It is undeniable that CO2 does not affect temperatures.
So why do you think the warmist scam is being pushed so hard?
>>55551809
It's a convenient political vehicle for one world government.
>>55551809
http://imgur.com/account/favorites/ooAtx
>Co2 does not affect temperature
What a load of bullshit
And now the best point:
Even IF Co2 wouldnt affect temperature, the result would still be a cleaner, much more inhabitable world reducing pollution.
The only people "suffering" from Co reducing measure are big cooperations reducing their profit.
>>55551809
Broke Western governments need tax revenue.
>>55551809
True story..
All of my stem major colleagues believe we cause global warming.
The only people I have ever met that think it's not true, or is a government tax initiative, are minimum wage uneducated retards. The same people who think the Yanks didn't land on the moon.
I don't talk to those people, because arguing with animals is the definition of futility.
>>55551987
You didn't source your graph, princess. Try again?
>Even IF Co2 wouldnt affect temperature, the result would still be a cleaner, much more inhabitable world reducing pollution.
And massive death and suffering due to lost output. Will you volunteer to be the first to die?
>big cooperations reducing their profit
Corporations follow the laws of politicians. Politicians manipulate the public to shift blame and get away with it because pols also control the schools.
>>55552085
>All of my stem major colleagues believe we cause global warming.
Because they are all taught this while in uni. You aren't free from the bullshit just because you're studying STEM.
>>55552085
So facts don't matter to your colleagues?
Is this why we don't see much innovation from the Geebs?
Maybe they just know where the grant money goes, and doesn't go.
>>55552262
>You aren't free from the bullshit just because you're studying STEM.
Just the opposite, actually.
You will not graduate unless you Believe.
Same as here.
>>55552335
>You will not graduate unless you Believe.
Can confirm. Bullshit classes with nothing to do with my course. Still have to pass them if you want your certificate at the end.
>>55552262
>People who dedicate their lifes to science , make studies about it
>Arent free from this "bullshit"
I laughed as a environmental engineer student .
All of my colleagues believe in global warming because...well because nearly every evidance we have is pointing in this direction.
But i guess the jews are behind it right :^)
>>55551809
It is to justify that we are milked of our money via taxes. For example petrol tax anywhere or CO2 tax in France.
>>55551987
>MUH CORPORATIONS
ah yes, the lefts favorite boogeyman
>>55552503
>I laughed as a environmental engineer student .
>environmental engineering
Nope. No bias or vested interests there.
>well because nearly every evidance we have is pointing in this direction.
It really isn't.
>>55552503
Germanbro is right. Why do the rest of you buy into this denial crap? Follow the money down the rabbit hole- the industries responsible are paying shills to keep the people confused and misled so they keep making money.
>>55552214
>You didn't source your graph, princess. Try again?
I posted a link but the sauce is Nasa buddy
>lost output
You must be kidding right?
So lets have a look at every economy sine the 18th century:
>Guys we will close weaver factories
>People found new jobs
>Guys we will close factories for war material ( tanks, etc ) after WW 2
>People found new jobs
>Guys we will close mines because its cheapter to produce in other countries
>People found new jobs
>Guys we will close ....
>Corporations follow the laws of politicians. Politicians manipulate the public to shift blame and get away with it because pols also control the schools.
In other words you not adressed this issue. The main reason people like you exist is because of lobbyists from the cooperations that dont want their profits to shrink. They will do everything to do so.
You know lobbyists and companies saying cigarette dont harm you guys!!!
Im as right-wing as they come but why are you such cunts about trying to reduce pollution? We have to fucking live here you know. Have you ever been to LA? The haze is disgusting. Are you really ok with all the rivers of america becoming toxic shit when 100 years ago they were clear?
Does no one care about the Plastic fucking Continent floating in the Pacific?
>>55552713
That cuts both ways m8. The Greens are making bank off of the scare too.
I stopped believing the lies when they moved the goalposts from "global warming" to "climate change"
>>55552759
>Reduce pollution
Absolutely fine. Desirable in fact.
>Take your economy back to pre industrial levels because of a largely harmless gas. Also please ignore the overtones of communism and one world government.
No.
>>55552759
the solution to smog in LA is moving the fuck out of LA. Not my fault you choose to live in a giant city with tons of cars. Go to montana if you want clean air instead of forcing your utopia on others.
>>55551809
op is right, I want to be able to drive my 16 cylinder super charged truck with out going through emissions; I also want to burn insulated Cooper pipes and cables so I can get the cheap bucks out of it.
>>55552608
>Showing the graphf for 1997 to 2014
>Not showing it for 1880 to 2014
Selective inforation is truly amazing.
See my post here
>>55551987
You can even see your chart in my chart.
>>55552608
>Modern science
>Bias or vested interest there
Sure thing buddy because scientists and engineers have an interest in ....what? Manipulating the stock market from coal miners?
Lets not focus on the achievements this entire movement had so far:
-Stabilizing the ozone layer ( you know so people dont get cancer everywhere on their skin )
-introducing catalyst to reduce sulphur emissions from cars ( the car industry said this would ruin them btw )
-particle filters for cars, power plants
This is what happens when you try to make climate "scientists" explain data they don't like.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d4baOeuRDK8
>>55552895
>>Not showing it for 1880 to 2014
You can have it from the start of records. 1880 to now is the climb out of the little ice age and has nothing to do with CO2. Prove me wrong.
>>55552895
>Sure thing buddy because scientists and engineers have an interest in ....what?
Being employed. Green is big business right now, and it's getting all the grants.
>>55551809
It's a trillion dollar market annually with cap and trade. That's why Goldman Sachs is pushing it so hard. Check out the Chicago Climate Exchange.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-09-26/did-goldman-sachs-sacrifice-australias-prime-minister-his-doubts-about-global-warmin
>>55551987
Not listening to based Molyneaux.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TLvJZ0nw7Uk
>>55552968
>>55552992
your full of shit Mohammad
>>55552854
>pre industrial levels
Pants on the head retarded argument.
Energy is the blood in the veins of the economy.
Lets have a quick example why this argument is retarded as balls:
You have a country A . Country A is a small country and has 10 coal plants to provide its energy.
The president of Country A says he wants more energy from good and clean resources.
So he builds 500 wind turbines.
He closes 5 coal plants .
In the words of uneducated people you want me to tell that somehow this measure is going to get country A to pre industrial level?
This is not even going to destroy jobs, because somebody is going to
1. somebody is going to plan these
2. build the turbines
3. the turbines need maintenance
>>55553023
>I have no rebuttal but I must comment
>>55551809
Technologically this ends in the monitoring of electrical and heating of every home and business. This is total control beyond 1984 or Brave New World. But hey, they're just trying to save the planet.
>>55553025
He then realises that those 500 wind turbines are white elephants that are not actually reducing carbon output (because they need to be backed up by a fossil fuel power plant, being run inefficient - i.e more fuel used and more pollution than if it was simply run as the main power plant).
>>55552854
>Reduce pollution
>Absolutely fine. Desirable in fact.
>largely harmless gas.
So which is it? Is pollution bad or harmless?
>>55553116
CO2 is a meme, not a pollutant.
I think I get trolled by these threads way too easily. /pol/ isn't my safe space anymore.
