>denies global warming and climate change, says it's a myth made by the Chinese to control trade
>despite overwhelming scientific evidence
I want to like Trump but how can someone with so much genius and head for business be this retarded? Is he just memeing to get the hardline christian fundamentalists then he will drop this memeing once he wins the republican nomination to win over votes from the democrats?
If you deny global warming and climate change you are supporting an existential crisis.
>>69217710
>overwhelming scientific evidence
>>69217837
There;s no point in giving it to you, you will just meme arrow and say something about Jews again.
>>69217997
>there is proofs
>but I'm not gonna post it
>>69217710
>global warming
“[By] 1995, the greenhouse effect will be desolating the heartlands of North America and Eurasia with horrific drought, causing crop failures and food riots … [By 1996] The Platte River of Nebraska will be dry, while a continent-wide black blizzard of prairie topsoil will stop traffic on interstates, strip paint from houses and shut down computers.” Michel Oppenheimer and Robert H. Boyle, Dead Heat, St. Martin’s Press, 1990.
>>69217997
noone denies climate change
the actual issue is whether its manmade or a natural phenomenon that the planet goes through.
there's proof for climate change, just not for man's effect on it, and that's why you falsely ask about the first while you imply the second.
>>69217710
>Science in the previous year
Think you're forgetting who these 'scientists' are. Lets make Science Great Again!
>>69218333
>>69217710
>overwhelming scientific evidence
>unable to link any
>hasn't personally read any
as far as faith goes, stick to the quran, ahmed
http://www.mdpi.com/2225-1154/1/1/4
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/research/news/recent-pause-in-warming
http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/mailings/2013/20130115_Temperature2012.pdf
http://science.sciencemag.org/content/345/6199/897
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2014GL061456/abstract
http://science.sciencemag.org/content/347/6225/988
http://www.nature.com/news/climate-change-the-case-of-the-missing-heat-1.14525
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2013EF000165/abstract
http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/v3/n9/full/nclimate1972.html
http://www.thegwpf.org/content/uploads/2013/09/Montford-Consensus.pdf
hey look OP
overwhelming scientific evidence that the earth has stopped warming
guess we can all stop worrying now
>>69218384
>>69218318
/thread
>>69218411
![Mexican-Roman-Catholic-Invaders-Flipping-the-Bird-2010+%25281%2529[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/5Dk6yiw.jpg "Mexican-Roman-Catholic-Invaders-Flipping-the-Bird-2010+%25281%2529[1].jpg")
>>69217710
>overwhelming scientific evidence
FUCK OFF, REDDIRT
>>69218477
>>69218318
No.
There's sufficient proof that climate change is MAN MADE.
because there are so many "deniers" you'll just cherry-pick the sources which claim it can go either way.
>>69218502
Loving Every Laugh
>>69218507
u dropped this famalam
Even if the globe is warming, and even if the effect is caused by man, it doesn't matter if the whole west stops using fossil fuels and whatever as long as Asia and the developing world keeps going. All we're really doing then is shooting ourselves in the foot. Better to just adapt to the future while taking advantage of the resources we have while we can.
>>69218507
>There's sufficient proof that climate change is MAN MADE.
No there isn't.
>>69218477
story behind this picture?
>>69218507
>>69218541
>>69218609
>>69218605
it's a meme u dip
>>69218668
>>69218507
>>69217710
Yeah...I'm going to need to see some of this hard evidence you speak of.
>>69218485
those are south americans
>>69218695
ebin
>>69217997
>>69218753
>>69218507
Climate change is a natural and inevitable process. Earlier in Earth's history it rained non-stop for millions of years. Earlier in Earth's history the planet was covered in ice.
>>69218507
/pol/ btfo, we did it reddit!
>>69218507
>HERETICS! BLASPHEMERS!!
>>69218776
keep em coming Pierre I'm almost out
![Radiosonde-temps-since-1960[1].png](https://i.imgur.com/PdmZ79h.png "Radiosonde-temps-since-1960[1].png")
>No Warming in 58 Years
>Another attempt to defraud the public?
