Climate Denying PBR drinkers
BTFO
>>74112902
Okay now show me one for the last ten thousand years.
>>74112902
If atheists love science so much, why dont they understand its limitations or definition?
Science does not answer the question of why. It can describe the process by which something functions or has gotten to this point; but it cant explain why it is.
Religion seeks to answer the question of why. Do not say that science has given you that answer, because it shows your ignorance of what science is.
very few of the climate change deniers actually deny the idea of climate change itself. We just dont believe that humans play a role in it, as there is no proof we cause it or play a role that is statistically significant
>>74113610
what why question can science not give an answer for?
dont give me shit like "why do we exist" or "why are we here" because those have already been answered.
Because the atheists, and their little passive aggressive sidekicks the so called secular humanists, have co-opted science as their new religion, Science spelled with a capital S, or sciencegod as I like to call it, the credibility of all scientists has turned to shit. Thanks.
>>74112902
Lol
>>74112902
Lol, atheist jews
>>74112902
Shoo shoo filthy Jew.
>>74112902
Nobody with half a brain denies the climate is changing.
BUT. I will deny that it is mainly our fault. WE contribute like 5% of the problem. The rest is natural occurrences. Mainly the sun.
>>74113216
He wont. Because it will completely blow him the fuck out.
We're coming out of another miniature ice age, for fuck's sake.
>>74113852
Bullshit, faggot.
>>74114092
my dumb nigga
the purpose of life is to create more life, simple as that.
it's human selfishness that makes us contemplate something beyond that. self awareness was a evolutionary mistake and will most likely be humanities downfall
>>74114024
>Mainly the sun.
This. If you stick a slice of bread in a toaster, it's the toaster that cooks it, not the bread itself.
We have a massive ball of nuclear fusion sitting in our galactic back yard.
Of course it's going to have a massive effect on our climate. But no... ooh no, it's gotta be the SUVs.
>>74113852
>why do we exist" or "why are we here
They havent
They can decribe the process by which life has gotten to pint where we are asking this question but the cant answer why there is life at all or why there is a universe.
Also: once more this is a thread where the OP does not post more than once. Therefore it is a slide thread and should be abandoned.
>>74114348
life exists to create more life
also, read up on my high school drop out friends
http://ossfoundation.us/projects/environment/global-warming/milankovitch-cycles
the milankovitch cycle is the main reason for "short" term climate change
>measures temp in large cities in 1860s
>measures temps in larger cities in 2016
Oh its hotter now
Also the Antarctic ice sheet has been expanding for the past 5 years
>>74112902
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/apr/21/rahn-the-world-did-not-end/
>“The Arctic Ocean is warming up, icebergs are growing scarcer, and in some places the seals are finding the water too hot. Reports from fishermen, seal hunters, and explorers all point to a radical change in climate conditions and hitherto unheard-of temperatures in the Arctic zone. Exploration expeditions report that scarcely any ice has been met as far north as 81 degrees 29 minutes. Within a few years it is predicted that due to the ice melt the sea will rise and make most coastal cities uninhabitable.” — from an Associated Press report published in The Washington Post on Nov. 2, 1922.
>You may have noticed that the predicted disaster 92 years ago did not happen, nor have other predicted catastrophes from the global-warming crowd.
>On July 5, 1989, Noel Brown, then the director of the New York office of the United Nations Environment Program, warned of a “10-year window of opportunity to solve” global warming — “entire nations could be wiped off the face of Earth by rising sea levels if the global-warming trend is not reversed by the year 2000. Coastal flooding and crop failures would create an exodus of ‘eco-refugees,’ threatening political chaos.”
>The U.N.-forecast disaster never occurred. However, thanks must be given to Mother Nature for the unexpected 17-year pause in global warming rather than the actions of mankind, which have continued to spew out carbon dioxide at record levels. This little error has not stopped the doomsayers at the U.N.
>In 2007, the chief of the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) said, “If there’s no action before 2012, that’s too late. What we do in the next two to three years will determine our future. This is the defining moment.” It is now 2014 and nothing was done before 2012, so, since it is “too late,” why spend any more time and money fighting global warming?
