> 97 per cent of scientists agree that climate change is caused by humans, an American study has claimed
Can you climate change deniers just STOP already? This matter is no longer up for debate
what most people who are trying to "reduce" climate change also ignore the fact that animal agriculture is the main source of climate change.
>>70907802
>97 per cent of scientists agree
really?
wheres the source at
>implying climate change is bad
Let it happen, it should kill off a large amount of undesirables.
>>70907802
97% of 79 scientists out of 3,146 who responded to the survey
>muh 97% agree
>>70907802
notice how they never have arguments just the muh 97% appeal to authority and muh computer prevision (all previsions have been super wrong btw)
>>70907802
You're right, it is caused by humans. But it isn't caused by humans driving car.
>>70907802
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7jzBWmpzifc
op btfo
>>70907802
>paid shills say thing is real
Well, guess it's real!
>>70908051
>Let it happen, it should kill off a large amount of undesirables
This.
You notice they always say 97% of 'SCIENTISTS'
They don't say they are necessarily CLIMATE scientists.
>>70908214
You wouldnt fucking believe in what gigantic way they do this here.
>>70908338
>The "97 percent" figure in the Zimmerman/Doran survey represents the views of only 79 respondents who listed climate science as an area of expertise and said they published more than half of their recent peer-reviewed papers on climate change. Seventy-nine scientists—of the 3,146 who responded to the survey—does not a consensus make.
> deny climate change
> deny holocaust
> deny reality
>>70908408
the 97% stat is based on 79 scientists who were already on board with climate change. 79 out of 3,146 is as cherrypicked as they come.
Doesn't matter. If we can't get industrial countries like China to chip in, we will continue to have the issue.
>>70907802
97% of ~35%
>>70908488
leaf if anything we are heading into a new mini ice age within the next couple of decades and canada is already the ice world from super mario
>>70908055
I dont think you know how stats and normal curves work
For posterity's sake I feel nthat I must inform you that consensus does not equal fact.
T. Geoscientist.
>>70907802
It's interesting that the consequences of climate change are always just far enough away that by the time we get to that point in the near future, no one will remember the warnings to realize they never came true.
Remember when all gore said that by 2010 people in North America would never see snow again? And that by 2015 all of our coastal cities would be under water? They keep moving those goal posts and people still keep buying into it.
>scientists
Keep in mind that this includes social sciences. It's also BS because even the official climate change literature is still undecided on the extent of the anthropogenic impact of the changing environment.
isn't it funny how people who claim to be backed by scientists (not science or fact or anything, just scientists) never post sources, even for what basically amounts to a survey
>>70907802
Nobody is denying climate change or pollution. We're denying HUMAN MADE global warming.
>>70907802
No, 97% of selected scientists that responded to some survey done sometime ago that even the authors distanced themselves from is what happened.
Climate change is not what they are trying to sell you. Yes, the climate will change but your car and millions of others won't have any effect on it whatsoever.
Right wing is just so anti science its a huge turn off for intellectuals like me.
>>70909091
>Canadian intellectuals
>>70909091
>wew lad
>>70908792
ok explain how 79 scientists out of 3,146 warrants a talking point that states "97% of scientists agree that climate change is caused by humans"
>>70909168
n-no bully
All we have to do is claim that smoking weed is a main contributor to climate change or global warming, whatever the fuck it's called. The kikes for legalization will trump the kikes for climate change. Suddenly all climate change claims stop...
>>70909091
its going to be a worse turn off when the US imposes a carbon tax on your nation because you're producing too much CO2
>>70907979
It's one of those non-debatable figures analogous to "1 in 5 college women get raped" and the gender wage gap. You're just supposed to accept it as an irreducible fundamental constant of nature.
>>70909091
You must have a pretty sweet fedora
![350px-Empirical_Rule[1].png](https://i.imgur.com/5fxavj3.png "350px-Empirical_Rule[1].png")
>>70909183
Again, i dont think you understand how statistics and normal distributions work. You dont need a sample size equal to the population size to gauge an accurate distribution, if you suggested that to any political group as a statistician you'd be fired for being a retard.
>97 per cent of scientists
CLIMATE scientists
Scientists who work in the field
Stop exaggerating. It's no wonder conservatards don't listen. It's because you propagandists.
>>70907802
>1 in 5 women will be raped by the time they leave college, an American study has claimed
>>70909364
97% of sasquatch hunters agree that he exists and is probably like right at the treeline man
![De_moivre-laplace[1].gif](https://i.imgur.com/RJMquWp.gif "De_moivre-laplace[1].gif")
>>70909183
And to further illustrate my point >>70909437
>>70907802
This study has been proven wrong so many fucking times already.
just kill yourself
>>70907802
you making a thread about this every day doesn't make it any more true
>>70909437
Those 79 aren't a representative sample, though you fucking retard. They're cherry-picked.
