not just some iron application alone) promotes the growth of algae preferentially, then please serve it up.

The stats disagree with your perfect memory.

whats that in °C?
it sounds hot but i dont know the murrican temperature system

Post the stats for my childhood home, please.

>I can remember back 45 years.
>as many green Christmases
Well that's a tiny bit of hope. Yet, to my perspective it seems like there was 1or 2GOOD winters during the last 10year period, others were like just "meh".

And what about the weather people constantly talking about "hottest year of the observed history"? Did that also constantly happened over a 45 year span?

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29459727


Interestingly - and also tangentially related - are the observations made by a researcher Dr. Irakli Loladze(yes that's his name) who researches the connection between increased atmospheric carbon and the general dilution of plant nutritional attributes. Whether it's vitamins and minerals in staple human crops, or protein in pollen in wild flowering plants that pollinators depend upon, increased atmospheric co2 means lower nutrition. Increasing the basic mineral substrate upon which plants depend would make sense as a strategy to buffer against the potential loss of bio-functionality that will come as an ecosystem essentially becomes forcefully "weathered out" by the driving force of high atmospheric c02, which is a reactant in the chemical equation that drives most life.. increase reactants the equation drives towards equilibrium, which means growth and end-products. But if you don't have all the necessary reactants, the reaction won't proceed as you expect.. We need to provide the reactants.
gdi spam filter

ok boomer

> only my childhood home matters for global warming
sure boomer

>boomer
GenX, faggot.

Damn OP I completely agree. I don't want to sound like a nihilist, but I honestly think we as a species weren't meant to live this way. We are a parasite on the planet. I think the native Americans had it right, but nobody wants to live that way when we could have cars, video games, water parks, modern medicine, etc. I think we're going to do irreversible damage to the planet that will ultimately kill us off. I also think the rich know this, and they're using the media to keep us fighting each other (Republicans vs Democrats) so we're too busy hating each other to pay attention to what really going on. I think climate change is going to get worse at an explosive rate, and we're looking to colonize Mars like a parasite looking to leave its current victim because its almost been sucked dry. Going green is nice and all, but the real solution isn't just trying to be more Eco friendly; it's giving up or current lifestyles that we've come to know and love and taking some steps back. Children being born today are going to have some really shitty lives. Water is rising, food and drinking water will become scarce, land will be fought over between Nations because of the rising water reclaiming land, wars will be fought over food, the rich will retreat to their safe havens with their small militia to protect them, and we will ultimately kill ourselves and a large portion of the wildlife on this planet. The Earth will survive, we will not.

More porn to stimulate the discussion.

Attached: Oiled-Shaved-Michelle-Starr-with-Thick-Labia-2.jpg (2000x1333, 338K)

ok genx

You fucking retard.

>Post stats for the bottom of my yard or I no believe

i really like those pants if i had i girlfriend i would want her to wear them

This.

Although I did grow up in south africa and it never fucking snowed.
So it might not be relevant...

>And what about the weather people constantly talking about "hottest year of the observed history"?
Weather people do try to hype their bullshit reports with garbage stats like "most days in March with over 90% humidity in the last 100 years". Verify their claims against hard data and see whether or not they're true.

My claim was about what I remembered. I can't provide proof of my memories.
You, on the other hand, made claims regarding hard data. Post the data or fuck off.

Climate change has been a thing for litterally millenia now. I don't get why we're trying to stop the course of history. The "green house effect" has always been a thing. Living beings produce shit naturally. The fucking ice age is proof enough that the climate changes naturally.

I don't see what's so biggie about asking your gf to wear a pair of nice tights, it's not like a scat fetish or something.. ;D

Attached: Oiled-Shaved-Michelle-Starr-with-Thick-Labia-3.jpg (2000x1333, 355K)

is it less rainy durring rain season?

> if i had i girlfriend
Oh. Missed that part at first. Well, good luck user.

as much as i would agree, i can't dismiss that the most recent rise began exactly as the world began to use refined gasoline in 1850.

the biggie is i dont have a fucking gf

T

kek

>Silver said. "But these species are incredibly responsive to iron, often becoming dominant in algal blooms that result from iron fertilization. Any iron input might cause a bloom of the cells that make the toxin."
>Oceanic blooms of this algae probably occur due to iron deposited by volcanic eruptions, dust storms and other airborne sources, Silver said.

>"It is a natural phenomenon and likely has been for millions of years," Silver said. "But those are sporadic occurrences. To do iron enrichment on a large scale could be dangerous, because, if it causes blooms of Pseudo-nitschia, the toxin might get into the food chain, as it does in the coastal zone."

pnas.org/content/107/48/20762.short
ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007Sci...315..612B/abstract
ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014GBioC..28.1044L/abstract

iron is iron is iron is iron. iron oxide in basalt is still metabolized as pure iron oxide particles would be. it's the same element.

