>Be STEM student
>browse /sci/
>laugh at /pol/ when they say global warming isn't definitively
>have climate and earth courses this semester
>professor tells us he is quoted in the 95% who agree it's human contribution that causes climate change but that he never said that
>tells us it's not definite that we're causing it
Another course:
>Show us climate data showing that glaciers on Greenland have lost mass at a faster rate in the past
/pol/ you were right all along
I'm interested now. Could you link that climate data? What is "the past", like before industrial revolution?
>>69482867
You know why Canada has so many lakes?
Because the entire Canadian landmass used to be crushed under the weight of thousands of massive glaciers. It's also why the Great Plains of the American Midwest are so flat, glaciers carved them out. At that time, the sea level was so low because of all the glaciers that humans could actually walk across the Bering Strait from Russia to Alaska, which is how the Native Americans got the Americas.
Climate changes, and changes wildly over the course of history. It's been much much hotter, and also much much colder. In general, life does better when it's warmer. For example, during the dinosaur days, CO2 levels were 5 times higher, and the planet was a tropical paradise. The land was so productive it could support massive animals the size of a house. Something which would be utterly impossible in the sparsely vegetated world we have today.
Gasoline is compressed biomass. All of the CO2 which is contained within oil originally came from the air. And is now sitting unproductively underground instead of being part of the Carbon cycle.
In general, CO2 has a very minimal effect on climate and temperature, but a MASSIVE effect on plant-growth. A doubling of CO2 in our atmosphere might increase temperatures by .5 degrees Fahrenheit, but it will DOUBLE plant growth rates worldwide. More plants means more animals, which means more biodiversity all around. Crop yields would double, this would be an enormous benefice to all mankind.
>>69483901
Jesus you're retarded. It's like you heard part of a lecture in a community college and walked out so you intentionally wouldn't have to hear the rest
>>69483156
It goes back tens of thousands of years. Basically by analyzing geophysical data on Greenland we can see that glaciers have been moving at a faster rate than atm.
Also that the global temperatures have currently stopped rising for a year or two, even though the co2 model says it should keep going up.
Basically it's not like we can prove humans aren't contributing to it, but professors have told us it's become an extremely political sciencefield that doesn't allow any suggestion but the status quo.
Einstein and fermi would never have been able to been make the relativity theory if everyone had to agree before data was looked at.
/pol/ is always right?
>>69482867
Never believe shit until it is proven with replicable data that one can replicate, not arse pulled and modified computer models
>>69484190
I'm the one who came to the table with arguments. You're the one who came with insults.
The fact is that the Earth is not dangling on a knife edge where a fractional degree of warming or cooling will upset our precious balance and lead to a mass extinction. It's been much much warmer and much much colder, and yet life goes on.
Earth is a homeostatic system. No matter how much it's pushed from it's equilibrium, it always returns. It doesn't run off a cliff in a spiraling out of control warming trend.
>>69482867
>first year STEM student
>misunderstand lecture
>make grandiose statements about climate change that go against the scientific consensus
You are going to fail your education if you continue to be this retarded, Anon.
Kind regards,
Graduated (MSc) STEM student.
>>69484631
I never understood what was so horible if all the ice melted and the sea level would rise.
Places like the Black Sea can just build a dike. And the Sahara might be easier to manage maybe even cultivate plus the temperature increase will turn Siberia in the bread basket of the world.
>>69484893
Can you prove how he is wrong?
>>69482867
/pol/ is always right faggot
>>69482867
Yes. Global warming is the machination of the new world order coupled with socialism.
>>69485045
If the Northern ice cap melted, sea levels would not rise, because this is floating sea ice and is already displacing roughly the amount of water that would be added to the oceans.
Only if Greenland and Antarctica started melting would we get any appreciable rise. And Antarctica has more ice than ever. Greenland's melting is more of a meme than anything.
Besides, sea levels have been rising gradually for hundreds of years. Hawaii is still there.
>>69484893
I'm also a graduated STEM student nigger. A degree doesn't make you special, the weight of your arguments does. I know plenty of people that graduated simply by plugging and chugging the coursework without any real deep understanding or insight of their own.