>>55553055
I am not an expert on this matter but any one who don't believe there is a huge hole in the ozone layer just because they want to live in a China tier country can seriously go the fuck to China, see how an industrialized shit country who doesn't give a fuck about the environment lives.
good look getting skin cancer idiot
what ever scares people from burning nasty shit, weather climate change, climate my ass keep fucking scaring them
co2 has a low sensitivity as a green house gas. Even the IPCC has revised their estimates downwards due to the failure of the models.
>>55553114
>He then realises that those 500 wind turbines are white elephants that are not actually reducing carbon output
But thats wrong .And i mean so wrong it actually hurts. Because you know sometimes these wind turbines produce more energy than the 5 coal plants that were destroyed.
So what do we do with this energy:
storage power station.
>>55553147
>Not a pollutant
>Co2 effect can be reproduced in a much smaller scale in your greenhouse
>>55553025
>So he builds 500 wind turbines.
>He closes 5 coal plants .
Then wonders why he's an idiot when the wind isn't blowing during peak demand.
>>55553188
>I am not an expert on this matter
It shows.
Climate change and the hole in the ozone layer are completely different topics.
>>55553250
>>Co2 effect can be reproduced in a much smaller scale in your greenhouse
>Yet models based off of this experiment do not accurately predict reality
The earth is not a nice, predictable greenhouse laboratory.
>>55553250
>>storage power station.
Show me a "storage power station" that can deliver hundreds of mega-watt-hours.
>>55553250
>>55553250
let this fucking idiots cycle jerk man.
yeah fuck climate change let's turn America and Europe in to a huge cluster fuck of carcinogen waste and smoke infested shit hole because Ted Cruz wants more out put to compete with China.
trump shills are so fucking obvious
>>55552713
The money argument works for both sides.
Those with TB love climate taxes.
>>55551809
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kwtt51gvaJQ
>>55552214
Nobody said co2 is the only factor that affects temperature. How about we try this another way. Why do YOU think the earth has warmed .7C since 1900?
>>55553538
>Why do YOU think the earth has warmed .7C since 1900?
Natural climate variation. Something the alarmists pretend doesn't exist.
>>55552608
That graph is terrible. But seen as you like the source, lets see what RSS have to say on the matter.
http://www.remss.com/blog/recent-slowing-rise-global-temperatures
>Recently, a number of articles in the mainstream press have pointed out that there appears to have been little or no change in globally averaged temperature over the last two decades. Because of this, we are getting a lot of questions along the lines of “I saw this plot on a denialist web site. Is this really your data?” While some of these reports have “cherry-picked” their end points to make their evidence seem even stronger, there is not much doubt that the rate of warming since the late 1990’s is less than that predicted by most of the IPCC AR5 simulations of historical climate. This can be seen in the RSS data, as well as most other temperature datasets. For example, the figure below is a plot of the temperature anomaly (departure from normal) of the lower troposphere over the past 35 years from the RSS “Temperature Lower Troposphere” (TLT) dataset. For this plot we have averaged over almost the entire globe, from 80S to 80N, and used the entire TLT dataset, starting from 1979. (The denialists really like to fit trends starting in 1997, so that the huge 1997-98 ENSO event is at the start of their time series, resulting in a linear fit with the smallest possible slope.)
Are there any climate models that don't come to the conclusion that communism is only the solution?
>>55552891
I dont live in LA. My point is some people are well traveled enough to see how shitty some areas can get when people have become careless
>>55552835
That was done purely cause retards kept pointing to snow and saying 'it's snowing where I am so global warming is a scam'. Global warming still works as the average global temperature has been and continues to rise.
This 'no warming in 18 years' line is also bullshit. They choose 18 years cause 1998 was abnormally hot, so messes with the trend line. Had 1998 been an average year (at or close to 90s average) then the trend would have been clearer. Bascilly the people who outright deny climate change are latching onto one anomalously warm year as their ultimate proof.
>>55553279
>hurr durrr what if tha fukun wind dun blow?
Windmills are strategically built in areas with continuous amounts of wind. In valleys, on tops of mountains, off shore, if you pay any attention at all you'll see this.
>>55553742
Still believe it Australia?
http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2015/may/08/australia-pms-adviser-climate-change-is-un-hoax-to-create-new-world-order
>>55553672
>denialist
For a start m8 when you start seeing words like that thrown around you have entered the realm of politics, not science. Thus must treat it accordingly. In fact it all reads like the seething rage of an ideologue.
After that they admit that the anomaly exists and try to cover by saying it's an average (despite their predictions being averages too).
>>55551809
>So why do you think the warmist scam is being pushed so hard?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Rw5-X8CNaU
http://ufosightingshotspot.blogspot.mx/2015/10/signs-of-return-of-nibiru.html
>>55552968
Then what is the mechanism driving up temperature?
>>55553782
My bet is on the big firey ball in the sky.
There is nothing more degenerate than trashing the ecosystem of your country because you're too lazy to install and invest in windmills, solar panels and hydro energy.
>>55553147
co2 is a greenhouse gas. Which is what this is all about.
>>55552891
You're retarded. LA is the ideal that the entire world wants to be.
>>55553798
You mean the one that's been there 14 billion years but only in the last 100 years we've managed to fuck ourselves out of a layer of atmosphere that protects us from it?
>>55553386
Hence inaccuracies. This does not change the physical properties on co2.
>>55553811
Indeed, however you and I both know it isn't as simple as "Breathe out a lot, destroy the planet".
>>55553823
If you are referring to the one we nuked, we honestly have no idea what that one did (if anything).
Not that that makes it OK.
>>55553605
Even natural varoatin has a cause. And .7 in 100 years is faster than should be natural.
>As the Earth moved out of ice ages over the past million years, the global temperature rose a total of 4 to 7 degrees Celsius over about 5,000 years. In the past century alone, the temperature has climbed 0.7 degrees Celsius, roughly ten times faster than the average rate of ice-age-recovery warming.
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/GlobalWarming/page3.php
>>55553823
>>55553823
>14 billion years
Do you seriously think that our sun is as old as the universe?
>>55553776
Wasn't my word. Was a direct copy paste from the RSS website.
>>55553798
We're getting somewhere. So are you suggesting the sun's output has increased throughout 1900 to today?
>>55553847
Sure. But we also both know that since the industrial revolution co2 concentration has increased by 40% from 280 ppm to over 400 ppm. This increase is down to the addition of human activities.
https://royalsociety.org/topics-policy/projects/climate-evidence-causes/question-3/
>The CO2 level in 2012 was about 40% higher than it was in the nineteenth century. Most of this CO2 increase has taken place since 1970, about the time when global energy consumption accelerated. Measured decreases in the fraction of other forms of carbon (the isotopes 14C and 13C) and a small decrease in atmospheric oxygen concentration (observations of which have been available since 1990) show that the rise in CO2 is largely from combustion of fossil fuels (which have low 13C fractions and no 14C). Deforestation and other land use changes have also released carbon from the biosphere (living world) where it normally resides for decades to centuries. The additional CO2 from fossil fuel burning and deforestation has disturbed the balance of the carbon cycle, because the natural processes that could restore the balance are too slow compared to the rates at which human activities are adding CO2 to the atmosphere. As a result, a substantial fraction of the CO2 emitted from human activities accumulates in the atmosphere, where some of it will remain not just for decades or centuries, but for thousands of years. Comparison with the CO2 levels measured in air extracted from ice cores indicates that the current concentrations are higher than they have been in at least 800,000 years
>>55553834
funny you should mention the properties of CO2. There is in fact a limit to it's absorption properties. Such that there is a point where it doesn't matter how much more you add, it has already absorbed all the light of a particular wavelength it is going to. pic related.
