Admit it, its a fucking meme.
>>68054560
This is either bait or American education
>>68054708
United Cuckdom of Great Islamica and Muslimland
The right needs to shake its head and rethink this one. You're hitching your horse to UFOlogy-level nonsense here. This is the consensus of the global scientific community, and you're listening to literal paid disinformation.
You're the suckers in this deal.
>>68054560
I had a professor who said we were heading for an ice age next. But that won't happen for a few more thousand years.
>>68054876
I bet you browse /x/ just like a tin foiler should faggot
>>68054964
This. This this this.
>>68054560
Everyone knows it's a meme.
global warming is real, however it isn't because of carbon emissions from people
acidification of the ocean ain't no joke
anyway the globalists use it as a tool to gain control of resources and industry, and setup the false dichotomy were if you oppose them you deny climate change, instead of just opposing their bogus solutions and power grabs
It's pretty obvious it's happening.
All the hyperbole and doom and gloom surrounding it is bullshit, though. And there are obviously other factors at play and a lot we still don't know about climate science considering how far off predictions from decades ago are off from actual warming trends.
>>68054964
>To increase the rate in warming, NOAA scientists put more weight on certain ocean buoy arrays, adjusted ship-based temperature readings upward, and slightly raised land-based temperatures as well. Scientists said adjusted ship-based temperature data “had the largest impact on trends for the 2000-2014 time period, accounting for 0.030°C of the 0.064°C trend difference.” They added that the “buoy offset correction contributed 0.014°C… to the difference, and the additional weight given to the buoys because of their greater accuracy contributed 0.012°C.”
It goes both ways, really. NOAA has been fucking with data for some time. There's also some evidence around a 'hiatus'. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming_hiatus
There's just so much noise on either end of the spectrum.
Don't buy into the carbon jew.
Carbon Dioxide is plant food, not pollution.
What's worse is this nonsense takes away from actual pollution issues.
>>68056012
So when you water a plant, you pour a whole fucking pool over it because "It's plant food"
>>68054560
I'm undecided if it's real science, but yes, it's just a meme to most people.
Look at most of the people calling others dumb for not believing it. Do they actually know dick about the science behind it the way most of us do for evolution? Fuck no.
It's the uneducated claiming superior knowledge to the uneducated. Fucking hipsters.
It's real man, my city has a level 15~ UV rays going on, my eyes are pretty fucked because of that and no one told us about that. That's not fucking normal and it's due to contamination.
>>68055549
We don't need NOAA to fiddle with data. Landsat has been up for quite some time now, we can infer surface temperatures from hyperspectral imagery and have a nice and long record of spaceborne observations.
OPs image insinuates that people in climate science and related sciences are living like kings. Fuck that. I'm working 7 days a week to get my satellite data processed properly and for climate scientists to use, for a ratsfart of a salary. If you want to shit on my science, at least use arguments and skip the mockery.
>>68054560
I've never heard anyone say that climate is supposed to be constant, so of course it's going to change. The problem is that the left has cried wolf with so much bullshit like muh wage gap and 1 in 4 women will be raped on campuses, people are rightly skeptical of the left pushing the man-made global warming agenda so viciously.
What's even more questionable is not this nonsense about all scientists agreeing about man-made global warming, but rather the consequences of having a dissenting opinion. Presenting contrary evidence can be career ending. If a scientist were claim that the earth is flat, he would just get laughed at, but claiming contrary evidence on this issue can end with professionally catastrophic results. On top of that there have been several columns by leftist writers saying that climate change denial should be a criminal offense, and even the attorney general said that was looking into ways to prosecute skeptics. These are not the actions of people who simply think their opponents are wrong, these are the actions of people who have an agenda. With that given, it strikes me as perfectly rational to be skeptical on this issue for no other reason than the actions of the people pushing this issue.
>>68054560
The carbon shekels were a dead give away.
>>68054964
>consensus
No. Its not. Why dont you look up who is in this "consensus" and who are opponents.
