The liars are NASA (GISS), NOAA, along with a select few other independent researchers who manipulate data, both recent and retroactively, so that it fits their hypothesis that CO2 is causing global warming, when raw data shows no such thing. The other scientists then use the "final" data in their own research, leading to a snowball effect of lies and incorrect conclusions.
>Historical records published decades ago are different from the very same historical records published today (RETCON) >Most of the weather stations in the US today are actually defunct, and to make up for the shortfall they guesstimate the values >The changes made between the raw data and final data perfectly match up to the increase in atmospherical CO2, conclusive evidence that they change data to fit the hypothesis >They do this by "cooling" the past, giving the illusion that todays temperature are a result of a warming period. >that 97% of all scientists agree with AGW is a blatant lie.
this is the data that does not match historical records
Joseph Lopez
why do you faggots take it into a new thread all the time?
Liam Wood
...
Michael Thompson
even if i had known about that thread this one is aimed specifically at exposing the lies of NOAA and NASA with conclusive evidence
Levi Rogers
more retcon
Blake Green
its not global warming unless its, well, global, so they change data here aswell
Isaiah Cook
another example
Lucas Gomez
despite alarmists claiming that arctic ice will disappear, thickness and spread has increased
Benjamin Smith
despite temperatures allegedly increasing the amount of forest firest are at a historic low
Samuel Harris
we are not contributing to rise in sea level
Ryder Price
...
Sebastian Taylor
...
Caleb Nguyen
again, if atmospheric CO2 was the cause of global warming this graph would look a whole lot different
Dylan Hill
in '89 there was consensus that historical data since the late 19th century did not show any signs of global warming
Jackson Williams
"muh CO2 ghg"
Mason Sanchez
I'll give you a cheeky bump
Grayson Kelly
ex-NASA scientists write open letter to GISS telling them to stop lying and stick to data they can prove
Parker Price
here are one of the liars who actively fuck up for the rest of the world. his data sounds scary doesnt it?
Jeremiah Robinson
well, its nothing out of the ordinary. just a regular lie.
thanks bong
Hunter Ortiz
awesome thread.
we all know it's a lie. it's just another way to exert control over a select group.
much like sports, video games, and so on. everything is designed to make people 'tune out' of reality; while the jews take more and more control.
Aiden Howard
Other anons have contributed greatly here. The following is copypasta from a yank in a previous thread.
>The problem with AGW models is that they are theorized on a conduction rather than convection basis. That is to say the atmosphere is treated as thin slices in thermal radiative equilibrium with the above and below layers. Increasing opacity (higher CO2) implies higher temperatures to maintain the same thermal flow. Sounds reasonable at first glance, sure.
The problem is that atmospheric heat transfer is dominated by convection rather than conduction. Convection transfers heat to the upper atmosphere.
The question then is, once you move heat to the upper atmosphere by convection, what happens in a higher CO2 regime?
The lower atmosphere opacity doesn't change much regardless of CO2 concentration due to the strong overlap in H2O and CO2 absorption spectra. The middle becomes significantly more opaque (CO2) preventing downward radiative transfer. The upper atmosphere therefore warms and Earth is actually shifted into a COOLING regime due to a higher effective blackbody temperature.
In other words, CO2 acts to counter global warming not cause it.
Indeed, simple awareness of reality lends one to this conclusion. The oceans contain 50 times as much CO2 as the atmosphere and experience a massive 4% drop in solubility from 1C increase in temperature. If indeed rising CO2 caused global warming we could expect natural variability (which exceeds 1C) to result in a runaway greenhouse effect that drives CO2 out of the ocean, higher temperatures, and more CO2 out.
Alas, no such thing happens, so anyone with even the most basic knowledge of reality knows that AGW is an intentional fraud.
This is also why historical CO2 / temp data shows CO2 lagging temperature increase rather than preceding it and temperatures falling after CO2 peaks (it causes global cooling), much to the chagrin of the AGW tards.
Bentley Fisher
Please, data that old isn't accurate or trusted to be used. The people who wrote that also believed women were witches and burnt them at the stake.
That stuff is pointless and misleading, it has been removed for good reason, just like we stopped teaching that the sun doesn't revovle around the earth.
If this kind of this is your argument, it's not worth mine, or anyone elses time to look at the rest of your "evidence".
Get a life man.
Brayden Rogers
A lot of anons here can't seem to grasp it. I assume it's because they watch too much thunderfoot or AmazingAtheist or something.
Colton Evans
I don't get it. Who the fuck cares if it's real or not? wtf is the point of proving global warming false? In fact, wtf was the point of the global warming scam in the first place? Is that like your excuse for maintaining a completely unsustainable and inefficient way of life? You really don't see a problem with pollution other than global warming? ffs, apart from causing fucking cancer there's scientific proof that children in polluted cities do worse in school than those in non-polluted places. Pollution literally dumbs us down. Yeah, great way to redpill people, keeping them in a haze of stupidity.