Most climate science nowadays is grant-chasing. Hell I know Physics professors who've released papers on the greenhouse effect in the atmosphere of distant pulsars, simply because putting "global warming" in the title of their paper brings in the dough.
>>69484893
>first year
Nope, 2nd year.
>you will fail
Would be a first time.
It was never said humans can be proven to not effect the climate, simply that the current "95% of scientists agree" argument is retarded. Our professor is part of the alleged 95% and he never said anything like that. Also lots of data shows that earth in the past has had glaciers moving faster than the current, so it's not definitive that we can stop global warming by stopping human factors.
>>69482867
>/pol/ you were right all along
Well color me surprised
>>69485513
>Greenland melting is more of a meme than anything.
Disagree with you here mate, we can see glaciers moving in the north and in the east of Greenland and not just the west as it was a few hundred years ago.
Copenhagen will be under water in time if trends continue, question is whether we can stop it or if it's simply nature.
t. Denmark, owners of Greenland.
>>69486068
Can't you build a Wall?
And make the water pay for it?
>>69482867
>>69484893
>believes in climate """"""""""science"
You've already failed
Kind regards,
Doctor (PhD) STEM professional.
>>69482867
Time to get with it son.
>>69482867
>/pol/
>not always right
I find your lack of faith in Kek disturbing.
>current year
>not knowing global warming is a tax scam
>not knowing we have minimal impact on climate
take it from the expert
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FcxrWUTzrUA
>>69482867
Yes, because its some conspiracy by research institutions trying to get government to tax a business that's often intertwined with government via lobbying in order to benefit alternative energy businesses, many of which are owned by oil companies.
Plain and simple we are experiencing a change in climate at a rate faster than what we can observe. Naturally we want to stop it and we know CO2 is a greenhouse gas that can warm the atmosphere of this earth. Additionally our current methods of energy production and usage are polluting the earth a good deal as well. If you want to believe this is some hoax to make money then I feel sorry for you as what people are more interested in is trying anything they can do not live on some shitty planet caused by their own actions. You can believe what you want but the science has been settled.
>>69482867
in other news COWS
>>69482867
>/pol/ you were right all along
/pol/ is always right.
>>69483901
>sea level was so low because of all the glaciers that humans could actually walk across the Bering Strait from Russia to Alaska, which is how the Native Americans got the Americas
WRONG
they walked across an ice sheet because it happened at the tail end of the ice age when ice still connected the continent.
>>69486898
>oil companies
it won't matter what oil does to the environment cuck if it really does anything
we have 50 years more petrol left tops, then what? this is not a debatable opinion from your political science class, no one is hiding we are going to run out of it, but we sure as hell aren't buying a lot of time by tax scamming people on gas
>>69486898
You know who are the people that get a lot of grants to develop new "eco tech"?
Energy companies.
You know how uses lobbying and legislation to corner the energy market?
Big Energy Corporations.
Your argument is really shit.
>>69486898
>you believe some giant conspiracy
>You can believe what you want but the science has been settled.
Holy shit the damage control. I'm simply saying that the "95% of scientists agree" and "science is settled" meme is completely fucking retarded.
It's a politicized field of science where "everyone around the table has to sign" which means theories, models and data that doesn't fit the status-quo is scary and edited out.
Never said humans didn't cause it, simply said a lot of data challenges that notion.
>>69482867
The way you have to look at it is, as far as we know we MIGHT be causing some change in our climate. Unfortunately it's so fucking slow and takes so long to see noticeable changes, it's almost inconclusive. Weather is sporadic, and we haven't recorded it long enough to make sure-fire statements about our impact on our planet. So just err on the side of caution concerning the subject. Much like cancer or something else. Limit your exposure/Impact and mitigate risks.
>>69487372
Also to add to it because I hate hipocrites.
If you really give a dam about the earth then stop using technology that requires mining and energy production to exist.
Don't try an act all high and eco friendly when in reality you probably are doing more pollution and produce more of the dreaded gas than I do.
>>69482867
That's what my teachers taught me.
>>69487155
>>69482867
Only times /pol/ is not right is on some happenings.
Otherwise, /pol/ is really always right.
