Continuing
>>80051846
What are you working on /dpt/?
>>80112243
First off, some reading for skeptics.
20 of the most commonly asked questions answered by the most august scientific body in the UK.
https://royalsociety.org/topics-policy/projects/climate-change-evidence-causes/
NASA did one too.
http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/
>>80112550
You need to tell me what you're working on or I'll have your visa revoked.
>>80112661
>global cooling
see
>>79937652
Agenda 21
The idea is to take your car, your single family home, and your freedom by herding us all into mega-cities where you can be easily tracked and watched.
>>80112661
Arctic ice is melting though. pic related. New Shipping routes have already started due to the melting.
>>80112700
>NASA did one too.
I wonder how many millions they got for it.
>>80112700
And both talk to the IPCC, which makes this invalid. Their stats MIGHT be true, but their projections aren't.
>>80113091
>Arctic ice is melting though. pic related. New Shipping routes have already started due to the melting.
So global warming is a good thing then.
See also:
Global warming will remain a net positive until at least 2080
https://youtu.be/yTTaXqVEGkU?t=18m30s
18:30
>>80112459
you should then know why I'm sceptical of teh Heartlanders then. You know they were the last ones to admit smoking was dangerous too right? Today, Exxon funds them. The same Exxon who's own researchers decided climate change a real back in the 70s.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Heartland_Institute#Tobacco_regulation
http://youtube.com/watch?v=s4hpxAZum_U
http://youtube.com/watch?v=s4hpxAZum_U
http://youtube.com/watch?v=s4hpxAZum_U
http://youtube.com/watch?v=s4hpxAZum_U
http://youtube.com/watch?v=s4hpxAZum_U
>>80113167
http://arstechnica.com/science/2016/01/thorough-not-thoroughly-fabricated-the-truth-about-global-temperature-data/
You gotta adjust raw data. If you're comparing temperature readings from one city and another city, but the first city reading are taken in the afternoon and the city readings are taken in the morning, then you have to adjust for that.
>>80113351
Just watch this, they address the tobacco meme, too.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=s4hpxAZum_U
Nobody who has watched this lecture by a climate scientist can still believe in the climate change scam:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Owm25OHGglk
Jump to 24:15 to skip the introduction
1:24:28 Tampering with station data, ice hockey stick etc.
>>80113446
"""""adjust"""""
I wonder how many millions they got for adjusting it the right way.
>>80113196
I'd take your point much more readily if there as a single scientific academy on the planet who took to opposing view. But there's not one.
>>80113650
You can see all the adjustments though and call out ones that are clearly illegitimate. All science is peer reviewed that way.
Also big oil companies could easily find loads of money to fund better studies.
>>80113840
>You can see all the adjustments though and call out ones that are clearly illegitimate.
Except uncited adjustments have been in every IPCC report, each more extreme than the last, and any calling out of the adjustment has been met with no explanation other than "MUH DENIALS!"
>>80113457
an hour and a half? You don't see the slight issue with this being presented by the Heartlanders and Ayn Rand institute? They're both essentially free-marketeers who outright oppose regulation.
>>80113978
>>80113457
This said, I will watch. This better be good though India.
>>80113840
>You can see all the adjustments though and call out ones that are clearly illegitimate.
Exactly, and that's why this climate scientist >>80113490 filed a lawsuit because it's not scientifically adjusted but politically.
>>80112724
name relevant
OP is a poo in loo
>>80113091
Why am I supposed to give a shit? There's nothing anyone can do in the entire US to stop it.
Even if it is the fault of burning fossil fuels the only ones who could change anything would be south/southeast/east asian countries collectively.
>>80113747
And that's the reasn why most people don't agree with most "deniers". At this point, you need to check the science for yourself.
>>80113978
so what?
They're both honest, and WAY better than any other organizations. They're much more rational and make their arguments through facts and not "muh feelz" and have the balls to admit when they're wrong
>>80114060
Everything until 19 minutes is an introduction, but you should still watch it.
>>80112700
>NASA release image of Arctic ice
>"SEE IT'S X% SMALLER THAN Y YEARS AGO THEREFORE GLOBAL WARMING IS REAL AND WE'RE ALL RESPONSIBLE! NASA ARE PROFESSIONALS ON PLANETS! CHECK MATE NAZIS!"
>NASA release image earlier this year that shows the Arctic has actually gained ice
>"WOW YOU STUPID NAZI FUCKS WILL JUST LATCH ON TO ANYTHING HUH!? WHEN DID NASA SUDDENLY BECOME AN EXPERT IN CLIMATE CHANGE! JUST LOOK AT THESE TUMBLR AND LIVEJOURNAL LINKS YOU FUCKING RACISTS!"
The left is so ridiculous I wouldn't even trust one to tell me the time.
>>80113196
>stats are true
>any logical conclusions regarding the stats are false
If they projections are false you should be able to tell me why
you think everybody in the IPCC is a sociopath, yet you think that the heartland institute being funded by fossil fuels has nothing to do with the propaganda they have been spoon feeding you.
I find it ridiculous that you trust a politically biased think tank that does no real science at all, and is directly funded by the the fossil fuels industry, over an international ensemble of the worlds leading climate scientist, that have no reason to lie and couldn't if they did. The peer reveiw method is the ultimate fact and logic checker
>>80114661
You really do need to check the science for yourself.
Ffs, do you need help finding it?
>>80113490
Summarize it bitch, I don't have that kind of attention span
>>80116071
Then watch just a couple of minutes from 1:24:28 on.
>>80115466
>>stats are true
>>any logical conclusions regarding the stats are false
I never said that, faggot.
>If they projections are false you should be able to tell me why
>you think everybody in the IPCC is a sociopath, yet you think that the heartland institute being funded by fossil fuels has nothing to do with the propaganda they have been spoon feeding you.
>propaganda
>spoon feeding
nope and nope. They haven't "sppon-fed" me and I have seen the science for myself.
>I find it ridiculous that you trust a politically biased think tank
Depends if they are honest, and they are.
>that does no real science at all,
lol wut?
>and is directly funded by the the fossil fuels industry,
so?
>over an international ensemble of the worlds leading climate scientist,
means shit when only the democratic consensus is considered for any "scientific" decision
>that have no reason to lie
yeah, sure thing, buddy. Research funding is not a legitimate reason at all.
>and couldn't if they did.
false.
> The peer reveiw method is the ultimate fact and logic checker
nope.
>>80115597
?
>>80115466
The NIPCC is not funded by the fossil fuel industry, see >>80113457 @ 36:47
>>80112243
ALEX JONES VISITS /pol/
>>80115976
>>80115976
>>80115976
>>80114968
>The left is so ridiculous I wouldn't even trust one to tell me the time.
Climate Change hasn't been around as long as Christianity, but it's had as many failed prophecies.
As a young fool, I used to despise religion. Now as an older fool, I understand it's a necessary evil.
Belief is a beneficial evolutionary trait.
As long as that trait is with us, we will have religion. Abandon one, and people will create or flock to another.
For example:
The Lefties who are staunchly anti-Christian and athiest have begun to aggressively defend Islam.
Athiests are forming their own churches now.
Climate Change proponents already use words like Believer and Denier.
Lefties have long believed in equalism, to the detriment of scientific research.
They also believe in animism, talking of things like "bad neighborhoods", as though the dirt is inhabited by evil spirits.
>>80115466
>international ensemble of the worlds leading climate scientist, that have no reason to lie
They have the best reason to lie: Money. And those who refuse to lie get sued with the same money.
