97 percent of scientists say humans are causing it.
Why does /pol/ refuse to accept this?
>>76901377
Because we're a bunch of drooling retards.
didn't know majority of /pol/ denied global warming
also citation on that 97%
>>76901377
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WDWEjSDYfxc
>>76901377
If anythibg , it's the chinese destroying the planet. They have factories and pollute everywhere. Most we do is just have a shit load of garbage
/pol/, despite all of its grand standing, is controlled by the jews who use oil to control nations.
The sooner we can remove reliance on oil the sooner we won't rely on the middle east, and the sooner we can ignore the kikes and their mewling.
Because /pol/ lives in a fantasy land. They deny science of all kinds. They hate the reality that genetics refutes their ideals of racism. They hate climate change. They hate actually events in history that have been documented to have happened.
Most of them are paranoid delusional that believe everything is a conspiracy. They're one of the most anti-intellectual and anti-authority groups out there.
>>76901737
>genetics refutes ideals of racism
prove it
I don't, why do liberals insist on wiping out the most scientifically accomplished race on the verge of an ecological disaster?
>>76901377
The 97% crap was an Australian shitpost you liberal faggots love to puke up constantly.
>“only 41 papers — 0.3 percent of all 11,944 abstracts or 1.0 percent of the 4,014 expressing an opinion, and not 97.1 percent,” endorsed what Cook claimed.
Surely the most suspicious “97 percent” study was conducted in 2013 by Australian scientist John Cook — author of the 2011 book Climate Change Denial: Heads in the Sand and creator of the blog Skeptical Science (subtitle: “Getting skeptical about global warming skepticism.”). In an analysis of 12,000 abstracts, he found “a 97% consensus among papers taking a position on the cause of global warming in the peer-reviewed literature that humans are responsible.” “Among papers taking a position” is a significant qualifier: Only 34 percent of the papers Cook examined expressed any opinion about anthropogenic climate change at all. Since 33 percent appeared to endorse anthropogenic climate change, he divided 33 by 34 and — voilà — 97 percent! When David Legates, a University of Delaware professor who formerly headed the university’s Center for Climatic Research, recreated Cook’s study, he found that “only 41 papers — 0.3 percent of all 11,944 abstracts or 1.0 percent of the 4,014 expressing an opinion, and not 97.1 percent,” endorsed what Cook claimed. Several scientists whose papers were included in Cook’s initial sample also protested that they had been misinterpreted. “Significant questions about anthropogenic influences on climate remain,” Legates concluded.
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/425232/climate-change-no-its-not-97-percent-consensus-ian-tuttle
From the skeptical science website, ran by the great Australian scientist John Cook:
>This site was created by John Cook. I'm not a climatologist or a scientist but a self employed cartoonist and web programmer by trade
http://web.archive.org/web/20080213042858/http://www.skepticalscience.com/page.php?p=3
>>76901870
http://www.nature.com/ng/journal/v36/n11s/full/ng1435.html
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2271140/
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ajpa.10079/abstract;jsessionid=F7CE43E76C6B6AF7D965CF1A2F1C7E34.f02t03
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0002929707610015
http://www.nature.com/index.html?file=/ng/journal/v36/n11s/full/ng1436.html
http://www.nature.com/ng/journal/v36/n11s/full/ng1454.html
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289614000178
http://genome.cshlp.org/content/14/9/1679.short
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1800886/
>inb4 science is a jewish conspiracy!
>>76901377
((((scientists))))
>>76901377
Because science is not a popularity contest.
>>76901377
All the 97% meme studies have been debunked.
http://www.populartechnology.net/2014/12/all-97-consensus-studies-refuted-by.html
>>76901928
>the genetic variation of individuals is greater than the races between them
>therefore race dont real
Nah. See Lewontins fallacy.
>>76901377
> science is democracy and theories are established by vote instead facts and experiments
Yeah, right.
https://www.lternet.edu/research/keyfindings/soil-microbes-and-agriculture
contemporary farming methods are most likely causing global warming
taxing people for their carbon footprint isn't going to resolve this
>>76901377
>Muh Consensus.
