Seriously, how do you refute this?

Seriously, how do you refute this?

WTF I like global warming now.

Other urls found in this thread:

news.trust.org/item/20161114000455-vw85r/
theconversation.com/sea-level-rise-has-claimed-five-whole-islands-in-the-pacific-first-scientific-evidence-58511
news.trust.org
atm.damtp.cam.ac.uk/mcintyre/shakun-co2-temp-lag-nat12.pdf
strawpoll.me/11661651
youtube.com/watch?v=BZovcCxftAY
ir.library.oregonstate.edu/xmlui/handle/1957/21129
skepticalscience.com/climate-change-little-ice-age-medieval-warm-period-intermediate.htm
forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2015/05/19/updated-nasa-data-polar-ice-not-receding-after-all/#13c36c0132da
skepticalscience.com/antarctica-gaining-ice.htm
stevengoddard.wordpress.com/ice-free-arctic-forecasts/
skepticalscience.com/argument.php?p=11&t=534&&a=22
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

Zoom out

I care more about not getting killed by muslims and niggers. Therefore I don't care about this

If we didnt start saving the world 50 years ago, its too late now

People tend not to care about things that wont effect them so they will do nothing about them see

Satan confirmed
Also lmao a whole 1 degree over 150 years
Riparonipeperroni

Can be a huge deal for people in warm climates. Thankfully they're already being evacuated to Europe and Canada.

...

China. India. When they stop polluting I'll give a fuck.

Fuck m8
I can't imagine waving that flag and typing that out simultaneously
I feel for you brother
May the next wildfire end you swiftly in your sleep, no one deserves to endure this shit

this is the problem nothing is going to stop the chinks, poos and africans polluting unless we invade them. india needs invading with several nuclear missles to make sure they never pollute the atmosphere and human gene pool again.

This desu.

In a few decades (aka still your lifetime) temperatures in the middle east will make it near impossible to live and coastal flooding will displace hundreds of millions of people. No wall will keep out these immigrants. So you should start caring

This in all seriousness

Meant for:

This is a fine post if you think we will be fine with the environment of The Cambrian era

Why are there no intelligent people on the right?

I don't know m8, walls of fast moving lead tend to keep just about anyone at bay

Yeah and in most of the time periods shown humans would have a really really hard time survining, let alone have a civilisation with 7 billion people in it
Let alone having our current civilisation in it

>No wall will keep out these immigrants.

The wall won't keep them out.

But field fortifications can help. All we have to do is make it worse to invade our countries than to stay in their shitholes.

plz send nukes

news.trust.org/item/20161114000455-vw85r/

>World greenhouse gas emissions stayed flat for the third year in a row in 2016, thanks to falls in China
>Global emissions flat despite world economic growth

China is doing something about it, and so is india and plenty of other countries

FPBP

Iys not effecting people now so they don't care you aren't gonna change that unless you make them pay for CO2 out thier own pockets and even then they will ask why they have to when other countries dont give a shit. Its an all or nothing and since china gives no shits nothing is gonna be done about it.

Or you know, we could just curb emissions and prevent our nations from making a worse name for ourselves, inciting more terrorist actions.
All the while making the world cleaner and keeping the land and oceans from turning into a barren shit hole.

Well colour me surprised.

The zoomed out version is the misleading version. There was a temperature anomaly. A large spike means nothing when compared to a gradual upward trend.

This graph is blatantly false.
There is a direct correlation between CO2 levels and temperature
This is also false, the "hockeystick" is a fucking manual alteration of data that Nature unfortunately published.

When the dinosaurs roamed the Earth, the whole place was a jungle. There have been ice ages.Human activity had nothing to do with these, and if you aren't willing to allow for a natural variation at least this wide, you're an idiot.

A large spike doesn't last thousands of years. The little ice age ended right before the industrial revolution. People are connecting dots that aren't there

fpbp

>How do you refute temperatures increasing after the end of the Little Ice age?

See:China does give a shit, and they are doing something about it.