>In a recent press briefing NOAA displayed a radiosonde temperature graph covering the past 37 years. The graph made it appear that we have endured yet another “hottest year ever.”
>However, it turns out that radiosonde temperature records go back for 58 years.
>Why is the rest of the graph missing?
>Because NOAA’s “earlier data showed as much pre-1979 cooling as the post-1979 warming,” says this article by Tony Heller.
>“The omission of this data from the NOAA report, is just their latest attempt to defraud the public,” says Heller. “NOAA’s best data shows no warming for 60 years.”
>Heller created a graph (pic related) going back to the 1950s, and lo-and-behold, the earth’s atmosphere is no warmer now than it was back them.
http://realclimatescience.com/2016/03/noaa-radiosonde-data-shows-no-warming-for-58-years/
Obongo-loving leftist climate fags BTFO
>>69218830
>>69218700
>>69218609
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_United_Nations_Climate_Change_Conference
>inb4:
>tl;dr
>hurr durr jews
>wikipedia isn't a credible source
>>69218867
>the UN says x is true, therefore x is true
you know what an "argument from authority" is right?
>>69218778
>it's a natural process
>all that fucking smoke in China that is equivalent to constantly smoking a cigarette when you breathe it is natural guys!
Your fucking brain is cucked by some kind of neural eating cancer.
>>69218866
>>69218830
out of ammo already, Tony?
>>69218507
there's more than sufficient evidence you love to suck dick. MAN DICK.
>>69217710
Maybe he is right. After all, he is a billionaire, and all of the warmist "scientists" are welfare trash living off of government grants.
>>69218905
It's not the UN, it's scientists from many world-leading institutions.
>imposes tarrifs to bring manufacturing back to EPA-controlled USA
>curbs pollution anyways
I don't see how not believing in it changes anything.
Obama got checked and balanced by the courts when he tried to executive order stricter regulation, so trumps policy of end I g free trade rape of the US is probably the most practical pro-environment policy for a presidential candidate.
>>69218965
>>69218968
>Dump gorillions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere everyday for decades
WE DIDN'T DU NUFFIN, FOSSIL FUEL INDUDSTRY ARE GUD BOYS. NEED MORE TAX BREAKS FOR DEM PROGRAMS GOYS
>>69219018
>>69219012
>>69218925
Smoke is mostly airborne soot, the result of incomplete combustion. Soot is soot, not a greenhouse gas.
Just because smog is a sight to see, it doesn't necessarily have devastating consequences for anything except the persons breathing it in.
>>69218983
All of which are directly or indirectly funded by governments. Which do NOT care about the environment. Governments only care abut stealing as much as they can.
>>69217710
>>69219044
>>69217710
>>despite overwhelming scientific evidence
>>69218925
And yes, climate change is a natural process. The climate naturally changes because it is a closed system with enormous amounts of geological activity going on.
>>69218983
those scientists are paid by governments to prove that global warming is a serious issue. it's cargo cult science. you should be able to fucking tell because most of the money and PR goes into trying to convince plebeian idiots like you that there is a problem that requires democratic engagement, rather than them just fixing it through engineering or legal means.
there are shitloads of scientists who also say that it's completely bullshit as I have already linked to you here >>69218409 check out the Heartland Institute too. why not believe and trust them? why only trust your precious liberal faggot governments on this one issue that is their fav thing ever to talk about because it gives them the political capital to control the economy?
>>69219071
I'm done Pierre, we could have a frog-off?
>>69219061
Well thanks for proving my point.
The institutions bite the hand that feeds them
>>69217710
Everyone knows global warming is bullshit.
It's a government ploy
>>69219147
see
>>69218507
you're just cherry-picking the sources which align with your point of view.
97 percent consensus?
Errrr, not exactly: 0.3 percent is more like it.