1. Science is not a democracy.
2. The "Consensus" has been debunked ages ago.
3. Man Made Climate Change is a hoax.
4. You are a mongoloid.
5. Kill yourself.
>>76902925
Retarded meme. Also, Edward's critique is incorrect. Edwards even admitted the findings are correct, but tried to argued you could still classify races. Edwards so proved incorrect.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Genetic_Diversity:_Lewontin%27s_Fallacy
>>76901377
scientists are not always right
>>76901377
the good old 97% meme...
When will liberals start to inform themselves instead of being corporate media slaves
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yTTaXqVEGkU
>>76901552
That's why trump should bring all these factories and jobs to america, so we can bring all the fucked up pollution closers to home :)
>>76901377
>never forget the 97 (gorillion) percent
>>76901928
>http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289614000178
Lol if you read this study it even says that genetics have a significant cause on intelligence. It's consistent witb a 50% genetics 50% enviornment hypothesis.
>>76901377
/pol/ is the dullest saw in the tool box and a burnt out bulb on the Christmas tree.
>>76901377
>>76901421
This is a thread meant to slide something else, either the warrant canary thread/s, or the ruski-blackout-NATO thread.
No way that these two just so happened to post a reply 26 seconds after the creation of the thread, both a small and stupid reply.
>>76901501
The number is higher than 97% and more like 99.9% at this point in time.
>>76902952
http://news.berkeley.edu/2012/04/02/fertilizer-use-responsible-for-increase-in-nitrous-oxide-in-atmosphere/
Check this out, too. Turns out that using shitty, non-shit-based fertilizer, is really JUST'ing our environment.
>>76903289
Your "environment vs genetics" thinking proves you don't understand the problem. It's about gene-environment interactions.
Also, you'd have to prove that different "races" have different genetics for intelligence, regardless of how heritable it is. This is not observed.
>>76901927
Stop fucking citing Legates, he's been bought off by ExxonMobil. That's not a conspiracy theory, he's a member of several conservative think tanks -- he might actually have headed some of them, I can't remember -- that've received direct funding from Exxon to deny climate change. He's been called out for this conflict of interest many times. His beliefs are also religiously-motivated.
From Wikipedia, there's this gem of a letter that he attached his name to:
"We believe Earth and its ecosystems — created by God’s intelligent design and infinite power and sustained by His faithful providence — are robust, resilient, self-regulating, and self-correcting, admirably suited for human flourishing, and displaying His glory. Earth's climate system is no exception."
>Humans caused climate change
So, what exactly are people using as a control in order to limit the change in climate to the effect of human activity?
#1 cause is fucking cows
god damn I hate cows
they shit everywhere and produce methane more than EVERYTHING ELSE COMBINED WHICH IS 10 TIMES WORSE THAN CARBON DIOXIDE
>>76903125
Because you can you fucking retarded idiot.
The genetic variation (FsT) of chimpanzees is greater amongst chimpanzee populations compared to humans.
Yet no scientist would say we aren't a different species.
>>76903572
But the large majority of greenhouse gas produced is co2. The largest problems are longhaul trucking, cars, planes, and shipping.
>>76901377
I wouldn't exactly call Chinese, Muslims or Africans "human".
>>76901377
>Be climate change scientist
>Attend IPCC meetings with all other climate change scientists.
>No climate change, no research
>Purpose of existence as climate change scientist is null if global warming does not exist.
Can't deny or prove desu. When politics play into science that's where the bullshit happens.
>>76903519
>Stop fucking citing Legates, he's been bought off by ExxonMobil.
Who told you that? John Crook? The man bought off my AlGore/U.N.
Why are you so delusional as to think that Warmists are not corrupted by their funding but skeptics are?
Q: What do you call a (untenured) publicly funded climate "scientist" who denies climate change?
A: Unemployed.
>>76903468
This is perfectly observable in adoption studies you idiot. Blacks adopted by whites still had lower IQs than their biological white children raised in the same enviorment
While mixed race children had IQs in the middle.
>w-we haven't identified the genes yet
Neither have we for height, but heightness is considered to be highly heritable.
>>76903633
Fst. Fixation INDEX. Indexes are not metrics. You can't take indexes from different studies and compare them. For calling someone else a retard, you need to learn the difference between a metric and an index.
