[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vr / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Search] [Home]
Board
Settings Home
/news/ - Current News

Name
Options
Comment
Verification
4chan Pass users can bypass this verification. [Learn More] [Login]
  • Please read the Rules and FAQ before posting.
  • There are 75 posters in this thread.

05/04/17New trial board added: /bant/ - International/Random
10/04/16New board for 4chan Pass users: /vip/ - Very Important Posts
06/20/16New 4chan Banner Contest with a chance to win a 4chan Pass! See the contest page for details.
[Hide] [Show All]


Now accepting credit card payment for 4chan Pass purchases and renewals. Click here for details.



https://www.voanews.com/a/as-arctic-chill-hits-us-trump-again-casts-doubt-on-climate-change/4764109.html
>>
Fortunately NOAA are on hand with some elementary school level instruction on weather.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DyFkxmaU8AQcZG2.jpg

>Winter storms don't prove that global warming isn't happening.
https://twitter.com/NOAAClimate/status/1090263390503596032/photo/1

https://www.climate.gov/news-features/climate-qa/are-record-snowstorms-proof-global-warming-isn’t-happening
>>
>>348815
Didn't Al Gore himself say in the original Inconvenient Truth that the midwest would have arctic winters (because of Greenland ice melt disrupting the gulf stream) whereas most other places would get hotter and dryer?
>>
>>348815

i like it. no climate change or anything. btw. accord to some simulations that Chill can go down to Houston.
>>
Anyone who thinks that this 1 degree rise in average temperature is not 100 percent humanity's fault is a deplorable. Modern science and it's weather models are 99.9 percent perfect, and this polar vortex is 100 percent global warming's fault. Nothing like this has ever happened in the earth's history. Like AOC said we have 12 years to change our ways or it is all over.
>>
>>349725
>On 13 December 2008, Gore appears to have made a similarly flawed statement while speaking at the opening of a German natural history museum. Though transcripts and clear audio are hard to find, one video of the event documents Gore saying that “The entire North polar ice cap may well be completely gone in 5 years.
truly a prophet.
>>
>>349773
No, ignore the fact that their projections are always wrong! USA bad, socialism good!
>>
>>349774
>T-they are hurting my American feelings with facts!
I have isolated the anomaly. You are a tribal animal who loves only himself and therefore hates truth.
>>
timing is everything for the Trumpster.

May and September were the warmest on record in Ohio, and 2018 was the 2nd-warmest year ever. But a cold spell comes along in mid-Winter and the MAGAtards come crawling out from under the fridge like roaches.
>>
>>349775
>argument free post
Clinging to your idiotic, repeatedly wrong scriptures of apocalypse seems like something your side would disapprove of, but hey, here you are.
>>
>>349774
Don't forget its bigoted and racist to deny the settled science of climate change. EDUCATE YOURSELF BIGOT.
>1981 James Hansen, NASA scientist, predicted a global warming of “almost unprecedented magnitude” in the next century that might even be sufficient to melt and dislodge the ice cover of West Antarctica, eventually leading to a worldwide rise of 15 to 20 feet in the sea level.

>Reality check: Since 1993 (24 years) we have totaled 72 mm (3 inches) of sea level rise instead of the 4 feet that corresponds to one-fourth of a century. The alarming prediction is more than 94% wrong, so far.

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/10/30/some-failed-climate-predictions/
>>
>>349778
Just ignore that. The solution is to ban cars and cripple the economy! Ignore that Bill gates has figured out how to turn atmospheric carbon back into gasoline! CARBON TAX NOW!
>>
>>349776
Why can't the weather just be consistent each year? WHY IS IT DIFFERENT?
>>
>>349777
>repeatedly wrong
You are expressing an unsupported opinion.
>>
>>349781
>Ignore that Bill gates has figured out how to turn atmospheric carbon back into gasoline! CARBON TAX NOW
In all fairness it was students at MIT that did this. Moneybags Bill didn't do shit except help fund
But def as soon as Carbon Engineering has an IPO I will be investing quite a bit
>>
>>349786
It would be good if it were true
>Carbon removal technologies, promising though they may be, are overhyped, says David Keith, an applied physicist at Harvard and Carbon Engineering's founder. "And the overhyping has become a political trick." That hype, he says, makes it easier for policymakers to avoid drafting near-term mitigation strategies and exceed their carbon budgets, in hopes that their debt will be repaid at some point in the future.
>>
>>349785
>he said, despite the post earlier in the thread with the list of climate alarmist false projections
Dogma is a hell of a drug

>>349788
>he said, ignoring the fact that the United States actually held to its agreement in the Paris accords which we pulled out of
You would have to be a fool to believe that carbon engineering would solve all the issues involved, but idiotic knee jerk reactions by legislators which would seriously harm the economy is clearly also not the solution. Investments in technologies and research like carbon engineering IS the answer, which requires a strong economy, NOT strangling technological progress in the name of projections which are historically incredibly inaccurate. After all, no matter how many laws we pass, or how much we destroy our own economy, the Chinese and every developing nation in the world will still be pumping out pollution. Literally the only way this gets better is if we can make these technologies and others like it work, because America is not the only country in the world.
>>
>>349785
>implying that the bible is in any way true
You are a drain on society.
>>
>>349778
let's go back even further

http://ossfoundation.us/projects/environment/global-warming/frank-capra-warns-of-global-warming-1958
>>
>>349785
>The bible being repeatedly wrong is an unsupported opinion

*Sins*
*Gets completely ignored by god*

Wowwwwwww
>>
>>349788
yeah, but the same guy who owns the same company mentioned announced "research findings that show how carbon dioxide could be sucked up from the atmosphere for less than $100 per ton" and the comany he own, Carbon Engineering, is currently trying to make full scale facilities are are getting together the investment needed to do so
>>
al gore
>>
>>349798
>>349858
What are you retards on about?
>>
>>349778
>Sea level prediction from 1981
>Wattsupwiththat
In the bin
Here's the actual data from the IPCCs predictions, not cherry picked bullshit to fit an agenda
https://www.cmar.csiro.au/sealevel/sl_proj_obs_vs_proj.html

TL;DR
Sea level rise is tracking at the upper bounds of the IPCCs predictions.
>>
>>350132
>IPCC
Disregarded. You realize all their jobs rely on climate change being real right? Not a conflict of interest im sure. They also adjust all their data.
>>
>>350194
But climate change is real you numbskull. Do you actually believe this flat earth has had the same climate for its entire 4,000 year history?
>>
>>350194
>You realize all their jobs rely on climate change being real