Nathan White
Climate researcher here, ask me anything.
James Lewis
Why would the accuracy of measurements taken back then degrade over time?
>Who the fuck cares if it's real or not? Because user, this is the foundation for politics in many countries. The Paris Agreements and other environmental accords puts undue strain on western economies while emerging economies are free to do whatever the fuck they want. This is dangerous for our economy, businesses and regular people.
Pollution is radically different from global warming. One can be against pollution while still maintaining that todays theories about global warming and its connection to atmospheric CO2 is a blatant lie.
Cooper Sullivan
Who are the main researchers within climate science and how much money are they making off these lies?
Brody Fisher
how hot does your anus get while your taking dicks faggot?
Nathan Garcia
Because, as I said, people back then thought witchers were real and the earth was flat. Everything they said is false until we prove it true gain with up to date, modern, technology that can't make mistakes.
And just as we've discovered the earth is not flat, we've discovered that these old people were just mistaken about the truth of the world temperatures. It's not their fault, they just didn't have the information we have now.
Using what they thought as fact, is just as foolish on your part as if you started talking about how there is no world outside or Europe or something else.
It's just ridiculous.
Ian Robinson
Global warming is a damned hoax.
Ethan Harris
>Because user, this is the foundation for politics in many countries. The Paris Agreements and other environmental accords puts undue strain on western economies while emerging economies are free to do whatever the fuck they want. This is dangerous for our economy, businesses and regular people. What's the difference of wether you're doing it because MUH GLOBAL WARMING or just doing it to not live in a polluted shithole? If nobody believed in global warming but still wanted to reduce pollution, how would those politics differ?
Lucas Turner
This has to be fucking bait. Noone can honestly be this retarded and not be trolling.
"People back in 1999 thought witches was real and earth was flat, so we shouldnt believe any data from then"
try again mongrel
William Green
ive lived in FL all my life and can tell you that the climate here is changing, the 'winters' are shorter than ever before and it stays hotter longer (well into december now). I highly doubt this is man made though as the earth has natural cycles
Brayden Morgan
Jesus, what an idiotic image.
Brody Roberts
>Who are the main researchers within climate science Depending on the specific research field. There's dozens, probably even more than a hundred. Each field has a handful of high-profile heads, and a swarm of well-known researchers.
>how much money are they making off these lies? You're likely to earn more than they do. E.g. my boss at the department is in a pay grade that puts him at a measly £50k-55k per annum.
Jack Turner
>everything is ok guys, climate is just changing to the temperatures of 200.000 years ago in a matter of 100 years, nothing to worry about I don't give much credit to the whole global warming thing, but your infograph shoots itself in the foot
Jayden Parker
It's not the people from 1999, it's the old "data" from before the 20th century that is suspect. I mean come on man, do you still belive that the sun revolves around the earth too? Those old people thought that. It's ridiculous, all their "data" has to be re-checked with our new and better technology and information sources.
Taking centuries old "data" as fact without checking it is just foolish, and childish,
Carter Cruz
Except there are no temperature changes in the past 100 years that is outside natural variation.
Jose Thomas
>UN Official Admits That Climate Change Used As A Ruse To Control The World’s Economy
Predicted temperatures for 2050 and 2100 du Blinschleiche
Dylan Lee
>never forget: UN is kike cancer. most evil organization on this planet with the goal of one world government.
Asher White
But as has already been pointed out, all of the predictions have been wrong.
Christopher Barnes
Trip's confirm it. Man made climate change is a lie.
Mason Rivera
...
Ethan Torres
Thanks for your scientific analysis, Doctor.
Jace Ramirez
in essence you're agreeing with me that they're retconning data. I'm just saying they're doing it to fit the hypothesis that CO2 is the cause of this.
how come there was conensus in 89 that historical data did not show any signs of global warming? what exactly has 'improved' since then for them to go a complete 180 on this?
Brody Ortiz
haven't scienshits said it is already too late to do anything? if it is true there is nothing we can do, if it is fake we won't do anything anyway.
Juan Thompson
"Retconning" makes it seem like the old data was in any way correct. It wasn't. They aren't "retconning", they are fixing the data to be correct.
Jack Brooks
Oh ok. Still kinda stupid to use a graph that includes those predictions, it's confusing. Is this supposed to prove anything? Disprove anything? w/e global warming is stupid
but even stupider is to keep polluting pollution pisses me off. I hate that I leave my house and any large street smells of cancerous exhaust fumes. Fuck that.
Grayson Carter
That image is pretty fucking convincing. Are there any actual rebuttals to that? I am genuinely curious.