>In 2013, John Cook, an Australia-based blogger, and some of his friends reviewed abstracts of peer-reviewed papers published from 1991 to 2011.
>Mr. Cook reported that 97% of those who stated a position explicitly or implicitly suggest that human activity is responsible for some warming. His findings were published in Environmental Research Letters.
>Mr. Cook’s work was quickly debunked.
>In Science and Education in August 2013, David R. Legates (a professor of geography at the University of Delaware and former director of its Center for Climatic Research) and three coauthors reviewed the same papers as did Mr. Cook and found “only 41 papers—0.3 percent of all 11,944 abstracts or 1.0 percent of the 4,014 expressing an opinion, and not 97.1 percent—had been found to endorse” the claim that human activity is causing most of the current warming.
>Elsewhere, climate scientists including Craig Idso, Nicola Scafetta, Nir J. Shaviv and Nils- Axel Morner, whose research questions the alleged consensus, protested that Mr. Cook ignored or misrepresented their work.
>See entire article:
http://www.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303480304579578462813553136?mg=reno64-wsj
Climate change is a natural phenomenon. Human activity contributes little to it, if nothing at all
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Ice_Age
>>69219095
A FUCKING LEAF
F
U
C
K
I
N
G
L
E
A
F
>>69219232
You too.
>>69219031
CO2 makes plants grow, we need more of it in the atmosphere to help increase wheat yields. :^)
>>69219150
I've got to eat, man. It'll take days to dump my pepe folder.
>>69219258
The UN aggregates all evidence (even those institutions you listed), and publishes a final report.
>>69219256
A FUCKING KEK
FROM THE WORST COUNTRY IN THE WORLD
>>69217710
IT. DOESN'T. MATTER.
The candidates who believe in global warming have other beliefs that will destroy the United States if allowed to go unchecked. Trump can believe what he wants about global warming, it's an entirely separate issue to politics.
>>69217710
Here is ted cruz letting climate change agenda through and workable even though he himself the data doesn't add up which inturn means he expects to be paid.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sl9-tY1oZNw
>>69217710
BECAUSE NO ONE ELSE IN THE THREAD SEEMED TO POINT THIS OUT YET
TRUMP ADDRESSED THIS SHIT IN AN INTERVIEW
HE SAID HE WAS BEING SARCASTIC AND ALL HE MEANT WAS CHINA DOESN'T HAVE TO FOLLOW THE SAME LAWS IN CARBON DIOXIDE EMISSIONS SO OUTCOMPETES THE US IN TRADE
>>69219232
1) so are you
2) you've given no proof that the period of warming observed in the second half of the 20th century which has since stopped (http://www.mdpi.com/2225-1154/1/1/4) is directly attributable to man. because no such evidence exists and you are the useful idiot of NGOs who want to keep their tax money flowing.
it's a shakedown. you're being swindled.
>>69219232
You moron
>>69218507
And you will just cherry pick the sources which claim it goes your way. Whats your point.
>>69219299
I haven't listed any institutions.
>The UN
How terribly unbiased and reliable.
>global warming
oh okay
>>69219299
Are you seriously this naive?
>>69219299
the UN compiles all of the data which confirms their view that global warming is real and super scary and packages it with million dollar public relations firms in order to keep people buying into the scare story so they can pretend like they're heroes saving the world from VERY VERY VERY slow ocean rises which have been observed to have increased ~7cm in the past entire century.
it's not science. that shit is meant to convince VOTERS. not scientists.
>>69219307
>hurr durr I'm from a better country than you so climate change isn't real!
I can feel your butthurt from here, leafy.
Pro Tip : global warming is a sign of impending Ice-age
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_age#Causes_of_ice_ages
>>69217710
Global warming exists because our world has an expiration date, not because we have an actual impact over it.
>>69219488
>I'm from the most anti-science, violent, degenerate, poverty stricken country on earth
>take my opinions seriously
Climate Change is seriously overrated and not that important.