No, you idiot, their jobs rely on their data being accurate. If they didn't talk about climate change they'd still get paid.
>>
How many more decades of this hoax do we have to put up with? Climate change is the religion of the left. The end goal is communism
>>
>>350224
>If they didn't talk about climate change they'd still get paid.
What would they be getting paid for? Are you actually this stupid? Oh wait you believe in man made climate change, stupid question.
>>
>>350226
>>350232

do you not plan on having kids ? do you not care about their future ?
serious question.
>>
>>350194
You realize that doctors rely on illnesses they treat being real right? Not a conflict of interest I'm sure. They also adjust their data
>>
>>350194
the climate scientists that work for the oil companies are totally trustworthy tho
>>
>>350246

>Any day now goys. Pay your carbon taxes and let the government nationalize all business before it's too late
>>
>>350226
it's our job as capitalists to do the right thing and find a way to make a profit
>>
>>350352
Like many on the the right, you seem pretty flustered by all this crazy AGW stuff - totally understandable given your rather limited worldview.
Since It isn't going away though, is actually getting worse, and since you seem intent on ignoring the reality of nature and instead hunkering down in a partisan spider-hole, well, maybe you should just embrace it all instead ?
People in foreign "shitholes" will die first but the poor in the US will suffer eventually, rich people will still be able to buy protection at the expense of others, democrats will be as fucked as everyone else, and I can guarantee some corporations, many in the military industrial sector, will make a killing in profit from the collective misery.
See, not so bad really !
>>
>>350253
cool strawman.
>>
>>350219
so you admit that the climate has changed, and will change regardless of human intervention. Glad that we've cleared up this wealth redistribution scam.
>>
>>350254
Keep boiling, frog.
>>
>>350445
you're in the same boat as us, faggot
>>
Reminder that the US has reduced its carbon emissions in line with the Paris accords despite leaving them, while China has increased pollution and in fact pollutes far more than us. While US billionaires devise ways to turn atmospheric carbon back into gasoline and plastic in the oceans into usable products, Chinese state run businesses continue to manufacture pollution.
>>
>>349778
>In the next century
We’re only 1/5 into this century and it’s not looking good
>>
>>350494
Clearly someone should tell the people who control the weather to fuck it up a little bit less over the US.
Oh wait, they're probably counting on the fact that the current warming is caused by fossil fuels that were burned 20 years ago, mostly by the US.
>>
>>350226
>How many more decades

3 but it won't be very nice towards the end..
Maybe more if you are part of some financial elite though.
>>
>>350467

That is why he is trying to make you understand it is sinking.
>>
>>348815
This issue is a pointless waste of time.

The environmentalists have such an enormous emotional investment in this issue that they'll never admit that they're wrong, no matter how much evidence piles up.

Right now, they're literally claiming that antarctic-tiet temperatures in north america are proof that the climate is getting hotter. They're just not intelligent people.
>>
>>350516
weather isn't climate you dumb cuck.
>>
>>350507
>argument free response
Yeah, we did some bad shit, but we're doing everything reasonable to undo it. And all you mealy mouthed socialist retards can think is to ask us to do insane things that simply will not work, BECAUSE WE ARE NO LONGER THE PROBLEM. If you idiots got your way Bill gates would never have been able to fund carbon engineering, and China would STILL be polluting far more than us. Maybe suggest something that is even remotely feasible and we'll talk, but if the green new deal is your game, there will be blood in the streets before the American people will allow you idiots to drive us, as a nation, to poverty and starvation.
>>
>>348815

https://electroverse.net/professor-valentina-zharkova-breaks-her-silence-and-confirms-super-grand-solar-minimum/
>>
>>350516
>no matter how much evidence piles up.
I guess years of temperature observations via satellites and weather stations aren't evidence but one major weather event is "evidence" that singlehandedly invalidates all the millions of gigabytes of global temperature observations ever made.
>>
>>350524
years of research we have on hand which is what, less than 200 years really?
versus the entire history of the planet earth and its cycles and shifts...

nothing unordinary is happening, albeit we may be speeding up the process. the earth is stabilizing.
>>
climate change is the leftist rapture
>>
>>350523
Oh fuck, pollute more!
>>
>>350507

>It doesn't matter that the US isn't the problem. Pay your carbon tax and import more rapefugees
>>
>>350540
> the US isn't the problem
The US is still producing enough greenhouse gasses to continue global warming all on its own even if everyone else stops. The idea that the US is no longer a problem is nothing but an attempt to avoid doing anything by blaming someone else. We won't be able to stall climate change if the US is going to do nothing but demand that everyone else changes while it continues business as usual.
>>
>>350518
>Weather isn't climate

I'll remember that the next time you environmentalists go on a rant about how it's the "hottest day in two years" and get your panties in a knot
>>
>>350524
Satellite data shows no warming since 1998.

And over here in science-land, if the data says your theory is rubbish, then that means that your theory is rubbish.
>>
>>350546
> Satellite data shows no warming since 1998.
That's not true.
https://www.climate.gov/news-features/climate-qa/did-global-warming-stop-1998
>>
>>350547
Yes it is

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/01/12/satellite-records-and-slopes-since-1998-are-not-statistically-significant-now-includes-november-and-december-data/
>>
>>350548
> picks the highest place to start that he can
> picks the lowest place to end that he can
> claims that this shows that there is no warming
> ignores all other data from both before and after those points
That's pretty much the exact opposite of good science.
>>
>>348815
End of the world by whatever cause has been predicted many times before and false every time. Excuse me if I take this newest Doomsday prophecy with a grain of salt.
>>
>>350550
Fact: No global warming since 1998
>>
>>350553
Only if you stop paying attention at just the right point and ignore all other data that might contradict that.
>>
>>350554
Fact: No global warming since 1998
>>
>>350555
You know, just repeating that over and over again doesn't make it good science. You're still cherry-picking data to fit your conclusion.
>>
>>350558
Fact: No global warming since 1998.

It's the satellite data that says this, not me. If the data says that your theory is rubbish, then your theory is rubbish. That's how science works.
>>
>>350560
Picking and choosing which data points you use because it fits your conclusion is not how science works.
>>
>>350561
Fact: No global warming since 1998.