>>70909437
taking a sample group from people who are actively publishing articles on man made climate change and then asking them if climate change is real doesn't seem like a good way to do statistics either
>>70907802
>Event A happens
>Actor B does something that makes a small contribution to Event A
>Actor B doesn't change the overall course of Event A, just make a minor change to its rate
Wow they're right AGW is real and we're past the "tippping point." So I guess it's too late might as well enjoy the time we have left. :^)
>>70909594
>asking climate scientists who have peer reviewed articles on the subject their opinions on climate change is a bad idea
You're right, lets ask your local metallurgist what he thinks of climate change instead.
>>70907921
when the fuck are bugs going to be available in the supermarket?
holy shit, i want to give up large mammals but i don't trust the mealworms from the pet store
>>70909091
Can I borrow your fedora some day? I bet you have a few extra.
>>70909594
they're not publishing on man-made climate change, they just publish about climate change, they can be for or against
>>70909677
Why can't they make a single successful model?
Since AGW is driven, as they claim, by completely measurable human activity, why have they still failed to produce a model with predictive power?
When the peers reviewing your study are a bunch of useless cucks for your voodoo science it means very little.
97% of people believe the holocaust was real, doesn't mean it was
>>70909781
>they're not publishing on man-made climate change
yes they are.
Even if all the worst prediction came through this isn't a white man problem. Only shitskins will die and suffer because they lack the agency to adapt.
>>70907802
>97 per cent of scientists agree that climate change...
The appeal to authority is frown upon.
>an American study has claimed
...Do I need anything about this?
>This matter is no longer up for debate
Then it's not science/philosophy.
>100% of AGW based climate models can't model the past 20 years
Consensus is NOT science.
![ChristyChart500[1].gif](https://i.imgur.com/iOuzLqb.gif "ChristyChart500[1].gif")
>>70909782
>voodoo science
Listen, if you're too retarded to interpret models and know how they actually work, or understand the scientific process thats your fault. You're arguing on a subject you dont know about on a purely contrarian basis and not based on empiricism.
Here, let me spoonfeed you, all sources and releant data included inside before you dismiss the link
>https://www.skepticalscience.com/climate-models.htm
Go learn something, you inbred, scientifically illiterate dipshit
>>70910000
QUADS CAN TELL NO LIES
>>70909677
the fact that the 79 scientists listed 'climate change' as an area of expertise and had published atleast 50% of their recent articles about 'climate change' means that they are already heavily invested in the topic, and the extremely political and polarizing context of the topic should be scrutinized, especially when it has gone from global cooling, global warming, and then climate change. What are we supposed to do about it anyways? Tax other nations and corporations if they do not meet with our standards for carbon output. Its a scam, and all it's going to do is get the retarded liberal lead western nations to pay more for stupid shit while our competitors laugh and actually get shit done.
>>70910000
Quads of truth. Honestly we're not even close to being near the warmest period Earth has seen (since complex life became commonplace) and life weathered on just fine.
>>70910042
>look our broken clock is right twice a day GIMME MORE GRANT MONEY TO SAVE DA URF
>>70910084
>the fact that the 79 scientists listed 'climate change' as an area of expertise and had published atleast 50% of their recent articles about 'climate change' means that they are already heavily invested in the topic,
Thats like not taking the opinion of a biologist seriously when asking about drug resistant bacteria. You're a fucking moron, they are heavily invested in it, BECAUSE ITS THEIR FUCKING JOB TO RESEARCH IT. You dont know how science works, they're not out there to conspire against you, they follow a process based on rational thinking and empiricism and publish whatever results they get.
If you have a climate science question, you ask a fucking climate scientist because he knows better than you, you dumb shit. No amount of armchair politics on an imageboard will make you more qualified to talk on the subject than the people that spend countless hours working in the actual field, you fucking troglodyte.
>>70910127
Here's your reply. Yes, the evil scientists and their massive billion dollar budgets are conspiring with the jews to get us to stop shitting up our planet like an indian shits up a street.
Also isn't man made output of CO2 many magnitudes less than natural output by eruptions?
Why is it always blamed on people?
Also weren't the CO2 levels much higher than they are today when megafauna existed?
>>70910352
No, volcanoes emit between 60-300 million tonnes of CO2 per year, humans emit approx. 29 BILLION per year.
>>70910310
I never said did I? I think they've fully drank the koolaid and that's the problem.