BTW, I knew a guy from bosnia, total shitstain, he tried to smuggle drugs across the Chinese border and he's been in a Chinese prison for the last 4 years and will die there.
LMAO
>>69219594
>I proudly pull all my "facts" out of my ass
>>69219594
>>69219623
>I'm from the most anti-science, violent, degenerate, poverty stricken country on earth
[citation needed]
>>69217710
If you've listened to trump, he explaisn that the chises quote was a joke, and he's half and half on it. He just wants clean air.
>>69219121
Let's see if you'll still be saying 'natural process' when 90% of the world's surface disappears underwater.
Recent studies from NASA show fossil fuels could actually cool the planet. Don't buy into the propaganda Obama tells you.
>>69219661
>[citation needed]
Just say the word.
Bosnia.
What terrible genetics you less than yurotrash wastes have.
You should probably just kill yourself.
>>69218541
>>69219713
>its not natural if shit happens
What?
>>69219661
Violent Crime
When it comes to violence, criminals in Bosnia and Herzegovina use direct approaches to settle their various differences. And by direct, I mean they use hand grenades. Like criminals all over the world, they also use guns, but they seem to have a distinct preference for hand grenades.
https://www.worldnomads.com/travel-safety/bosnia-and-herzegovina/sarajevo-on-the-slide-crime-in-bosnia
>come to bosnia bring your money watch for pickpockets.
>>69219736
>my entire argument is still hurr durr ur country sux so ur stoopid
Pic related, your butt.
This is now a hohol proofs thread.
>>69219625
Go read a book and not your weekly "science" magazine you uneducated faggot
>>69219353
where? Link?
Show me and I will completely rebuke my own thread.
>>69219713
Do you think the climate has been static -- or even hospitable to humans -- since the Earth's formation?
>>69219808
Literal first sentence of that article:
>Throughout Bosnia, the crime rate remains low to moderate. As an added bonus, foreign travellers are not specifically targeted for violent criminal activities.
>>69219937
Give me a legitimate source that denies climate change and I'll come to your nigger country and suck your nigger dick
>>69219984
No but there is a direct correlation between how much it has changed since the industrial revolution.
>>69217710
Nobody denies climate CHANGE. The climate CHANGES 4 times a year. Global warming has been debunked as of right now, we're in a cooling trend.
>>69217710
Unfortunately Daddy has to take some of the republican's less based opinions in order to get their support, but if you look at his past statements he knows what's up.
>>69220025
im remaining impartial you have some crime but its not the worst place in the world.
>>69219924
waiting
>>69219894
>posts a picture of his mother as a "rebuttal"
BOSNIA
>>69218507
Are you fucking retarded? There were ice ages and extended periods of tropical climates all over long before humanity existed. The Sahara used to be one big jungle.
>>69220047
What change? Any change beyond statistical noise would leave us extinct.
>>69220079
>>69219924
http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/14/world/ice-age-postponed/
>>69217710
Luckily, you don't need to believe in climate change to do things to improve the environment. Like supporting Nuclear Power, which Trump is in favor of...unlike most Democrats.
>>69218507
The big problem with the "muh science" argument is that it is an appeal to authority.
An authority who refuses to let the public see the data in its raw form, and most crucially does not put error bars onto its measurements.
How do I know that your temperature didn't go up over time because where you had your sensor used to be an open field but now is part of an industrial zone? That would be very manipulative data reporting.
How do I know that the temperature didn't go up because in the past your sensor was only accurate to plus or minus 1 centigrade, and is now accurate to plus or minus of one hundredth of a centigrade?
How can you even control for spatial variables such as the one I first mentioned, and inaccuracies in your data over time such as the one that I mentioned second if we don't even know the solution form of the navier-stokes equation upon which you are basing your argument for more temperature = bad?
The big problem with global warming is that it really does not stand up to any sort of basic scientific scrutiny. You can't just measure things and say, "look it changed, people caused it". Especially when you refuse to allow people to access the raw data, you refuse them the creation of meta studies that take in all of the outcomes you predicted and rank them against what actually happened, and defund anyone who does anything but pray at the altar of manmade climate change.