Source: The Data
>>
>>350563
> Source: The data points I selectively chose because they support my conclusion
Fixed that for you.
>>
>>350522
>Yeah, we did some bad shit, but we're doing everything reasonable to undo it.
Hardly. Your president denies climate change is real, has filled the EPA with deniers, is rolling back the clean power plan, and re-opening coal plants. Your emissions actually rose in 2018, reversing a 3 year decline. Even that much quoted "decline" is pretty much bullshit since it's based on the highest level in 2005 - your country is still producing Co2 at levels highter than it was in the 90's.
You talk about China as if it isn't your problem anymore - It was largely the US that got us here so don't start with the dindu bullshit.
>socialist retards can think is to ask us to do insane things that simply will not work
Like what exactly ? Have a leader that isn't a denier that panders to corporate power ? A commitment to dealing with AGW that involves doing something beyond denying it on twitter ? I'm mean, just do something for fucks sake - it doesn't have to involve a centralised economy and everyone in matching boiler suits but at least do something ffs.
>If you idiots got your way Bill gates would never have been able to fund carbon engineering
That's just fantasy though isn't it ?
>there will be blood in the streets before the American people will allow you idiots
And this is just hyperbole and bullshit.
>>
>>350568
Are you guys on this site yet?
http://www.abhota.info/
>>
>>350548
Lol classic wattsupwiththat deception
>zoom right in to 20 of the 22 hottest years on record
>ignore all previous temperature records
>Blatantly misapply the statistical significance interval of 95%
>ignore and don't mention all well understood natural factors contributing to variation in the 1998-present dataset
>Still admit there is a 70% chance the earth has warmed since 1998
>Post brainlet food on blog as evidence that global warming is a scam
>....
>Profit?
>>
>>350574
so much for discussion then.
>>
>>350581
Tell me more about how the world is going to end and about how you, personally, are going to save us

I wanna know all the details
>>
>>350582
I personally do my part to stop global warming.
I don't use plastic straws, I drive a Prius, I make sure to stick one penis in both my mouth and my rectum, daily, and I use my spare money to purchase carbon credits
>>
>>350582
>>350593
It's good that you've kept a sense of humor about this whole thing, useful to have a coping strategy.
Good luck with that !
>>
>>350251
>False equivalence is a logical fallacy in which two completely opposing arguments appear to be logically equivalent when in fact they are not. This fallacy is categorized as a fallacy of inconsistency.
Oh so mother earth is paying climate scientists to do studies on her? wow! amazing.
>>
>>348815
propaganda hit piece again
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mqejXs7XgsU
I'm all for renewables but...
>>
>>350612
>heartland institute video
That's not a valid source though, is it ?
I mean, these are the same fuckers that lobbied on behalf of tobacco companies back in the 90's
Perhaps it's the same deal with climate change as it was with cigarettes ? No one reasonable claims they aren't cancer causing these days - perhaps in 20 years dumb right wing Americans will finally admit there's something to this climate change thing after all. Of course, too late by then...
Way to go you fucking cucks.
>>
vehicles of scientific debate

gold standard: scientific paper or comment (arxiv if you're mad about gatekeepers)
bronze tier: long-form essay with citations
participation trophy: blog post
literal shit tier: youtube video
>>
>>350621
oh sorry i forgot about that dreadful vehicle of communication the ~infographic~

it probably goes somewhere between participation trophy and shit tier
>>
>>350541
>the amount agreed to in the Paris accords are not enough
>because it will never be enough until there is no America
>>
>>350630
>faggy whining fantasies about everyone wanting to destroy america
>refuses to give a shit about the AGW that will likely destroy america.
>>
>>350636
Nah, America is the refuge of the rich who'll pile onboard and start "fighting" global warming.

Then they'll start giving up and fleeing to New Zealand or some other microstate after people start shooting.
>>
>>348815
>-15 C°
>whole nation grinds to a halt
>the greatest nation in the world can't handle a little chill weather
Where did it go all so wrong? That's practically a t-shirt weather.
>>
>>350596
No shit. Clearly a serious reply wasn't warranted. Make a stupid post, get a stupid answer.
>>
>>348815
>voanews.com
The pinnacle of world journalism.
>>
>>349725
Yes, global warming doesn't mean the world gets hotter, but that climate becomes more extreme. Stronger storms, it becomes hotter and colder during heat waves and cold snaps, etc.

It's just there really isn't a way to fear monger climate change to get people to pay attention to it.
>>
>>350690
We're experiencing a new denial tactic right now i think ?
Instead of just chanting that isn't happening, that everything is the same, deniers make a point of "misunderstanding" the whole weather =/= climate bit in an attempt to muddy the waters, confuse the issue etc...
>>
>>350539
ironically i'd make sense to limit now the use of fossil fuels because we'll need them during the Ice Age
>>
>>350699
Climate Change deniers are using 3 tactics.
1. being retarded like Trump where they conflate weather and climate.
2. Admitting it's happening, but denying it's man made.
3. Admitting it's happening and saying it's to late to do anything.
>>
>>350782
You conveniently left out the best tactic they use, which is to say that the way the left wants to deal with climate change would both destroy our economy and not actually accomplish a single thing except for preventing wealthy investment into possible avenues of overcoming climate change.
>daily reminder the US continues to decrease carbon emissions in line with the accords we left while China literally increased their pollution
>daily reminder that Bill gates and other wealthy US billionaires are pouring money into (successful) projects such as carbon engineering which are actually a net negative on carbon pollution
>daily reminder that Al Gore thought we'd be underwater by now, and every climate alarmist model thus far has either already been wrong or is logically untenable due to periods in history which we know giant volcanoes erupted and spewed vast amounts of carbon into the air
>>
>>350656
>no argument detected
>ad hominen
Still waiting on why I should trust people who work for an organization that wants to play world government.
>>
>>350782
he says in a thread saying about how weather is climate and how it proves climate change. nice self awareness.
>>
Very interesting how the "It's cold, so global warming is a hoax" people are quiet on the fact that it's now 53 degrees in February in Michigan.
>>
>>350792
You've conveniently ignored the fact that US emissions actually rose last year - currently they're at mid 90's levels, ie still atrocious.
Bill Gates experiments are far from proven as realistic or viable. How much carbon has been removed by this tech so far ? Fuck all.
Al Gore, volcanoes... man, you're wearing a lots of hats beside that made in China MAGA one - the only thing you left out is that grand solar minimum faggotry you guys are so fond of. Feel free to point me to anything that disproves current climate models though - nothing from the heartland institute though, that stuff is just shite.
>>
>>350807
you can't be this thick really, no one is...
>>
>>350819
http://notrickszone.com/2019/02/03/polar-vortex-of-controversy-experts-slam-polar-vortex-global-warming-claim-suggest-public-trickery/
>>
>>350821
>The message from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), which is devoted to climate science and information, includes a link citing research that severe snowstorms may be even more likely in a warming global climate because higher ocean temperatures appear to create more moisture.