>>55551809
Saying the radical change of the constitution of the atmosphere doesn't affect temperature and ecosystems is idiotic beyoned measure.
How much shit do you need to fill the atmosphere before the penny drops? Some extinction events were caused by huge amounts of shit in the atmosphere. To say it only matters after it reaches some critical point of excess is like saying 10% alcohol doesn't affect your body and only 100% alcohol does.
Muh party politics. Fucking sage in every poll, survey, and presidential and senatorial forehead.
>>55553823
>14 billion years
Man the Sun has already crashed twice on earth. Earth recovered. This is the third Sun
>>55553759
Show me a wind farm that generates at nameplate capacity all the time anywhere in the world. Show me one that generates 50%. Where are these magic valleys were the wind blows constantly. Show me the acres of wind turbines on mountaintops.
>>55553902
>So are you suggesting the sun's output has increased throughout 1900 to today?
Honestly mate I don't know what drives the climate, outside of the extremely basic. No one does. That's why we can't predict the weather with any kind of accuracy.
The sun does however seem the most likely candidate.
>>55553759
This is one of the biggest problems with climate change solutions.
Their solution is to invest in energy sources most likely to be negatively impacted by change in climate.
Absolutely fucking retarded.
ITT shills
I'll take the word of the people who do this as a career, over Exxon paid shills who push the exact same talking points. Hurdurrr what do you mean putting chemicals in the atmosphere has an effect. This is like the leaded gasoline debate all over again.
>>55553939
This is a bit of a change of tact from you, admitting that the warming up until now was down to co2. co2 is not yet 'saturated'. Yes, as the concentration increases it will become less effective at trapping heat. But it's not at the point of being insubstantial yet.
>>55554052
>admitting that the warming up until now was down to co2.
I have done no such thing. I just know that CO2 does have a role to play in the greenhouse effect.
>>55553867
>And .7 in 100 years is faster than should be natural.
Says you.
>>55553823
>14b years
>>55554020
We should go nuclear.
>>55554022
Fair enough. However the suns output (irradiance) has not increased in the time we've been able to make accurate readings.
>>55554107
And NASA
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/GlobalWarming/page3.php
>>55553902
Are you implying climate trends didn't exist prior to the industrial age?
I don't like how often the word natural is used instead of likely. Please create a less dishonest lingo mr climates
CO2 is not the only greenhouse gas.
Also we should just destroy the ozone hole once more to make the world a colder place.
>>55554150
NASA are shills for big climate.
>>55554209
Kek
>>55554160
Queston with a question. So you don't want to answer
>So are you suggesting the sun's output has increased throughout 1900 to today?
And no. That's not what I'm suggesting. Given we didn't have the same accuracy of measuremnt of science back in the day as we do now it;s hard to explain previous dramatic changes, though long term trends are generally pretty well understood.
As to the MWP in particular, New Scientist report a cause has been identified.
>Natural mechanism for medieval warming discovered
https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn16892-natural-mechanism-for-medieval-warming-discovered/
In the past, when atmospheric CO2 was up to one thousand times higher than at present, there were no tipping points, no carbon dioxide- driven climate change, and no runaway global warming.
Why is co2 such an earth-shattering pollutant all of a sudden?
>>55554248
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change#Statements_by_scientific_organizations_of_national_or_international_standing
>As of 2007, when the American Association of Petroleum Geologists released a revised statement,[14] no scientific body of national or international scientists rejects the findings of human-induced effects on climate change.
>>55554265
You're addressing the wrong guy here.
>>55554340
Do you think the alarmist censoring at wikipedia will brook any dissent from climate dogma?
>>55552085
HAHAHAHAH a punk fucking idiot no doubt
top 1% IQ here YOU DUMB SHIT ANIMAL.
Now, there is no doubt humans cause warming, the bigger question is more than a simple scientific fact apparent from the time of caveman fires.
Bone up dipshit.
>>55552503
>I laughed as a environmental engineer student
and laughing at the evidence is required, as so much of it is lies and spin, something a child like you will find out
>>55554336
The temperature and geology of the planet were drastically different back then. Generally co2 increases came about as temperature was rising. This is the 'lag' referred to. This is due to warmer oceans releasing much of their co2 (oceans are the biggest co2 sink we have). This time, there is no lag. Temperatures and co2 concentrations are increasing at the same time.
>>55554399
The post was just meant to highlight that it's not just NASA. There are in fact no scientific bodies who now outright dispute the basic premise.
Global warming is real, but so is global cooling. And you can be sure that it has happened before and it will happen again.
>>55552713
We've all seen the lies and spins half truths and endless massaging and IGNORING of data while tiny subsets are said to represent the entire earth... with massive errors in data sets and extreme changes in "compiled results" and absolutely incorrect "estimations" with major contributing factors completely ABSENT.
Only a moron still believes.
Of course human industry causes localized heat, but the 10 year ELEMENTAL LEVEL EXTINCTION EVENT that our dear Al Gore came out with over a decade ago (10 years to human extinction) is one big fat fucking lie and very sad indeed.
So when you fart there is global warming, the problem is there is also global cooling and the earth radiates heat to space a few sunspots are more important than ALL OF HUMANKINDS ACTIVITIES FOR HISTORY
>>55552759
>Does no one care about the Plastic fucking Continent floating in the Pacific?
ISN'T IT WONDERFUL how the earth swirls it into one big floating pile so you libcunts can whine your asses off... ?
Some day some asshole capitalist will surf up and suck the gigantic pool of floating profit into the towed recycle mill, then you will whine slave labor was used and some shitskin got hurt by a plastic bag that attacked him.
>>55552895
>-Stabilizing the ozone layer ( you know so people dont get cancer everywhere on their skin )
that of course is a total fucking lie, you are of course a brainwashed robotic dumb fuck
Go look at the historic ozone "hole" data, YOU FUCKING IDIOT
Man, WTF !? KEEP UP YOU SHITHEAD, DON'T JUST SWALLOW THE HEADLINES THEN PRAISE YOUR HOLY HALO
>>55553025
>This is not even going to destroy jobs, because somebody is going to
That was argued them a couple euro countries found they lost 75% of the jobs for every green rev
YOU'RE A FUCKING FOOL AND A LIAR PROVEN WRONG BY THE BIG PLAYERS ALREADY
>>55554678
Post your best evidence that contradicts the theory. If the scale of deceit is as great as you say this should be easy.
>>55553116
CO2 IS NOT POLLUTION DIPSHIT
>>55553188
>I am not an expert on this matter but any one who don't believe there is a huge hole in the ozone layer just because they want
THE OZONE HOLE IS A FRAUD DUMB SHIT
it opens and closes all on it's own fuckface, and been oscillating for decades... GO LOOK FOR YOURSELF COWARD
>>55554622
Except co2 is claiming while the temperature is not presently. A divergence.
And appeals to authority are not science. We all know that governments in the western world are pushing the agenda. But I would be surprised if there were scientific bodies in Russia that are not on that bandwagon.
>>55553250
>Because you know sometimes these wind turbines produce more energy
holy fucking stupid - ENERGY DENSITY FOR GROWTH OF HUMANITY IS REQUIRED YOU GOD DAMNED PLEBE - AND COAL FAR FAR OUTDOES WIND POWER IN ENERGY DENSITY HENCE PRODUCTION OF POWER
>>55554989
There's been a slowdown in the warming. The pause only works if you start at 1998. Despite this slowdown, 9/10 of the hottest years on record have been since the year 2000. And all the while the oceans continue to heat up.
