Do you just ignore evidence and lie to yourself? Why are right wingers so anti science?
Grade A thread leaf.
>>71713089
i believe in intelligent falling.
see,jesus pushes down harder on sinful stuff than on godly stuff.
it's all a rich tapestry...
>>71713089
Scientist can't comprehend that we're the most endangered species without stable culture. The problem with progress mindset is that it assumes things can never get worse so it never plans for it - smaller series of strikes become devastating.
>>71713305
>That picture
Mexico please no
I honestly don't get why Americans deny scientific evidence when it comes to global warming. Is it just a religion thing or what? Genuinely curious.
>>71713089
If global warming is true, why is it no legitimate climatologist ever gets involved in the public debate, why is always stage actors posing as scientists, and why is their only argument always "don't be a loser, jump on our consensus bandwagon"? Besides, /pol/ knows more about logic than any climatologist will ever know about the weather. Can't shitpost a shitposter.
>>71713089
tyson is a chronic lier.
>I cant successfully defend my positions so I will mock my opponents
>>71713089
>>71713447
Not an argument. Evidence is evidence you just sound like a conspiracy theorist. Are you a creationist/ flat earther too?
I don't trust scientists who demand we gut our economy while the wealthy elites and foreign nations aren't held to the same standards. I support slow gradual changes because that way we don't kill the patient to save the organs
>>71713587
>Evidence is evidence you just sound like a conspiracy theorist
So why have they been calling it "global warming" for years and years and only recently shifted it to "climate change"?
>>71713089
DAILY REMINDER UNDER ALL REPUBLICAN PRESIDENTS SCIENCE AND NASA GETS MOST FUNDING, WITH EXCEPTION OF KENNEDY
>>71713447
the media would rather have a celebrity scientist on for better ratings than a real one who might drone on or sound boring
>>71713829
>>71713089
Almost no one thinks climate change doesn't exist. They just doubt the extent of the change, and what amount is caused by humans.
>>71713557
I'm not argueing against global warming. I just hate tyson.
http://thefederalist.com/2014/09/15/did-neil-degrasse-tyson-just-try-to-justify-blatant-quote-fabrication/
http://thefederalist.com/2014/09/16/another-day-another-quote-fabricated-by-neil-degrasse-tyson/
http://thefederalist.com/2014/09/10/super-scientist-neil-degrasse-tyson-doesnt-understand-statistics/
http://thefederalist.com/2014/10/02/neil-tysons-final-words-on-his-quote-fabrications-my-bad/
http://thefederalist.com/2014/03/13/five-things-neil-degrasse-tysons-cosmos-gets-wrong/
http://thefederalist.com/2014/09/23/neil-degrasse-tyson-anti-science-and-anti-intellectual/
http://gotnews.com/breaking-neil-degrasse-tyson-lying-close-relationship-carl-sagan/
>>71713741
The wealthy are never held to account. Anyone who tries is derided as a socialist. /pol/ needs to stop defending the super rich.
>>71713587
>Evidence is evidence
So Germany has now South-Italian weather? Like they told us in the 90s?
Sadly, they were wrong, by the way.
>>71713089
Good point black science man, climate change is like gravity.
We barely understand it and are pretty sure human's don't control it. (Unless we are marval superheroes)
>>71713089
>that false equivalency
Wew lad
>>71713305
>>71713992
You the best m8. Poetry.
Global warming is happening. I just think the solution is to move to nuclear energy and fusion energy. I think technology will advance in time before anything major happens.
>>71713430
It's not an issue of denying evidence. It's an issue of evidence of one thing being used as a vehicle for something else.
There are a multitude of things we could be doing to reverse this problem, that cost almost nothing compared to the amount that we pay academia to study global warming.
(Cloud seeding, using permaculture techniques to reforest the vast tracts of land the Federal government owns, altering the BLMs policies on mob grazing to encourage the rebuilding of the American grasslands, producing biochar to sequester carbon, etc.)
But we aren't doing those things, instead the fear of global warming is used to argue for more state control over consumption and resources.
This is a common tactic, so if we react in a way that seems illogical to you, it's because we've dealt with this type of fear mongering from the parasite class before.
>>71713873
But but CORRLEASHON DOESNT IMPLY CAUSSAITION!!! STOOPID LEFTIST KEK STATIST LEEBIRALS TAKIN AWAY MUH FREEDOMS
>>71713089
>97 % of scientists BELIEVE that global warming is man made
>3 % don't
3% of scientists believe gravity ain't real, good job you glorified Caribbean dancer
Global warming is the same as anti-vaccers just jumping all over the correlation of vaccine use and autism even those one is not relsted to the other. Stop bwing a conspiracy theorist who can't handle the reality of a chaotic universe.
> The left denies racial differences
> The right denies global warming
Both sides are fucking retarded
>>71714043
Just build a load of Thorium reactors. They are pretty save and cleaner than Uranium.
>>71713873
Fucking anti-vaccer logic right here.
>>71713994
this.
Nobody negates that Earth's climate has been changing since the beginning of time
>>71714329
It's getting warmer in direct correlation to the rising CO2 levels.
>>71714077
>>Muh autism came from vaccines
Normal people don't give a flying fuck about you global warming conspiracy theorists
>>71714404
That's what they said about vaccines and autism. Did co2 cause your autism maybe?
>>71714404
correlation =/= equivalency
You're not wrong, but you didn't prove anything either.
>>71713089
I fucking hate that imbecile unca tom sonofabitch. Can someone please interview his dumb ass into a corner over the role of physicality vis identity. GAH i want to kick him repeatedly in the balls till his eys bleed.
>>71713089
Climate change is REAL and GOOD regardless of it's cause/s.