>>69487372
>>69487680
So why is big energy fighting big energy if this is some mass conspiracy? Sounds more like the market changing under pressure from new scientific results. You're fucking idiotic. Additionally I'm not some hippy who wants us to go back to the pre-industrial times and you're double retarded if you think that this would work. We need to transition to methods of energy that reduce this issue. We'll be funding it so your gypsy nigger ass can later copy it.
>>69487413
>I-I wasn't being retarded!
Sure. Listen freshman you obviously haven't read a journal article let alone know what you're talking about here. There's little politics inside the actual field and its greatly watched with prying eyes. If climate scientists were fabricating evidence it would be on the front papers. You say a lot of data, but have you read it? Can you link me sources? I've read a lot of this "data" you no doubt saw when I completed my Bachelors in Biochemistry. You really think you know more because you didn't understand what a professor was telling you?
>>69482867
the 95% get paid for saying that. If they weren't saying it, they would not get funding. What better occupation then echo chambering w/e everybody else says and essentially doing nothing?
Its probably a hoaks, I am not sure who invented it. Donald trump thinks the chinese.
>>69488114
You do realize mining pollutes more than Energy Production.
>Oil Extraction Company is fighting a Multiple Energy Production Conglomerate
>Therfore I am right.
Besides this shit argument I haven't seen you provide anything besides
>You are wrong
>Cause I say so
>Do your research
>>69488114
You might be so mighty and academical,
but it hasn't been proven, and there are sound reasonings on both sides
do not try to deny the progressive left is pushing like crazy the global warming hysteria, it is painfully obvious.
Since it ultimately not proven, and as a maths student I give certain value to that, there is plenty reason to doubt what is commonly accepted and pushed by the jew
well, global warming/climate change may be a meme, but pollution from coal automobile exhaust fumes is bad for your health
source: my ass
Let me tell you something
If global warming is real, and I hope so, Siberia North Canada and Greenland could become habitable, and what's more important they could become farm land
White peoples countries will be huge, and others who life in the equator can go fuck themselves
And what's more, now we can cut off trees because of the extra CO2 they grow much faster
I don't really care either way since there's little that can be done to stop it.
However, the consequences are going to be much more gradual and unpredictable than another environmental topic that ruffles my feathers a good deal more: the pollution of the ocean with plastic waste.
It's a problem whose effects will be felt much sooner, and which are thoroughly detrimental to biodiversity, to human health, and to the beauty of this blue pearl among the stars. It makes me angry.
While difficult to tackle, it is something against which effective measures do exist, though a lot of damage is already irreversible (like microscopic particles floating around the ocean). You could impose towering, painful fines on ship owners whose ships are found to have tossed trash overboard, trawl parts of the ocean for larger bits of trash, and cordon off river mouths with facilities or structures to filter any waste that would otherwise be carried into the sea.
Shitholes could/would not significantly enact these measures, but strict enforcement by first-world harbours and navies would already help a little.
>>69488578
Also accepting something just because a allegedly large percentage of the science community agrees on is retarded.
Two hundred years ago we believe that the universe was always in the current state.
I pulled this graph from co2(dot)earth
As you can see the current co2 leve is 404.16ppm and according to this graph, that must be terrible.
Now lets do some math.
ppm stands for parts per million, so:
404.16ppm=404.16/1000000=0.00040416% concentration.
I'm not sure how much more insignificant it can be.
Now if we take the time to read the Toronto Protocol, published by Serge Monast in 1992 (they killed him for publishing it), we can that the rise of ecoism is essential for the rise of the NWO. Why?
1.Ecoism trumps nationalism on all levels.
>it doens't matter what your nationality is, we are all on this rock together.
2. If we as a species were to demand global eco laws, who would enforce them?
It would take a world govt in order to pull that off.
So the elites push ecoism through their control of the media, and we, the idiot masses, end up begging for their NWO to protect us.
It's genius if you stop and think about it.
>>69488493
>Whataboutism.
Good old soviet argument cancer.Mining is part of the energy industry for a variety of reasons. Coal and Natural gas for one. You're pretty terrible at making counterpoints if you can't see glaring issues such as this. Additionally the whole point of switching to alternative energies is that we minimize pollution as much as possible as completely cutting it out isn't happening soon. You're deflecting with your shit points.