Adam Young
why are they lying about global warming then if they're just doing it to not live in a polluted shithole? why do they have to lie about it?
the poltiics would differ massively btw. take a look at pic related. it confirms that global warming is a hoax to push down modern economies in favour of emerging ones. Global warming is, well, global, and pollution is local. If they really wanted to save the planet, they'd make all countries adhere to it with extreme prejudice. But no, only a few select countries have to fuck up their economies to go green.
Charles Lopez
what is your proof of this? how are you backing it up? what do you base the fact that it was incorrect on? the scientists themselves have not claimed that it was incorrect, they've just changed the data retroactively and hoped noone would notice.
Brody Young
china signing this. really?? of all the polluters on this planet? give me fucking break! they couldn't give shit about the climate it's all about the shekels.
Brandon Peterson
>Is this supposed to prove anything? It's demonstrating that the anthropogenic global warming narrative is false. It's pure superstition.
Localized pollution is an entirely different issue that has little or nothing to do with AGW.
Jace Moore
>That image is pretty fucking convincing It's really. What actually convinced you? Can you explain said picture or plot?
Charles Wright
...
Thomas Cruz
>global measure is to keep down modern economies >local measure would affect all economies in the same way I still don't see it. It seems more logical the other way around, that if you only care for the local issue, THAT would push down your economy, while treating it as a global issue would in theory affect all countries.
not saying you're wrong. I'm genuinely confused. pls explain.
Samuel Powell
What the hell? This is Nate Silver tier data. Why does the measurement noise suddenly tighten? The modern data is of course more accurate, but is for the most part within historical noise margin. So you can't simply compare two data points like they want you to do in that graph unless you're going to address the double noise margin, at which point the data starts to look ugly.
I'm not saying that the data is completely invalid, but it's certainly not something that we can use to justify spending billions of taxpayer money on climate programs. Where I work you need to be damn sure that your data before you can justify spending company money to fix a problem, why the fuck can't the government be held to such a standard?
Daniel Reyes
So basically nothing is happening with climate? How the hell does an outright lie get so popular?
Jason Brown
Another quality leaf post, thanks for increasing our reputation!
Eli Evans
god job shilling for free you illiterate faggot
Isaac Jenkins
It's not a complete lie. Global warming is real, the point is that it's not caused by humans but a natural phenomenon. You can easily find data to prove that there's been global warming in the last 150 years (ie since the beginning of industrialization), as long as you just leave out this basically. Make up some exponential predictions which make mathematic but not logical sense, and you have a lie that's pretty convincing to people who don't read up on anything they hear on the news.
Cameron Davis
Please, it's obvious to everyone who isn't a conspiracy theorist that old data isn't always correct, and must be rechecked from time to tie to insure accuracy. They don't have to "tell everyone" this because it's just assumed by everyone of intelligence and relevance.
Why don't you stop posting these ridiculous fairy tails and go look into the moon landing "hoax" or whatever else you do for entertainment.
Noah Ramirez
Why? Over years of this argument Ive yet to be given a decent answer for this.
What is the point of this worldwide conspiracy? To make money? Who? The evil people in wind, solar, and nuclear power industries?
You ever think maybe the oil industries make 100x more money and are more heavily invested in trying to shed doubt on a theory that will someday end their business?
Aiden Smith
The warming effect of co2 is not linear.
The rate of sea level rise is increasing.
US =/= globe
>Indeed, simple awareness of reality lends one to this conclusion. The oceans contain 50 times as much CO2 as the atmosphere and experience a massive 4% drop in solubility from 1C increase in temperature. If indeed rising CO2 caused global warming we could expect natural variability (which exceeds 1C) to result in a runaway greenhouse effect that drives CO2 out of the ocean, higher temperatures, and more CO2 out.
This is exactly what is going to happen.
Brayden Gomez
"Why" is a different question than "Whether." Clearly, the narrative is false. The motivation is probably a combination of sincere stupidity and outright maliciousness to push a political agenda.
Asher Garcia
If the world was genuinly concerned about the global climate issue, then modern, powerful economies would force emerging economies to adhere to the same standards that they do themselves, because otherwise its really not a big point. If we reduce emissions but China increases them by 200%, then the climate would be fucked anyways. ¨ Huge oil companies are actually shilling for AGW since reduced coal production (and other forms) increases energy prices while theres literally no way that the world can pivot away from oil in the near future.
Ryder Martinez
White guilt.
Tyler Sullivan
>The rate of sea level rise is increasing. Not according to the data. Current sea level changes are well within the established trend of natural variation.
Matthew Hughes
good thread i appreciate it
Aiden Flores
Shit, NASA is manipulating their results almost as much as I did in high school physics and chem labs!
Brandon Reyes
He's right.
> Hottest ever June marks 14th month of record-breaking temperatures
popular? this world isn't a popularity contest! don't you get it people?! our politicans are bought by the jews - every single one of them. we would have no wars and racial problems if we would get rid of both of them!