They're convinced they're saving the Earth when in reality they're just seeing rivers on Mars.
Now since you're so well versed in climate science you can thank me later.
http://www.informath.org/Contest1000.htm
When you win your $100,000 make sure to come back and rub it in face my "scientifically literate" friend.
>>70907802
Allow me to contribute to this pile of shit.
This only ever a subject for debate among people who are making money off it, and people to young to remember that the world was going to be fucked by 1995, 2005, and 2015.
Shit, we should all be eating Soylent Green while treading water, at least twice by now.
>>70910231
These people only get paid if they say there is a big problem. Science has been corrupted. Library unis teach people the 'truth' now instead of how to think for themselves. Original post is a case in point.
>>70910231
Ok so 97% of 79 scientists out of 3,061 warrants endless headlines and constant talking points of "97% of scientists agree that climate change is man made" and it's not disingenuous? Also, are you saying that a subject that has been a liberal staple for years is not affected by politics when its in an academic environment?
>>70907802
>trusting big science
And I bet you believe in a round earth too you fucking cuck
97%? I can tell you 100% of the people behind my keyboard know that stat is bullshit. Stop being a gullible liberal mouthpiece and check your facts for once in your fucking life.
FORBES calling bullshit on 97% scientists agree:
>http://www.forbes.com/sites/alexepstein/2015/01/06/97-of-climate-scientists-agree-is-100-wrong/
National review: No, it's not a 97 percent consensus.
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/425232/climate-change-no-its-not-97-percent-consensus-ian-tuttle
WALL STREET JOURNAL: The Myth of the Climate Change '97%'
>http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702303480304579578462813553136
It took me a fifteen secong Google search to disprove it. Maybe you should stop being such a gullible kid and be a little more skeptical about the things the media tells you. Seriously stop for a moment and consider what is the actual proof you have about climate change being caused by humans. A fake statistic? Several Hollywood fiction movies? Pictures of starving polar bears? Please, stop being a useful idiot.
>>70910231
They have been shown to conspire in a big way for years.
Even if you disregard that their model of income is heavily pressured to produce alarmist content. The fact is their methods and models are extremely flawed. Their cherrypicking of weather stations caused their simplistic simulation to go full GiGo and fudging with the modifiers withing the code didn't matters either. It is all bullshit on par with psychology and astrology.
>>70910579
>>>70910231 (You)
>Ok so 97% of 79 scientists out of 3,061 warrants endless headlines and constant talking points of "97% of scientists agree that climate change is man made" and it's not disingenuous?
You got it, go back to school and learn statistics my dimwitted chum.
> Also, are you saying that a subject that has been a liberal staple for years is not affected by politics when its in an academic environment?
They're scientists, they dont give a shit about your political opinions, because they dont (shouldnt) matter. You're just some guy online, they're scientists dedicated to their work and spend their careers researching the stuff.
>>70907802
It's as cold as a nun's cunt here.
Scientists can fuck off.
If global warming is real, why is my heating bill so expensive? Why is it permanently cold?
I'm freezing my bollocks off and it's the middle of April. It's fucking cold.
>>70907802
97% of APPOINTED scientists. You are literally talking about a few thousand institutes whom got several millions in government funding to - totally unbiased of course - prove the governments position on this topic.
And yet man-made climate change nuts have not even managed to build a case strong enough to be considered a scientific theory.
>>70910773
You would have a point if those 79 scientists were representative of all scientists, instead of a specific field of science.
Go back to high school stats, and try to pass this time.
>>70910666
>The fact is their methods and models are extremely flawed.
No they're not, they're fine. See
>https://www.skepticalscience.com/climate-models.htm
>>70910890
>You would have a point if those 79 scientists were representative of all scientists, instead of a specific field of science.
Please, tell me how i should value a psychiatrists opinion on climate change. Stop being retarded.
>>70909437
this is wrong in so many fucking levels
there is a method behind choosing a sample out of a population in statistics, you don't just pick 100 people and say you are done
besides that, 79 is approximately 2,5% of 3146, and even your fucking graph shows that this percentage is inadequate to extract results
stop spewing ignorance faggot
>>70907802
97% of scientists agree Op is a Faggot
>>70907802
No. The climate will become hotter and the russian lands will become better for living. Everything is going according to the plan.
>>70907802
![250px-Dice_sum_central_limit_theorem.svg[1].png](https://i.imgur.com/bwUYYX6.png "250px-Dice_sum_central_limit_theorem.svg[1].png")
>>70910990
>hey everyone look at me, im a dumb greek who doesnt know statistics
Go educate yourself
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_limit_theorem
>>70910984
>"97% of SCIENTISTS" is the quoted figure
>huuuurrrrr why should I care what a physicist thinks
kill yourself,
>>70910925
lol nice site you got there, shill it some more maybe someone will visit it. Faggot.