>>69488578
>It hasn't been proven, that data and consensus doesn't count
>Because the left likes it its bad
Sweet Jesus fuck off you hugbox nigger
Oh sweet I can copypaste things too
Greenhouse gasses, principally CO2, have controlled most ancient climate changes. This time around humans are the cause, mainly by our CO2 emissions.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/climate-change-little-ice-age-medieval-warm-period.htm
In the last 35 years of global warming, sun and climate have been going in opposite directions.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/solar-activity-sunspots-global-warming.htm
Negative impacts of global warming on agriculture, health & environment far outweigh any positives.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-positives-negatives.htm
97% of climate experts agree humans are causing global warming.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-scientific-consensus.htm
All the indicators show that global warming is still happening.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-cooling.htm
Models successfully reproduce temperatures since 1900 globally, by land, in the air and the ocean.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/climate-models.htm
The warming trend is the same in rural and urban areas, measured by thermometers and satellites, and by natural thermometers.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/surface-temperature-measurements.htm
A large number of ancient mass extinction events have been strongly linked to global climate change. Because current climate change is so rapid, the way species typically adapt (eg - migration) is, in most cases, simply not be possible. Global change is simply too pervasive and occurring too rapidly.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/Can-animals-and-plants-adapt-to-global-warming.htm
For global records, 2010 is the hottest year on record, tied with 2005.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-stopped-in-1998.htm
Satellites measure Antarctica is gaining sea ice but losing land ice at an accelerating rate which has implications for sea level rise.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/antarctica-gaining-ice.htm
>>69488974
>You are deflecting with your shit points
>Doesn't adress anything else I said
Faggot bring proof and arguments, or I will just call you a Commie Faggot
>>69489215
I just did you dumbfuck.
Fucking read gypsy nigger
>>69488752
I don't know how much someone should trust the average ecologist anyway, they're not the smartest bunch
>>69488974
>consensus = proof
data does prove the world is warming up
data DOES NOT prove the world is warming up because of human influence
Fuck off to your art school already, tree hugging faggot
>>69489368
Humans are dumping CO2 into the air at massive rates
CO2 is known to be a prime component of climate change as evidenced by findings.
Learn to fucking read you ape.
STEMfags who actually did their research knew all along that global warming was bullshit.
>>69489286
>The source is a single site.
It will take me a while to go through everything, but you know that looks BS as fuck.
>>69489473
>art student telling me to l2read
massive rates? how does it feel a volcano eruption can generate as much as we have in the last 20 years? Do you shill for greenpeace?
>>69489674
>>69489473
You are so beneath me desu
I'm wasting my time, non-science people can't be brought to doubt the "science" they see on tv
>>69482867
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S-nsU_DaIZE
send this to your friends
>>69489674
So? We're causing this shit right now. Are you retarded?
>>69489643
If you check those articles you will find many sources listed under each of them. But I guess that's too hard for your dumb gypsy nigger ass.
>>69489836
Go pretend to be retarded somewhere else then
>>69484631
Sure 'life goes on'. But specifically human life? The Earth will still be here with life on it for millions of years. But humanity may not make it.
Global warming will affect the spread of crop pests and farming. Just watch the price of food soar when crops fail or shrink in yield and famines will increase. Then there will be a mass exodus from the over heated areas to cooler climes. Think lots of people are trying to get into Europe and North America from the Middle East and Mexico? Let's see how the next 50 years unfolds. The next world war will be over food and living space.
The future of the UK is a worry. We import so much and make so little. If other countries refuse to export or charge vast sums, we're stuffed.
>>69482867
this shit was known for decades denny, my science teacher in middle school used to tell us the climate change as the media describe it was a hoax, the earth and the sun are not immutable, they've phases and these phases can't be predicted with precision because both objects are in constant mutation and we didn't observe them for a time long enough yet, technically climate change is real but it's not something we can handle ourselves as simple human beings.
tl;dr holding your farts won't save the planet.
>>69489892
First link lacks that, well it cites 1 source under the pictures.
I see it links to pages already on the site on key words and those pages sometimes links to stuff outside the site.
>>69489473
CO2 is also known to accelerate plant growth rates.