>>74114738
>life exists to create more life
That does not answer the question of why we exist or why there is a universe in the first place.
What you said is close to a religious answer; life exists because God exists and God is life.
>>74114406
Single reply thread starting should be a bannable offense
Why do people still need religion to tell them what to do
>>74114804
Good job mexican intellectual
>>74114235
You're using toaster analogies to argue against decades of scientific research done by people with PhD's and state of the art equipment?
>>74115013
but it does. there is no inherent reason as to why life began. it was a mistake, a result of a chemical reaction. and once the most basic form of life formed, it evolved to the point of creating more life.
the universe's creation is the same, a reaction.
there is no real end game for the universe, it just goes along with the physics and rules set in place.
>>74114406
Twice.
>>74113852
Why are electrons attracted to protons.
why do neutrons exist.
>>74115491
>a result of a chemical reaction
That does not explain why there is universe instead of nothing.
Is there a block in your head when it comes to this? I'm sure you will say the same about me.
Life does not explain itself. Thats like making an equation with the first half of it missing and saying there is your answer.
>>74115456
>decades of scientific research done by people with PhD's and state of the art equipment?
weird, ive yet to see any of this "science". For decades.
>>74115821
Why are we discussing origin theories. Non sequitur.
>new illustration of the same old lies
cool thanks
thinking realistically, i do not fear global warming, i do not think it will have a very large impact on my everyday life.
All i know for certain is that the political globalist elites will not do anything about it as it is one of their highest source of votes,
clearly fear makes people vote, we used to have the soviet union to threaten the public with, but now we have the very planet itself.
because they rely on the climate change, you can bet your arse they wont do jack shit to change that but further confuse you about whats actually going on.
so democratic-socialism wont "save the planet"
and capitalism wont for obvious reasons.
what you need, is national socialism.
and preferably a dictatorship.
but then again, i do not believe our planet is threatened by us, and i don't buy the xenophobic, whatever the change in climate, it will be bad bulcrap they are pushing.
openborders for globalism and population rise for cheaper workforce,. . . yay!1!!1!1
>>74116005
> Why are we discussing origin theories. Non sequitur.
>>74113852
> why do we exist" or "why are we here" because those have already been answered.
Just say you dont know, there is nothing wrong with that.
please tell me all about how accurate and thorough temperature measuring devices, worldwide climate/weather reports and icecap measurements were 150+ years ago then maybe using the last 20 years will be a relevant comparison.
>>74116051
Why do you think the North Pole is melting?
Do you deny that millions of tons more carbon in the atmosphere makes the planet warm up?
>>74115806
physics and quarks
>>74115821
>>74116151
but we do know. we exist as a convenient chemical reaction, same as the universe itself.
>>74112902
Tip top kek
Obviously that should be the case but for some reason when society lost religion, society went to shit.
>>74112902
Earth is billions of years old
>here look at this .00001% time slice.
>lol climate deniers BTFO Lmao get gud
>>74114235
>If you stick a slice of bread
Stopped reading there.
>>74116308
Physics doesn't tell us why protons and electrons attract each other, only that they do.
Also, why are their charges what they are? Their weights?
And you can't say, "because of the things that constitute them," because he same questions can be asked of those particles.
>>74112902
How do we even know that science is real? We never will.
>>74116696
because of gravity and electrical forces
physics can't go beyond its own bounds, things of greater density pull in things of lesser because the laws of physics
>>74116567
>being this butthurt
>>74115906
Quality data tampering.
>>74115456
And that research has had some spectacular failures.
Source: Dr. John R. Christy, the Distinguished Professor of Atmospheric Science and Director of the Earth System Science Center at the University of Alabama, Huntsville.
>>74117122
Why are the laws of physics what they are? This is the point. Science can continue to define all the laws but not why we have them.
Sir isaac newton said something along the lines of "I have explained gravity, not why there is gravity" and this is something you have no answer for. Science can only observe what is here, not why it is here, and hence science and religion are unrelated and don't contradict.
>>74114024
>>74114235
Holy shit you two are retarded.
