ALRIGHT YOU FUCKING LOSERS, I WANNA HEAR YOUR RESPONSE TO THIS SHIT:
>Humans have triggered the last 16 record-breaking hot years experienced on Earth (up to 2014), with the new research tracing our impact on the global climate as far back as 1937.
>The findings, led by Dr Andrew King from the University of Melbourne and the ARC Centre of Excellence for Climate System Science, suggest that without human-induced climate change, recent hot summers and years would not have occurred.
MUH LIBERAL CONSPIRACY, MUH 'CLIMATE CHANGE EXISTS, BUT HUMANS HAVE NO EFFECT'
The only problem with this board being anonymous is that I can't write down your names and call you out in 20 years when the results of your ignorant faggotry are apparent.
http://phys.org/news/2016-03-human-climate-dates-1930s.html
>>67282943
>humans have triggered
>triggered
We triggered the climate so bad it wants to kill us. Earth really is female.
>>67282943
Shouldn't this stuff be fairly easy to simulate to put all debate to rest?
>>67283096
>Mother Earth
>>67282943
>earth gets warmer
>therefore earth gets comfier
not seeing a problem here lads
>>67283406
american education
>>67282943
Earth , like any other planet, was designed to equilibrium at the end of it's lifetime, to die from a lack of entropy. That's what it's doing. Think of it like a sine wave that's getting longer and decelerating. Or maybe, just maybe, it's getting more entropy, which means that the wave is getting shorter and higher. This means that bursts of warming and ice ages will appear more frequently until they cancel each other out, and all entropy is dead, yet again.
If you want to solve global warming, Think bigger than global.
>>67283406
>lads
Please go to Pakistan, you are needed there
>>67283152
I mean, the claim is that there's a greenhouse effect caused by the CO2 emissions if I remember correctly?
Shouldn't it be pretty easy to create a controlled enviroment where we try to atmospheric samples to see how much they heat up from solar radiation and then compare the effects to a sample where CO2 is gradually increased in order to not only conclusively prove the phenomenon, but also to display exactly how much CO2 is required to cause an effect?
Seems natural to me, broseph.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interglacial
>>67283822
http://www.starhop.com/library/pdf/studyguide/elementary/glojar-7.pdf
have at it bro.
>>67283406
Do you realize that a average global temperature rise of 1 degree could kill of phytoplankton?
>>67283917
>but look at this graph with a squiggly line and the word 'ice age'!
Go back to your cave in Bavaria, Ingo.
Who cares? We have more important issues to deal with.
>>67283822
Moreover, in the event this method is conclusively proven, that would also give us access to controlling the earth's climate, provided we develope a method of changing the Atmosphere's CO2 levels up and down, thus allowing the prevention of the next ice age when the time comes?
>>67284062
Top rebuttal. Funny how Global Hoaxers are fine with science, until it gives proof that contradicts their beliefs.
All this lvl 12~17 UV rays fucked up my sight, be careful.
>>67284195
You're an idiot. Correlation doesn't prove or disprove causation.
>>67284407
That is the direct fallacy you are peddling.
I honestly wish conservatives like the peoplle on pol werent such fucking sheep sometimes. Theyre like liberals in that often times they'll buy into the entire ideology rather than picking out what makes sense. Most have bought into the mining and oil lobbyist propaganda. I'm conservative myself and you'd have to be a retard to not believe humans are destroying the environment.
>>67284407
And therefor, the rise of human CO2 production doesn't prove an impact on climate. Thank you for agreeing.
>>67282943
I have yet to see a graph that shows a change in climate and temperature in modern times that differs from previous cycles.
Though I don't really care.
>Chinese
>human
>>67284062
You fucking reatard
>>67284643
We're not talking about proof, we're weighing evidence. Your evidence is shit, and the only reason you cling to it is because you don't like the inevitable upshot (global regulation of greenhouse gas emissions) of the overwhelming evidence contra your position.
>>67283957
That experiment proves the existence of a greenhouse phenomenon, not the effect of the greenhouse gases.
The goal is to measure the capability of different gases to trap radiation, not to prove whether or not radiation can be trapped.