A doubling of CO2 would almost double plant-growth worldwide. This means higher crop yields, healthier ecosystems, and more biodiversity worldwide.
Satellite photos show the Earth "greening" substantially as more and more CO2 is released into the atmosphere.
Carbon dioxide is .04% of the atmosphere, it is a trace gas which is barely measurable. The idea that it is the single greatest forcing agent to the greenhouse effect is laughable. Water Vapor is a much more significant greenhouse gas.
All of the apocalyptic predictions for runaway warming rely on higher Carbon levels leading to higher levels of water vapor, and then higher levels of water vapor leading to yet higher Carbon levels. Thus you have a trend of irreversible runaway warming. The problem is, none of this has been observed in nature. Only in computer models, which can't even predict the weather next weekend.
>>69482867
the us gov has literally talked about making climate change denial a crime, whats that tell you
>>69490074
Why would crops fail? More CO2 in the atmosphere is incredibly beneficial to plant growth.
Greenhouses actually artificially bump up their CO2 levels to 4 or 5 times atmospheric levels, and the plants LOVE it! They grow 5 times vaster, greedily sucking up the extra Carbon like a dying man who found water.
>>69482867
>professor tells us he is quoted in the 95% who agree it's human contribution that causes climate change but that he never said that
>>69484190
He's right with that.>>69484631
Your response is extremly poor, indifferent of on which side you are. You are an embarrassement for your 'cause' if you react this way.
>>69490633
You're the one preaching the apocolypse
>>69482867
>>69490817
>i know you are but what am i?
wew, lad
>>69482867
you're the cancer of science, well you did change a bit now but you should still kill yourself
>>69490229
>Carbon dioxide is .04% of the atmosphere, it is a trace gas which is barely measurable. The idea that it is the single greatest forcing agent to the greenhouse effect is laughable. Water Vapor is a much more significant greenhouse gas.
You fail to understand how greenhouse gases operate then. CO2 is strongly regarded as the most important for climate changes as that is the gas which is most easily removed and then reintroduced to the atmosphere over time. The issue is that we're pumping enough CO2 into the atmosphere that we're impacting the environment significantly
>The problem is, none of this has been observed in nature. Only in computer models, which can't even predict the weather next weekend.
We are observing this affect right now. Worlds warming up as we dump large amounts of CO2, a known greenhouse gas that is an indicator of climate change based on concentration. The runaway effect happens on planets like Venus and that takes thousands and thousands of years. I'm more concerned about artificially induced warming contributing to forming an environment we're not going to thrive in.
>>69491013
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S-nsU_DaIZE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S-nsU_DaIZE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S-nsU_DaIZE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S-nsU_DaIZE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S-nsU_DaIZE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S-nsU_DaIZE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S-nsU_DaIZE
>>69490968
That doesn't prove shit. You KILL YOURSELF FUCKING NIGGER
>>69491117
Well it does show that if the temperature goes higher we won't fucking die.
>>69491117
we're talking about global warming and so far it's the best indicator we have
>>69491013
The atmosphere of Venus is 97% CO2. Hardly a fair comparison to the Earth where CO2 is 0.03% of the atmosphere.
We are not observing the effect right now. This is a media hoax. Every time there is a tornado or a hurricane, they blame "global warming", despite the fact that the frequency and intensity of tornados and hurricanes is decreasing.
Actually the temperature has been rather stable for the last 15 years or so. In fact, we expect that it will get a lot colder in the near future as we are entering the weakest solar cycle on record.
>>69482867
Modern global climate science:
>Scientific method is a methodology based on skepticism and hard data
>You're not allowed to question the most popular opinion, even if you have data
>If you do question, you're ignored or laughed at, lose your grant money, etc.
>This is considered "science"
>>69491344
>This is a media hoax.
So everything you don't like is a hoax?
>Actually the temperature has been rather stable for the last 15 years or so. In fact, we expect that it will get a lot colder in the near future as we are entering the weakest solar cycle on record.
Completely false
>>69491465
>>69491344
Well neither of you are giving a source for the Temperature in past 15 years, so neither of you are right.
>>69491465
>So everything you don't like is a hoax?
I don't like you, but i don't think youre a hoax, youre just brainwashed.