If the evidence were as strong as they suggest, then it would be public record in its raw form. But it isn't, and that's cause for concern.
All that I'm asking you to do is to show me a plot of temperature vs. time with error bars while controlling for the sensor grid spacing so as to prevent from one sensor getting hotter because it's now in a parking lot.
But you won't be able to provide that for me without first solving and navier-stokes equation, now will you, Mr appeal to authority?
>>69217710
Trump was being sarcastic so he could complain about the Chinese getting a free pass for 30 years(more).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IHCLJGb9XcM
>>69219976
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3405315/Trump-insists-joke-claimed-Chinese-invented-global-warming.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IHCLJGb9XcM
>>69217710
Global warming is "real", in a way that some places are getting warmer, but it is not a problem four Europe, and USA. It is problem only for third world shitholes, and the problem only comes here if leftish faggots preventing the problem to be gunned down at the borders. Europe will become more green, as plants love more co2. Netherlands and Venice may "sinks", but those are just a small portion of Europe, we will get over it. This is just a way for the left to excercies control over industries, don't let the jews trick you, a few decades ago they were crying over global cooling, as they will again when this shit blows over.
![saskatchewan-glacier-timelapse[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/EvdwANm.jpg "saskatchewan-glacier-timelapse[1].jpg")
Holy fuck you fucks are retarded. There are so many proofs, some you can even see with your eyes, like how glaciers have retreated dramatically since old pictures from like a century ago, or how extreme weather events and heat records are more common, or how the North Pole has less and less ice, or how the average temperatures have risen, or the effects on permafrost and animals.
http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/ (inb4 >dah governmant is lieing to get you to stop buying oil)
There's no such thing as a conspiracy that engulfs a whole goddamn branch of science (except for the few righteous scientists who just so happen to be on BP's payroll, as if by chance...)
Stick to happenings and identity politics, stay away from macroeconomics and real science please, you're out of your depth.
>inb4 I'm reddit for not agreeing with you scientifically illiterate geniuses
Pls redpill me on why the fuck politicians blame people for the climate change? Is it because of lobbying of catalytic converter businesses etc?
I mean, who the hell gets the advantage of this?
>>69220212
Okay my anime friend I got some fresh proofs.
>>69220433
>Pls redpill me on why the fuck politicians blame people for the climate change?
carbon taxes
>>69217997
>>69220488
>>69218507
>mankind controls climate
What Bond villain succeeded in hijacking the climate? When did we obtain mastery over the suns output?
>>69220523
>>69220431
>There are so many proofs, some you can even see with your eyes, like how glaciers have retreated dramatically since old pictures from like a century ago
I've got some scary ass news for you, Kowalski
>>69220542
>>69220587
УДOЛИЛ!1!11!
>>69220678
Holy shit I'm stupid for never thinking about this. Rational as fuck.
The reason that 99% of scientists believes that climate change is manmade its because tbey are all payed by the goobemant. Jesus. Autism is strong with this board.
>>69220587
>>69220431
Address the issues raised in my post then, faggot. Because all I hear from you is more appeal to Authority.
>>69220303
>>69220431
Don't you remember what happened in 2012 and 2013?
There were huge solar flares coming from the sun, so bad that I couldn't watch the World cup at the time.
If greenhouse gases are the problem of climate change, then adding more solar energy should make a huge spike right?
>>69220765
>>69217710
Look up warming period during the Viking age.
The fact that people actually think that we can currently control or influence our climate is a ridiculous notion.
We can't even get along with each other.
We can't even control our made up borders.
We can't even control our made up monetary system.
We can't control shit.
>>69220431
>like how glaciers have retreated dramatically since old pictures from like a century ago
everybody on the "denier" side admits that the earth experienced warming in the second half of 20thC
>>69220431
Are you so blind that you can't see the perspective has changed in each shot there?
