Sup Forums doesn't believe global warming exists

>Sup Forums doesn't believe global warming exists

Other urls found in this thread:

climatedepot.com/2015/07/30/what-consensus-the-97-consensus-is-now-43-less-than-half-of-climate-scientists-agree-with-un-ipcc-95-certainty/
sli.mg/xp6q24
oilandgasclimateinitiative.com/news/oil-and-gas-ceos-jointly-declare-action-on-climate-change
xkcd.com/1732/
youtube.com/watch?v=Gh-DNNIUjKU
twitter.com/AnonBabble

>Sup Forums is one person.

This is a weak troll. You make me ashamed to be a bong.

>>Sup Forums doesn't believe global warming exists

Global warming is a scam to try to a pass carbon tax on the whole planet, to be paid to the world bank.

It has NOTHING to do with saving the environment, it is just a way for bankers to get more of your money, literally.

>denial of mankind's hand in global warming is denial of global warming all together

smog sucks and we shouldn't have to live like china land but you do know volcanoes exist right?

>says global warming is real
>provides no evidence
almost got me there

you're a fucking brainwashed autist

kill yourself faggot

>he believes in global hoaxing
>he believes tampered statistics

Remind you, the medieval warm period was warmer than what we currently have. No science article has yet told when we "surpass" that warm period when even in England wine was made.

He's right though. The Jew has brainwashed you to believe it's for the environment, wildlife and shit

It's mostly just redneck Americans who live in coal country and get their information from coal-funded right wing radio. The problem is just that they're the stupidest, and therefore loudest.

> muh chart

> believe

This is the key word ever present in any argument with GW zealots. No logic, no reason, zero research or study on the matter, just an obstinate, ignorant and oblivious religious faith.

>the liberal hippies arnt letting us use nuclear power
>blame red necks for coal

kay

Carbon is literally plant food. They love the shit.

this is a super fair point, fuck hippies. I once publicly yelled at John Perry Barlow about this issue. Go nukes. Pebble bed reactors FTW.

>redneck Americans
what does redneck mean to you?

> another american retard doesn't understand limiting growth factors
> another american retard doesn't understand the carbon cycle

you

are

not

smart

this

>as CO2 levels rise, less water is needed for plant growth
>as human population rises, more fresh water is needed

without global warming we would be having worst water shortages

>no logic, no reason, zero research
>over 95% of scientists agree on global warming

>volcanoes are the cause methane and carbon dioxide concentration in the atmosphere have grown at a greater than linear rate over the past 250 years
lmaooo

the consensus on the existence of anthropogenic global warming is so universal that at this point denying it is almost like trying to deny newtonian physics
a bit sad that a contrarian mindset can cloud your judgement so much

How retarded are you? Tax on CO2 emision is discourage people to poluate the environment and to opt for an electric care. Ora a bike. Or public transport.

bait

>global warming exists
correct
>it is a natural occurance
correct
>our (read: humanity's) contribution is significant to the extent we can change the current trends
no
>we can do anything within reason to prevent what will happen naturally
no

global warming =/= 'global warming in the media'

the media obsession with it is literally the result of a globalist ploy to obtain more control

you

are

not

smart

>volcanos
It's not the fucking volcanos. It's us. We're putting carbon back into the atmosphere. When you burn this much organic material it is impossible to not increase the concentration. And unless you want to argue CO2 isn't a greenhouse gas, which is just wrong, then yes, it's us.

Sup Forums so badly wants to justify what it wants to believe that it just throws science out the window. It's like how they just assume God exists because "muh heritage" and they associate atheism with liberals whom they despise, and thus think not believing is a step towards liberalism so they refuse to acknowledge that God does not in fact exist.

>global warming
global warming does not exist
global climatic chance exist
but it's not really proven that that's our (humans) fault, only assumed

>over 95% of scientists agree on global warming
did you know 6 gorillion percent of statistics are made up by the jews

climatedepot.com/2015/07/30/what-consensus-the-97-consensus-is-now-43-less-than-half-of-climate-scientists-agree-with-un-ipcc-95-certainty/

Lol how can they know the average temperature even 300 years ago? Huamns didn't start measuring temperatures up until 200 years ago.

