Climate Change General

Old thread died, I want to see you salty fags arguing again. So, why don't we have another go at it?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=LsnW6L7VBp4
boards.Sup
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

youtube.com/watch?v=LsnW6L7VBp4

It's natural and manmade, there is no stopping this.

/thread

>12 minutes of listening to his voice
yeah nah

/thread

Frederica such a qt. please post more

...

>qt

why should i believe him?

How do you suppose we stop it? Oil is unsustainable sure but precious metals for solar panels and elecrtic motors are somehow? Do we build windmills in our backyards?

I would think hydrogen fuel cell motors and nuclear is the way to go.

Liberals love to point out problems they have no intention of fixing.

>muh Sup Forums posts from science illiterates

...

Post swimsuit Frederica

climate changes naturally is not an argument . nobody denies that you mongoloid

Is there such a thing?

>Italy
>calling anybody a mongoloid

>tl;dr: it's been warmer before
wow, can't wait for the paleoclimatologists to hear this, I bet it'll blow their minds. If this doesn't convince everyone climate change is a hoax, I don't know what will

You shouldn't

Climate Change debate revolves around Carbon Dioxide.

Problem is CO2 cant cause global warming and it wouldnt help with global cooling either.

CO2 sits down near ground level, its heavier than air, so literally the only real concentration of CO2 is down here with us.

Literally, just about everything that goes into the Upper Atmosphere is something that BLOCKS OUT sunlight.

All those pictures you've seen about CO2 reflecting heat back into the atmosphere are grossly inaccurate.

Its not up there!

> and then we have this issue of
> a boat studying climate change
> in the south atlantic
> which gets caught in the advancing ice pack
> because its colder in antarctica than they thought

Freddy on the front page!

if the CO2 is "down near ground level", why haven't we asphyxiated all?

do you have any scientific papers you base this on or is it just your uneducated opinion

Oil certainly is unsustainable, and furthermore destabilizes world politics too (oil barons like arabia have more power than they should)

Nuclear?
This has to do with the Suppression of safe and clean nuclear technology - Thorium

Because you cant build a bomb with it and it renders uranium enrichment null and void.

Without uranium nuclear there's no Source for Plutonium which is used for all modern nuclear warheads (these being the tactical nuke and smaller size)

If you dont know the benefits of Thorium nuclear power go educate yourself. It produces pretty much pure heat, little or no gamma radiation so thick concrete walls on reactors arent necessary, and the biproducts are easily dealt with or recycled back into the medical industry (radium).

And its incapable of "melting down"

In essence Thorium nuclear is what we should have transitioned into almost immediately after nuclear started to mature back in the 50-70s

But governments wanted to keep building bombs and switching over to Thorium would mean mining/enriching Uranium would have absolutely no other purpose than to build nuclear weapons (warmongering) and couldnt be justified for any peaceful purpose as well (power plants). And that would make further uranium projects politically capable of being shut down.

Did somebody say Freddy? On the first page?

>If this doesn't convince everyone climate change is a hoax, I don't know what will
The data fixing scandals didn't do it?

Huh.

its a problem but people are making it into end of days and its making people go off the rails. reasonable measures are necessary. we could always just nuke china. problem solved

It's real but I WANT future generations to die

Getting things cheaper and increased profits is just a sweet extra.

None are required, its common knowledge.

Its also one reason that mosquitos tend to bite the legs, they smell/detect CO2 as part of identifying victims and it sinks to the ground.

And as far as I know nobody writes scientific papers about common easily understood facts like these that you might learn (or might not?) in a high school chemistry class.

Because plants are down at ground level too, and so are all the other things the CO2 gets trapped in (water, swamps, etc).

Also there's not that much of it. The scientific studies about the percentage of CO2 in the air compared to the way it was a hundred years. What is it like 0.3% more or somesuch?

Obviously the assertion that warming periods before were linked to a slight rise in CO2 are inaccurate. The assertion anyway, the increase in CO2 levels at previous points in history may have been a biproduct of something else

(such as, reduced volcanic activity allowing plants to grow more easily, which leads to more plant decomposition because there are more weeds - but volcanic activity is one sure thing that will make it cooler...)

(every once in awhile we have a big volcano go off that drops temperatures by 5 degrees across the planet)

lol there is not a single scientific inquiry or institution that found any wrongdoing on party of climate scientists. These scandals don't exist outside of obscure internet blogs and FOX news

>claim: world wide scientific conspiracy that forged literally billions of data points over the course of a century to tell an internally consistent story that is 180° to reality for some mysterious reason
>evidence: a handful of innocuous, out-of-context sentence fragments

Climate change deniers do not believe in science, they believe in obstruction of scientific progress

> mfw
> we should invade Saudi Arabia
> and take their oil

> we did this just across the way from them

She is so hot, want her to wrap her legs around me and force me to cum inside her.

Thank you for a useless post

>just making stuff up on the fly
so on the one hand, CO2 is concentrated at the bottom (>what is atmospheric circulation?) and on the other hand, CO2 isn't concentrated on the bottom because of plants n' shit. Which is it now?

nice strawman you fucken braindead alarmist

where's the scientific paper that proves co2 isn't linked to global warming?

slide thread

boards.Sup Forums.org/pol/thread/9961866299618662

we don't care about your shit thread gypsy

>but people are making it into end of days

As we have painfully learned over the past centuries, it's far easier to cause damage to a habitat than it is to repair it.

People are correct to say we aren't "destroying" the Earth. However, we are accelerating the rate at which the Earth becomes inhospitable to humans. Further, the pattern of extreme weather events becoming more frequent is concurrent with a warming Earth.

The reason people are "alarmed" is because we are approaching a point of no return. Passing this doesn't mean the Earth rapidly becomes inhospitable overnight

don't count out human ingenuity. i wouldn't be surprised we find ways to capture co2 once the problem gets taken seriously