Also, the entire human population is more closely related to each other than troops of chimpanzees separated by a few hundred miles. We have far less genetic diversity than any other apes. This is because we started with a relatively small population that went through a series of bottlenecks that quickly expanded to a population of 7 billion.
>>76903519
Stop citing a self-employeed cartoonist and calling him a scientist.
The 97% meme is bullshit.
>>76903881
>This is perfectly observable in adoption studies you idiot.
It's observed in a single flawed adoption study done in the 70s.
Other studies like trans-continental adoption studies show people take on the average IQ of their adopted country.
And again, the question is not how heritable things are. It's a question of different races having different heritablily. Intelligence is though tot be very complex with hundreds to thousands of genes contributing to it. If our genetic diversity was so drastically different, it would contradict everything we've already studied about human genetics.
>>76901377
>97 percent of scientists
>>76903905
No. The argument that lewontin made was because FsT is much greater in populations than between them, race has no validity.
The argument Edwards made is that even though this is technically true, the relatively small genetic variations between populations still have a massive impact. And you can classify races based on that.
Again, more genetic variation between chimpanzees than between chimpanzees and humans. We're the same species, right?
>>76904328
>No. The argument that lewontin made was because FsT is much greater in populations than between them, race has no validity.
It's been verified through multiple studies and the results are repeatable. Your emotions don't trump facts.
Edwards was also later proven wrong.
As for the chimpanzee thing, I've already explained that. It's clear you don't understand the science or even understand the difference between a metric and an index.
>>76904147
>single flawed study
No it has been replicated multiple times.
Find me one adoption study where the black-white IQ gap was closed. You simply cannot. In every Western country, blacks have a lower IQ than the native whites.
Just a glance at the scores during the ages tested proves my point. The gap is lowest during childhood while it increases during adolescence and adulthood. This is consistent with genetics playing a smaller role during childhood and a much bigger one during adulthood.
>>76901531
>>76901531
Which university is more respectable: Prager University or Trump University?
For the longest time we thought weather control was just a conspiracy.
Now its a necessity.
>>76904526
Again, Edwards argued this is this irrelevant. Small varoations have MASSIVE impacts when it comes to genetics. You fail to understand this.
If you are going to argue against my chimp example and using FsT, then why do you and every libshit scientist continue to use it when it comes to humans and claim that races are not real?
>>76904597
Just because there's a gap doesn't implying it's genetic. You can't say it's genetic without any evidence based in genetics, either.
You also still fail to understand how genetics works. It's not something deterministic.
>>76904795
It's not that fixation distances are a flawed system.. it's that you don't understand what they are. Look up the difference between an index and a metric.
>>76904597
Check out this learned geneticist. I bet this nigga spends all day in the lab. Has his whole research center on google.com.
>>76901737
this
>>76901377
In general...
>>76901377
>>76905211
Specifically. Fuck it.
>>76904930
>doesn't mean it's genetic
Considering no enviornmental factor has been shown to account for all of the gap, we can reasonably assume that genetics play a part in intelligence. IQ has been shown to be highly hereditary in studies looking at twins.
Why is the IQ gap between blacks and whites lowest during childhood but highest during adulthood? This is perfectly consistent with the theory that genetics plays a far bigger role during later life.
Edwards was not proven wrong you idiot. Read the article.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Genetic_Diversity:_Lewontin%27s_Fallacy#Response_to_Edwards
Both him and Lewontin are right. Lewontin is right in claiming that most genetic variation is in populations than between them, Edwards is correct is saying that even though the genetic variation between populations is much smaller than in them, that variation no matter how small it is still has a massive impact and you can accurately classify races with almost-certain accuracy off loci based on that.
>>76903851
Also, the climate is changing, but climate change is also a natural process.
You can't separate what the net human influence on that change is without A) a control group or B) know what every single other influence on climate change is, and what it does.
appeal to authority and appeal to popularity are both logical fallacies
What they're saying may not necessarily be true, it could be motivated by politics / grants
>>76901737
nigger i believe in global warming.racism is backed up by genetics you dumb cunt.whites are inherently superior and you would know so if you took any college biology class
>>76901377
49°15'33"N 5°24'30"E
>>76905355
Edwards wrote that in 2003. We've been studying human genetics and evolution ever since we had the tools to do so; about 50 years. As my original links point out Edwards was later proven wrong.