The paper you mentioned is sort of weak in their conclusion, because they sampled water from places with high basalt content, rather than dumping basalt into oceanic water or whatever. Their conclusions are implied, rather than derived from evidence. They don't even mention the iron content, which is a big fucking deal.

sci-hub.se/https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S000925410300247X?via=ihub

>Living beings produce shit naturally.
Well yeah, but that's were humans come in and fuck up the delicate ballance.

If you are still denying AGW at this point you are either mentally retarded or work for an oil corporation.

People who endorse pollution should be round up and shot.

orange tights is really serious, she means business.

I'm a zoomer and I don't give a fuck about her just like every other zoomer, we don't give a shit because nothing matters to us.

>the lawmakers are decided by the public
But not bound to value their promises

I agree that's a serious buisinesswoman right here.

Attached: Oiled-Shaved-Michelle-Starr-with-Thick-Labia-4.jpg (1333x2000, 310K)

>yellowstone explodes sometimes and eradicates life on earth
>no reason to keep an eye on it or try to prevent it, this just happens sometimes

Attached: 1388055500042.gif (250x189, 1.96M)

Tens of millions of bison shitting all over the American plains for 100s of thousands of years before White man arrives doesn't cause global catastrophe.
White man slaughters vast majority of them, reducing amount of methane-producing manure by millions of tons per year doesn't cause global cooling.
White man importing/breeding millions of cattle, increase amount of methane-producing manure by millions of tons per year doesn't increase global temperatures.
>cOw FaRtS aRe DeStOyInG tHe PlAnEt

dont vote for them again then
if you give a guy 5 bucks and he punches you in the dick, don't keep giving him money

Mmm, like the little skinny one in the blue

>doesn't cause
>doesn't increase

Maybe, but it certainly contributes to it.

cow = buffalo
corn based cow feed = grass
apples = oranges

Do you know what does change the climate? CFCs and guess what they arent natural and were banned because how what they were doing to the atmosphere which in turn effects the climate

>it certainly contributes to it
Provide evidence please.

i dont remember who but a politician sayd just a couple years ago only weeks after his election
"what concerns me a promises i made yesterday" when he was asked about something he promised durring the election

Google the greenhouse effect.

thank you for the close up of serious business michelle user!
I really have nothing to add to this thread though, I think the backlash against Greta is because there's a notion that as a child she's a sacred cow who can't be criticized, and the general fact that many conservatives who tend (at least in this period of time) are climate denialists are the kind of guys who the only woman who they'll let them tell them what to do is the one in their GPS navigator.
If climate change is to be attenuated (it can't be reversed or stopped with our current technology) then it needs to happen in China and India anyway.

it fucking sucks. i have to import my spray deodorant from fucking iraq just so i can stick two fingers up to al gore, and keep my pits from drenching my work shirts.

>who the only woman who they'll let them tell them what to do is the one in their GPS navigator.
and even GPS navigators come with a male voicepack now

youtu.be/Fb6nlViDcWw

true but it doesn't work as well for the joke

>only woman who they'll let them tell them what to do is the one in their GPS navigator.

My middle class fat saturated sides

>then it needs to happen in China and India anyway.
Of course. No matter how clean European Union gets with their emissions, they still not gonna do any kind of effect. Unless we master the artificial carbon capture and make business out of it. Which I highly doubt we do.

Attached: 1543177730567.png (600x724, 420K)

Manure from grass fed animals is not more environmentally friendly than manure from grain fed animals. The environmental benefits of grass fed livestock is from the negative effect that farming grain has on the environment, not because of a difference in methane production.

>Greta Thunberg
climatism.blog/2019/12/05/team-greta-admits-climate-change-has-nothing-to-do-with-the-environment/

there's a strawman to set up and knock down by saying "as if conservatives can figure that out lmao!!!!

Google average global temperature over the timespan of the slaughter and replacement of the American bison and point out where it had an effect.
Present your own argument you lazy nigger.

>TFW no need for thigh highs when there's no winter.

Attached: 1576025283287.jpg (1280x1920, 577K)

where do you think the methane comes from? is it just a constant byproduct from cows, unaffected by diet?

it comes from the methanogenic bacteria in the animal's gut, as a result of metabolizing the insoluble fibers and cellulose in their food. methane production is absolutely influenced by diet.

do you think pollution is okay? given the two choices, should we
1) increase pollution
or
2) decrease pollution

It's all a lie to get globalists and lefties into power. They run on campaigns to initiate green solutions and once get power, they start to implement socialist policies. They are counting on gullible people thinking we are on the verge of environmental disaster and using that fear to garner votes. Cortez fucked up and gave them away with her Green New Deal. There were a few socialist initiatives tucked I there that have NOTHING to do with the environment. Even Dems abstained for voting for it though, because it was ridiculously impractical to ever hope to be implemented

Attached: moving the goalpost.jpg (550x412, 56K)

It's not OK to increase pollution, but to decrease it, any plan that requires tax payer fund to fix is wrong, and any plan that takes money from the corporations to implement will cause them to pull up stakes and move to another country.