They literally do the exact same thing as Trump just in reverse.
>>
>>350806
Got any evidence for that tinfoil troll?
>>
>>350826
https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/outcomedocuments/agenda21
>Agenda 21 is a comprehensive plan of action to be taken globally, nationally and locally by organizations of the United Nations System, Governments, and Major Groups in every area in which human impacts on the environment.
>>
>>350820
https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2018/jun/18/environmental-protection-agency/are-greenhouse-emissions-down-under-donald-trump-e/
>tl:dr emissions did decline, albeit slightly less than under Obama, you're a fucking liar.
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/07/carbon-engineering-and-harvard-find-way-to-convert-co2-to-gasoline.html
>tl:dr Bill gates' invention HAS been proven to work and has been in operation for a while now, you're a fucking liar
Finally, your last argument (well just disprove the CURRENT model) is idiotic because you have not specified one. There are many, and you seem to be uneducated in addition to dishonest if you aren't aware that a primary means of discounting your models is looking at periods in geological history and seeing what was going on depending on what was going on in the atmosphere. Volcanic eruptions spew VAST amounts of carbon into the air, and there have been more than a few in history to look at. And in case you weren't aware, Al Gore was the guy who originally popularized the issue with apocalyptic climate models. Besides that, my argument is based on your word and model being untrustworthy as evidenced by how frequently (all of them) the climate models pushed by you guys have been wrong. So provide a model that is accurate first, and then provide your policy prescription. The merits of both can be debated against the actual projected damage and the actual projected benefit.
>>
>>350828
Not to say that there weren't climate alarmists who were wrong way before then, there were, he just made the movie.
>>
>>350823
Figuratively, you're an idiot because the reverse of what Trump is doing is what is correct.
>>
>>350827
>the Statement of principles for the Sustainable Management of Forests
>1992
Still waiting for that proof
>>
>>350828
Anon you should call the scientists, I don't think they realise that CO2 was higher back when our oceans were sulfuric and there was one continent. You should also let them know about your new breakthrough that volcanic eruptions have a positive radiative forcing effect not a negative one. If all of the cities and bridges and people survived back then, we'll be fine now right?
>>
>>350835
Oh, right, how silly of me!

When was this, by the way? was it 55 or 65 MILLION YEARS AGO?

I remember something else happening around that time...
>>
>>350830
OK MB figuratively, still use every time we have extreme weather as proof of their theory. Oh its hot, global warming, really cold, proof of climate change, oh we had a fire, climate change, hurricanes, climate change. its pretty easy for your predictions to be true when literally any weather event is supposedly proof of the theory.

>>350832
Read behind the Green Mask UN Agenda 21. protip: you wont.
>>
>>350839
>Oh its hot, global warming, really cold, proof of climate change, oh we had a fire, climate change, hurricanes, climate change. its pretty easy for your predictions to be true when literally any weather event is supposedly proof of the theory.
That's because it is.
>>
>>350840
Isn't science supposed to be able to predict things? Your theory is literally anything could happen. Oh hey look things happened! I must be right. Pathetic.
>>
>>350843
How about you get the shit out of your eyes?

Climate scientists have been calling this since the 80s, and CORRECTLY.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2018/jun/25/30-years-later-deniers-are-still-lying-about-hansens-amazing-global-warming-prediction
>>
>>350837
Yeah I'm glad we designed our cities and economies based on conditions 55 million years ago
>>
>>350835
>>350837
All right you fucking idiot,
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/earthtalks-volcanoes-or-humans/
Read this article and understand that volcanoes have been around for fucking EVER and we can take a look back and see what the world is like. You know, geologists. Scientists? Understand? We can use what they know to figure out what was going on in the past. Yes, up to 55 million years ago, and they can compare the (relative lack of) ice ages to the (relative profundity of) volcanoes erupting, and given the vast amounts of carbon these things belch out we (well someone of more intellect than yourself at least) can figure out how what your models predict should have effected the climate back then, given the amount of carbon that should have been in the atmosphere before and after these eruptions. And that's one of the main ways your models are disproven. That, or just fucking being wrong when the time comes every time.
>>
>>350846
You realise that climate models have 100,000s of variables right?
>>
>>350846
So you admit that the environment is drastically changing and if left unchecked will result in humanity's extinction? because large numbers of volcano eruptions are the primary cause of at least two extinction events.
>>
>>350828
>you're a fucking liar.

from the thing you posted - did you even read it ? or were you counting on my not doing so ?

>Did greenhouse gas emissions fall on Trump’s watch?
When we asked the EPA for supporting evidence, they pointed us to a report titled, "Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks." This includes data collected and released regularly by the EPA, most recently in April 2018.
The report found that the amount of greenhouse emissions by the United States fell in the most recent year. But there’s a problem: Due to the lag in data collection, that decline occurred during President Barack Obama’s final year in office, 2016, not under Trump.
>In addition, the EIA estimated that emissions will actually rise over the next two years. In 2018, the agency forecasts a 1.1 percent increase, and in 2019, it projects a 0.2 percent increase.

you can read about that increase here:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-12-13/u-s-greenhouse-gas-emissions-rising-again-defying-trump-boasts
or here
https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/08/politics/us-carbon-emissions-rise-2018/index.html
or here:
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/08/climate/greenhouse-gas-emissions-increase.html
>>
>>350844
How about you speak without using profanities?
>Guardian, yeah no.
ill just post this again
>1981 James Hansen, NASA scientist, predicted a global warming of “almost unprecedented magnitude” in the next century that might even be sufficient to melt and dislodge the ice cover of West Antarctica, eventually leading to a worldwide rise of 15 to 20 feet in the sea level.

>Reality check: Since 1993 (24 years) we have totaled 72 mm (3 inches) of sea level rise instead of the 4 feet that corresponds to one-fourth of a century. The alarming prediction is more than 94% wrong, so far.

Just ignore the ones he gets wrong though, and accuse me of cherry picking of course.
>>
>>350852
Hansen predicted 3 scenarios. How much of an idiot are you to assume that two of them don't exist?
>>
>>350853
Again with the baby rage insults. Sorry I made fun of your religion buddy, clearly there is no point talking to you.
>predicted 3 scenarios
again science is supposed to be able to predict 1 thing occurring not 3 and then picking and choosing the ones you get right and screaming I WIN! And sea level rise is the one that would actually be most catastrophic.
>>
>>350852
>in the next century
meaning this one, the one that isn't quite over yet but is already showing signs of glacial retreat, record temperatures, extreme weather events, and a melting permafrost, all the result of the co2 we emitted 20 years ago.
the century where we're still pumping co2 into the atmosphere at ever increasing levels with no viable tech solution yet implemented to remove it.
yeah, that one.
i think you'd be better served by reading just how Hansen arrived at his rather alarming predictions instead of trying to debunk them with dumb divisional math, ie look at the feedback loops perhaps...
.
>>
>>350855
>science is supposed to be able to predict 1 thing occurring not 3

I suspect Hansen was giving up various scenarios based on the level of co2 emissions we might mange to get down to. Pretty reasonable really - the IPCC does much the same thing.
>>
>>350860
This is exactly what he was doing. It was the one variable he knew we could control, so he predicted multiple scenarios based on how much control we would exercise.