Just because all of the research done doesn't coincide with your emotions don't discount decades of genetics research.
>>76904930
>>76905355
And again, if you are going to claim that the genes relating to intelligence haven't been fully found yet, the same could be said of height. Yet pretty much every scientist agrees heightness is highly hereditary.
>>76905290
>(((zimmerman)))
cant trust this one
>>76901377
The most greenhouse effect gas is the water vapour (>95%) and yet the excess of CO2 become absorbed by the oceans. Global warming is just a tool to make sanctions and to manipulate the market.
>>76905587
You can shitpost on this anime board as much as you like. It doesn't change the facts and it doesn't change that you don't understand the science and refuse to learn it.
>>76905650
It doesn't rain co2. The water cycle is self stabilizing. The co2 in the atmosphere takes a long time to be sequestered and global warming has nothing but positive feedbacks.
>>76901377
scientists also say that cutting your dick off is a good way to fix a tranny
>>76905584
>all the research since then have proven edwards wrong
No they haven't. They merely replicate Lewontins findings which nobody has disputed. Read your own study.
>fst is greater in populations than between them race isn't real
Which again, as Edwards proved is fucking irrelevant because the remaining variation while smaller can be still used to classify different races with near 100 percent accuracy when several loci are examined at the same time.
>>76905859
Your response to multiple studies was "muh lewontin's fallacy"
With your level of understanding of science I doubt you actually read any of my links.
>>76901377
>97 percent of scientists
dental hygienists know nothing about climate change
>>76901377
That's opposite, most of scientists believe global warming is fabricated if they ever read the researches.
However left wing politicians have to make us believe global warming for money.
You'll see what's happening if you search climategate by yourself.
This is a modern tragedy for humanity.
>>76901377
Problem with climate science is that the scientists who research it are making money hand over fist by claiming its true
The other scientists know nothing about it and/or too afraid to say something about it.
Denying or questioning climate science as a scientist is akin to being a devout Christain and a scientist.
>>76905684
And you can continue the massive i.pact that genetics play in determining intelligence. I don't care.
>b-but muh flynn effect
Flynn effect does not occur on g. It has nothing to do with generalized intelligence.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1041608013001556
https://newrepublic.com/article/115787/rising-iq-scores-dont-mean-greater-intelligence
The rising iq scores amongst niggers in the last decades does not correspond to an increase in their general intelligence.
I live in Florida, the place that they said would be underwater by now. When I go to the gulf coast beach near me, the water line is exactly where it has always been. Not an inch higher or lower. I'm not saying it's all lies, but obviously something is not right about the predictions.
>>76905927
Because they are all essentially making the same claim.
>genetic variation is greater in populations than between them
>this means race does not exist
The same tired argument that has been addressed multiple times.
>>76906147
Continue to deny*
>scientists
lol
This has lost a lot of meaning. People now think that psychologists and sociologists are scientists.
>>76905644
Not all Zimmerman's are kikes. Many wetbacks, some German. Red-pilled? Please prove kikery.
>>76906147
>And you can continue the massive i.pact that genetics play in determining intelligence. I don't care.
What are you even trying to say?
>Flynn effect
I never even mentioned it.
>bad retorts to pre-made strawman
lel
>newrepublic.com
kek
Look, you're not going to change reality. Maybe you should write Nature and tell them all the stuff they published is wrong.
>>76906245
Nope, you just can't read and refuse to learn the science. End of story.
>>76906218
Dont think anyone ever said Florida would be underwater by now. Also your evidence isn't actual evidence at all. You must be fucking with me here.
>>76905355
>>76904930
>>76904526
The fundamental fallacy is comparing apples to oranges!!
APPLE = within populations comparisons
ORANGES = between population means comparisons
The "within populations" (like race) variation is average differences between individuals.
The "between populations" (like between 2 races) is the difference between the average values of different races.
That's A Fundamental Category Error! Comparing differences between population mean values to differences between individuals. Apples to apples means comparing differences between INDIVIDUALS within races vs. between races. Its easy enough to show what the right answer is by a little number crunching:
a) Average IQ Difference between individuals within (white) race: 15
b) Average IQ Difference between individuals between (white and black) races 15*sqrt(2) = 21. (the square root of 2 comes from central limit theorem).