>>68056535
Al Gore did make a fucking killing with his global warming shit back in the 2000's.
>Fossil fuels will never run out
>It doesn't poison the water and air
>coal jobs are great
>>68056779
Al Gore is an American PR figure. He's got nothing to do with science, or my statement.
>>68056466
>Do they actually know dick about the science behind it the way most of us do for evolution
There is no science behind macroevolution. All science points against macroevolution. Small pockets of life, whether they be bacteria in the arctic or fish off the shore of a small specific island, always end up to have living descendants that perfectly match the fossil record from millions of years ago. We have never found an evolutionary link for any animal ever. You have one spicies and then you have another species 30 million years later, but there are never any intermediate steps found.
I think the issue is the alarmist rhetoric of those who support the theory crates a backlash of denial from those who don't. Ultimately, I think you would have to be a complete fool to deny that the climate is changing, the real questions lie in who or what is to blame, and is there a way to reverse/damper the effects of the change?
>>68056786
Biomass, of which fossil fuels are one part of, is a renewable resource. While we will eventually reach a point where our fuels can no longer be considered 'fossil', biomass will never stop being a viable option as a fuel source.
>>68054560
It depends what you mean by meme. I really fucking hate global warming or climate change as a concept because it allows people to skirt the real issue.
You should be "anti-pollution" because it will fucking poison your oceans, and destroy your land, not because a very new science says the world temperature will change a bit.
Like for fuck's sake, more powerful anti-pollution measures would do a much better job than say carbon offsets. Even if climate change is man made, then there really isn't much to be done about it.
>>68057060
>We have never found an evolutionary link for any animal ever.
>What is an australopithecus africanus
>>68056786
So the solution to these problems is to push green energy before it's affordable/viable, significantly increasing the cost of energy to consumers (which, by the way, would be very regressive and hurt the poor the most)?
Just look at how much electricity costs in Germany, one of or if not the most expensive in Western Europe. And although they're way ahead of most countries in PV, their grid is still ONLY 6.5% SOLAR.
I'm all for green technology. But let's not shove it down people's throats before it's practical or affordable, k?
>>68057060
>There is no science behind macroevolution.
What? The macroevolution of whales is probably one of the best documented and traceable instances of it.
https://bioscience.oxfordjournals.org/content/51/12/1037.full
i can't invest one iota of a fuck into saving the sea snails and dandelions... I've got too much else on my plate to worry about
>>68054560
I believe human caused climate change is real, but I dont think its worth worrying about because we wont do shit about it.
Consider this: cows. Their release of methane is by far one of the biggest contributors to climate change. And do you EVER hear people complaining about that? No because hamburgers are tasty.
I do believe that climate change is real but as it stands, the left just uses it to bring down big businesses. The real causes are left unhindered.
It pisses me off, I see all these dumb sheltered white liberals complain about climate change and how we need to DO SOMETHING! Yet most of these people just continue their lives the same, they personally are doing nothing, they just want others to do something. How about you stop eating meat, how about you stop using your car? Oh thats what I though.
>>68056692
Or you could instead read the fucking scientific research and weigh the evidence.
Faggot.
![Screen-Shot-2014-12-19-at-4.35.16-PM-350x350[1].png](https://i.imgur.com/xCNydvg.png "Screen-Shot-2014-12-19-at-4.35.16-PM-350x350[1].png")
I don't normally sit through a joe rogan podcast but this dude may be on to something
https://youtu.be/G0Cp7DrvNLQ?t=12m20s
>>68054560
so 4 things how i view global warming.
1: The science and technology to understand the global climate isn't there yet for us to know what they fuck we're talking about, like trying to predict weather patterns with the technology we had 20 years ago.
2: Over fishing, pesticide/herbicide/fertalizer run off, strip mining(kinda), coal based power plants, over population do far more to effect animal and earths habitats and our lives and living conditions more than gasoline based power(i don't like it as a fuel source and changing would eventually be ideal.)