>>67285021
>trying to say normal and accepted things on /pol/
>expecting them to understand science
>expecting logic and reason from an anti-semitic soothsaying doomsday fascist frog cult on 4chan's edgiest board
>>67282943
We really need to take a lesson from the dinosaurs here. Look what happened to them from their use of the planet's resources.... It caused a huge ice age.
We need more taxes for dem progams mammy. Tax dem footpints!
>>67282943
perhaps you should care more about fixing your miserable life faggot
in 20 years you will probably have killed yourself
>>67285021
no m8 there you go again with those assertions based on the evidence we are debating lol
>>67284573
Even if the Republicans voted for everything Obama asked, global warming wouldn't be affected. China by itself overwhelmingly out pollutes us, let alone the rest of the world.
I'm fine with working to stop pollution as a health issue. The problem is that the left is too stubborn about what they want:
>they want to stop using all fossil fuels immediately
>they only want investment into "green" energy
We should be pushing nuclear hard and maintaining our independence with oil, and invest into alternative energy research. We can do everything at once rather than crippling our economy like the left wants.
>>67285021
You're the one making the claim, therefore it is your burden to prove that CO2 gas is capable of trapping solar radiation more efficiently than our current atmosphere.
By proving that, you'll also give an industrial use to CO2 gas, making it profitable to keep it trapped, rather than just blowing it away.
>>67285621
THIS
It all can really be BTFO by pointing out unless you are all willing to enforce climate change laws globally (meaning going to war if they are not followed) no one will take this little liberal initiative seriously.
Ok, so? We aren't separate from nature. We are a catalyst for what creation needs to explore.
>>67284004
who gives a shit about plankton? i'm not a fucking whale bro
>>67286101
Without plankton the world will literally break in half, DIDNT YOU FUCKING KNOW KID
>>67282943
>20 years
You think the last mass glaciations of this planet melted overnight huh...that's cute. It took CENTURIES of increasingly warmer weather to make that happen. Global warming, then cooling are cleansing processes the earth uses to maintain a homeostasis. You arrogantly believe humans have ANY impact on the environment? You're not that special...
No matter how many carbon offsets you buy, you're never going to halt or even stifle environmental changes.
>>67286222
No, without algae the world wouldn't exist in its current state, plankton don't contribute anything other than sustenance for creatures humans don't benefit from.
Inb4: herr derr muh cosmetics and perfumes argument, those aren't essential and could be easily gone without.
But it hasn't gotten warmer. This is most likely another story misrepresenting findings and banking on no one actually reading what it says
>>67285021
>>67285300
Just answer my fucking question you plebs
>>67284751
>>67282943
You know what, fine. Lets play devil's advocate and say that this bullshit is true.
What is your solution?
>besides taxing everyone on shit that won't work
>>67282943
why 1937? why choose that date when earth is more than 4 billion old? or 6000 years for americans? why not 200k years ago when supposedly the first humans appeared? why not 10 years ago when we won the world cup? why 1937? why not 1488?
>>67282943
Let's get this fucking straight.
Greenhouse effect is real and it is science that is explained by quantum physics and chemistry when you study the CO2 molecule.
The problem is on how severely it is actually affecting us. All avaiable data about levels of CO2 or rise in temperature is mainly from research funded by the state. If the state threatens to stop funding that research, they will do whatever they want.
So the actual problem is if the numbers are really as high as they are being shown and if it really is humanity's fault.
The reason many people have to be skeptical is because some said that outrageous things would be happening now 10 years ago. And no, its actually being a much slower process.
Worst even is how people use it to dodge questions. Look at the questions asked last democratic/republican debates regarding Florida housing near water: it was just either people criticizing those who deny global warming or criticizing global warming itself, no actual solution to the housing was given.
People have to start looking at the real problems and start to put out raw data from satelites so private research can actually refute it or approve of it themselves.
>>67282943
>with the new research tracing our impact on the global climate as far back as 1937.
>1937
You're gonna have to go back much further than that to convince me.
>>67285287
Uh anon chill, chill. I dont wanna be that guy but what youre talking about sounds like some pretty gnarly anti-feminist science. Just chill with the hate ok?
>>67282943
OP is right. we are all hurting the planet. we NEED to kill ourselves.
starting with op of course