>And appeals to authority are not science.
Fine to say this but when literally every scientific body agrees or is non committal, while none reject the theory it strongly suggest that the theory is correct.
>>55554904
Self-deceit. In most cases.
>>55555032
What's your opinion on nuclear?
>>55553698
>Are there any climate models that don't come to the conclusion that communism is only the solution?
there are no climate models that have been correct( they all far overshoot reality and claim massive heating of the earth with 90% of climate factors not included in their "great kyoto protocols!") , but they are, anyway, because communism, yes
Comrade' ! We shall rule the entire earth ! EVERY RIGHT WING OIL FUCKER EXXON BASTARD GREEDY CORPROATION IS OURS TO FUCK WITH !!!!!!
>>55553759
yes global bullshit monkey windmills have wind 24/7/365 as you say MASTER...
" typically around 30 to 55 mph, in which it will produce at its rated, or maximum, capacity. At slower wind speeds, the production falls off dramatically. If the wind speed decreases by half, power production decreases by a factor of eight. On average, therefore, wind turbines do not generate near their capacity. Industry estimates project an annual output of 30-40%, but real-world experience shows that annual outputs of 15-30% of capacity are more typical. "
SHOVE IT UP YOUR ASS YOU MORON FUCKING LIB DREAMING BITCH FAGGOT LIAR FOOL IGNORANT IDIOT FUCK
The problem is that the Left is hyperbolic about this shit.
No we won't die, we can adapt just fine. Their timescales are way wrong in an effort to cause panic.
>>55555327
Prevention is cheaper than cure. The 'cure' in this case will be relocating 2 bn poor people to areas not severely affected.
>>55553940
>Saying the radical change of the constitution of the atmosphere doesn't affect
THERE IS NO RADICAL CHANGE YOU IDIOT FUCKHEAD
Were far below ice core and traditional NATURAL earth atmopsheric co2 YOU FUCKING FOOL - FUCK EVEN YOUR ASSHOLE MIND MKULTRA MASTER AL GORE SAID SO IN HIS BANNED MOVIE !
800 PPM BITCH !
>>55554020
>Show me one that generates 50%.
HE CUNT I HAD TO SLAP THE IDIOT TOO
>>55554989
You would expect records during a long term upward trend. I've heard this argument before (blank over blank of the hottest years on record) but is was pointed out that a similar thing occurred during the late 40's/early 50s. Where a string of record years occurred close together.
But the thing is: you're talking about the age of temperature thermometer recordings. A very short piece of time. The medieval warming period had higher temperatures just recently.
>temperatures
Do you mean the weather or the climate you illiterate ignorant subhuman lard scum?
global warming is real desu
>>55555472
>The medieval warming period had higher temperatures just recently.
That's debatable.
>>55555566
who go the get?
>>55555555
>>55554622
>There are in fact no scientific bodies who now outright dispute the basic premise.
WEASEL WORDS FOR WEASELS
>>55555379
Not our problem
Bangladesh can drown desu
>>55555753
Good point. How about you point us to a reputable body that rejects it outright?
>>55555472
This was meant for this
>>55555127
>>55555127
>The pause only works if you start at 1998
ROFLMAO WOW WHAT A FUCKING FOOL YOU ARE
>>55555768
That's not how the UN works anon. Look at Europe right now. We were never consulted. Yet they keep coming.
>>55555892
>>55555753
>>55555467
>>55555426
You drunk or just retarded? You've not made a single argument ITT besides wind turbines are bad.
>>55555687
It was generally excepted before climate hysteria. It's how greenland got it's name.
>>55555152
Of course it is the best solution we have and it will be used much more massively in the future when our insane lefttard coward tyranny finally have to give in to reality or are just executed for holding mankind back for DECADES.
We have massive pollution now because the libturds, INCLUDING AL GORE PERSONALLY AS SENATOR AND VP have held back nuclear power for DECADES - of course dirty power and thus "global warming" for the SAME ASSHOLE SHITHEADS THEN OCCURS
See that's why THE HAVE TO BLAME BIG OIL BECAUSE THEY ARE REALLY THE ONES TO BE BLAMED, THEY HAVE STOPPED NUCLEAR POWER AND ADVANCEMENT.
>>55556030
>>55555999
>>55555379
>The 'cure' in this case will be relocating 2 bn poor people to areas not severely affected.
ROFLMAO YES SURE YOU WHINING CUNT DRIBBLING HUMAN DYNAMO -
WE CAN'T GET RID OF 10 MILLION ILLLEGAL ALIENS IT'S IMPOSSIBLE - BUT THE GLOBAL WWARMING PSYCHO REMINDS THE IGNORANT PLEBES THAT "RELOCATING 2 BILLION PEOPLE IS OUR COST IF WE DO NOTHING"...
YOU'RE A FUCKING RETARD, LITERALLY
25%-33% OF ALL HUMANITY - DOWN FROM THAT 100% AL GORE EXTINCTION LEVEL EVENT NUMBER YOU FADING FAGGOT ?!
LOLO
>>55555958
accepted
>>55555687
>That's debatable.
THE DEBATE IS OVER THE SCIENCE IS SETTLED.
>>55556002
Big oil, Exxon in particular are proven to have paid people to shill against AWG.
I agree with you on nuclear. It's the only viable short term solution.
>>55555853
AHH A SCIENTIFIC BODY - NOW REPUTABLE BODY .. ROFLMAO
GOT SOME MORE WEASEL GOALPOSTS YOU PIECE OF FUCKING LYING SHIT ?
>>55556160
muh "robust" science
>>55556206
Either would do. Crack on laddie.
>>55556161
There are plenty of people being paid to shill for big climate.
>>55555958
again from the link here >>55553867
>>55553386
1975-1979 is known as the little ice-age , where the temperature dropped a lot in europe.
So that is a weak starting point for a graph. It was about 20degrees colder in 1979 then it is today. But that was of course related to polar winds.
>>55553811
it makes plants grow.
good for nature.
THey even pump it in greenhouses to make crops grow better.
>>55556253
HOW MANY TIMES HAS YOUR AUGUST NON SCIENTIFIC IPCC REPORT BODY CHANGED IT'S FUCKING TUNE AND CALLED ITSELF AND IT'S FORMER CONCLUSION(S) ONE BIG FAT FUCKING LIE ?
........... WELL FUCKNUTS ?
HOW MANY SCIENTISTS BEHIND IPPC "BULLSHIT POLITICAL BY POLITICIANS REPORT" HAVE PUBLICLY DENOUNCED THE RELEASED PAPERS ?
... WELL FUCKING GENIUS INFORMED ?
>>55556279
There could well be. I've not seen any proof of this though.
>>55552214
>You didn't source your graph, princess. Try again?
Neither did you
>>55556383
When it's said .8 this is comapred to the pre industrial average. The reason the 70s ae chosen is this is when satellite measurements became available. You can go back further than that but the measurements are not as accurate. Though IMO close enough when you include plenty of data sources.
>>55556407
True but plants haven't exactly been starving the past million years when we've been at roughly 280ppm.
>>55556412
Still waiting on that link.
>>55556429
It's built in to the system. No one gets a grant to study climate "denial."
>>>55555555
IPCC: “Risk of death, injury, and disrupted livelihoods in low-lying coastal zones and small island developing states, due to sea-level rise, coastal flooding, and storm surges.”