>>69485513
A lot of ice is on land in the southern ice cap though
>>69491465
The fact is that the Sun contributes more to average global temperature than any minute fraction of a fraction of CO2
>http://www.space.com/23934-weak-solar-cycle-space-weather.html
>>69491465
>I'm the average normie who doesn't research anything for myself, or uses shit sources and predisposition to determine facts.
Seems legit, to an american
>>69491939
>Seems legit, to an american
>>69482867
>>69484215
>change in climate happens without the influence of humans
who knew huh!?!?!?
I always laugh when I see /pol/ conspiriationnist invoking the mighty NWO for absolutely everything.
Like if evil geniuses are behind every problems when actually half of humankind are stupid obscurantist monkeys.
>>69483901
*sigh*
Cunt
>>69485513
Actually news as of this week reports that Antartica has a massive cascading ice melt underway. Huge amounts of ice are melting there.
>>69482867
Truth: ice eras are periodic. Human activities and some volcanoes have slow down the process, as we are passing from a spring era to an ice era again.
Do we alter climate? Sure
Are we really that relevant? Not at all
Important issue here isnt temperature buy toxics we pollute like mercury, lead and heavy metals on ecosystems.
>>69492470
http://edition.cnn.com/2016/03/31/tech/study-melting-antarctic-ice/
Link
>>69482867
>Be STEM Student
>browse /pol/ and /b/
>always hear "believes in the global warming jew"
It doesn't matter who is responsible, us or the planet. Agreed,perhaps not enough data, but still. WE NEED TO DO ANYTHING TO STOP IT OR WE DIE.
>>69492586
>there was no mercury, lead or heavy metals present on earth until man put them there.
How's that koolaid taste, canacuck?
>>69482867
Used to have a laugh with my proffs that if there was a massive vulcano erruption in the pacific, it would cancel out the "global warming" and create a new "little ice age"
>geo humor
>it's the worst
>>69492686
Why are we going to die?
>>69492686
Sorry to break it to you anon, but we will all die one way or another.
Fear mongering won't get you anywhere.
>>69482867
Is this your professor: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bj%C3%B8rn_Lomborg
?
>>69486894
Taking this dipshit seriously ayyyy lamo
>>69492713
Buried 4km underground is not the same diluted in crops water supply.
>>69492684
earth is changing since 4+ billion years ago, why would someone think it will stay like it was 100 years ago forever? and most importantly why do i have to pay shitload of jewuros for ecology taxes?
>>69492713
that post made me fat
>>69483901
>CO2 makes animals big and not O2
>land bridge apparently and not an ice sheet
>dinosaur days and not the triasssic jurassic and Cretaceous
>we don't have elephants the size of a small house
>tropical paradise
Either way it's happening and we're all screwed. Greenhouse affect is a big part of global warming.
>>69493073
>it was always 4km underground
>those place where it was on the surface, it ended evolution
>no life currently exists because these elements were on earth
really dude?
>>69485045
>the temperature increase will turn Siberia in the bread basket of the world.
Are you sure we want a sudden explosion of inbred russian siberians and mongoloids on the scale of China?
>>69493073
Also some heavy metals are not life treating in their natural salt / rock composition.
>>69492686
>http://edition.cnn.com/2016/03/31/tech/study-melting-antarctic-ice/
Kek, not sure if serious.
We will not die, but the sure thing is there will be climatic refugees, massive population movements, starvation, species extinction, etc...
And even if the anthropic cause is surestimated there is still no downside to develop cleaner energy on the long run.
Cow farts are causing global warming actually
>>69493432
Then you should stoip feeding your mom
>>69488114
>If climate scientists were fabricating evidence it would be on the front papers.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/environment/globalwarming/11395516/The-fiddling-with-temperature-data-is-the-biggest-science-scandal-ever.html
>http://www.breitbart.com/london/2014/06/23/global-warming-fabricated-by-nasa-and-noaa/
>>69493239
There is a difference between precense and CONCENTRATION. A little bit of them is fucking nothing, a huge dump of industrial waste is serious treat.
>>69482867
>STEM student
Hello autism my old friend.
>>69493697
>a huge dump of industrial waste is serious treat.