He was right.
>>
>>350852
I got a feeling you deny the holocaust too given how you're acting.
>>
>>350862
Only a fucking idiot believes blindly in jewish narrative.
>>
>>350864
lol
>>
Another /pol/ tries and fails to be scientific thread. Glorious
>>
>>350862
Oh look Godwins law. Where is the massive sea level rise? Where is it guys? Shouldnt New York be getting flooded now?
http://www.worldpropertyjournal.com/featured-columnists/celebrity-homes-column-al-gore-tipper-gore-oprah-winfrey-michael-douglas-christopher-lloyd-fred-couples-nicolas-cage-peter-reckell-kelly-moneymaker-2525.php
Actions speak louder than words.
>>
>>350864
>everything I don't like is x
You're legitimately an imbecile.
>>
>>350869
>Mickey Rourke does not understand all aspects of how a lightbulb works therefore lightbulbs do not exist
the absolute state of /pol/
>>
>>350871
No argument detected. Wheres the flooding guys? Where is it?
>>
>>350869
>Oh look Godwins law.
Would be a great point if >>350864 didn't prove him right.
>>
>>350874
That wasnt me. Why would i say fucking idiot after just complaining about profanities and childish insults? More than likely it was one of you guys false flagging.
>>
>>350873
if you live long enough, that is, if someone doesn't stave in your skull in the next 30 years for being so fucking annoying, you'll likely get to see it.
.
>>
>>350848
Yep, probably why they're so inaccurate.

>>350850
Nope, don't admit any of that, and i don't know how you got that from my post at all. If you would look without a veil of hysteria on you'd realise that volcanic eruptions put out carbon on a scale similar to literal decades of all of humankind's carbon output. Now, i want you to think really hard, can you remember any large volcanic eruptions that DIDN'T throw us into an ice age? Here's a hint: if you're old enough to post here the answer should be yes.

>>350851
>let me just cherry pick what i want out of the article
I'll just copy and paste their conclusion paragraphs then if you want to play this game.
Our ruling

The EPA said, "The science is clear, under President Trump greenhouse gas emissions are down."

Emissions did fall slightly between 2016 and 2017. But the rate of decline slowed under Trump and the month-to-month changes have been modest.

>the rate of decline slowed
>not stopped
>not reversed
Meaning you've been caught in a lie AGAIN because even without government overregulation and with regulations getting the axe taken to them we STILL are reducing emissions while China STILL produces far more pollution than us.
>>
>>350877
lol
>>
>>350893
And again, you've conveniently ignored the 3 links i posted to reputable news outlets reporting that US emissions are rising, are currently at the same level that they were in the 90's..
Re the article you posted links to, an article you were apparently to lazy to read - the gist of it was that the EPA were sort of full of shit:. You simply posted their statement.

>The report found that the amount of greenhouse emissions by the United States fell in the most recent year. But there’s a problem: Due to the lag in data collection, that decline occurred during President Barack Obama’s final year in office, 2016, not under Trump.
And
>In addition, the EIA estimated that emissions will actually rise over the next two years. In 2018, the agency forecasts a 1.1 percent increase, and in 2019, it projects a 0.2 percent increase.

That's from the article you posted links to..
I'm not the liar and cherrypicker here, you are.
Why you bother is beyond me - anyone can google the correct stats.
..
>>
>>350897
Haha XD
>>
>>350893
>volcanic eruptions put out carbon on a scale similar to literal decades of all of humankind's carbon output
Wrong again. Mate you need to read more before commenting
>According to the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the world’s volcanoes, both on land and undersea, generate about 200 million tons of carbon dioxide (CO2) annually, while our automotive and industrial activities cause some 24 billion tons of CO2 emissions every year worldwide. Despite the arguments to the contrary, the facts speak for themselves: Greenhouse gas emissions from volcanoes comprise less than one percent of those generated by today’s human endeavors.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/earthtalks-volcanoes-or-humans/
>>
>>350619
You obviously knew so much you didn't even watch the video, so nice going there. No one's saying the climate isn't changing. The climate's always changing. What is in doubt is if humans are causing it, and those scientists are saying in the video that this is all normal and levels are WAY BELOW what's been seen in the past, and that for 95% of Earth's history it's been where we're going and not where we've been the past 30 years.
>>
So I'm thinking the solution is just to annex the rest of the world and forcefully install nuclear power plants in all their countries. No matter what we do here it'll just be a drop in the bucket compared to China now and probably far less than that in Africa in another decade or two. Forcing the whole world to rely on the only plausible alternative fuel source is the only way. New age of US enviroimperialism NOW!
>>
>>351587
>CO2 levels are normal
Lol
http://www.johnenglander.net/wp/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/420-kyr-graph-US-w-download-Englander-1080x816.jpg
>>
>>351587>>351587
>You obviously knew so much you didn't even watch the video,
Yes, that's right, i do.
Look, if you want to suck up to corporate interests, go ahead - don't expect everyone to rally around you though.
>>
>>351633
is this one of those estimated temperature graphs
>>
>>351587
>heartland institute
yeah, nah.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2017/07/26/heartlands-6-reasons-to-be-a-climate-change-skeptic-are-six-demonstrable-lies/
>>
>>351589
We could just offer good deals to build nuclear power plants and renewables in their nation.

We won't but we could.
>>
>>352135
>We could just offer good deals to build nuclear power plants and renewables in their nation.
They generally go massively over budget, and take decades more than planned to finish. A large scale nuclear rollout would require major changes to how the nuclear industry works, and not just "remove all the regulations!".
>>
>>351721
The data is derived from oxygen isotopes in ice cores from Greenland and Antarctica, deep sea sediment isotopes, ancient coral reefs and speleothems, salt marsh core samples and physical evidence of ancient shorelines. The anomalous CO2 concentrations which currently exist are a problem given the positive feedback cycles which exist between temperature and CO2.
>>
>>352169
>The anomalous CO2 concentrations which currently exist are a problem given the positive feedback cycles which exist between temperature and CO2.
That's true, but probably not a helpful way of looking at it.
A better model is that the climate has a particular CO2 sensitivity on each timescale. On the timescale we live in, the rise of CO2 from 280ppm to >400ppm is sufficient to generate a significant temperature change.
>>
its insane to me that American conservatives are the only ones in the world under the thumb of lobbyists and politicians enough to deny climate change. even other countries that dont care about fixing it at least admit that its happening
>>
>>350852
right now the ocean is absorbing a lot of co2, which is acidfying it. once the ocean is co2-saturated, the co2 in the air is going to climb extremely quickly
>>
>>348815

NBC = no body cares

Go cry the sky is falling elswhere cuck.