SHEESH! This is the most elementary mistake. And Lewotonin got away with it because he's a good little commie.
SUMMARY: When you compare apples to apples "individuals within race differences" to individuals between race differences; yup between races is much larger. And that's why you should disregard commie pseudo-scientists!
>>76906562
>Science is all a conspiracy!
>Scientists say it must be so, so it has to be real!
These same people laugh at religions for the same logic. Get fucked.
>>76906476
>>76905927
SEE HERE!
The argument based on variation is fundamentally flawed because it compares apples to oranges.
>>76906368
>>76906476
I'm not disputing the findings that the variations are greater in populations than in them, but this does not negate the concept of race.
Your studies keep essentially replicating what Lewontin said. It is irrelevant as I have pointed out.
>new republic
New Republic is leftist as fuck.
Fucking tree huggers
>>76906718
Don't have an answer do you.
Making fundamental statistical errors is not a conspiracy. Its stupidity.
>>76901928
I've actually read these studies.
They're propagandist and junk science.
Here's some examples:
>human genome project. Supposed to be THE defining list of humans.
>doesn't map over 10% of the human genome.
How about that "more variants within a race than between races"?
>study treats all genes the same for comrarison, either yes same/ no different.
>genes that control fingernail growth treated the same as genes that control brain complexity.
If you actually read them and had an understanding of taxonomy or biology- you'd know they're all propaganda.
Its not the similarlities that matter- its the differences that create new species.
It only takes ONE gene to create a new organism, doesn't matter if 99.9999% of the rest are the same.
I accept the idea of anthropogenic global warming.
However the greenhouse effect is fucking retarded idiot "science".
It's not the fucking "greenhouse faggot retard idiot effect".
It's disruption in heat transit caused by agricultural practices.
So fuck you.
You have to be a fucking ignorant retard that has absolutely zero scientific understanding to believe in the greenhouse effect.
It's literally the most retarded thing anybody has ever come up with.
>>76906920
You're implying that somehow he was wrong, and it was accepted because he was a "good commie" rather than accepting the evidence.
You're claiming everyone is accepting something incorrect. You're claiming the science is a conspiracy.
>>76907016
>propaganda
Yep! science is all a conspiracy!
>>76906934
Don't have an answer do you? Explain, with specificity, how the statistical category error that I described did not actually occur.
>>76901377
lol these bumbo ockers would get a galliwag if they hopped down the franda and tried sturbin while havin a 4x fucking poofta cunts need some amber fluid put down tha books ya poofs tie im up an let im get the bities and drag im off on a bike an put maccas bag on is ed then say booya not even avin time for this flat out like a lizard scoot scoot watch ya lip
>>76907136
The liberal presentation of those studies is propaganda.
Again, read them. I have.
>>76907076
Can't answer my statistical assertion can you?
You say "evidence" yet I showed that the fundamental statistical argument is deeply flawed.
How about some non-flawed statistical analysis buddy?
>10k+ surveys mailed out
>3k returned
>70-something surveys hand-picked
>97% of the hand-picked surveys agree with us
>>76907076
>You're implying that somehow he was wrong, and it was accepted because he was a "good commie" rather than accepting the evidence.
No I'm saying that his argument is specious. Most everyone falls for it. I fell for it, except that something gnawed at me that kept saying "there's a reasoning error here." And there's a huge one: Comparing average population differences to average differences between individuals. Its totally comparing apples to oranges. And a huge mistake.
>>76902495
No one is implying that it is a popularity contest. You are just too stupid (and autistic) to understand that when people cite the 99.9% of scientists support... it is because we want to show there is practically 100% scientific consensus on global warming and that humans are responsible for it. The science has been properly documented and available for anyone to access it.
>>76907322
read
>>76901928
Also, your "argument" is bogus. The problem has nothing to go with "comparing means between groups." You invented a non-problem and make some bogus answer to fix it, pretending that this fabrication will somehow debunk 50 years of genetics evidence.