And I don't know if you've noticed, but half the forest in Russia was on fire this summer, and Canasia experienced its worst fire in history, displacing 90K citizens and costing the government billions of dollars.
Then there's islands in the pacific that have already been swallowed whole:
theconversation.com/sea-level-rise-has-claimed-five-whole-islands-in-the-pacific-first-scientific-evidence-58511

Then there's coral bleaching and ocean heating causing widespread marine death, which means a decrease in food supply for millions.

We ARE currently experiencing the negative effects of global warming and it is affecting us.

>Middle Eastern Islamic Terrorists attack the west because of our carbon emissions.

so you are saying we had accurate global temperature readings/records before 1940?

what is the average planet temperature for the last BILLION YEARS?

YOUR GRAPH IS GAY AND YOUR MOTHER IS A WHORE

Why does your graph end at the year 2000?

With the kind of pollution China's largest cities are facing it should be pretty fucking obvious that they're doing something against it. Jesus Christ, the people on this board.
Also, China and India are chump change if you add up total pollution over the last century or so, the US was number 1 for most of that time until just 2008 and thus easily obliterates everyone else.

This argument doesn't work
Since the planet has changed climate plenty of times in the past that just proves how fickle and sensitive the planets climate is
--and more evidence humans are likely to blame

Their retarded data is based on METAR reports. What are METAR reports? Weather reports from Human and automated ground stations that are scattered about, including at airports and in and around cities. What's the problem? Population centers produce heat and that heat increases as the city expands and grows in density and population. It's called the heat island effect. This skews METAR reports so much that pilots don't even pay attention to the temperature field from major airports in big cities. The site where that graph came from even says something to the effect of "urban heat may skew results". Of course nobody brings that up because it doesn't go along with the narrative.

Easily...

The world i 6 billion years old and you're using a 120 year sample that represents 0.00000002% of the earth total life span?

It's like lookg at a millisecond snapshot of the weather and predicting the weather for the res t of the year.

>news.trust.org

I don't trust them or their data

>Coral Atoll with 4 total inches of elevation at its highest point.
>An island.

You're a college student aren't you.

Really? There is a direct correlation huh? So all of those ice cores are inaccurate because Al Gore said so? Do you even know what the Carboniferous Period is?

scale that graph back 10 thousand years and watch what happens faggot

Eitherway I hope we get more snow in australia, I can't be bothered travelling for it.

>80 years
>gradual

Maybe if the world was only a few thousand years old ;)

>still colder than the medieval warm period

>Solomon Islands exist on a tectonic plate bound in close proximity by TWO subduction zones
>they are literally sinking into the earths crust at two points simultaneously
>sea level rise measured by aerial photographs

You refute it by expanding the temp cores to millions of years and you'll see the earth has been MUCH MUCH warmer and MUCH MUCH cooler throughout its history. The Earth will survive with or without us. Only thing we've done is nudge it a little.

Go back further than 200 years, a lot further. You'll find that the planet has been getting warmer well before human carbon emissions became "relevant". Why is the baseline temp around 1940? This whole thing is garbage.

The ice cores are the basis for the data that implies correlation and i assume that AlGore and his team, (a member of which i know) used, among others, those datapoints.

Look up the Original thesis (2012) by marcott and
atm.damtp.cam.ac.uk/mcintyre/shakun-co2-temp-lag-nat12.pdf

Look at the narrative for each decade. Global cooling, next ice age, acid rain, hole in the ozone layer, global warming, and now climate change.
Now tell them to go fuck themselves. We are past the "safe co2 limits" they are too late.

Yeah, remember all those great human civilization during the Paleozoic era? Pinnacle of human progress.
The concern about climate change is increasing scarcity of food due to droughts, flooding due to the pole caps melting, species going extinct if that's your thing or water scarcity. Nobody's arguing that the whole planet will literally go bust, it just might turn substantial parts of it into Australia tier barely livable shitholes.

strawpoll.me/11661651

>Islands that have been above sea level for years and years are all of a sudden submerged
>Hurr ad hominem
youtube.com/watch?v=BZovcCxftAY
Scientists can measure how much ice there is on the planet, and what kind of sea level rise will occur if it melts.
The ice is melting -> The sea level is rising -> ?? -> No profit

Hahaha this.
I'm bored of the hottest year and coldest winter and gayest shit since "records began"

Of course. That's not the argument. The argument is idiots thinking that human existence has any correlation to the trend, or that there's anything we can do about it. It has happened and will continue to happen with or without us and we're just along for the ride.

global warming happens, grow oranges in sibera, putin 10 steps ahead

>In a few decades (aka still your lifetime) temperatures in the middle east will make it near impossible to live
at what temperature does an area become impossible for people to live? could they cope by becoming nocturnal or mole people?