If you're going to use it to measure you'd best not have three fucking camera angles and distances.
For fucks sake, get your shit together you pirogi gobbling chode chomper.
>>69217837
Are you literally stupid?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cjuGCJJUGsg
Climate deniers BTFO.
>>69221227
you are so fucking dumb
>>69217710
>>69221468
Current year man and a mechanical engineer.
I am truly stumped.
Thanks for the share m8 I have to rethink my entire life now.
>look mom I posted it again
>>69217710
>denies global warming and climate change, says it's a myth made by the Chinese to control trade
Can you prove it isn't, faggot?
>>69217997
>>69217710
https://www.ipa.org.au/sectors/climate-change
the IPA are a very reputable hub for info on climate change for future reference
>>69221552
>implying John Oliver is ever wrong
>>69217710
it doesn't matter what he says, he's still literally the only candidate that supports nuclear energy
>>69217997
>>69217710
>>69217710
>despite overwhelming absence of scientific evidence
Fixed that for you britcuck
>>69221719
that dude is seriously gross
Why don't socialist bet on the temperature increasing if they are so sure about it?
>>69217710
>scientific evidence
>from Chinese scientists
Nice try.
>>69221826
ikr
>>69220431
Look up biogenesis. There are conspirivies that hijack all of science. It's well documented.
Btw polar ice has increased.
Oh and btw no one takes Poland seriously when it comes to facts, stick to construction and pierogies
>>69217710
I used to support Drumpf, now I'm a cruzmissle
there's evidence of climate change.
But there is NO evidence WHATSOEVER that government policies will modify the climate, for better or worse. It is simply a government power grab!
>>69217710
> scientific evidence
Ah the usual anglo.
>>69217710
There are no warming trend in the US climate record. Check the USCRN. Over a decade of nothing.
Is the US too small to be part of the global warming?
Who here actually /climate science/ here?
You guys are so retarded. YES, climate changes without human intervention - just look at Earth's natural history.
But also, YES, climate change in the last ~250 years has been dominated by anthropogenic forcings. CO2 is a greenhouse gas (GHG); physics and chemistry show that a rise in CO2 = rise in temperature. This cannot be refuted. Humans are influencing the climate.
The ONLY REAL question is the extent to which anthropogenic forcings are influencing climate change. Current research aims to quantify this factor.
Scientists build climate models. They are validated by running them using input data contemporaneous to the period to be reconstructed. These climate models are proven to be quite accurate. Now, these climate models are run for the present setting. The temperature and precipitation trends we are seeing currently can ONLY be reconstructed in the model if anthropogenic forcings are included. Remove them, and present trends cannot be explained with natural forcings ALONE.
Pic related, cucks.
>Is he just memeing to get the hardline christian fundamentalists then he will drop this memeing once he wins the republican nomination to win over votes from the democrats?
yes
>>69222180
Your journey will end with you being BTFO? Sounds about right.
>>69222245
Another government funded venture trying to get that carbon tax. I'm an old fag and even in the 80s and 90s they tried scaring us with CFCs and how we were going to have to wear radiation suits in the 00s. Still waiting for my suit and still not buying this leftist propaganda. Oh ya and they also said the US is going metric by the year 2000. How's that working out?
>>69222573
Strong argument.
>>69222685
Strong rebuttal.
>>69218605
Nothing but Australians defending the shitposting world title in here holy shit! They told me it was bad early in the morning, I had to see it for myself.
>>69223110
What is there to refute? I can't disprove his assertion that governments all over the world are going to great lengths to modify the global scientific consensus so as to justify the introduction of a carbon tax.
Neither can he prove his assertion.
>>69222245
>But also, YES, climate change in the last ~250 years has been dominated by anthropogenic forcings.
No it haven't.
>CO2 is a greenhouse gas (GHG); physics and chemistry show that a rise in CO2 = rise in temperature.