3: climate change does exist, how quickly and how badly it effects the earth isn't understood.
4: I feel like it's the athiest's version of the doomsday predition, religious people have it too.
I also feel like we will have new technology which will offset the production of co2 to even satisfy the nuts, and that will allow us to coast to the point we can control the earths climate with terraforming. Even if it is as bad as the climate kooks say it is.
>>68057764
> ITS TRUE BECAUSE ITS TRUE!!!!
>>68056535
Are you trying to argue seriously on a chinese picture forum touted and titled as "politcally incorrect"
>>68056692
why don't you enlighten all of us right here and right now?
>>68054708
It actually has a hint of truth to it.
Only the research that can bolster a political narrative get funding.
Research that might undermine political narrative gets it's funding cut.
Therefore the researchers have a vested interest in acquiring very specific results.
>>68054560
>Admit it, its a fucking meme.
Maybe, who knows. But the solutions to climate change are memetic at best, and there are a lot of people profiting from these solutions.
>>68056786
>Let's spend billions of dollars like Canada did and yet less than 2% of their energy comes from renewable sources
>Yes this will definitely make a difference
>Especially when Volcanoes around the world put more CO2 into the air than the entire country of Canada does.
>Great way to spend billions imo
The technology is not there yet. Throwing money at the problem does not solve it. The government cannot solve this issue only private companies create new renewable energy sources.
While we're on the topic of energy generation, anyone into physics enough to explain to me why we can't turn heat into energy by layering hundreds of very thin photovoltaic cells so that all the photovoltaic cells absorb each other's black-body emissions?
It'd be amazingly useful deep underground or in refrigeration if it worked, and I can't think of why it doesn't work, but no one does it.
>have PhD from one of the top institutions in my field
>know control of nonlinear dynamic systems, stochastic processes, MDP's etc.
>for the systems we study, can make reasonable forecasts up to a few days / a week into the future
>climate scientists claim they can predict the global avg. temp change over 100 years with good precision.
Can't say I have much faith in their predictions.
Politically driven science and the publish or perish rule have fucked us so much. Something like 65% or more of studies aren't reproducible.
>>68058461
The people way too heavily into climate change activism think that we're going to become a hive world from Warhammer 40k in the next 30 years if we don't change the way our production is run. Like you said, it's some sort of Doomsday prophecy to them when in reality, while it does exist, it's going to be a while before we even turn into Beijing.
>>68054560
That's a fucking stupid comic
Why bribe 95% of a population when you can bribe 5% and have them scream as though they're 100%?
>>68057385
Ah there is reason for that though:
Our old Government said to get out of Nuclear Energy by 2020 (or 2022 not exactly sure) and for that to happen the energy companies would have to build the infrastructure. For that they got way lower taxes.
The energy companies did nothing and waited til a new government got elected that dismissed the old plan -> nuclear energy much longer.
And then Fukushima happened. Fuck this tsunami.
>>68056786
>"Let's do that by more taxes, bigger government, and taking away rights!"
>>68057675
>I believe human caused climate change is real
Can you define the moment you were convinced of this? For me it was watching the Al Gore show. About 3 years later I was like, OMG, a politician lied to me!
Oh well, they are installing the fossil fuel taxes and cap and trades regardless of what anyone thinks, like most policies today, I suppose that was inevitable. If resistance is encountered, it simply requires a larger and sustained dogma bombardment.
They want carbon taxes
That's how you know it's bullshit
The jews just want your shekels
Aside from that, it's a natural occurence
The only reason weather seems so crazy is MAYBE from that HAARP thing up in Alaska that can supposedly change the weather.
>>68058999
YOURE A FUCKING WHITE MALE
>>68054560
lol. Public funded science is the only independent science you fucking retard.
>>68058621
This.
>>68054560
I admit nothing Cletus.
>>68059355
>public funded
>independent
Do you also believe the Ferkel is acting in the best interests of Germany?