To the area they are dumped in
ftfy
A waste pile in tennessee, USA will have absolutely zero bearing on the ecosystems of peru.
>we am I arguing with a peruvian intellectual
>it's like arguing with a toddler.
>>69493239
One spoon of sand in your food wont hirt you. You can sleep all your life in the sand and you will be fine.
A little bit of Al in your food will harm you. And sleeping in Al dust will definetly kill you.
See the difference,?????
>>69491417
Oil companies can always pay the scientists money so that they can produce research without government influence. They have a lot at stake, so I don't see why they wouldn't.
Grant money isn't much compared to the money oil companies pay to petroleum engineers.
>>69493956
Nope.
I see a child trying to rationalize a predispostion due to brainwashing without stopping to think about the fact he just built the worlds worst strawman.
Goodday, faggot.
>>69493856
Surface is not an static place. Sooner or later those piles will move to other sites and the contamination could last centuries.
>>69494234
>what is dilution?
ARE YOU EVEN TRYING SHITHEAD?
>>69494147
Nobody wants truth nowadays. They'd get inconclusive results just like everyone and we'd be in the same spot.
>>69493561
http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2015/feb/13/dana-perino/fox-news-host-climate-scientists-fabricated-temper/
>"(They) look through all those thousands of stations, find a few that show big adjustments, and tell everyone that they are evidence of fraud," Hausfather said. "You will rarely see them pick out stations like Reno, Paris, London, Tokyo, or many others where the adjustments dramatically lower the warming trend."
There are times adjustments actually make the raw measurements even cooler.
Adjustments actually make the raw measurements even cooler.
>>69494911
>Politifact
Opinion goes into trash.
>>69492686
A lot will die sure. Mostly in 3rd world countries though so it's no real loss. But humanity will live on.
>>69488761
You divide it by 10,000 not 1,000,000 you mongoloid.
(404/1000000)(100)
>>69495008
Read the article
>"The adjustments aren't of such a magnitude that they throw into question the overall increase in global temperature for the past 100-plus years," Curry said.
Keep in mind that Judith Curry is one of the few contrarian climatologists out there.
>>69493561
>http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/environment/globalwarming/11395516/The-fiddling-with-temperature-data-is-the-biggest-science-scandal-ever.html
Okay, so you are telling us that as we are talking thousands of meteo station around the world are throwing their ethics in the bin and make false reports to support an hidden agenda.
Oh, and you forgot the ocean rising and the mountains melting glaciers, alse data.
All these people working for the NWO, wew.
>>69493561
Adjustments over and over and over.
And always increasing the rate of warming.
Pic related. Gif comparitor shows the historical rewrite of Earth's temperature history.
>>69494911
What about these "adjustments?"
>>69495991
>>69495897
Look at this comparison of raw NOAA data and "Adjusted" NOAA data.
>>69495897
Climategate emails discussing rewriting the temperature history.
>>69494297
You dont have to be a dick, whats your problem anon?
Come on we are on the same team
>>69488761
With that kind of logic, bolulism toxin can't kill you either.
>>69490484
Crops fail due to pests and disease, and also drought. Depending on the location, all these things are likely to increase when major crop producing regions warm up. Other extreme weather conditions such as tornados/storms or flooding can destroy large areas of farm land too. Climate change seems to be characterised by extremes, periods of drought and occasional strong storms/rainfall. This isn't good for reliably growing crops.
CO2 levels increasing only benefits some plants, depending on whether they have a C3 or C4 metabolism. Maize and sugar cane are C4 and increased CO2 is of limited use. Those plants that can make use of higher CO2 levels need increased nitrogen to match the carbon, thus more fertilisers, and more water. Both these things add considerable costs especially under drought conditions.
CO2 levels increasing can be of benefit, as can some temperature increases. It all makes it more complicated though because of the other requirements of plants, water, nutrients, and the impact on pests, weeds and diseases which all can benefit from climate change and threaten crops. The future for agriculture under global warming is generally more difficult than beneficial. More crops unreliable with failing or decreased yield, higher costs through fertilisers, pesticides, herbicides, irrigation, etc.
>>69484215
>earth sciences
>thinking he needs to dumb it down
Wew, /sci/ has taught you nothing, brainlet.