I believe it. NOAA isn't exactly a "Jew run organization". Many atmospheric scientists are actually quite conservative in comparison to their academic counterparts in other fields.
That being said, meteorologists in general are more skeptical than their climatology counterparts because they understand how unreliable modeling can be even with constantly updated real time weather obs
>>76905780
No they don't. The guy who invented gender reassignment surgery quit because he was disgusted by it. No one recommends it and gender dysphoria is classified as a mental illness by the WHO. It is the libtards you guys keep voting for that keep suggesting this kind of procedure is good. But to be honest, the scientific literacy among western populations is laughable.
>>76907642
Basically, meteorologists have 1,000,000 times the data to work with and feed into their models compared to climatologists, and they're still wrong about what the weather is going to do quite often. Even the leading minds in the field don't fully understand the atmosphere.
We might be affecting the climate, but I think it's mostly a natural process.
>>76907599
Can't answer the argument, so you pretend it never existed.
From Lewontin himself, http://www.philbio.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/Lewontin-The-Apportionment-of-Human-Diversity.pdf
85% genetics variation is within race, "Less than 15% of all human genetic diversity is accounted for by differences between GROUPS." P. 17; The first is a statement about individual variation, the second is about population means. HE SAID GROUPS, NOT INDIVIDUALS.
Get over it you're wrong. He said it, I proved it. Stop trying to make things up.
>>76908086
Why do you think that? What evidence has led to you believe this? Have you considered all the information available?
>>76907528
>No one is implying that it is a popularity contest.
Yes you are and an appeal to authority. Otherwise you wouldn't cite a majority as "proof" of scientific truth.
A consensus of scientists believed in classical mechanics. They were wrong.
A consensus of scientists believed in the phlogiston theory of combustion. They were wrong.
A consensus of scientists believed that space and time were fixed. They were wrong.
A consensus of scientists believed that the continents positions were fixed. They were wrong.
A consensus of scientists believed that atoms were the smallest thing in the universe. They were wrong.
Consensus, especially consensus paid for by institutions that stand to make $Billions off taxes and confiscation is a non-argument. A consensus of tobacco company scientists said that tobacco was harmless. Since you thing that their funding source means nothing, you should believe the tobacco scientists.
>>76901377
Well no shit it's happening. Anyone who disagrees, believes so just because of "THA JEWZZ!!"
If anyone provides evidence and proof otherwise, I'll believe it.
>>76901377
>/pol/ is one person
I don't deny it, I just don't care. If something is done about it that doesn't effect me negatively, that's great. If nothing is done about it and climate change doesn't effect me (it won't), that's also great.
t. Moderately libertarianfag
>>76908881
Otherwise you wouldn't cite a majority as "proof" of scientific truth.
But I'm not. Are you autistic? I was convinced that global warming is true when I looked at Antarctic ice data you fucking mong. Stop having a theory and forcing your data to appeal to your theory.
People who say that a majority of scientists support global warming aren't saying it is a scientific proof. They are simply saying that a majority of scientists believe in global warming. If you can't understand this you should honestly kill yourself.
>>76909352
>a majority of scientists believe in global warming
Climate Change hasn't been around as long as Christianity, but it's had as many failed prophecies.
Science is a process, not a belief.
Anyone who claims otherwise is trying to sell you something.
Reminder: Climate Change priests are the same people in favor of sending hundreds of billions in food aid to Africa each year so their exponential birth rate can continue. Yet in their next breath they wail about the evils of overpopulation.
>>76908748
Do you know there is no evidence available proving global warming theory?
What do you think why people believe unproved theory without knowing evidence?
>>76901377
>humans are causing it
Improbable to prove
>>76909568
What the fuck are you smoking. Yes I know science is a process but I'm not going to start denying gravity because ugh humans are fallible.
Stop acting as if you are the only one who knows anything. There are people out there who actually have a solid epistemological structure for which they evaluate information unlike the people on this board and dare I say even you.
>Climate Change priests are the same people in favor of sending hundreds of billions in food aid to Africa
Do you think I will honestly entertain your drivel.
>>76909352
Now you're back-peddaling? No more "Muh 97%" popularity as proof argument, huh? What now? Citing tampered data? Pic related.