THAT is the problem. and that is why both of them must die. no exceptions.
Matthew Wright
Can some autist post this, then post this to reddit so some reddit scientist BTFO's it and then we can agree climate change is real.
It's real but I don't particularly care about it anymore.
I'd rather burn this earth down than give it to niggers and spics.
Noah Richardson
>Current sea level changes are well within the established trend of natural variation. How much would that be again? I'd like to check it against some JASON-2 data.
Except this isn't the "hottest year on record" by a long shot. See:
Mason Martinez
You're a complete mongrel. I've asked you to back your claims up repeatedly and you only come back with ad hominems. You are clearly of low intelligence and I'm not going to entertain your baits anymore. I've shown conclusively that the data has been retconned, often several times, in order to fit a hypothesis. Unless you can contribute you shouldnt be here.
Levi Lopez
See:
Brandon Rivera
Oceans heat, release co2. This is true. So why is it we've hot 400ppm co2 for the first time in hundreds of thousands of years? No previous glacial/interglacial resulted in co2 like this. What is different this time? Are you suggesting we are at some record high temperature?
Christian Johnson
Sup Forums is gonna regret denying climate change when Africa and the middle east become inhospitable to human life and the resulting wave of migrants makes the syrian civil war a joke.
Ian Fisher
WE DIDNT LISTEN!
Elijah Russell
>If the world was genuinly concerned about the global climate issue, then modern, powerful economies would force emerging economies to adhere to the same standards that they do themselves, because otherwise its really not a big point. If we reduce emissions but China increases them by 200%, then the climate would be fucked anyways. you keep saying this, but I still fail to see how that is related to the global warming scheme. If we all accept that AGW is bs but that we still should reduce pollution just for our own health and well being and sustainability, it would be even worse because the emerging economies would have the perfect excuse to keep not giving a shit about pollution, while modern economies would still do the same efforts if not more to reduce their pollution. With the AGW scheme in place, at least we can scoff at the countries not giving a shit and feel superior, and eventually maybe start putting pressure on them to reduce pollution.
Ayden Diaz
Its far from the hottest month. Thats absolutely retarded.
Adam Morales
Why do you still have faith in an unfalsifiable pseudo-science? Do you feel guilty that your pseudo-science is being used to spread socialism?
Ayden Barnes
Why don't you tell me how JFK died too while you're at it man?
Ian Hernandez
but the kikes are the real problem... they always were. you could say that hitler was the prototype of the redpilled man. too bad all these losers sold out, especially the brit cunts. well, now they got what was coming to them too. communism. pah. kike shit. you all fought on the wrong side.
Henry Jones
Guess we can't stop now, we've got a huge bill to foot!
Jaxon Cruz
That graph shows a steady rise from the peak of the last glacial period. This surely doesn't surprise you? As the glaciers recede they melt. But looking at this we are at peak temperature for natural variation, at least based on previous glacial/interglacial cycels. Yet we're still warming and the rise in the oceans is increasing.
Nicholas Nelson
>Why do you still have faith in an unfalsifiable pseudo-science? Kek. Are you Gabor Fekete?
I do science, faith isn't part of the job.
Ryder Hernandez
>implying Africa will not gonna produces billions of surplus population by itself without any climate change Build wall or become Africa.
Aaron Bennett
I wonder who controls that.
>Warming effect of CO2 is not linear. Right. What that graph shows is the changes that they've made to the data compared with the increase of CO2 in the atmosphere. It doesnt per se graph the increase in temperature, only the changes to the data compared with atmospherical CO2.
>The rate of sea level rise is increasing. Like another user said, not outside natural variances.
>US =/= globe US is part of the globe. A rather large part. If global warming existed it should be able to be seen in the US.
Ryan Fisher
The data noise reducing I can buy, you're not talking about going from, say, 1980 to 1990, but rather about 1800 to 2000, that's a pretty massive gap for new, more precise instruments to be developed.
On the whole I think the warming theory has a great deal of merit to it, the physics behind the greenhouse gas model is sound, but the biggest problem with climate research is the taboo surrounding skepticism of it.
Like everything else the Left gets its hands on, they treat it as sacrosanct - no one is allowed to question any detail of it or else they must be trying to deny the whole thing. You don't see this level of anti-skepticism in any other field of legitimate science, and that's a problem because the only way you refine a model is by looking at it skeptically.
And that's why we're in the situation that we're in - global warming is a reasonable model, but it's not perfect, there are parts of it that don't fit, parts that may be oversimplified, parts were coupling between shorter-term climate cycles may be ignored, etc but because nobody's allowed to question it, the model remains flawed instead of being refined and improved.
Benjamin Wilson
That's like the same argument Marxists use when they talk about super structure and false consciousness.