NIPCC: “Flood frequency and severity in many areas of the world were higher historically during the Little Ice Age and other cool eras than during the twentieth century. Climate change ranks well below other contributors, such as dikes and levee construction, to increased flooding.”
IPCC: “Risk of food insecurity linked to warming, drought, and precipitation variability, particularly for poorer populations.”
NIPCC: “There is little or no risk of increasing food insecurity due to global warming or rising atmospheric CO2 levels. Farmers and others who depend on rural livelihoods for income are benefitting from rising agricultural productivity throughout the world, including in parts of Asia and Africa where the need for increased food supplies is most critical. Rising temperatures and atmospheric CO2 levels play a key role in the realization of such benefits.
IPCC: “Risk of severe harm for large urban populations due to inland flooding.”
NIPCC: “No changes in precipitation patterns, snow, monsoons, or river flows that might be considered harmful to human well-being or plants or wildlife have been observed that could be attributed to rising CO2 levels. What changes have been observed tend to be beneficial.”
>>55556354
Proxy reconstructions. You can make them say almost anything. Ask Michael Mann and his hockey stick.
IPCC: “Risk of loss of rural livelihoods and income due to insufficient access to drinking and irrigation water and reduced agricultural productivity, particularly for farmers and pastoralists with minimal capital in semi-arid regions.”
NIPCC: “Higher atmospheric CO2 concentrations benefit plant growth-promoting microorganisms that help land plants overcome drought conditions, a potentially negative aspect of future climate change. Continued atmospheric CO2 enrichment should prove to be a huge benefit to plants by directly enhancing their growth rates and water use efficiencies.”
IPCC: “Systemic risks due to extreme [weather] events leading to breakdown of infrastructure networks and critical services.”
NIPCC: “There is no support for the model-based projection that precipitation in a warming world becomes more variable and intense. In fact, some observational data suggest just the opposite, and provide support for the proposition that precipitation responds more to cyclical variations in solar activity.”
YOU'RE ALL FULL OF FUCKING CRAP 100%
https://www.heartland.org/media-library/pdfs/CCR-IIb/Full-Report.pdf
55556536 HERE'S A THOUSAND PLUS PAGES FROM REAL SCIENTISTS DIRECTLY, REFUTING YOUR GOD DAMNED POLITICAL LIES AND HYSTERIA 100%
>>55551809
>It is undeniable that CO2 does not affect temperatures.
>So why do you think the warmist scam is being pushed so hard?
*This post has been sponsored by the coal industry. Coal - - burn it! What are you, Socialists or something?
>>55556546
Anyone with compelling evidence should have seen Exxon.
>>55556642
I believe that *is* the hockey stick.
>>55556354
That graph is a load of nonsense. It has somehow managed to remove the little ice age and medieval warm period, both of which we know existed from historical and archaeological evidence.
For example, the Romans grew grapes in northern Britain. Something that it is too cold to do now.
>>55556642
True but the blue line at the end is measured by satellite. Also what you said could equally be applied to any data that shows the MWP as being hotter than today.
>>55556832
The IPCC quietly dropped that from their reports. You got to be kidding me if you still credit the hockey stick graph. Even die hard alarmist scientists think it's a piece of crap.
>>55556909
GLOBAL temperature anomaly. That is to say across the globe. What you are referring to is local.
>>55556992
Fairly sure the effect *was* global m8. As evidenced by increased glaciation during the little ice age and Greenland actually being green when the Vikings landed.
>>55556954
>True but the blue line at the end
You see how terrible it looks on that graph? It's because they flattened out the hockey stick handle with terrible proxy reconstructions.
" “This was the biggest dose of heat we’ve received from a solar storm since 2005,” says Martin Mlynczak of NASA Langley Research Center. “It was a big event, and shows how solar activity can directly affect our planet.” "
“The thermosphere lit up like a Christmas tree,” says Russell. “It began to glow intensely at infrared wavelengths as the thermostat effect kicked in.
"This is a new frontier in the sun-Earth connection," says Mlynczak, "and the data we’re collecting are unprecedented." "
MARCH 2012 NASA
ROFLMAO EXTRA CO2 BLOWS TRILLIONS OF EXCESS HEAT WATTS BACK OUT AND AWAY FROM THE EARTH
http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2012/22mar_saber/
NEW SCIENCE THAT FUCKED UP EVERY KYOTO AGW COMPUTER PROGRAM ON CO2 EVER RUN !
For the three day period, March 8th through 10th, the thermosphere absorbed 26 billion kWh of energy. Infrared radiation from CO2 and NO, the two most efficient coolants in the thermosphere, re-radiated 95% of that total back into space.
>>55551809
Because protection of the environment isn't really a bad thing. Smog infested shitholes are unhealthy for everything regardless of whether or not it warms the planet.
>>55556954
The medieval warm period has been common knowledge well before the current scientific agenda. There are hundreds of papers on it.
>>55556992
It's not local. There is evidence for it worldwide. It has always been considered a worldwide phenomena except in alamist rhetoric. This is pure revisionism for an agenda.
>>55556429
>>>55556279
>There could well be. I've not seen any proof of this though.
OMFG - HOW ABOUT THE CARRBON EXCHANGE FOR STARTERS ASSWIPE ?
THE 9 BILLION ASSIGNED TO NASA OVER A DECADE AGO FOR A STARTING YEAR TO PAY OUT TO GLOBAL WARMING HANSEN BUTTFUCKERS ?
"uhh.. hurr derr uhh I've seen no proof of that', uhh i i i i uhh err umm ahh.. actua;ly BIG FUCKING OIL MAN HATE HATE HATE HATE sorry i was uhh triggered uhh emm... err.. uhh
>>55557130
What point are you making here? Are you trying to account for the observed warming or portray co2 as having a net cooling effect?
>>55557123
The blue line at the end is from direct measurement. Yes the proxy data could be suspect but it's the best we have.
>>55557071
Some places were significantly warmer, some places much as they are today, some places cooler than today. This is what distinguished today's warming from previous anomalous periods, the warming today is global.
>>55556992
>GLOBAL temperature anomaly.
STOP AVOIDING THE MASSIVE COOLING AT THE SOUTH POLE THEN YOU FUCKING LYING WEASEL
I am a visiter from 2000. Apparently we're all supposed to be underwater by now? If that's not true, I hope you all aren't seriously taking that global warming thing seriously anymore.
Also, did hoverboards ever happen?
>>55557341
your mixing up industries that sprung up around global warming with paid shills. Exxon funded the heartland institute (who produce the NIPCC documents) who in turn pay WUWT and no doubt others.
>>55557425
No no, you don't understand. Our predictions from past decades don't count because they were inaccurate. Now that we've improved on those predictions, clearly you should take our predictions for future decades with 100% certainty
>>55557425
If you were asked to identify the trend from this image, would you say it's warming or cooling?
Shit I want to go back to dinosaur times levels.
Shit looked lush back then.
>>55557370
>Yes the proxy data could be suspect but it's the best we have.
Michael Mann's proxy data was shit. Even alarmist scientists know this.
Damn dude.
You're thick headed.
Still trying to push that ridiculous hockey stick BS when even the IPCC dropped it like a hot potato.
>>55557497
>they overestimated the warming
>Fuck it the entire concept is wrong
You don't actually believe this?
>>55557541
Show us a better collection of proxy data. One that you accept.