>November 1st
>-6 C
Fuck you, Global Warming is a meme

>a consensus on a concept based on extrapolations from an incomplete data set is 'almost like trying to deny newtonian physics'

consider suicide

That feel when you're a geology major and your professor is a globalist lefty cuck

We've only been recording temperature since 1880 dumbass. Only 150 years of records doesn't prove anything when it comes to climate and temperature trends. Weather is some of the most unpredictable phenomenon on the planet, and goes through trends of increase and decrease in temperature. I'm not saying that global warming doesn't exist. I'm saying that we just don't have enough proof yet to say that it does. Only time will tell.

bullshit, there is more co2 and methane under greenland than we ever released, it doesn't take much and shit snowballs out of control.

you

are

a

cuck

>nice ad hominem

Name those scientists. Name a person who had discovered phenomena known as "global warming". Name a fundamental research on the subject.

now you understand why any prediction of future temperature trends and the subsequent effects is to be treated with a healthy dose of skepticism

the way you broke between each word really added a lot of force to your argument. oh wait, you don't have an argument! you're just an assflustered, impotent redditor who believes in pseudoscience with a religious fervor!

>lefties believe that 'green' energy will fix it, even though they hate nuclear power which is the greenest energy source
Globe might be warming, but there's no direct proof that humans are to blame or that humans can stop it.

It's a conspiracy designed for you to spend your money on different things and be afraid of a new boogeyman

No one does. Scientists have slowly backed away from 'man made global warming' and moved towards 'man-caused climate change'.

Soon they'll have to face the reality that there has ALWAYS been climate change and there ALWAYS will be. Humans might be responsible for like 3% of what factors into climate.


The thought that your recycling makes a difference in the climate is pure narcissism.


Littering is still degenerate though.

it doesn't matter if it's real or not because no amount of retarded carbon taxes are going to change shit

you either figure out how to generate enough energy clean that can cope with the ever expanding need for more and more power (IE: nuclear or fusion not fucking wind and solar), or we figure out a way to lower the amount of solar radiation coming in through Geoengineering

It has something to do with layers of ice caps and air trapped inside it.

I believe it exists, but I don't believe there's anything we can do about it that will work.

Most of the proposed solutions are scams, snake oil, or the end goal is a global government with consolidated authority.

Want a real solution? Curb the population growth of India and Africa.

Tell me, why is x a real number? What does this mean for global warming?

Sources please

Perhaps the earth is trying to kill us off because humanity is literally a parasitic entity.

daily reminder that

Climate Change =/= Global Warming

Climate is always changing, the real question is if the main cause is anthropomorphic

I think that's undeniable, but some believe it's not man-made whatsoever

Only in america

can you hear someone being serious while saying that insane shit

Climate change is one thing

Global warming is mostly scaremongering used to tax the middle class out of existence.

Only good argument I've heard about climate change that the temperaturs are rising at a faster rate than the last 200 years we've been measuring temperatures.

Ignore everything up to +-1800 CE in pic.

shit. image won't upload; i've posted it here sli.mg/xp6q24

We have to be careful that's all.

>predators are parasites

wew

Agree on that, but isn't it the same whether it's a natural cause or man-made? We're still seeing consequences and we'll have to fight it one day

Even many huge oil companies have joined the cause to fight global warming, acknowledged it and are ready to face it for the good of humanity. Its just the Murrican oil companies, their shills and the retards who have bought into their propaganda that are holding the rest of the world back.

oilandgasclimateinitiative.com/news/oil-and-gas-ceos-jointly-declare-action-on-climate-change

>flat earth and global warming just made up to take your money. Similar to the space station.

>mankind has no effect on it whatsoever

Yeah, all this massive amount of pollution we pump into the atmosphere, garbage we throw into the oceans, None of it has any negative effect at all! Keep consuming like a good goy, we still have a bit of natural resources to deplete.

Interesting. But how do we know it reflects the temperature around the world and not limited to Greenland?

Human beings are no doubt effecting climate change.

here's the thing though - if you ask the common retard what's causing it they'll give you some throw away like about how these "gas guzzling cars" or whatever and how you should go out and buy a prius

meanwhile, production of meat from livestock creates over 50% of the CO^2 in the atmosphere, but nobody will mention it because it's not good for business

Dangerously underrated

>Sup Forums
>modern music is shit
The fact that so many books still name the Beatles as "the greatest or most significant or most influential" rock band ever only tells you how far rock music still is from becoming a serious art. Jazz critics have long recognized that the greatest jazz musicians of all times are Duke Ellington and John Coltrane, who were not the most famous or richest or best sellers of their times, let alone of all times. Classical critics rank the highly controversial Beethoven over classical musicians who were highly popular in courts around Europe. Rock critics are still blinded by commercial success. The Beatles sold more than anyone else (not true, by the way), therefore they must have been the greatest. Jazz critics grow up listening to a lot of jazz music of the past, classical critics grow up listening to a lot of classical music of the past. Rock critics are often totally ignorant of the rock music of the past, they barely know the best sellers. No wonder they will think that the Beatles did anything worthy of being saved.

Curse you for your transparent background, I can't read shit.