>>69484215
>the co2 model says it should keep going up
Exactly
What they also never mention is that the CO2 concentration was more than 2000 ppm (400ppm currenly) for millions of years with much higher average temperatures and it did not cause a feedback loop which caused runaway global warming. So why the fuck would it now?
>>69496300
I saw them.
And I will tell you "okay, you win, they are caught manipulating datas to exagerate the problem".
Still, that does not change the fact that there is a lot more proof than temperature recordings.like the satellite record of the ice sheet loss, ocean acidification, concrete biosphere pertubation (like coral bleaching), etc...
It's not because you contest a proof that suddendly the big picture collapses on itself.
>>69496300
HCN stations are aren't global I believe. Their only located in the US.
But that is one strange conspiracy. Make adjustments to the raw data. Then make it public for everyone to view.
I just came into the thread to say if you believe climate change is thanks to humans then you might want to follow the others of that bridge.
Bye
>>69488590
Exactly. If they were pushing this bullshit as a health issue that would be fine with me. Smog really does affect our health, but reducing carbon doesn't help much in that regard.
>>69496422
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climatic_Research_Unit_email_controversy
>Eight committees investigated the allegations and published reports, finding no evidence of fraud or scientific misconduct.[15] The scientific consensus that global warming is occurring as a result of human activity remained unchanged by the end of the investigations.
>>69497575
And for the life of me, I can't understand why the majority of CO2 observatories are built very close to or even on top of fucking active volcanoes.
The primary IPCC info comes from the Mauna Loa observatory which built on the Mauna Loa volcano.
They say they can differentiate from the volcano CO2 (which emits 3.3 million metric tons of CO2 a year) and atmospheric CO2, but wtf build it or house the measuring devices there in the first place?
They say that they
>>69484215
>Having it stop for a year or two
Wow such logic
Brah there's this thing called an overall trend that you seem to b forgetting about
>>69496300
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2016/feb/08/no-climate-conspiracy-noaa-temperature-adjustments-bring-data-closer-to-pristine
>Stations have moved to different locations over the past 150 years, most more than once. They have changed instruments from mercury thermometers to electronic sensors, and have changed the time they take temperature measurements from afternoon to morning. Cities have grown up around stations, and some weather stations are not ideally located. All of these issues introduce inconsistencies into the temperature record.
These are their reasons for adjusting the data. I think this is more reasonable then scientists conspiring to fudge the data to make it look like global warming is real.
>>69482867
>professor tells us
Stopped reading there
>>69483901
>A doubling of CO2 in our atmosphere might increase temperatures by .5 degrees Fahrenheit, but it will DOUBLE plant growth rates worldwide.
You realize that the increase in temperature that allows one plant to live is an increase in temperature that kills another?
Arid biomes will become deserts. That's a negative you need to account for (and don't).
Then you don't account for how rapid a transition it is. What happens when it gets too hot to sustain a jungle? It's not instantly replaced with suitable plants. Even worse for areas like Tundras that will undergo massive transformations as the permafrost melts and the underlying biomass starts to decompose, releasing tonnes of methane and CO2, accelerating warming further.
Your entire post is pretty much "CO2 is plant food maaaan".
>>69488761
>404.16ppm=404.16/1000000=0.00040416% concentration.
>I'm not sure how much more insignificant it can be.
First, your calculation is wrong.
It's not 0.000404%, it's 0.0404%.
Secondly your point is "it's so small it can't do anything".
I invite you to prove your thesis by stepping into a chamber where the air has a concentration of 0.59 ppm mustard gas, for 10 minutes.
Since you're confident 404 ppm does nothing, 0.59 ppm must be truly meaningless.
In fact, you will die.
>>69482867
>>laugh at /pol/ when they say global warming isn't definitively
Isn't definitively what, you halfwit cretin?
>>69482867
Stem student here too.
Climate change is measurable but it's largely conjecture to assume humans are "the cause"
Still, we should cut down on emissions if we can. Probably.
>>69482867
Most lifeforms can deal with at least double the ambient CO2 level we have now. Earth had a much higher CO2 concentration a couple thousand years ago. It didn't exactly run away into a greenhouse effect , clearly..
>>69482867
look at saturn