>>55557370
>Some places were significantly warmer, some places much as they are today, some places cooler than today.
Here is a paper proving that the medieval warm period was in fact global in scope.
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/342/6158/617
>>55557541
>muh hockey stick
The .8 indicated on that graph has been observed. Nobody denies this.
>>55557370
>This is what distinguished today's warming from previous anomalous periods, the warming today is global.
You've gone full dumb ass here.
You're know saying that global warming trends started with Al Gore's hockey stick.
UHH DUHH THERES NO MONEY FOR AGW LLIES !
I'VE NEVER SEEN ANY EVIDENCE OF SHILL PAYOUTS !!!!
" To be clear . . . that’s $22 billion of taxpayers’ money . . . the amount that our government pays to stop the “global warming” epidemic.
That comes out to $41,856 every minute.
Or, to put it in perspective, that is twice as much as what our government spends on securing our borders. ..."
ROFLMAO ONE FULL BORE MIDDLE CLASS YEAR SALARY EVEY FUCKING MINUTE - ONE MORE GOVERNMENT PAID SHILL FOR GLOBAL WARMING !
>>55557554
> Outrageous predictions were made in the past
> Some people said "Hey, maybe we should take these with a grain of salt."
> Got slandered as denialists
> They were proved to be right
> "Hey, don't ever take this stuff with a grain of salt again."
>>55557541
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:2000_Year_Temperature_Comparison.png
>>55557486
YOU FUCKING LIED AGAIN
" During 2014, The Heartland Institute received support from approximately 6,000 individual, foundation, and corporate supporters. Its 2014 income came from the following sources: Foundations 62%, individuals 25%, corporations 10% . No corporate donor contributes more than 5 percent of its annual budget. "
YOU JUST FUCKING MADE IT UP, A BIG FAT LIBSHIT LIE
>>55557597
>The .8 indicated on that graph has been observed. Nobody denies this.
NO IT HAS NOT BEEN OBSERVED AND IT IS MASSIVELY REBUTTED
>>55557569
I don't keep that stuff on my phone but I've seen it. It has to show the Medeival Climate Optimum, Little Ice Age, Roman Warm Period, etc.
You mean the only proxy reconstructions you've ever seen are hockey sticks?
Good lord.
Nobody denies CO2 is capable of retaining heat. People deny the claim by globalists that we need a world government to prevent the negligible contributions to CO2 made by humans.
Increased CO2 would actually be a good thing as it would encourage plant growth. The shitskins cutting down the rainforests around the equator are doing the most environmental damage out of anyone.
>but muh ice caps
They aren't permanent. They're a remnant of the ice age and have got to go eventually.
HERE'S WHAT THE LYING FAGGOT AGW TURD FUCKING RETARDS WON'T DARE MENTION !
" What starts out being a scientific report becomes a political instrument because after a hard-core group of IPCC supporters draft the Summary for Policymakers, government representatives discuss, negotiate and eventually agree on the wording of each sentence. The scientific component of the report is then modified to better align it with the thinking of government representatives.
If the IPCC reports were accepted for exactly what they are – exaggerated science with a large dollop of politics – this would be the end of the matter. Unfortunately, various bodies actively encourage us to believe the reports are entirely scientific, accurate and completely authoritative on all climate matters, this despite the IPCC’s charter and the political interference."
ROFLMAO TOTAL FUCKING LIES FOR POLITICIANS AFTER MASSAGED SHIT DATA ADJUSTED FOR FUCKING HOT TWATS, THE POLS THEN RAPE EVERY FUCKING SENTENCE... FOR THEIR AGENDAS OF THE BIG ASS UN GLOBAL POWER FUCK
WAY TO GO RETARDS, ALL THE SCIENTISTS AGREE
>>55557644
The .8C you hear mentioned? Yeah that's the global temperature anomoly. Global. As in it averages out to .8 across the planet. Some regions have warmed more (the arctic) and some less but the average is .8C
>>55557597
That's not my point. You're kinda dense, to be honest. I'm tired of beating a dead horse with you.
Also, you should always keep in mind that these ground temperature data sets have been fucked with to hell and back by people with an agenda. I'm not confident in them and neither should you be.
Skepticalscience.com
All your bullshit is debunked there
A big thing to remember as it relates to measuring anything is the error associated with that measurement.
Today's thermocouples are highly accurate, and the data they generate is very much real (assuming they are properly placed, which they are not, but that's for another conversation).
The issue is this highly accuracy data with margins of tenths of a degree is being compared to data with error bars of 2 centigrade. 2! So, until the difference between the new measurement falls outside the error band of the old measurement, it's meaningless to draw a conclusion.
Pic related: the first and third columns in section A cannot be said to be different. Though, they are both different from the second bar in section A.
Warmists would look at the bars in section A and proclaim them all different, which is the mathematically incorrect basis of their agenda.
>>55557671
They were proven right RE what?
CO2 is a ghg
the planet is warming
human activity is responsible for the increase in co2.
All of these are facts that can be verified any number of ways.
>>55557782
I didn;t say exxon exclusivly funded them. Simply that their funding was so the Heartland would keep the 'skeptic' train going.
>>55557903
then see the wiki link I posted above. Numerous datasets.
>>55557903
>You mean the only proxy reconstructions you've ever seen are hockey sticks?
>Good lord.
A real scientist got a hold of the formulas the asshole hockey stick creator used and PROVED that any data set shoved into the lying shit stick PRODUCED A HOCKEY STICK 100% OF THE TIME !
Yes, it's that's bad folks - the "scientist" that created the "hockey stick" is so fucked up that ANY DATA SET comes out a hockey stick with his LIBTURD RETARD METHOD he was forced to gorge up.
>>55558024
So global temperature anomalies didn't exist until the current anomaly. No global temperature trends. Just cool areas and warm ones scattered about.
You're like a fucking child.
>>55558024
thanks retard captain obvious lying fool, only a fucking moron would think that needs explanation
>>55557941
Human activity is the main if not only factor that has caused the increase in atmospheric concentrations.
>>55553938
>>55558055
It's hard to keep track of what point yous are even making one post to the next. You take issue with the graph I posted above. So I've given you a handful more here >>55558123
>>55552968
> 1000 bc
> mean temperature 24 celcius
> recorded with a stick tied on a goat
Greenhouse gasses, principally CO2, have controlled most ancient climate changes. This time around humans are the cause, mainly by our CO2 emissions.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/climate-change-little-ice-age-medieval-warm-period.htm
In the last 35 years of global warming, sun and climate have been going in opposite directions.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/solar-activity-sunspots-global-warming.htm
Negative impacts of global warming on agriculture, health & environment far outweigh any positives.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-positives-negatives.htm
97% of climate experts agree humans are causing global warming.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-scientific-consensus.htm
All the indicators show that global warming is still happening.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-cooling.htm
Models successfully reproduce temperatures since 1900 globally, by land, in the air and the ocean.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/climate-models.htm
The warming trend is the same in rural and urban areas, measured by thermometers and satellites, and by natural thermometers.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/surface-temperature-measurements.htm
A large number of ancient mass extinction events have been strongly linked to global climate change. Because current climate change is so rapid, the way species typically adapt (eg - migration) is, in most cases, simply not be possible. Global change is simply too pervasive and occurring too rapidly.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/Can-animals-and-plants-adapt-to-global-warming.htm
For global records, 2010 is the hottest year on record, tied with 2005.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-stopped-in-1998.htm
Satellites measure Antarctica is gaining sea ice but losing land ice at an accelerating rate which has implications for sea level rise.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/antarctica-gaining-ice.htm
>>55558097
So basically you're wanting to set the slate clean by dismissing all direct measurements prior to the 70s? Fair enough.