>that picture
projection: the thread
>>68058817
because the photovoltaic cells would heat up?
>>68058818
most models rely on simple, but effective and reproducible concepts. If you break down a full climate model in its integral parts, it actually becomes rather easy. Soil moisture and evapotranspiration, carbon fixation and emission, global transport, .. the difficulty arises when you have 50 or more of these subsystems interacting. Which is also the main reason why we need models; it's just not possible to derive simple descriptions or closed analytic expressions of any climate variable.
But then, it's an ongoing effort. Would be boring if someone would have figured it out already.
I also wonder why most people tend to focus on temperature predictions. LST and SST are the most dull climate variable, aren't they? If I were you, I'd rather have a look at tropical carbon fluxes, tropopause height/pressure, ocean heat content..
>>68054560
I don't doubt the globe is warming. We're exiting a month in ice age so of course it is. However I do not fall for the leftist agenda that is designed to destroy the American economy with ridiculous, needless and overbearing regulation.
>>68058745
We should be using the money for researching how to make renewables more efficient instead of pouring money into sub optimal renewable energy sources that don't yield nearly enough power to justify their cost.
A lot of the public money put towards "climate change research" is actually put towards legal fees for kneecapping production facilities with environmental taxes in years long court battles
>>68059738
I don't see how the photovoltaic cells heating up is a problem though.
>>68054560
It's probably exaggerated, but definitely not a meme.
>>68054560
fuck off with your bait
if you wanted a serious discussion you would have said "Admit it, it's an exaggeration", which is true, the supposed effects are massively exaggerated
but denying it outright is idiotic
>>68059789
Month in autoincorrected from mini.
Simple physics
http://eesc.columbia.edu/courses/ees/climate/lectures/radiation/
>>68059797
Agreed. That's why I'm against the government being involved.
>The West eats itself over it's emissions while China and India sit back, laugh and light another cigar with a US$100
>>68058621
>Only the research that can bolster a political narrative get funding.
Not really, though. First of all, most decision makers in research councils have a reputation to uphold, so blatantly favouring a specific political narrative would hamper their careers.
Second of all, I have never - and I've successfully gotten grants in 3 countries so far - witnessed in any review process that the scientific outcome was judged based on the quantitative nature of it. Research councils care about whether you publish lots, and whether you publish in prestigious journals, and maybe whether you do some public outreach. They don't give a shit about whether your research confirms hypothesis X rather than Y. And if, I'd like to see some substantial evidence for this, as I haven't come across such a thing even in my field of research, which is politicised as fuck.
>>68059738
>have 50 or more of these subsystems interacting
>Don't quite know how they interact
>think you can make a decent forecast for any considerable time horizon
Yeah, right
>>68054560
the 95%/97% percent number is based on a study of abstracts by a pro-climate change lobby. They narrowed that pool down themselves and some of the papers are ridiculous or don't really apply.
>There is warming
>There most likely is anthropogenic warming
>This warming is not necessarily harmful
>It doesn't warrant massive government intervention and control
There was recently a paper about feminism/pronouns and glaciers. That would technically apply to supporting global warming. This was mentioned in a recent episode of the Jason Stapleton Program (I think "Answer the Questions Bernie!" but I'm too busy to check. Should be around 5-7 min in).
>>68059738
Extrapolation is not usable data
>>68060271
>>Don't quite know how they interact
That's a bit of an exaggeration, don't you think? Especially models that assimilate observational data do a pretty swell job to reconstruct the past. Every model has its strengths and weaknesses, but that's why there's a lot of them. The only forecasts that tend be shitty are the only one's you hear about on these shitty image boards (I mean really, who cares temperatures). You don't really hear about how well surface pressure is forecast, or onset of boreal co2 drawdown ..
This probably has nothing to do with anything, but I think global warming is real, but not man made. I think it's a natural cycle the earth goes through, I think when a species becomes dominant and starts to take a negative effect on the earth it starts "immune system" kicks in and rids itself in the same way the human body increases its temperature to rid itself of a virus.