Tell me about. Everyday this summer we would have thunder showers and the weather people would label it as SEVERE THUNDERSTORMS.
everysingleday.

Sea levels have been rising for centuries without any significant change in co2

>graph starts RIGHT BEFORE the industrial revolution

such science, wow

Its a natural process the planet goes through. Antarctica was once a lush forrest, not a giant piece of ice.

You are literally falling for kike/chink propaganda.

sounds like my wife

You do realize that those changes were much slower though right?

Gibs proofs.

Sure, I was just replying to the straya shitposter. It's obviously not caused by humans alone, but we certainly accelerate it, that's really the point of the discussion. All measures are essentially just buying time, the underlying factor behind any climate policy is a strong, somewhat naive believe that we will eventually be able to deal with it and have to stall until then. Will you gamble on the future or just give up, basically.

Wtf happen in 1875

Except that's a lie.

...And now that there's a rapid increase in co2, ice will melt and the seas will rise at a much faster rate

This is a graph proving that the temp has nothing to do with the actions of mankind, not one showing that we could survive a warmer earth.

Why arent canadians banned yet?

You don't. We are screwed. But with all due respect, there's no way we can stop it with a carbon tax. We need geoengineering now!

I was about to refer you to the much posted XKCD comic... however that guy turned out to be a cuck.

ir.library.oregonstate.edu/xmlui/handle/1957/21129
Have this instead.

atm.damtp.cam.ac.uk/mcintyre/shakun-co2-temp-lag-nat12.pdf
And this.

skepticalscience.com/climate-change-little-ice-age-medieval-warm-period-intermediate.htm
And this. Look specifically for the:
>Palm-fringed Arctic and balmy dinosaurs
part.

To be fair though, shit like bee's and other wildlife going extinct is a far scarier issue, with some implications we probably can't even imagine.

The polar ice caps were supposed to have been completely melted 40 years ago.

Even if you buy the continual backpeddaling, goal-post moving propaganda, then we're ALREADY way past the point of no return.

The planet is supposedly fucked either way, so we might as well use 100% of our resources now to fuck off and find some new planets to live on.

>jewish and asian authors

k

We're going to reduce our CO2 emissions sooner than you might think.

What the fuck is your source on that, mspaint?

forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2015/05/19/updated-nasa-data-polar-ice-not-receding-after-all/#13c36c0132da

>asian
We hating asians now?
Also who the hell is asian?
Shaun Marcott certainly isn't.
And the skepticalscience people also arent.

skepticalscience.com/antarctica-gaining-ice.htm

This is a great site, because it has a shitton of hyperlinks to articles and sources.

>If temperature goes up, it's climate change.
>If temperature goes down, it's climate change.
>If temperature stays the same, we must spend more to prevent climate change.
>If bees go extinct, blame climate change, not GMOs.

Global warming is the (((Jews))) of liberals.

>Doctor tells you you have 6 months to live from cancer
>It's been 6 months and you're still alive, but you've lost 60 pounds and all your hair is gone, and you can barely get out of bed in the morning
>"Fucking doctor, fear mongering asshole!"
I've never understood this argument, the signs are all around that shit is warming up and it's not good for any of us

>We're fucked so we might as well go to another planet
The technology isn't there for us to go anywhere else yet, so we might as well dump all we can into research and development to start sucking that co2 out of the air. And we need to stop using fossil fuels, it's our only chance

>The polar ice caps were supposed to have been completely melted 40 years ago
Source?
Most scientists were predicting warming back then but not to that extent

You have to look at a meaningful period of time. Current temperatures aren't outside the variation demonstrated over meaningful timescales. And you really have to check behind these shysters, because they will deliberately manipulate data to present a particular narrative.