>>74114738
>life exists to create more life
Then why do atheists always support pro-faggot initiatives when it's against nature?
Checkmate atheicucks.
>>74121536
no one ever said you had to fulfill the purpose of life. humans are intelligent enough to choose, and if that intelligence eventually brings about the extinction of humanity then we all simply lose. other life will continue and maybe one day a superior, more survivable species will evolve
>>74121303
Feel free to explain why.
>>74121303
Not an argument
>>74113216
Are there records of temperature for the last thousand years?
all I've seen are CO2 readings from ice cores.
>>74113610
>Religion seeks to answer the question of why
Surely you must agree that prior to the 20th century most every religious figure would claim that earthquakes had supernatural origins.
>Science does not answer the question of why
Plate tectonics / movement of the earth's lithosphere causes earthquakes.
Religion was wrong.
>>74116406
This is how my wife looks and I love it. She wants to lose weight, should I let her?
>>74112902
>From 1800 to 2016
>Emission of human caused greenhouse gases has risen exponentially in the last few decades
>graph rises linear
yeah sure totaly manmade
>>74113216
FPBP
why is the thread still going?
>>74122348
>implying explaining how earthquakes happen disproves a force behind them.
Once again. Explaining the laws of physics does not explain why we have laws of physics. Doesn't explain why, only how.
>Religion was wrong
Oh yeah? Science has finally proved there's no god? Evidence please
>>74122379
>graph rises linearly
not exactly
>>74122645
>Explaining the laws of physics does not explain why we have laws of physics. Doesn't explain why, only how.
I believe what you're questioning has been memed into what people call the anthropic principle.
My point was that phenomena in the natural world does not have supernatural origins. Religion was wrong about earthquakes. Keep moving the goalpost, friend. You'll eventually get somewhere that science can't explain and you can feel free to believe whatever you want.
>Science has finally proved there's no god?
Burden of proof is on y'all
>>74113216
Here's one. Funny, it used to be a lot warmer.
>>74112902
What is that supposed to show, other than the fact that we are currently in a warming period?
>>74123341
Religion hasn't been wrong about earth quakes. Science has explained how they happen but still not why the universe has the laws that make them happen.
>you'll eventually get somewhere science can't explain
We've been there since the beginning of time. Science can't explain why there is anything, only how it works.
>>74123290
Amazing man made temperature changes. Pic related.
>>74121761
..which happens to be religious people. Kinda odd, isn't it. If religion is a delusion, why does a delusion lead to better survival?
Of course, if this is correct, how sane are we to begin with?
>>74123496
Just because science hasn't gotten there yet, doesn't mean it can't.
I mean if science can eventually explain how it all works, it can also then figure out how it started.
>>74123590
If religion leads to better survival natural selection will favor religious people. That doesn't mean it isn't a delusion though.
Science duh
>>74123290
Sigh. How many times am I going to have to say this? This is the endlessly repeated CO2 "hockeystick" graph. Tacking on high frequency data (beginning 1958) onto low frequency data (ice cores pre-1958). A statistical abomination. Daily measured CO2 tacked onto ice core air samples which have a temporal range of 70+ years. Put that CO2 uptick through a 70 year mean value smoother and it will disappear.
Now look at this high frequency CO2 data that goes back to the 19th century. Pic related. Surprise! Nothing new about today's CO2 levels.
Source: Fig. 12 from Beck, Ernst-Georg. "180 years of atmospheric CO2 gas analysis by chemical methods." Energy & Environment 18.2 (2007): 259-282.
Never seen these data before, have you? And yet you warmists think the the UN IPCC is all about science, don't you?
>>74123668
Science can explain how everything in the universe started, and still not why. Science can completely map the laws of physics, but that doesn't answer why we have laws of physics. Science can completely define the big bang and how the universe was created, and that still won't answer why it happened. Like sir isaac newton said "I can explain gravity, but not why there is gravity"
>>74123496
>>74123874
>Science has explained how they happen but still not why the universe has the laws that make them happen.
only in a universe capable of eventually supporting life will there be living beings capable of observing and reflecting upon its fine tuning.