Sources:
https://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/far/wg_I/ipcc_far_wg_I_chapter_07.pdf
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs_v3/Fig.A.gif
>>76909584
>Do you know there is no evidence available proving global warming theory?
No I wouldn't know something that is completely false
>>76909774
Holy shit you fucking balloon head. Time to kill yourself buddy.
>>76909352
Look at this graph of all your failed predictions.
Source: 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.
>nb4 Schmidt and Nutter.
Completely debunked, Gavin Schmidt gets roasted:
https://climateaudit.org/2016/04/19/gavin-schmidt-and-reference-period-trickery/
Nuttercelli destroyed:
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/02/20/the-guardians-dana-nuccitelli-uses-pseudo-science-to-libel-dr-john-christy/
>>76909352
Oh, and that water-vapor feedback in the upper troposphere. Didn't happen.
>>76901377
because those 97% also said that because of this some of Florida and the east coast would be inhabitable due to being underwater. However they are still above water and show no signs of going under and becoming inhabitable anytime soon.
They were wrong, move on.
>>76909352
And why don't you talk about how CO2 has a vanishingly small (logarithmic) effect on temperature?
>>76909958
>>76910043
good work
>>76901377
why do those same scientists refuse to believe race exists nigger
>>76909827
No one proved global warming theory yet.
They only implied the possibility of the theory while oppressing other scientists denying global warming.
Do you also know why these "scientists" don't use "hockey stick graph" recently?
people who claim to care about the environment but continue to produce CO2 and all the other pollutants that result just from existing are fucking hypocrites
>>76909729
>Do you think I will honestly entertain your drivel
Do you think I care?
I don't believe in your religion. That hurts your feelings, not mine.
Former U.S. Senator Timothy Wirth (D-CO), addressing the same Rio Climate Summit audience, agreed: “We have got to ride the global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing in terms of economic policy and environmental policy.” (Wirth now heads the U.N. Foundation which lobbies for hundreds of billions of U.S. taxpayer dollars to help underdeveloped countries fight climate change.)
Also speaking at the Rio conference, Deputy Assistant of State Richard Benedick said: “A global warming treaty [Kyoto] must be implemented even if there is no scientific evidence to back the [enhanced] greenhouse effect.”
In 1988, a former Canadian Minister of the Environment told editors and reporters of the Calgary Herald: “No matter if the science of global warming is all phony…climate change [provides] the greatest opportunity to bring about justice and equality in the world.”
In 1996, former Soviet Union President Mikhail Gorbachev emphasized the importance of using climate alarmism to advance socialist Marxist objectives: “The threat of environmental crisis will be the international disaster key to unlock the New World Order.”
Speaking at the 2000 U.N. Conference on Climate Change in the Hague, former President Jacques Chirac of France said: “For the first time, humanity is instituting a genuine instrument of global governance, one that should find a place within the World Environmental Organization which France and the European Union would like to see established.”
http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybell/2013/02/05/in-their-own-words-climate-alarmists-debunk-their-science/#1a566c5076fb
>>76910141
>>76909901
>Holy shit you fucking balloon head. Time to kill yourself buddy.
Sees specific empirical evidence, with sources, demonstrating data tampering.
>Oh my god, what do I do??!!, I know, say something like, really mean. Heh.
Isn't it past your bed time?
>>76903021
>Man Made Climate Change is a hoax
You're the mongoloid.
>>76910315
You are so deep into your delusion that no matter what I say I cannot break you out of your confirmation bias.
You would rather believe the scraps of tinfoil hat tier conspiracy theory you've gathered that the sum knowledge of all the professionals that have dedicated their lives to the field.
Average temperatures have risen roughly 0.85 degrees Celsius from 1880 to 2012, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
>>76901531
Holy shit, that guy has so little knowledge of chemistry and meteorology.
>>76910500
>Heretic! Blasphemer! Un-believer! Denier!!
NEVERMIND GUYS, WE GONNA BE FINE. FALSE ALARM!!!
“Earth Day” 1970 Kenneth Watt, ecologist: “At the present rate of nitrogen build-up, it’s only a matter of time before light will be filtered out of the atmosphere and none of our land will be usable.”