Take the Marcott data set in pic related. It appends modern, high-resolution data sets to proxy data sets that have been smoothed with moving average windows so large that all of the variation has been obfuscated. This gives the impression of a "spike in temperature," when the reality is that other data sets (that actually include the variation) show that current temperatures are well within established norms.

There is no evidence of abnormal temperatures.

OK, humanist.

Who cares, you're gonna die someday anyways, might as well take billions with you.

Most of the chart is irrelevant, because humans have not been on the planet. The argument is not that climate change will destroy the planet -- obviously the Earth has been through worse. But we've never had severity of temperature increases hit our fragile agricultural system, bloated cities, and industrial activity, which are more at risk than "the planet" generally.

There does not have to be any evidence of abnormal temperatures now because that is not what the theory predicts. AGW predicts an increase in average temperature, among other things, as a result of CO2. This usually happens years in the future, i.e. the effect is delayed. We see today the impact of emissions from 1950. And the CO2 accumulates.

Except the Jews are real, newfriend.

um, if it really isn't the case that temperature is skyrocketing then the whole co2 argument goes out the window because co2 is supposedly abnormally high.. Yet temps aren't?

Most of that data is unverifiable extrapolation.

like this.

and this.

There is no correlation between CO2 and global temperature.

No, even if Co2 is high now, we won't see the temperature effects until later... the theory is not that you will see the effects *immediately*, there will be a delay

Even if they are high now (i think they are quite high, so the theory is right anyway) they will get higher later.

Those are some local datasets.
You have to average local datasets all over the globe.
Yes there have been variations in local average temperature up to 3K but *not* in a global average.
If you take the global average a lot of the variations previously will smooth out (as in the shaun et al i linked above), and the current upwards trend will stay, because that is *global*.

>(((Doctor))) tells you you have 6 months to live from cancer, and you have a 100% chance of dying, unless you take this magic medicine!
>Don't take shit
>Holy shit, goy! It's a miracle you survived! But this time you really will definitely die with 100% chance unless you buy my placebo, I'm absolutely certain!
And this happens over and over and over again.

>The technology isn't there for us to go anywhere else yet, so we might as well dump all we can into research and development to start sucking that co2 out of the air.
Yeah, because instead all the funding goes to how to prevent a thing that's supposed to have passed the unpreventable point dozens of times already.

> And we need to stop using fossil fuels, it's our only chance
I agree, mostly just because they're a limited resource, so we're going to have to replace them some day. Might as well start making that easier now.

>Source
It was an obvious exaggeration, but here:
stevengoddard.wordpress.com/ice-free-arctic-forecasts/

>vostok

see the arguments from post 511
skepticalscience.com/argument.php?p=11&t=534&&a=22

Jeez learn the difference, global warming exists. The only question is if mankind accelerates/contributes to it.

So in other words we have to wait and see if the predictions are real. Yet everyone is screaming that the sky is falling when there's no actual evidence of that being the case?

DAILY REMINDER

* A doubling of preindustrial CO2, absent any feedbacks, would result in a maximum forcing of +1.2C.

* The General Circulation Models, and the IPCC, predict 2-8C of warming because AGW theory assumes a positive H2O feedback. They assume that if CO2 causes a little warming, the atmosphere will hold more water vapor which will lead to a lot of warming.

* The warming predictions cover such a large range because everyone assumes a different average H2O feedback rate.

* Every GCM based on this assumption has failed to model temperatures for the past 17 years. They are all trending too high.

* In the late 1990's the modelers themselves stated that if they missed their predictions for more then a decade that would falsify AGW theory.

* There is no data to suggest a +H2O feedback either now or in Earth's past.

* If there is no +H2O feedback then we literally have nothing to worry about.

* The average climate change believer knows none of this. Politicians, citizens, activists, surprisingly even a lot of scientists are literally ignorant of the theory and the math. In their mind it's simply "CO2 = bad" and "experts say we're warming faster then ever."

You don't know the theory.

It's cooked data to help further the climate change agenda; it was never about the environment, it was about the money such policies put into the (((right))) hands.

See satellite temperature data for more.