I believe the dinosaurs died from a great flood "global warming" and the earth became cool again which contributed to another ice age and so began the cycle again. I believe thats why a lot of ancient civilizations refer to "the great flood" which is just the earth going through that cycle.
But then again this is all basically just [citation needed] tier shit, and we actually haven't been around long enough to sort of figure out what the fuck is going on.
>>68060931
>I think when a species becomes dominant and starts to take a negative effect on the earth it starts "immune system" kicks in and rids itself in the same way the human body increases its temperature to rid itself of a virus.
You actually believe that it's more likely the planet has an appreciable level of life to where it can make this happen rather than that we as a species are just overproducing emissions that can cause it?
>>68059152
>They want carbon taxes
We already have Carbon Taxes after we elected the fucking Green Party into power.
I don't believe in man-made Gobal Warming. Global temperature has only been recorded since the late 19c and with any great accuracy since the 1970s with satellite data. When you hear "hottest year on record" it's complete BS. Temperature is driven by the sun and we are at the top of a solar cycle.
Satellite and the Argo sea data show NO global warming.
>>68056786
Coal miners start at like 70k. In West Virginia.
Coal miners get all the pussy.
>>68058817
>black-body emissions
Not enough to make electrons move.
>>68060893
I'm not exaggerating. Remember that when the short-term temp predictions were way out of bounds, they came up with the excuse that the heat might be trapped in the oceans?
Just putting this here
http://strawpoll.me/7128927
>>68061235
Yeah I think it was just a bad analogy. I mean that I think the earth goes through the process of global warming as a given, but as a result sort of rids itself of species that could be harmful to it.
I think a bit too much emphasis has been put on carbon emitted by us as a species and less research has gone into natural trends of the earth, like it's almost as though we're trying to find more ways in which we're responsible for everything.
>>68061615
At least it's a little detail rather than a rule of physics that's the issue.
There are possibly still ways to allow an electron to be moved that easily, if even caesium has no photoelectric effect with middle infrared.
>>68061741
>they came up with the excuse that the heat might be trapped in the oceans?
But data suggests so, see e.g. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/grl.50382/full
Honestly I dont have an opinion on it, because I dont know the science well enough. I have been ignorant for far too long, I need to do some research.
However, what I do know is that our environment is in trouble regardless if global warming exists or not and we need to take extra measures to make sure we dont destroy it. Im talking about landfills full of waste and material goods.
I have become more serious with recycling recently. I recycle all of my plastic bottles, card board boxes, magazines, etc. And you should to. Your local university is bound to have a recycling center set up, mines does. I take all of my assorted trash to it on around a weekly basis, or just whenever it starts to pile up.
If. Even if global warming is a lie.
Whats the harm in treating the environment better and doing research for cleaner energy.
>>68057675
>cows
No. Not even close.
I'm a geologist, so I've studied some climate and earth systems. Let me explain why methane or H2O is not the problem. Methane breaks down relatively quickly in the atmosphere. At best Methane will remain in the atmosphere for a few months to a couple of years. Modern warming cannot be explained by methane outgassing from cows. It's high school science at best confusing how the climate works. Methane is only a problem over short (relatively) time spans.
Water vapor has 2 problems.
1. Water cannot be absorbed in the atmosphere unless you warm the atmosphere up. The warmer the atmosphere the more water vapor can be absorbed. Water can't even evaporate if the air is saturated. This is called vapor pressure.
2. Water only remains in the atmosphere for a few hours to a few days. Even if you somehow magically got all the world's oceans, rivers, lakes, and streams to evaporate it would all just rain out and return to the oceans. You cannot use water vapor to change the climate. It creates a positive feedback loop at best.
CO2 stays in the atmosphere for decades to centuries. The only ways to get CO2 out of the atmosphere is to absorb it into plants which already maintain equilibrium, absorb it into the ocean which can hold less the warmer it gets, and create carbonate rocks like calcite or limestone, a process that takes years.