Of course, but imposing a huge carbon tax on companies won't solve anything. People will just be replaced by something less expensive, or the company will simply move to a country where the carbon tax is not imposed

claiming the temperature is rising because we're burning carbon is like saying we'll run out of water because we lose it as steam when we cook.

Everything returns to its origin.

>water
>evaporation
>rain

>carbon in the air
>plants eat it
>returns to the soil

the key is not producing so much it sits in the air of your cities like faggot China. Fuck China anyway. My town doesn't pollute like that.

What I dont get is that why you fucks are so resistant. The worst thats going to happen with accepting climate change and working to limit emissions is that your energy bill will go up 5%. Meanwhile, many many companies that stand to lose literal billions from climate change (see ) are acknowledging it and actively working to limit the damage.

That makes no sense.
There is more profit to be made ignoring the climate change than there is talking/denying it.

Look into the beef industry, it's not just man made pollution.

...

good goy, tax small buissness to death with carbon taxes and stop them goys from driving that 1996 used car.

>implying science is done by consensus

because Vatican astronomers were so accurate

fuck you and your post trying to derail the thread.

Seems like my pic is showing properly. Maybe here xkcd.com/1732/ it will

>meanwhile, production of meat from livestock creates over 50% of the CO^2 in the atmosphere, but nobody will mention it because it's not good for business
No it doesnt, you dumb shit. Live stock produce methane, not CO2. And methane, while potent, only has a half life of 7 years. CO2 stays in the atmosphere for an entire century.

youtube.com/watch?v=Gh-DNNIUjKU

daily reminder that surface based reading are garbage and there is NO logical reason why atmospheric readings all over the world shouldn't be used as a raw dataset instead. None.

At this point, the real reason I think the Global Warming hoax is pushed is to obscure the real pollution issues of the world happening right now.

There are xenoestrogens in the water, in the fish, in plants, in food, in plastics, and it's literally turning animals into hermaphrodites. We're consuming this. But we're talking about the climate change scam instead.

Real clever.

>global warming exists

The phenomenon exists, but it isn't currently happening.

The planet is getting cooler right now because of changes to the jet stream and what the Sun is currently doing.

Also anthropogenic CO2 is a meme and CO2 itself has virtually nothing to do with climate change.

kys IPCC shill

Seems like an absurdly complicated and retarded plan.

If these bankers can infiltrate literally every government on the planet, including separate branches of military, and the Chinese ad Russian ranks to the highest order and convince them all that global warming is real when it not, then they wouldn't need to have such a dumbass convoluted plan ion the first place.

Isn't it convenient that the only organization on the planet that hasn't been taken over by the climate change conspiracy is the GOP establishment? And only the parts that take coal money?

If I were running this conspiracy, I'd just get both parties on board with it first and make it one of those things they both agree to and don't make an issue about, like most corrupt issues. Don't know why you'd change that formula just for this one thing.

Some random ass quote I have found:
>The temperature of the environment when the ice or sediment in a core was deposited can be estimated using isotopes of hydrogen or oxygen. The Vostok record is most complete for the hydrogen isotopes, but the concepts of understanding how the isotope-temperature relationship works is easier with oxygen. In addition, oxygen can be used to determine temperatures from ocean sediment cores as well.
Oxygen has two stable isotopes of importance, 16O and 18O, which vary in mass. Differences in the amounts of these isotopes in a sample (air, water, ice, rocks, organisms) are measured by comparing the ratio of 18O/16O in a sample to that ratio in a standard, which for oxygen is average ocean water. This comparison is called d18O (pronounced delta-18-O). Variations in the d18O of the oxygen in the water molecule, H2O, can be useful in understanding the hydrological cycle and the cycle of glaciations. Average ocean water has a value of 0‰ d18O (‰ is pronounced permil and is the symbol for one-thousandth. It is analogous to %, percent, which is the symbol for one-hundredth).

Sometimes it's better to not ask.

Holy shit you are retarded.
That's like saying drinking a gallon of oil is good for you because you need fat to power your body.

Fuck people on this board are retarded sometimes

>concensus

Reminder that the climate change 'concensus' statistic is a fraudulent claim based on ~95% of 1/3 of scientist respondents to the polling. 2/3 didn't respond.

Talk to china before I give a shit, faggot. My town is fucking pristine. Probably better than yours because you sound miserable.

consensus* fuggggg

No it isnt, thats been debunked. Plenty of similar surveys confirmed the ~95% approval.

Let me explain politics and global warming.

Some politics are about finding solutions to economic or social problems.
Other politics are mainly about pointing out a problem, but being so vague about it that no solutions come, so the problem continues to be a talking point that brings in money.