>>70910042
FRAME 1
1 is false.
2 - just because there's no "uncertainty range" doesn't mean the graph is misleading. Indeed, the graph in the 2nd frame uses an uncertainty range to make model predictions look like they could be accurate when they are not (they are clearly running too high and observation is about to break out of the bottom).
3 - The data sets ARE in close agreement.
4 - no idea what they're talking about, there's not another group of satellite temps.
5 - I'm sick of the faggots who complain about the region being analyzed. If AGW theory is true then this region would absolutely show the effect. If it's not showing the effect then either there is no warming, or the warming else where is not anthropogenic (man made).
FRAME 2 - LOL this very clearly shows that the models are running away from reality. You can cut all the other frames and just post this one since it shows the truth: minor warming due to CO2 alone with no H2O amplification.
FRAME 3 - the global surface record is shit due to UHI effects and flat out tampering. It's no longer a scientific data set. It's a mythology.
FRAME 4 - sea level rise is at the low end of all the scary predictions.
FRAME 5 - Arctic sea ice melt literally cannot be due to atmospheric warming. It is driven entirely by ocean temps and currents. And no, ocean warming isn't sufficient to explain it either. It's probably just a natural cycle.
On the other side of the world, Antarctica is gaining ice. Antarctica is the one that matters btw. The Arctic could melt completely and ocean levels wouldn't change 1".
FRAME 6 - at this point the ocean surface temperature set is a fiction just like the ground data set. Why? When buoy temps didn't show the expected rise they incorporated engine intake temps for ocean crossing vessels. Engine intake water. As in "preheated."
Nice try though.
>>70910579
Clearly not! Science definitely doesn't work that way. Muh purity of science.
Lemme tell you how this goes if you even brush up against Climate Science.
I set up an experiment to demonstrate chaos theory, and how it makes modelling even very simple things very complex in reality. I did this by building a pool playing robot. I went overboard on sensors and measurements. It took literal minutes for the computer science whiz kids to model the robot striking the cue ball and it's subsequent travel along the pool table.
At some point in this experiment, I was joined by a friend who has already completed his Phd. He suggested that we scrap the entire thing and never speak of it. I didn't.
A Stanford mathematics Phd and a Phd candidate along with Stanford Computer Science geeks, could not model the travel of the cue ball accurately. It can't be done.
I was not allowed to publish. I had to find a new supervisor, and I'm at risk of losing my place here and all of my work for even posting this story.
>>70909550
wow
a seriously good answer from australia for once
:^)
>>70911084
THE CENTRAL LIMIT THEOREM ONLY WORKS FOR REPRESENTATIVE SAMPLES YOU DUMB FUCKING NIGGER
>be climate scientist
>be working for the government
>prove climate change isn't caused by humans
>lose my job
>be climate scientist
>be working for the government
>"prove" climate change is caused by humans
>get to "work" for the next 10-15 years at government's expense researching how is it caused.
>government loves you because you are giving them an excuse to further expand bureaucracy and intervention in the economy.
>literally a useful idiot.
>>70910773
>They're scientists, they dont give a shit about your political opinions, because they dont (shouldnt) matter. You're just some guy online, they're scientists dedicated to their work and spend their careers researching the stuff.
You're right, they give a shit about their own political opinions. They're human, not ubermensch who can't be swayed by their surroundings, peers, the politicized nature of the topic or cash money.
>>70907802
Prove it.
>>70910414
It doesn't matter because CO2 is a weak GHG. The maximum forcing for a doubling of preindustrial CO2 levels, absent feedbacks, is +1.2C. Everyone agrees on this and it is not in dispute. But not because "muh consensus!" It's basic physics.
The IPCC gets its 2-8C warming range based primarily on a range of H2O amplifications. Observation to date indicates there is no H2O amplification. At all.
Now you know.
>>70911084
nice adhom faggot
>In probability theory, the central limit theorem (CLT) states that, given certain conditions, the arithmetic mean of a sufficiently large number of iterates of independent random variables, each with a well-defined expected value and well-defined variance, will be approximately normally distributed, regardless of the underlying distribution.
>certain conditions
>sufficiently large number of iterates
>well-defined variance
this isnt a representative sample you dumb fuck
>>70908317
>>70908051
Of course the Syrupniggers are the ones begging for it to get warmer.