As a greenhouse gas only the temperature rise is tiny and is swamped out by noise from other greenhouse gases and ocean oscillations. It's only with models that have added magic forcing numbers that CO2 can become a problem. That's not how science works, you don't add magic modifiers to fit your ideological narrative.
>Humans are influencing the climate.
Yes of course, but nowhere close to such an extent that your hysteric alarmism is warranted. The fact that you feel so strong emotions about this means that you're unreliable.
>Scientists build climate models.
That have the equivalent predictive power of the verbal opinion of al Gore.
>They are validated by running them using input data contemporaneous to the period to be reconstructed.
That validates nothing, you can do the same with a stock market predictor but it's not going to predict the future.
> These climate models are proven to be quite accurate.
Nowhere close to be reliable.
>be reconstructed in the model if anthropogenic forcings are included.
It's not even true because the observed temperatures are far away from model predictions, yet even if it where it proves nothing because the models are fundamentally broken.
With your broken understanding of scientific modelling we could prove anything through some backwards modelling.
>Pic related
Mine too, it's of the same data qualtiy as yours: and artist impression of how reality should look.
>>69222226
100% not edited
aslo just finding >>69222222
>>69217710
but global warming is a scam.
>>69218507
There was an ice age like time in the 16-17th century, ancient european climate was a lot warmer than now.
It shifts over time, it's not proven to be man made.
>>69222245
>claims to be /climate science/
>"climate change in the last ~250 years has been dominated by anthropogenic forcings."
You know nothing of climate science or the climate debate. The IPCC themselves do not believe an anthropogenic signal was detectable until the last half of the 20th century. They attribute warming prior to WWII to natural causes.
>CO2 is a greenhouse gas (GHG); physics and chemistry show that a rise in CO2 = rise in temperature.
Given a perfect sphere, with a relatively static atmosphere, orbiting a star? Sure. Given a planet with a chaotic weather system? No. That's why the IPCC refers to CO2 as a "forcing" in the models. They themselves have to admit that it's possible an increase in a forcing could ultimately lead to cooler weather. (It's stated in their reports.)
While physics cannot tell us what more CO2 will do in a chaotic climate system (because we lack the ability to accurately simulate it), it CAN put an upper bound on the possible warming absent any feedbacks. It's +1.2C for a doubling of preindustrial CO2. Nothing to be concerned about.
AGW theory rests entirely on the idea of a positive H2O feedback for which there is no evidence.
>These climate models are proven to be quite accurate.
Pic related. You are wrong.
>>69223492
>muh conspiracy argument
You don't need that when the greens have turned it into communism 2.0.
Politicians generally give no shit about the factual content and will parrot anything, and being excommunicated from further research if you're a scientist means you'll add the "for the climate!" blurb to your research by default. The greens don't care about the fact as they already know that mankind is universally evil and everything we do destroys the world. Media loves alarmism so they'll parrot anything that gets people riled up.
Carbon trade was juicy as fuck to a few speculators but by now it's dead. It was a cashgrab by a small group, just like all the other small groups that are using AGW as the scapegoat or champion of their cause.
>>69217997
You sound like an anti-trump protestor refusing to substantiate why trump is hitler and instead just says "im not giving you proof because you are illogical".
>>69217710
i'd refute this faggot thread but this faggot website is run by jewish faggots that thinks my links are spam.
the nigger jews that run 4chan need to be assassinated.
>>69217710
>/pol/ denies that replacement migration and open borders are the only way to save the European economy.
>despite overwhelming scientific evidence.
>>69223527
Yes, you are right insofar that modelling and its interpretation should be approached with doubt. Yes, it is also very easy to fuddle the data or the weighting of the model to produce the graphs necessary to backup one's agenda. Perhaps I was a bit rash with the statements I made.
Believe me, I would like nothing more than humanity's role in climate change to be disproven, but I have yet so see anything nearly as convincing as its proponents have produced.
You are clearly a sceptic, or a denialist. I would appreciate it if you could produce the best evidence you believe your side to have. So far, you have only applied what is really a common sense critique of modelling in general.