Climate will always be changing.

Adapt or die.

Fuck off.
>>
>>352729
s o e d g y
>>
climate change is a leftist doomsday cult
>>
>>352643
I agree. Amazing watching the issue become so divisive over the years.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=69&v=yzDjjUAt3zc
>>
>>352737
Really ? I thought it was just an informed concern about the future, the world we're leaving for our kids and theirs.
>>
>>352750
Nope. It's definitely a retarded doomsday cult.
>>
>>352784
prove it.
>>
>the "left" wing likes to talk about climate change but also likes mass immigration from the third world to the first world which would obviously increase C02 levels.

Can someone on the left explain this to me I would like to see some advanced mental gymnastics today.
>>
>>352806
i'd imagine pretty much anything is advanced mental gymnastics to someone so entrenched in partisan politics as yourself though, no ?
>>
>>352821
If you don't want to answer the question you could just not respond, no?
>>
>>352806
I'd like better border security actually but the effect you speak of seems like a drop in the bucket. Only thing I could see saving us is a huge push toward nuclear or something similar. Building massive walls might delay the worst by a year or two, sure.
>>
>>352911
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/jul/12/want-to-fight-climate-change-have-fewer-children

Population would be declining in first world countries if it wasn't for immigration so not accepting any more immigration would seem to be a pretty simple way of reducing our C02 output by whatever amount of population we decline each year times 58.6 tonnes of C02. I dont really know how much it compares to other C02 factors so maybe it is just a drop in the bucket, but I dont know. The wall in specific your probably right about though as its not like the US wont try to grow its pop. with legal immigration anyways.

Also i know you don't work for the guardian or anything, but I just want to point out the kind of obvious bias in the media that pisses people off, note how the same outlet posts in favor of reducing native populations to fight climate change, but when they write an article about immigration the topic doesn't seem to occur to them.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/dec/20/immigration-force-for-good-labour-migrants
>>
>>352963
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/may/17/immigration-good-for-britain-bust-myths-austerity

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/dec/23/new-immigration-proposals-are-economic-and-political-nonsense

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jan/11/migration-benefit-world-un-global-compact

https://www.theguardian.com/science/brain-flapping/2013/nov/04/immigration-is-essential-science

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2018/dec/04/politicians-may-be-panicking-about-immigration-australians-are-not

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/feb/04/working-class-lives-more-fraught-not-down-to-immigration

Just so i dont get accused of cherrypicking :)
>>
>>352795
Tell me more about how the world is about to end. I wanna know all the details.
>>
>>350792
Daily reminder that these dumb bastards constantly harp about "only 10 years left!!" but refuse to accept that nuclear could replace all coal, oil and even nat gas (but at a higher cost) while wind and solar simply can't, especially if we're going to replace all cars with electric. Protip: Car charging happens at night when solar panels don't work.
>>
>>352795
just like all doomsday cults, you keep predicting the end then it doesn't happen and you push the date back.
>>
>>353234
>just like all doomsday cults, you keep predicting the end then it doesn't happen and you push the date back.
Actually reading the predictions climatologists have made isn't hard. It deniers who won't shut up about "doomsday", not scientists.
>>
>>353234

I asked for some proof of your assertion that the science of climate change is some kind of commie plot - I've had fuck all from you in terms of explanation though, just more of your lib-hating partisan drivel.
>>
The carbon tax will encourage innovation for greener technologies, just like minimum wage encourages innovation to automate low skill jobs.
>>
>>353244
oh ok then I was right to not give a shit
>>
>>353438
That doesn't follow at all.
>>
>>353477
He seems to think if he ridicules climate change and the science behind it, labels it a partisan issue and mocks those that want to address it, that it will simply all go away.
Not exactly a reasonable or realistic strategy.
>>
>>353511
What if Global warming isn't the end of the world?
>>
>>353521

It's the end of one world and the beginning of another.

It's not a human extinction event, not by itself, but it's going to make us awfully pissy, which makes other man-made extinction events more likely to happen.
>>
>>353521
Human progress getting crippled by massive bloody wars over arable land isn't technically the end of the world, great insight.
>>
>>353521
does an issue have to be apocalyptic to address it?
>>
>>353533
>It's the end of one world and the beginning of another.
Come on are you seriously telling me this doesn't sound like a fucking cult.
>>
When you're actually ready to get on India and China's back, then you can call me. Not a second before.
>>
>>353659
>When you're actually ready to get on India and China's back, then you can call me.
They emit a fraction of what the US does per capita.
>>
>>353767
That's because half the population of both countries live in squalor. The US emissions are mostly from electric power and transportation, both of which are well on their way towards drastic improvement due to natural industry forces (electric cars are becoming cheaper and popular, solar and wind are becoming more competitive).
China's CO2 emissions are something like 80% from coal burning. They have massive coal infrastructure while ours has been mostly natural gas for a while. Imo China should go full bore into Nuclear.
>>
>>353767
Who cares about per capita it's about total volume.
If I'm a single person who burns a wood fire every day that doesn't make my household the greatest threat to global warming because my per capita is so high
>>
>>350593
based and hilarious pilled
>>
>>353834
Wood fuel is actually very low carbon since you're only releasing recently sequestered CO2, and tree farms renew their crop. Burning wood pellets is even better since the fire can be smaller and hotter (thus more efficient) with forced induction and a consistent feed of low moisture content fuel. Wood heat is considered carbon neutral because the fossil fuel burned per ton of output wood is minimal.
>>
>>348815
>establishment media dooms public discourse by crafting every world event into a hitpiece on Donald Trump somehow
>>
>>348815
>Muh climate change
>Duh world is ending
>Gimme shekels

Why should I care about "climate change"? Gimme 3 reasons that aren't "muh feels"
>>
>>353947
Rising food prices as crops and fishing fail.

Coastal and low-elevation areas being submerged as sea levels rise.

And public bankruptcy as natural disasters become steadily more severe - case in point.
>>
>>353951
>Rising food prices as crops and fishing fail.
Fishing won't fail if the climate changes. And the amount of arable land in my country will increase if it gets warmer.

>>353951
>Coastal and low-elevation areas being submerged as sea levels rise.
Sucks to be those losers

>>353951
>public bankruptcy as natural disasters become steadily more severe -
Meh. People should just buy more insurance
>>
>>353952
>Fishing won't fail if the climate changes.
It will as the oceans continue to acidify and deoxygenate, only questions are how much and how fast.
>>
>>353952
>And the amount of arable land in my country will increase if it gets warmer.
Won't just get warmer. The seasons get erratic. The summers get hotter, but the amount of time they spend above freezing (IE farmable) changes.