We already know where the CO2 in the atmosphere is coming from. Every molecule on Earth can be measured using their isotopes to see where they come from. Atmospheric CO2 is coming increasingly from fossil fuels. This cannot be debated. It is simple fact.
>>68062099
The real recycle revolution is going to occur when people start more heavily investing in research involving biological microbial decomposition of oil based products, especially plastics. It's a real thing, look it up.
>>68058301
What's the tl;dr ?
Even if, even IF there was a grand, worldwide conspiracy to make the world think global warming is real (at a global consensus rate even higher than the fucking Holocaust), what's the point in denying it? Why shouldn't we devote our time to developing cleaner and eventually more effective sources of energy than modern day fossil fuels? That money isn't just being burnt and released into the sky like all the oil we use every year.
>>68062040
>Model predictions failed
>Post-hoc explanation on why the models fail
The proper procedure is to make a new model, make new predicions, and show them to be reasonable.
All we know is that the established models failed in their predictions.
>>68062496
I wish that we would invest more money into recycling. Teach our kids how to recycle, and hire more people into the field. People can actually make a difference by simply assorting their trash and throwing it into recycling bins, but I guess people would rather sit on their computers and complain. Or they are just too lazy or stubborn to do it, like my parents.
>>68054560
The fact that the earth is getting warmer is real, that its because of human interference is bullshit.
The earth have been getting warmer and colder for centuries before we even had coal. It's natural.
>>68062175
Billions of dollars and the credibility of the scientific establishment
Not to mention all public good faith towards future public funding towards research being overshadowed by the bloated behemoth that is climate change research
>the i fucking love science crowed committing mass suicide as (gasp) scienTISTS lie like whores and thieves to get precious dollars and for undeserved fame and recognition in a bloated and derivative field or so called research which is populated by nasal gazing, inbred, unimaginative fuckwits
You could literally slap any oil company logo over Obama's face, and it would be accurate.
>>68062671
The only REAL answer is a nefarious one which of course is "dirty energy" companies not wanting to lose money/potentially waste time searching for energy alternatives.
One big meme people are buying into, which is retarded, is that somehow electric energy is definitively cleaner than other sources. Electricity is very commonly generated in a very dirty way.
>>68062691
>The proper procedure is to make a new model, make new predicions, and show them to be reasonable.
Which these guys did: http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/v1/n7/abs/nclimate1229.html
>All we know is that the established models failed in their predictions.
Eh, you can't win every time.
You can't cry about global warming and then be proud about reducing fuel prices.
>>68054560
Remember when democrats tried this before with global warming?
OK, so here's a serious question, and I'm a biologist so........I bet there's a simple answer I'm overlooking that will make me feel stupid, but......
>why don't we develop some type of system for CO2 to be bound when it's in the open atmosphere, contained, and transported to space?
>>68062671
>Why not focus energy on developing clean energy
For one thing "clean energy" itself is a dumb meme. Manufacturing solar panels requires dumping toxic chemicals and eventually throwing old solar panels into landfills. Burning oil is fairly clean already, unless you're a cabonophobe
>>68054560
There are real issues facing our environemtn that I can't be bothered with this shit. Deforestation, mass extinction, acid rain, islands of litter floating in the sea. On top of that, fossil fuels aren't going to last forever. The longer we rely on oil, the more power we give to Russia and the middle-east. As soon as we swap to renewable energy sources, our main enemies collapse.
>>68063428
*carbonophobe
>>68056415
It's found that plants do grow better when near highest concentrations of CO2. It won't poison them. They're made for that shit. Throwing them in just water messes up osmotic pressure and concentrations.
>>68058461
No. Not even close. Climate and weather are not the same thing.
Weather is dependent primarily on air masses, which change because of atmospheric circulation, orographic lifting, Hadley cells, Farrel cells, polar cells, changes in the positions of the ITCZ and jet streams, the Coriolis effect, particulate matter in the atmosphere for rain nucleation, altitude, biological processes, volcanism ... it gets complicated. The saying 'a butterfly flaps its wings in Tokyo and it rains in New York is used to discuss the chaotic nature of weather.