>>70911186
Which is why they were in consensus before (oil funded) conservative media started shilling against them. The only ones politicizing this issue is your collective dumb asses thinking this is all a conspiracy, they're just doing their jobs.
>>70911467
Again, you do realize we've been having this argument for over 30 years right?
We've blown past so many doomsday deadlines, I've lost track of many, but The Population Bomb will always be my favorite.
>>70911129
If you get shitcanned be sure to nuke them with this story. We will help you disseminate. Hey maybe you can become an e-celeb :)
>be Canadian bleeding heart liberal
>see kindergarten tier bogus infographs made by government like pic related
>without much further thinking buy into the climate change political narrative
>watch several Hollywood fiction movies on the subject
>Like several starving polar bear pictures on Facebook
>write a few pretentious semi-deep posts in social media once in a while
>never ever check the blatant evidence that human caused warming is BS.
>never know that even after having emmited 25% of all CO2 in human history in THIS CENTURY there has been NO NET INCREASE in global temperature.
>not any noteworthy climate change happens in his entire life.
>...
>his grand-grandsons die frozen because he lives in Canada and the climate got colder instead of warmer, ending his bloodline forever, that in the case he actually gets to reproduce, which is quite dubious since he's a fucking faggot.
>>70907802
>This matter is no longer up for debate
so is evolution (for a hundred fucking years btw) and theres still idiots who dont believe it
>>70911702
And this motherfucker, just like our modern climate scientists, was a 'biologist'. By which they meant, his PhD was in Entomology, specifically butterflies.
>>70912162
Evolution is still just a theory
Consensus among '''''''scientists is'''''' not a proof.
>>70907802
m8 we will all be long dead from the race war before climate change kills us.
With a bit of luck the whole of the middle east will just shrivel up and die.
I doubt the Bangladeshis would even notice more floods unless it interrupted their gang rapes.
Thanks to the Internet and the fact we now really know what these people are like, the west doesnt give 2 fucks.
>>70911467
>muh big oil shilling
>theres no conspiracy
pick one
>the president quoting the 97% meme verbatim
>but the conservative collective is politicizing climate change
carbontax.org
There is no neutral party, this topic is politicized for a reason. Academia is performing its services to support a desired outcome. The outcome is increased leverage and a bigger slice of the pie that is the US energy industry for the government. The only real industry that is left in the US. Eventually it will move to taxes on other nations and even corporations. If you don't see that this is a powermove I can't help you out. I'm not trashing academia, but when there is this much at stake I would never think anyone has only pure motive.
>>70910231
>implying that they won't lose their job if climate change turned out to be a scam
>implying these people aren't hired by big institutes who only exist because of climate change
>implying said institutes won't try to do anything to make climate change real so they can get more money
>>70910666
>Even if you disregard that their model of income is heavily pressured to produce alarmist content.
this especially
>>70909437
>79 people out of a group of 3k+ is a reasonable sample size
I'm sorry, how true are those statistics made by Fox and whatever media company on political standings again?
also this:
>Its a scam, and all it's going to do is get the retarded liberal lead western nations to pay more for stupid shit while our competitors laugh and actually get shit done.
>Implying we aren't creating a new ice age to kill off all the non whites
>>70907802
>The world is never-changing, and anything that does happen is because humans are asshoels
>be it extinction, natural disasters or global temperature
if scientists were around during the mini-ice age, would they blame it on humans as well?
Would Chicxulub be the fault of pesky mortal meddling as well?
>>70912627
explain how this is a powermove? by whom? What does the US stand to gain by taxing other nations? China probably won't give a fuck...
>>70912778
If the US could impose more taxes on the energy production industries here (like oil and natural gas) then it would be a huge win for them. If they could implement carbon taxes they could use them as leverage against domestic companies the oligarch class sees as competitors or who just wont play along. European nations leadership are pretty easily swayed by anything "progressive" and will gladly pay a carbon tax or open up their own companies to being subject to the tax for whatever reason they do their crazy shit.
>>70913022
so in the end, they'd be raping european businesses, but wouldn't it be better if they started fucking over chinese/russian/asian businesses? they pose more of a threat than the communist superstate which will roll on its back and die in a few years I'd say
>>70912778
China, no. But remember Keagan's leaked "Fuck the EU" leaked call? You see the immigrant crisis at least. The Ukraine bullshit, also. The groups in charge don't give a flying fuck, and its not about the taxes really, its about having more control and leverage over the EU.
>>70913149
They can't right now. Russia threw out all of our NGOs last year, and China doesn't fuck around either. The least we can do is make sure the EU can't pivot to Russia for the forseeable future due to internal crisis.
>>70913022
>>70913228
>>70913326
thanks mate