The trend from the 70s is pretty clear.
>>55558123
Another hockey stick.
>>55558123
>I didn;t say exxon exclusivly funded them.
NO IN FACT YOU DID, AND YOU STILL HAVE ZERO PROOF OF A SINGLE FUCKING DIME YOU LYING SACK OF SHIT.
Simply that their funding was so the Heartland would keep the 'skeptic' train going.
THERE IS NO SKEPTIC TRAIN YOU JACKASS, THERE'S A GIGANTIC LYING GAPING HELLHOLE IN YOU AGW'S FUCKED UP CONTINUOUSLY CHANGING LIEFESTS AND GOD DAMNED CRIMES AND MONEY SCHEMES, AND YOUR BFTO ASSHOLES KEEP GETTTING PROSTRATE PINNINGS AND SIDEWALL REDUCTIONS AS YOUR BIG FAT ASS FUCKING LIES GET MEGA DOWNSIZED OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN, WITH NEW CHEATING AND LIES AND DATA EXCLUSIONS AND FRAUDS DEVELOPED ALL THE TIME AND EXPOSED.
THE TRAIN IS YOUR GOD DAMNED CRASHING PILE OF SHIT THAT GETS SMALLER AND SMALLER SO YOU CAN'T HUFF YOUR STONER METHANE WORLD DESTROYING FLAMING RETARD FUMES OFF IT
>>55558276
We have ways of working out various things about past conditions by looking at things such as sediment and tree rings.
Numerous papers have documented how IPCC predictions are more likely to underestimate the climate response.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/ipcc-scientific-consensus.htm
>>55552085
I have the same experience. But here on the internet these uneducated rednecks can pretend to be smart and special
>>55554039
Leaded gasoline wasn't removed because of muh planet, it was removed because it would fuck up the catalytic converter.
>>55558300
from a dozen sources. All the different colours. Datasets. The black line at the end. Direct observation that you can check yourself.
>>55558290
>Greenhouse gasses, principally CO2, have controlled most ancient climate changes.
This is wrong. CO2 historically lags behind temp changes. All climate scientists know this.
>>55558292
The point I'm trying to make, you scientifically illiterate retard, is that without error bars you cannot conclusively draw a trend from anything.
You have failed to provide the error bars associated with those measurements. Scientifically speaking, you're either intentionally hiding the error associated with your measurement to obfuscate the results in your favor, or you do not have the relevant dates to have this argument.
Your plot should look like pic related
>>55552335
>You will not pass a class in Ecology if you don't agree with the data
>You will not pass a Chemistry class if you don't think atoms exist
>You will not pass a Biology class if you think evolution is false
>B-but its totally brainwashing for me to agree with these things in order to get my degree!
You're a special kind of stupid, aren't you?
>>55558315
No I didn;t. And if you want proof, all you have to do is squak.
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Heartland_Institute#Exxon_funding
And here's a bit about WUWT being Heartland funded.
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Anthony_Watts
>>55558292
That tells us very little about climate. What he's saying is comparing modern thermometer data to past proxies with a margin of error in the whole numbers is to be taken with a very large pinch of salt.
>>55558461
CO2 didn't initiate warming from past ice ages but it did amplify the warming. In fact, about 90% of the global warming followed the CO2 increase.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/co2-lags-temperature.htm
>>55558290
Even the name of the site is a lie.
>>55558290
>still shilling the 97% myth
Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the literature: A re-analysis
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421514002821
Global Warming Alarmists Caught Doctoring '97-Percent Consensus' Claims
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2013/05/30/global-warming-alarmists-caught-doctoring-97-percent-consensus-claims/
>>55558461
This time it's not. Which is how we know something different is happening.
If what you are saying is true, there should have been significant warming between 1600 and 1900 to account for the spike in co2. And this warming, if it was driving co2, would have to be more substantial than any other period of time over the past million years, as that's how long co2 levels have been sat at roughly 280ppm.
>>55558531
A survey of 928 peer-reviewed abstracts on the subject 'global climate change' published between 1993 and 2003 shows that not a single paper rejected the consensus position that global warming is man caused (Oreskes 2004).
A follow-up study by the Skeptical Science team of over 12,000 peer-reviewed abstracts on the subjects of 'global warming' and 'global climate change' published between 1991 and 2011 found that of the papers taking a position on the cause of global warming, over 97% agreed that humans are causing it (Cook 2013).
>>55558463
OK. lets assume that all temp data from 1800 to 1970 was wrong. We've still seen warming the past 50 years through direct observation.
>>55558361
Tree ring data is shit for temp proxies.
>>55558511
right but it's unlikely that all past data was out in the same direction by the same amount.
>>55558531
Several studies have confirmed that “...the debate on the authenticity of global warming and the role played by human activity is largely nonexistent among those who understand the nuances and scientific basis of long-term climate processes”. (Doran 2009). In other words, more than 97% of scientists working in the disciplines contributing to studies of our climate, accept that climate change is almost certainly being caused by human activities.
>>55558627
And all that was debunked in the links I provided.
>>55558687
So what proxy or past data will you accept? Just that that shows what you want to see I suspect.
>>55558714
>Opinion article
In other words... you posted a shitty blogpost
Try again
>>55558734
You missed the study. Try again.
>>55558744
Blogpost
Try again
>>55558757
>Shill detected.
Nice try.
>>55558438
Those are not datasets dummy. They are proxy reconstructions. Even the part at the end isn't a dataset.
>>55558714
you realise James Taylor works for the Heartland Institute right? Funny how they keep coming up...
As to your other proof, it's behind a paywall.
>>55558744
That study also merely criticizes the data made available and doesn't debunk the study
He just is skeptical of it
Blogpost tier journal article
>>55558786
what would you suggest using for looking back beyond 1600?
>>55558779
>Posting articles from a known shill
>Calling others shills
>>55558692
We don't know. That's the point.
For example, here in your graph:
>>55556354
You will notice a grey shadow. That represents the error. It means they are 95% sure that the real temperature is somewhere in that shadow, but they don't know where.
>>55551809
business and no panic
Ice age is coming
>>55558665
You're missing the point, probably intentionally, because you do not have data to support your feelings.
Get this through your scientifically literate skull, until you know the error associated with a measurement, you cannot draw any conclusions from the measurements.
Let's use an example that's less likely to trigger your feelings.
If all you had was a ruler that was marked every centimeter, and you went and measured something to 11 millimeters, you wouldn't be able to say conclusively determine its length. As you are eyeballing in between the demarcations where are you think the measurement lies.
If you later came back with a ruler demarcated in millimeters, and got a measurement of 9 millimeters, it would be dishonest to compare the 11 millimeter measurement with a one centimeter error with a millimeter measurement with a one millimeter error, and then conclude the object has shrunk by 2 millimeters.
This is what global warmists do, and you're a useful idiot for them.
>>55551809
I'm more worried about what's under the ice that's melting, i've heard talk about shitloads of methane.
>>55558918
Actually I'll amend that. I don't know what they have done to the data so I don't know what their confidence interval is.
In light of that it's not "95% sure", it's "somewhat sure". More like "I like pretty pictures sure".