Climate is altered primarily by 5 things (i'll give you a 6th but it's over short time periods)
1. The sun. We already know what the sun is doing, we monitor it constantly with a satellite called SOHO.
2. The Milankovich Cycle. Which measures earth's orbital eccentricity, axial precession, and tilt toward the sun that change over time. We're talking 10s of thousands to hundreds of thousands of years. Milankovich Cycles can explain nearly all changes in climate over long time periods.
3. The relative positions of the continents. These change how ocean currents move. When the North and South American continents collided with Central America it cutoff tropical currents forcing them north and south toward the poles where they cool quickly. When Gondwana broke up to create Australia and Antarctica it created the Antarctic Circumpolar current. The world's strongest current. Preventing warm tropical water from reaching Antarctica and freezing the continent. This is why we're in an interglacial period of an ice age.
4. CO2.
5. Albedo. Changes in the reflectivity of the Earth. Either add or subtract reflectors such as snow. Albedo changes on Earth are a consequence of climate change and create positive feedback loops at best. We also monitor Earth's albedo by satellite.
6. Aerosols. Tiny particles in the air that can block or absorb sunlight. Aerosols don't stay in the atmosphere long.
>>68063428
Burning coal sure as hell isn't.
>>68062671
Because a lot of this climate change stuff has just become a funnel for money from the West into shitholes like Africa, farmers claiming their crops aren't turning out because something American biz is doing
>>68054964
Yeah, I can't take any rightards seriously when they get upset about stupid things like gay rights and then completely ignore the greatest threat we face as a species.
>>68054560
Last semester I took a class on Environmental Economics. Its main argument is that global carbon credits (A country buys "credits" to be allowed to produce carbon dioxide, and each credit is worth a certain amount of tons of carbon output) would be an effective means of limiting carbon production to sustainable levels while still making it possible and profitable across the globe. If every firm gets a yearly "allowance" of credits, then the firms that produce little to no carbon dioxide can sell their credits to high-producing firms, so people can also profit by abstaining from carbon dioxide production.
I can see the logic in this system. The Kyoto Protocol and Montreal Protocol which happened in the last 20 years have laid the framework for all major industrial countries to facilitate this sort of international permit system. Developing countries are also considered - Europe in particularly wants to force the U.S. to assist Central and South America in developing industry without exceeding carbon dioxide limits. For this reason, the U.S. has refused to ratify the Kyoto Protocol, a source of tension to this day (it still went into effect in 2004 when Russia ratified it to spite the US).
While this economic system is being pitched to the planet as a humanitarian effort, it IS a global taxation system. It is New World Order-tier ability to tax the entire planet under the guise of protecting the planet from destruction. The only way that this can be brought about - the power of a small international council to tax the ENTIRE PLANET'S INDUSTRY - resides in the public's acceptance of global warming as real and its ability to end humanity as we know it.
That is a LOT of political and economic power to wield. It will only work if people are so scared, they willingly give up their sovereignty and allow it to happen. Global warming is a perfect way to achieve this, convincing everyone that we must allow ourselves to be taxed and limited or the planet ends.
>>68063692
That's it. That's all you get. We know what's causing modern warming when we eliminate the causes one by one and are left with one answer. CO2.
Some people argue changes in cloud cover. Well, cloud cover does both, absorbs and reflects solar energy. And while cloud cover is the biggest question mark in modern day climate science we already know that clouds don't magically form or disappear on their own. They're a consequence, not a cause. Again, like many other things they create a positive feedback loop at best.
>>68063178
Why are you trying to starve plants?
>>68063697
Tell that to China
>>68055156
We're already in a fucking ice age, Christ. We're progressing along the natural cycle out of it.
>>68063957
cont.