Global warming is that. There are true ecological issues- air pollution, water pollution, over fishing, waste issues, etc. But these are concrete issues that can have solutions to be found, and not always are profitable except in a social, health sense.
Global warming is hard to measure and some data could be mistaken yo support it. It is vague, a vague idea that exists to hover over us, to be discussed, but ultimately won't be solved simply because it is unsolvable. It also has a vague time of impact-supposedly the oceans will rise as will temperatures but when? Thousands of years from now? Tens of thousands? Hundreds of thousands?
Its kept vague enough to keep the skeptics disengaged, but shouted enough to rile up those with a conscious for the environment. The problem is there are greater pressing environmental issues that will impact us sooner, the ones I aforementioned.
BUT, if we focused on those, as we should, it wouldn't be so divisive, it would yield results and gain traction, which is exactly what global warming promoters don't want. They want it to be vague, they want it to be scary but they don't want people to feel like they can impact anything. They just want to be at the center of attention, not the problem itself. This is why celebrities and celebrity politicians love it. It gives them a bogeyman (oil) to punch.

But gravity is electromagnetic not magic dumbass.

Yea but at some point carbon too much carbon in the air keeps the plants and phytoplankton from growing, creating a runaway effect that basically cooks everything on our plants surface.

It would be fine if we were 1000000000 humans on this planet, but we are over 7000000000 and the carbon cycle can't keep up to that amount of greenhouse gasses.

Culling the world population is the only way to save our planet now.

>Culling
Well only fair way is rampage.

and you people are retards for not realizing the world isn't black and white. Global warming is a real issue but it most certainly is also being used as an excuse to further other agenda instead of actually preventing it 99% of the time it is mentioned in politics

Maybe you're right.

Just read it again. You're definitively not right.

I thought you were claiming the population could grow to where it would be a problem. But you actually state it already is a problem! Obviously it is NOT a problem now by your own admission!

>at some point carbon too much carbon in the air keeps the plants and phytoplankton from growing
We clearly haven't reached that point, ergo you are wrong.

I meant the deciding your Sup Forums board picture, not the XKCD link.

Yup. Marxists hijacked it.

But oceans at higher temperature produce more CO2 and opposite.
If that was the case then warming could not be stopped.

Is Sup Forums the Borg or something? Get outta here with this bullshit.

The heat that comes from the sun is not constant. It fluctuates.

Climate change is not caused by humans

The only way you can say the beef industry is a huge carbon emitter is it you are including South America where they slash and burn the rain forest to make room for cattle. US beef production is a whole different deal.

As a man made impact on the world? No.

As a natural event repeating itself? Sure.

*revisionism intensifies*

Empirical studies show increased plant growth with increased co2, this is established fact. They sometimes pump co2 into greenhouses.

That's because you buy shit made in China.

climate change 'science'

1. come to a conclusion
2. manufacture data
3. perform an experiment
4. hypothesize why experiment failed
5. observe grant funds rolling in

>We find that 66.4 percent of abstracts expressed no position on AGW, 32.6 percent endorsed AGW, 0.7 percent rejected AGW and 0.3 percent were uncertain about the cause of global warming. Among abstracts expressing a position on AGW, 97.1 percent endorsed the consensus position that humans are causing global warming.

Also
>(((surveys)))
yes goyim we can definitely trust political climate change giants like the IPCC to properly use and represent data when they survey the academic world. It's not like the global warming lobby constantly amend and edit scientific journals, exclude and manipulate data to fit projections and are consistently inaccurate with their predictions.

Honestly it's scarier to think that 97% actually do agree, because that means that only a tiny fraction of the world's climate scientists don't accept that:

>the 4% of atmospheric CO2 that man is responsible for is what is driving global temperatures
>man has more of an effect upon global temperature than any number of natural phenomena such as the jet stream, solar and lunar influences
>man has more of an impact on atmospheric CO2 than many animal species who produce many more times more CO2
>atmospheric CO2 levels precede temperature, despite the endless historical evidence against it
>the flawed and manipulated land data is constantly in contradiction with satellite data

Anthropogenic CO2 is a misleading con and the IPCC is a fraudulent organisation. The science and dats are what matters, not the consensus.

>muh communist conspiracy

lol how can they know how old rocks are or that dinosaurs existed? Huamns didn't even exist up until 200,000 years ago.

Are you actually retarded or do you lack the simple processing power to realize the steam coefficient in your simplistic equation has been accelerated significantly in the real world for over the past 80 years?

>hur dur steam+chicken=steamed chicken
>steam chicken=global warming is fake

Pls kys

It's climate change and extreme weather, you climate change denier! You're probably a racist, too.