American farmers are already dealing with those problems.

>>353952
>Meh. People should just buy more insurance
They do. The insurance companies, even federal emergency agencies, literally cannot insure against back-to-back hurricanes - there's too much damage. people who filed claims after hurricane Michael STILL haven't recieved money.
>>
>>353863
>based and hilarious pilled
more like totally samefagging and obnoxious
>>
>>353956
>American farmers are already dealing with those problems.

https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-met-climate-change-report-midwest-20181123-story.html
>>
>>353953
>It will as the oceans continue to acidify and deoxygenate, only questions are how much and how fast.
No they won't. That's been debunked. Ocean "acidifiation" is just a crackpot conspiracy theory

>>353956
>Won't just get warmer. The seasons get erratic
You're just making shit up. First it was "global warming means more hurricanes hurrrr" then it was "global warming means fewer hurricanes hurrrr"

>>353956
>They do. The insurance companies, even federal emergency agencies, literally cannot insure against back-to-back hurricanes - there's too much damage. people who filed claims after hurricane Michael STILL haven't recieved money.
Then they should buy more insurance from a better company
None of this shit affects me. All of your arguments boil down to "buh but some farmers don't have insurance" and a bunch of alarmist scare tactics
>>
>>353969
>That's been debunked.
Okay. By who?
>>
>>353834
>Who cares about per capita it's about total volume.
Exactly - it's not about volume per country. The Earth's climate doesn't care about countries.

>If I'm a single person who burns a wood fire every day that doesn't make my household the greatest threat to global warming because my per capita is so high
It does mean that your household is more wasteful than one with four people and solar panels. The people who need to change most are those with the highest per-capita emissions. France is greener than Kuwait.

>>353969
>Ocean "acidifiation" is just a crackpot conspiracy theory
No.

>First it was "global warming means more hurricanes hurrrr" then it was "global warming means fewer hurricanes hurrrr"
The impact of global warming on the NUMBER of hurricanes is minor. Global warming will significantly increase the SEVERITY of hurricanes.

>Then they should buy more insurance from a better company
Asking broke people to find magic fixes to problems caused by a civilization-wide issue is downright stupid.
>>
>>353969
>Ocean acidification debunked.
It's high school level chemistry
https://www.noaa.gov/sites/default/files/styles/scale_crop_1120x534_2x/public/thumbnails/image/pmel-oa-imageee_landscape.jpg?itok=OSCPES7P

>You're just making shit up. First it was "global warming means more hurricanes hurrrr" then it was "global warming means fewer hurricanes hurrrr
Your reading comprehension is terrible. Maybe you should Google what erratic means.

>Then they should buy more insurance from a better company
You're probably too young to realise that people and governments can't afford to insure against literally every natural disaster or extreme weather event. Insurance companies are notoriously stingy and sneaky with their insurance coverage. The idea that everybody can totally cover themselves from natural disasters or extremely weather events is naive at best.

Besides, you seem to not realize that after any natural disaster, there are massive economic and cost of living flow on effects during the rebuilding phase, which will never be able to be insured against.
>>
>>353969
>Ocean "acidifiation" is just a crackpot conspiracy theory
sorry bub, i'm gonna need a source on that.
>>
>>349770
When you can't make a coherent statement.
>>
>>349791
the Chinese and every developing nation

China isnt trying its hand at renewable energy?
Other countries arent?
Are any countries over 50%?
What country is the number one polluter?
>>
>>350782
Don't forget all of those that focus on carbon and ignore methane and other greenhouse gases that do a much better job of heating this bitch up.
Was there any news over the last year of relaxation of methane regulations?
>>
>>353166
Protip, get a fucking lobbyist.
Jesus christ coal found a fucking retard, why can't nuclear get off its fucking ass?
>>
>>353952
>>Coastal and low-elevation areas being submerged as sea levels rise.
>Sucks to be those losers

The only benefit will be watching fags from texas to florida get their shit fucked up. Watching assholes in Tennessee and Kentucky get washed the fuck out, along with Nodak.
I bet Montana and Idaho bros are feelin comfy.
>>
>>354000
You'd think after watching something like ten thousand square miles of the Texas coast flood, killing hundreds of thousands of cattle and costing millions in damage to the lowland farms, they'd figure out this isn't a 'coastal elite libtards' problem.
>>
Three men standing in almost naked in front of a sign that says -50F.

https://www.greaterfool.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/ALASKA.jpg?x64811

Toxic masculinity?
>>
>>354018
They're Alaskan. That's like mid-fall for them.

Pretty much everything in Fairbanks is built for that kind of temperature, including the people. The Midwest and New England...not so much.
>>
>>354018
toxic homosexuality
there are 4 men in that picture btw
>>
>>354013
They consider it an acceptable price to own the libs. They're perfectly happy to kill themselves and their own kids by taking away the health care they need to live just to own the libs, and mere property damage is nothing next to that.
>>
>>354410
moron, fuck off back to /pol/
>>
>Well, it happened again. Amy Klobuchar announced that she is running for President, talking proudly of fighting global warming while standing in a virtual blizzard of snow, ice and freezing temperatures. Bad timing. By the end of her speech she looked like a Snowman(woman)!

It's like he literally can't help himself
Why is he so impulsive
>>
>>349781
Unless you somehow have stable source of energy that does not burn fossil fuels your green gasoline is net positive in CO2.
Sucks how fearmongers ousted nuclear, ey?
>>
>>354768
Nuclear reactors in cars are overdue
>>
legalizing weed will fix climate change, maaaaaaannnn
>>
First of all humanity is by far not the dominant species on earth.
All human activity combined has a throughput of 20 terawatts. Cyanobacteria alone blast out 450 terawatts.
>>
Takes a special kind of retard to worry about the globe warming when we just had a record arctic blast.
>>
>>355210
Dude, global warming is freezing the planet.
>>
+1 °C would be pretty amazing and extend growing seasons tremendously
-1 °C is armageddon with mass starvation, but that's exactly the Socialists always want isn't it
>>
>>355209
wow, this is actually correct
the jewish media have lied to us
>>
>>355210
>>355211
>>355213
Your misunderstanding of science is about as clever as heraclitus covering himself with shit.your lack of knowledge will kill your entire family when you starve and are struck by anti biotic resistant diseases that will flourish in the new world.after nine missed meals your neighbor will kill you for bread."global warming" is going to garuntee you miss those 9 meals."Omae wa mou shindeiru..."-the world.
>>
>>355213
Fucking idiot plants don't work that way.species have ranges and if it is to hot or cold they die.either event fucks up agriculture to apocalyptic levels.americans don't know starvation and know even less about mass extinction.everything you know and love today will die or wish it was dead,soon enough I fear.god have mercy.
>>
>>355220
Let me guess. Trump is not your president.
>>
>>355222
>>355220
Sounds like you are in hell already. Poor guy.
>>
>>348815
this person looks like they don't belong in a cold climate
>>
>>355220
climate change cultists are so funny. tell me the one about the final judgement day again.
>>
>>355250
>tell me the one about the final judgement day again.
Oh, what page does that show up on in the IPCC reports?
It seems kind of notable that you had to reach that far away from real climatology to find something to criticise.
>>
>>355274
The other guy did it for him
>>
>>355274
>real climatology
but enough about al gore lol
>>
>>350846
you do realize there have been multiple mass-extinction events right? Trilobites, dinosaurs, hell the earth used to be purple because bacteria changed the atmosphere from one gas to another. Life has changed earth before.