>>69217710
>>69224399
>>69224134
>>69222245
Is /pol/ capable of unanimously agreeing that burning fossil fuels is definitely detrimental to the environment and atmosphere? We can agree that some regulations are necessary in order to prevent the destruction of our environment, right?
>>69217710
He actually said this?
Good has actually on point. I looked at all the data a while ago to try and get to the bottom of all this shit and here's what I understood:
> global warming is happening
> climate change is happening
> it has been happening throughout all of the history of the world (or global cooling)
> are humans causing it to increase faster? Maybe but there is simply not enough data over a long enough period to tell
> the world collectively has had a knee-jerk massive over reaction to it
>humans at this point can pretty much develop technology to overcome the effects of any warming in temperature (it isn't even the warmest period in the last 1000 years
> stunting human technolgical growth and punitive taxes on the population because of this fear is beyond stuoud
> protip: the biggest people up in arms about it are students who always NEED something to whine about right or wrong
Tl;dr global warming /climate change is irrelevant
Acquire technology
>>69220836
flares were mainly a thing in the 60s
>>69222245
>Scientists build climate models. They are validated by running them using input data contemporaneous to the period to be reconstructed. These climate models are proven to be quite accurate.
hahahahahahaha
not one was proved correct, was it?
see >>69224991
and >>69224134
>>69226027
no, burning fossil fuels is fine
>>69224399
>I would appreciate it if you could produce the best evidence you believe your side to have.
There's more than one part to that.
RSS/UAH showing no rising trendline for an 18-19 year period is pretty damning in the data department.
The tryhard consensus "Climate science agrees to 97% mantra" Followed by someone claiming "no pause!" simultaneously as a dozen other all having their own special snowflake explanation for why there is a pause.
The tryhard alarmism "no glaciers in himalaya", "no snow in britain", the constant negative claims that "global warming causes [bad thing 1...n^2000]"
The underhanded tactics as apparent from climate gate and the other constant bickering.
The claims of priesthood, again it's related to the 97% mantra. Every scientific field have a problem with reliability of papers, depending on field and which study you read you find different numbers of how much is impossible to replicate or outright fabricated and subject to retraction but they're large and concerning numbers.
Except for climate science, instead of advocating a increasingly stringent quality control and transparency it moves towards becoming a black box with scientology-like conduct with an internal hierarchial power structure, subversive conduct and other bizarre behaviours.
>>69217710
>myth made by the Chinese to control trade
Source?
>overwhelming
>scientific
>evidence
Source?
>>69217710
"global warming" is just the modern day eugenics: a belief that's based on science - but not scientifically proven - that brown people using white peoples' technology will destroy white people and then brown people and thus brown people should be stopped from advancing/growing.
Everyone that pushes this global warming bullshit and the anti-growth "solutions" should be given a short trial, thrown up against a wall, and executed.
>>69217710
>I want to like Trump but how can someone with so much genius and head for business be this retarded?
Knowing about Global warming doesn't stop it, no less than you can stop the sun from rising in the morning. Global warming is also requires a united global effort to stop any and all carbon emissions and even if we did, it would only delay global warming since it is a natural phenomenon that happens every ten or so millions of years.
Course, this doesn't mean that I want global climate change to occur, I don't want california under water (yes I do). Point is, it down right stupid to get riled up about something that you cannot possibly change nor control. Trump has the right idea, but not necessarily for the right reasons. Either way, you cannot stump the Trump because his actions lead to prosperity.
This is why I'm voting for him, guy has a prophet's keen sight. Faggots may not agree with him, but at the core, all his principles and suggestions yield positive benefits.
>>69217710
Pollution is a serious issue (so that we don't become like China), but it's not an issue because of things like "climate change".
>>69227353
even the IPCC themselves refer to the pause as the "hiatus", I think it's in AR5
>>69217710
>>>/sci/7954433
for the deniers, lot of evidence within.