****
“Earth Day” 1970 Kenneth Watt, ecologist: “The world has been chilling sharply for about twenty years. If present trends continue, the world will be about four degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990, but eleven degrees colder in the year 2000. This is about twice what it would take to put us into an ice age.”
****
April 28, 1975 Newsweek “There are ominous signs that Earth’s weather patterns have begun to change dramatically….The evidence in support of these predictions has now begun to accumulate so massively that meteorologists are hard-pressed to keep up with it….The central fact is that…the earth’s climate seems to be cooling down…If the climate change is as profound as some of the pessimists fear, the resulting famines could be catastrophic.”
****
1976 Lowell Ponte in “The Cooling,”: “This cooling has already killed hundreds of thousands of people. If it continues and no strong action is taken, it will cause world famine, world chaos and world war, and this could all come about before the year 2000.”
****
July 9, 1971, Washington Post: “In the next 50 years fine dust that humans discharge into the atmosphere by burning fossil fuel will screen out so much of the sun’s rays that the Earth’s average temperature could fall by six degrees. Sustained emissions over five to ten years, could be sufficient to trigger an ice age.”
****
June, 1975, Nigel Calder in International Wildlife: “The continued rapid cooling of the earth since WWII is in accord with the increase in global air pollution associated with industrialization, mechanization, urbanization and exploding population.”
>>76903403
Wow it's still not a source.
>“He gasped when he saw the room bathed in the light of fifteen large candles. The Jacuzzi had rose petals scattered over the water. And I was sitting in it, reading Sigmund Freud.”
>>76906147
Flynn effect is global - not just on blacks.
>>76910964
Sensationalism is nothing new. It doesn't matter that scientists have been wrong in the past (if anything, that's a good sign). I would rather believe the actual climatologists.
This is the problem these days with every fucking idiot having their own opinion about things they have no real qualifications to talk about.
>>76910964
What exactly is the 97% concluding? That man made climate change is real?
Is that all? Do they make a comment on how big the impact is?
>>76911675
Did you trust Ben Bernanke when he talked about the housing market and completely missed the bubble?
Hey guys, science is about explaining the data. There's no committee, there's no voting, you come up with hypothesis to make predictions and either you're proven right or the data shows you're wrong over time and you need to go back to the drawing board.
Let's make up an example. Let's say you and I are having an argument on the beach. You say the tide is going out, I say the tide is coming in. Over a few minutes we go back and forth yelling at each other, 'that wave was closer in shore than the others, clearly the tide is coming in' and again 'but the previous 4 waves were further out, clearly the tide is going out'.
After yelling at each other for awhile it becomes obvious from observation that the tide is going out. No matter what arguments I tried to make, no matter how often a few waves came in closer, it's clear that my position cannot be supported any longer. The evidence is in and I need to change.
That is how science works. Sure, sometimes people try and hold on to pet theories their whole lives. You'll find these people in climate scientists, they don't want to give up a theory they had over their lifetimes but eventually they'll be gone too. You are running out of people that support you.
There is no way to argue that the Earth is not a ball orbiting a main sequence star. The evidence cannot support it. But how many people have taken out their telescopes and measured the orbit of the Earth and other planets against background stars and proven Kepler's 3 laws of planetary motion themselves? We accept that other people who've come before us, who have more knowledge and experience than us, know what they're talking about.
At some point you have to give up and on this you cannot win. The evidence is in. Even if you don't understand it, even if you haven't been educated enough to test the theories yourselves, you just have to accept it. Man made climate change is real.
Continue arguing all you want, all you'll do is prove that you're uneducated.
>>76911902
>Look at this good goy! He trusts the joos!
Would have rather you called me a cuck.
>>76912306
I'm not attacking you mate.
I don't know if he's Jewish or not. I'm just trying to make a point that some skepticism can be okay.
>>76912286
Good post
>>76912579
He actually is. But fair enough.
>>76912286
I believe that a large part of the debate is how large the impact of man made climate change is. I don't believe that many people think there is 0 impact.
>>76912286
>Man made climate change is real.
The argument isn't whether or not man affects global warming it's to what degree does the efect have.
Also,
>4chan in charge of analogies
>>76901377
Citation for that 97%? Quit pulling numbers out of your ass.