Also, we can measure and control for co2 released by volcanoes, because we have measured how much they release on average. The increase in co2 measured in our atmosphere is far more than what they produce.
>>
>>355338
>things have changed before
>and there are volcanoes
>therefore believe al gore and pay your carbon tax goy
interesting take
>>
>>355220
You environmentalists are going to be really heartbroken in 20 years when the world still hasn't ended, aren't you?

Not the rest of us though. We've all been laughing at you retards for years
>>
>>355375
they'll reschedule doomsday back a few years, just like all cults. or maybe they'll go heaven's gate and mass suicide to force the issue.
>>
>>355377
>mass suicide to force the issue.
as long as they don't take me or mine out with them, that would be great
>>
>>355375
Well, laugh it up I guess ?
I don't think your doing so will really change the reality of the situation though, think that the scientists and climatologists are probably right in stating that we have to actually deal and do so soon, not just ignore it.
But hey, if it works for you.
Sorry, but the Heavens Gate option doesn't really appeal - you need us guys around anyway to justify your partisan worldview, I wouldn't want to deprive you of that.
>>
>>355375
>>355377
The only people talking about "the end of the world" are deniers, not climatologists. Also, "In the future everyone will see I'm right" isn't actually a convincing argument.
>>
>>355346
See
>>350965

I believe in numbers only. Come at me with some numbers
>>
>>348815
Yet, they don't think about the moving magnetic north pole that's been erratically shifting away from the geographical north pol for decades now. Lately it even shifted about 40-50 kilometers a year.
>>
>>349858
Let's not forget about the part that no one ever talks back in a clear and concise manner.
>>
>>350246
>Anon's justification for believing a lie.
>>
>>349770
"Nothing like this has ever happened before"

I would like to see the data set you're using.
>>
>>355473
Why is climate change a lie ?
And why is my caring about the future of my kids, their welfare and the world they'll inherit, proof of this lie ?
Again, you're not really making any sense at all.
>>
>>348815
Why are people still pushing this global warming nonsense.

The pseudo science doesn't mesh with reality.
>>
>>348816
Reality proves global warming isn't happening.
>>
>>355551
>>355549
Thank you for your post !
Remember, Koch industries will pay you .03 cents for every post you make - they don't even have to make sense !
>>
>>355551
in the same sense that looking up proves that the earth ends in sky
>>
>>355466
Remember back in 2007 when Al Gore claimed that there was a "scientific consensus" that the ice caps would be gone by 2015 and that "catastropic sea level rises" would destroy coastal cities around the globe? And that "le ebil deniers" belong in jail? Dat all duh poor ol' polar bears are gonna drown?

It's 2019 now. The ice caps are still there.

So I guess him and the other crazies were wrong then huh
>>
>>355619
>in 2007 Al Gore claimed that there was a "scientific consensus" that the ice caps would be gone by 2015
Do you have a source for that?

And what makes you think that Al Gore is an expert on climatology? His opinions don't hold any more weight than yours or mine.
>>
>>355623
>Do you have a source for that?
Yeah. His nobel prize acceptance speech and every newspaper in the western world that reported on it

>>355623
>And what makes you think that Al Gore is an expert on climatology? His opinions don't hold any more weight than yours or mine.
He took the figure from a peer reviewed scientific paper.
>>
>>355619
do you really pin your worldview on what al gore says? He's a fucking politician with a message to sell. Which if you havent noticed- 'an inconvenient truth', is a household name so his message has been heard. Of course he's going to make it seem more urgent than it really is. The sea level slowly rising an inch or so every few years just isnt that scary and who gives a fuck about Miami and shri lanka anyways.

Also, the ice caps have decreased greatly in size. I dont know how you can watch a video like this and be 'whatever'

Do you honestly believe that as stuff melts on earth, that sea levels will not rise? Isn't that kind of a basic idea? What divine being is going to keep the world the same? Fuck, the whole midwest used to be an ocean! Dino's on each side!

Source: NASA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1&v=qHE0n5c6-6g
>>
>>355635
>Also, the ice caps have decreased greatly in size. I dont know how you can watch a video like this and be 'whatever'

Oh no no no no

https://www.plateclimatology.com/antarcticas-larsen-ice-shelf-breakup-driven-by-geological-heat-flow-not-climate-change

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2008/01/22/surprise-theres-an-active-volcano-under-antarctic-ice/
>>
>>355639
you do realize the video I posted is of the north pole, right?

Also, you just helped my point by posting more evidence that the earth is warming, thanks! Feel free to keep posting!


I love how you are posting plate tectonic theories though, like shifting the blame to volcanoes really achieves anything. Like there's any difference between energy from cars and volcanos (other than cars emitting 100X more). Also, 97% of scientists disagree with plate climatology as being the leading cause of the warming. So even if it's peer reviewed and correct, it is a meaningless study that is a side note at best to the scientific community. The vents warming that part of the ice shelf are tiny and scattered, and dormant- the only active volcano is thousands of miles away inland.

You cant just find some heat source somewhere and decide that that debunks co2. That's not how it works. Shit is fucking complicated and you are not in the realm of being able to make an argument here.
>>
>>355650
>He thinks the north pole melting will raise sea levels
>He thinks that a volcano melting ice in antarctica is "more proof of global warming"

The "global warming" crazies are a cult
>>
>>355651
Oh shut the fuck up your troll. Like you are a fucking scientist who did any fucking digging. I'm already proven correct. The onus is on you, retard.

Cults are defined as a small group. You are the small group BEEYATCH.
>>
Save the Vegetables people
>>>/pol/203048877



Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.