>>55558627
The thing about that is that all scientists agree that humans create some heat. They don't differentiate between scientists that think humans create a little heat or ALL of the heat.
Even I know humans cause warming. This doesn't make me an alarmist.
>>55558561
>>55558561
>if it was driving co2, would have to be more substantial than any other period of time over the past million years, as that's how long co2 levels have been sat at roughly 280ppm.
ROFLMAO - ICE AGE 10K YEARS AGO -THEN IT FUCKING HEATED UP BY MAGIC !!!!
LIBTURD IDIOTS SQUEALING CO2 RISE TEMP RISE
NOW MASTER HACK FUCKING RETARD SAYS 280PPM FOR THE PAST MILLION YEARS....
BWHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHA
>>55558665
Which doesn't prove a damn thing about anthropogenic warming.
>>55551809
Cronyism
/thread
>>55558730
Everything but tree rings.
>>55558959
> scientifically literate skull
hue.
I understand uncertainties. You think this hasn't been taken into account by places like the MET office and co? If you choose to dismiss them all entirely cause of uncertainties then so be it. Just don;t drag up old temp data as proof that we've been warmer in the past or whatever else you may try prove with it.
>>55558841
I'm just pointing out that you don't even have your terms right.
As someone who constructs methodology for studies in general, I can tell you much of the "data" is from bad science based on flawed methodology
The IPCC is full of politicians masquerading as scientists
>>55559139
The ice age ended 10,000 years ago. If this was driving the increase in co2 then co2 sould have started to increase 9500 years ago. You're just throwing out wildly unrelated points at this stage hoping something sticks. You have less than no idea what you're talking about and simply parrot WUWT and their friends.
>>55559149
Well if you refuse to consider any data prior then yes, all we can say is that for the majority of the past 50 years the trend has been upwards. Anything beyond this would just be speculation til we've got another 100 years of direct measurements. However for now I will choose to put some faith in the MET and their equivalents.
>>55558997
>I'm more worried about what's under the ice that's melting,
YOU WILL DIE.
THE APOCALYPSE IS CERTAIN AS AL GORE SAID.
1.GLOBULL WARMING HYSTERIA THE FUTURE DEATH OF ALL MANKIND THAT IS CERTAIN EVEN WITH 100% COMPLIANCE OF KYOTO PROTOCOLS AS IPCC ADMITS.A TINY.7 C REDUCTION CHANGE WILL STILL GIVE US ELE AND ALL HUMANS DIE.
THANK YOU AL GORE !
2. GLOBULL THERMONUCLEAR WAR YOU ARE DEAD
3. BIOLOGICAL WARFARE EXTERMINATION YOURE DEAD
4. GALACTIC CENTER EXPLOSION YOURE DEAD
5. COMET ASTEROID IMPACTING EARTH YOU ARE DEAD
6. GENETIC STRAIN ANOMOLY HUMANITY COMPROMISED YOU ARE DEAD
7. SOLAR FLARE OF IMMENSITY YOU ARE DEAD
8. BIBLICAL APOC WIPEOUT YOU ARE DEAD
9. WORMHOLE/BLACKHOLE ENTRY FROM CERN YOU ARE DEAD
10. FUKUSHIMA EXPLOSION 4+ ATMOSPHERIC CARRY YOU ARE DEAD DEAD DEAD SICK THEN DEAD
shall I go on YOU GOD DAMNED COWARD ?!
I admit it was much nicer when the bible thumping wackadoo evangelists and other televangies screeched the end times are near since only 1 thing wiped out all of humanity...
HOWEVER NOW THE BIG ASS SCIENCE FLUNKIE FUCKTARDS HAVE THEIR AGW AND NEAR A DOZEN OTHER EXTINCTION LEVEL EVENTS OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD... ISN'T IT TIME YOU GOD DAMNED PSYCHOES SHUT YOUR COWARDLY FUCKING LYING HOLES ?
>>55559278
Didn't the MET recently get fired by the BBC because they can't even predict the weather?
>>55559606
You're the only one shrieking ITT retard.
>>55559386
>The ice age ended 10,000 years ago. If this was driving the increase in co2 then co2 sould have started to increase 9500 years ago
My point exactly and I'm parroting no one and have no idea what your god damned wwut is.
I'm saying you're a lying moron and the more you talk the more you contradict yourself and get caught lying,
Yes I'm top 1% world intellect but you're so easy and so god damned flawed with propaganda and lies it's child's work.
>>55559679
nice rebuttal cock sucker faggot, exemplary evidence I'm sure
>>55559667
That's just the BBC wanting to save money, they'll replace them with some other company that predicts weather terribly.
>>55559679
NO YOU DUMB FUCK GLOBULL WARMING MONKEY SHITHEADS ARE PERMANENT SHRIEKERS BECAUSE ELE
Why don't we just create co2 scrubbers?
>>55551809
53% of global warming comes from cattle agriculture - red meat - as methane is 25~100 times more potent a greenhouse gas than CO2
why is this not being discussed if climate change is such an issue? (...too hard basket / meat lobby too strong / fat westerners are too addicted to the dopamine carcass cravings release....?)
why are cars and electricity generation the targets when they contribute only a fraction of the aggregate warming effect? (...could it be to curtail developing nations' modernisation?)
why is the fact that, if all the science is true about global warming, why have we not already resigned ourselves to the fact that the melting ice caps and permafrost in the likes of the Antarctic and Greenland (respectively) are already at the point of no-return and will raise global temps ~10'c by 2050, according to NASA? (...because we'd all go anarchic and wreck the place?)
>>55559429
You're the guy that seems to think there has never been an upward trend until this one. I fully recognized that global temperatures have always trended up or down.
>>55560031
Bullshit propaganda statistic.
>>55560031
Abert Gore here
>>55551809
>So why do you think the warmist scam is being pushed so hard?
22 BILLION PLUS A YEAR JUST FROM AVAILABLE USA GOV TAX FIAT MONEY FOR STARTERS...
So you have a new goddamned warmist paid full salary every minute of the year to lie and lie and lie and lie...
USA global hegemony is forwarded with AGW death cult fear mongering - all shores and beaches must be scouted and intense plans for saving the (2 billion says this threads dying faggot commie collegiate retard life invested) poor helpless savages must be plotted with data collection of massive military import.
All left wing cuntbag faggots can scream big oil is lying a thousand times and shreik the evil republicans want us all to die, a political god damned psychotics wet dream atttack - now the rethugs will murder THE ENTIRE PLANET !
VOTE DEMOCRAT AND REMEMBER AL GORE IS YOUR MASTER !!!!!!!
That last one is so huge that no liberal bitch of any stripe can possibly fucking resist it.
They will save the entire human race of which there are no races of course from the evil vile republican conservo enemies who are not just starving children and old ladies but intent on murdering all of humanity with their greed and corpo pigggery !!!!!!
OHHHH GOaaqwwdddddd GAOOWDDDDDDDD IM HAVING A LIBERAL INTERNAL BUTTHOLE RAPE NUTTVAGINA GOD DAMNED ORGASMIC EXPLOSIONNNNNNNN !!!!!!!! OHH GOOD GOOD GODDDDDDDD OH MY FUCKING MY SEED AND VAG HAVE PEAKKKKKKKED THE 'GASM IS SO INTENSE I MAY DIEEEEE !!! OH THE ATTACKING RAPE AGAINST THE RETHUGS OHH MY GLOUSSOIUS CUUUNNNYTTTTTTT