You're falling victim to what statisticians call selection bias.
It snowed today near Toronto, and our winter had almost no snow.
>>74114024
>Mainly the sun.
Solar irradiance hasn't changed by more than 0.1% over the last several decades. It also changes in cycles, it hasn't trended upwards like temperature has.
daily reminder that polar bears and ice caps were supposed to not exist by now
daily reminder that when the globe mostly stopped warming, they changed the name to "climate change" and pretend it's always been that way
daily reminder that the world's two biggest polluters are totally exempt from carbon limitations at the expense of the third and first worlds
>>74123874
Only humans ask "why?", because we need to make sense of everything, even if there is really no reason/sense to be made.
>>74112902
I don't see a problem. Looks pretty normal. Probably a late 20th century tendency to fudge the data upward, though.
>muh climate armageddon
>>74124156
They've been calling for doom and gloom forever now. It's a huge load of bullshit.
>>74115456
Daddy Putin says it's not real.
The earth could certainly be heating up due to man's influence, but it certainly wasn't caused by man. We've only been recording weather accurately for a little over a century, and on a geological timescale a century is fucking nothing.
>>74116183
>then maybe using the last 20 years will be a relevant comparison.
They can't prevent themselves from readjusting the data every few months as it is now.
>>74113216
The earth isn't even 10k years old, scienceshit.
>>74123874
You are confusing science with humans. Humans just haven't figured out the science that explains everything yet.
>>74124526
Do your parents know you're an ignorant faggot?
>>74124526
the thing is, I'd be ok with reasonable limitations on fossil fuel burning, because it reduces pollution in general even if global warming isn't real. But there are no reasonable limitations. It's purely to drive up cost of living in the first world while preventing development in the third world, so China and India can become superpowers unopposed
>>74124622
Yeah... I'd like to see where they're collecting this data.
I'd like to see if the places they'd been collecting temperatures from for over 80 years haven't suddenly become cement wastelands as time goes on.
Because that certainly would fuck up the numbers.
>>74124821
Not an argument.
>>74115456
Science gave us globe earth and "space" and evolution all of which is bullshit so it is sane to not trust it without proof.
>>74124990
Why does everyone who thinks the earth is flat and NASA is a big lie is from the US?
>>74125127
Because they looked for the truth and found it to be that the earth is flat and all the space programs are lies.
>>74125127
Because they have rewritten the global temperature history over and over again.
>>74123583
>>74124733
HOW WILL HE RECOVER COMPLETELY BTFO'DINATED
>>74125219
More temperature rewrites.
>>74119730
>>74112902
>science is his god
>still thinks all humans are the same species
Just admit it, global warming is your religion. it's ok, we understand.
>>74112902
Nobody is arguing the recordings. But thousands of scientists are claiming that the cause isn't man made. The ones who are claiming its man made are ignoring the government's effects on the environment and begging the federal government to wield power it has no right to wield (the federal government is not supposed to do anything that doesn't fall within the constraints of the US Constitution; STATE governments are free to do whatever they like, and reap the consequences fully, without the federal government bailing them out).
>>74113610
>Why does x happen?
>Religion then: "Gawd did it"
>Religion now: "Gawd did it"
>Science A then: "Y did it"
>Science A now: "We now know that Z did it. The Y hypothesis has been shitcanned"
>Science B then: "We don't yet know"
>Science B now: "Z did it"
>>74125491
I didn't say anything about the temperature rising. Wrong person?
>>74126242
You implied that any anon who doesn't trust NASA is wacked.
>>74125219 reply to >>74125127
But as is shown here:
>>74125491
>>74125362
>>74123583
>>74119730
NASA has been rewriting the temperature record which isn't exactly trustworthy behavior
Do I have the wrong anon?
>>74126709
>You implied that any anon who doesn't trust NASA is wacked.
Again wrong person. I said the opposite. And I narrowed the conversation to space and the shape of the earth.
>>74127244
OK!
>>74123359
png is Greenland. gif is 'world'.
>>74114019
i love this post but hate the screenshot.
here