For this reason, I remain extremely skeptical of global warming. There is every reason for people like George Soros to pay politicians and "scientists" to preach fear and imminent doom to the public unless drastic action is taken. There is every reason to believe that a global taxation system on carbon dioxide production will be the first step down an unstoppable path toward a one-government global order ruled by very few.
>>68063178
Well ignoring the fact that CO2 isn't inherently bad and is necessary in reasonable amounts for the plant life that sustains life on this planet...
Probably the exact same reason we don't just immediately replace all our cars with electric, power plants with wind/solar, etc. to reduce emissions:
Cost
It's real, and humans are the vast majority of it. I understand the consequences.
But I oppose it because I want humanity to fuck itself without abandon. Humanity is too proud and stupid for words today. I want 9/10 of humanity to die a prolonged, painful death of privation and desolation. I want humanity to learn from this. I want future generations to live.
Fucking LET'S DO THIS.
>>68063957
Yes son. A new age religion. You can trust these guys! There won't an Inquisition or dark ages because of it, really! It's science! Social science but still science! A consensus if you will!
>>68063972
That and the fact that aerosol feedback isn't fully understood. The errorbars in the last IPCC make that rather evident..
I wonder why there isn't any new aerosol-specific mission proposed. Some fancy multi-axis radar (Ka-band maybe) would surely be interesting.
>>68064585
Yes, you are being witty but I essentially agree that the global elite is REALLY, REALLY trying to push acceptance of global warming at this point.
We have guys like Justin Trudeau going to Europe for a conference about ISIS and giving a speech about global warming. Leonardo DiCaprio wins his first ever Oscar and uses the moment to shill for global warming acceptance. The Pope has made global warming acceptance a huge part of his message.
This is not a coincidence. Someone is paying these high profile people - or strong-arming them - into shilling their message. We already know that guys like George Soros exist and actively fund movements to incite civil unrest. We don't even know who George Soros reports to, and we allow this guy to manipulate public opinion in a way never before possible. It is completely reasonable that he is also pushing for global warming acceptance to bring about the first ever global taxation system.
>>68054560
its been proven time and time again theyve falsified data. if that doesnt confirm an agenda what does?
Why can't you believe scientists on Climate Change, and yet not approve of the oligarchical 'solutions' of more taxes and smattering of funds for weaker power sources? Improve research into cleaner fuel services like Nuclear Power instead of making us all pay more taxes and chase half-forged pipe dreams while giving corporate entities a look-over, and the government more unnecessary power?
We have the ingenuity to answer the issues of today, this 'either believe the science, and support our governmental conniving, or don't support our conniving and be anti-science' is just solving nothing and turns what should be just as directly addressable as The Sanitation Movement or local cleanup projects into another reason to divide and gerrymander us, and I hate that both sides are so convicted in this cheat.
>>68060231
China is replacing oldest, dirtiest, coal power stations faster than anyone. Their pollution of the air over Beijing alone is reason enough, but it will also reduce their co2 output. India, I am not so sure. They want to build lots of power stations, and coal is still cheap.
>>68065191
Prove it faggot.
>>68065138
Why do conspiracies like this have to be so insidious? It's not enough that a Government uses a situation or a tragedy to their advantage, it's that they somehow manufactured the crisis in the first place? It makes all this scheming more complicated than it needs to be, and overly simplifies the issue. Exposing George Soros's manipulation is important, but don't get into things he can disprove. Hang him on his actions, actions of parading prominent men AS on the 'right side of science' so that everything else they push is equally accepted as a knowledgable source.
It's like 9/11, why would the US government concoct enemies to attack us to justify invasion, making a more complex web of hushed people and unnecessary leak potentials? They can just use the situation to their advantage as it plays, and worst notice it coming and then just let it happen as future justification. What's easier, paying hundreds of people to fake an elaborate attack, or just willfully ignoring red flags passed up the chain of command for more personal goals? One of those requires one person zip his lip, the other requires thousands.
>>68056786
Is that nigger an owl?