More carbon in the atmosphere increases total biomass of the earth's biosphere. Denser atmosphere, bigger plants, more of everything.
There is literally no reason to think that our current climate range is the optimal for life in general or humanity in particular.
Praise carbon.
>>71714501
The fact he's from Cucknada caused his autism.
>>71714404
And everyone knows correlation proves causation.
>>71713873
The spie in the 1940 is the nukes.
>>71714129
>>scientists believe
>>scientists
>>believe
0% can prove it. Just like vaccines and autism, you poor, gullible, sap.
>>71714588
Found the law student.
>>71714072
Isn't this guy a hack fraud?
>>71714077
Well, it's true. Its a cardinal rule of statistics.
Correlation does not prove or even imply causation by itself, and no closed system experiments can be done in climatology to test hypotheses.
Models are not experiments, they are literally just a computerised approximation, created by humans, of the most complex and interconnected system of feedback mechanisms that we know of.
>there are "free thinkers" who believe humans as a social group can continue to function in a cohesive way without a dominant culture and the moral guidance of religion to bind them together
>>71714501
CO2 rise could explain for the drop in IQ. Just sayin'...
Climate change denial is almost a religion for some people. No matter how much evidence is presented it always seems like these thugs are never willing to admit they are wrong.
>>71713430
Americans are totally inept at inspiring and empowering people. All they are able to do is instil fear, fear of this, fear of that so as to corrall people toward agenda goals. Fossil fuels are running out and it's time make real efforts to find alternative energy sources.
That's what the Global Warming meme is about.
>>71714588
Don't blame him, anon. His vaccinations gave him autism.
>>71713089
STARTALK !
KEEP LOOKING UP
>>71713089
there can't be a global warming if there is no globe, Jack.
>>71714684
Well lately they've mostly shifted from "it doesn't exist" to "there is nothing we can feasibly do about it"
>>71713089
>implying evidence exists which proves without a reasonable doubt that global warming caused by humans
>uses nigger scientist trying to prove a point by using nigger logic
>I'm often asked whether i believe in global warming. I now just reply with the question: Do you believe niggers are equal to the rest of humanity?
>>71714687
Probably why every politician in the west is sucking Islam's dick rn too.
>>71713470
He's a buffoon, the very worst kind of house nigger and a lucky cunt.
>>71714779
"submit to authority"
how about no
>>71714779
But black science guy has no formal education/expertise on meteorological systems or climatology.
He is no more of an expert on the subject than you or I.
You can tell global warming is made up because of all the retards who sponsor it. They want the world's biggest problem to be environmental so they have an excuse to make the whole world tree hugging hippies.
>>71714776
Or cause it. That goes both ways.
>>71714658
underrated post
>>71714872
Science: It's Still All Just a Theory
>>71714963
Do you drive a fucking car? Do you get your trash picked up by a polluting vehicel? Do you seperate your trash so it gets picked up 3 polluting vehicles? Do you have central heating? Do you eat farm factory products or anything from a supermarket?
>>71714963
wtf I hate capitalism now. I am now /team bernie/.
>>71715139
Pls Phonebank.
We change the environment to fit our needs. We do not change ourselves to fit the environments needs.
Too many people?
Too many undesirable people. There's your "Global Warming".
>>71715301
But we do change ourselves to fit the environments needs. It's called evolution.
>>71714644
no but close. The shit that got thrown up into the atmosphere by the massive increase in industry and burning cities did actually have a warming effect
>>71715301
Unless you want to preserve it.
Maritime anglo-style capitalistism has runned down forest land of spain, england, portugal to almost zero percent.
Germany still has maintained 33% despite industrialisation.
Japan still has 67% of her forests.
Don't let unregulated Co2 emission ruin other parts of the world. Unlike the UK, the US still has huge areas of beautiful nature which parts of could be threatened by fast rising temperatures.
>>71714881
yeah I've noticed less talk about stopping it now and more "welp we're fucked, better prepare for the dicking"
>>71713089
I don't deny that it's a thing, I deny that it's a problem. Climates change, that's what they do. The earth was once covered in ice, it isn't anymore. Who gives a fuck if certain animals go extinct; that's what animals do?
>>71715803
desu senpai Japan's forest are all on mountains and every scrap of flat land is used. Most of the forests in your country, and Europe in general, are new growth from the period after electricity became the way to heat a home and not wood.
>>71713089
>>71713430
>global warming DENIERS
Starting to sound uncomfortably like "Christ deniers" during the Spanish Inquisition. I'm a Left winger, background in STEM. I work with people with more advanced backgrounds in physics, chemistry, electrical engineering, etc. Everyone LAUGHS at climate science. It has a horrible track record, and no predictive ability. It's just constantly shifting computer models. Other disciplines make fun of it, calling it "the science of getting government grants". Even global warming is misleading; the globe warms and cools, it's always done this. The proper term is "anthropogenic warming". When you talk about "scientific consensus", you're talking about a HEAVILY politicized consensus, in one of the most poorly respected, least advanced scientific disciplines. No one with the greatest academic skills becomes a climate scientist -- that's generally reserved for the bottom of the barrel. I mean, let's just do a kind of hermeneutic, methodological thought experiment, OP:
> you play the Devil's Advocate, and make a coherent case that climate science is not sufficiently advanced enough to make predictions about planetary climate systems
If you can't do this, then you're simply not intellectually honest about scientific methology, and the issue you want to discuss. The Left today has the worst grasp on science:
>everything is a social, not a biological construct (queer theory)
>sexual dimorphism doesn't real (feminism)
>race doesn't exist, IQ doesn't exist, white prosperity is pure racism despite sub-saharan Africans not even inventing the wheel by the time Europeans arrived, no languages with abstract terms for the development of mathematics, etc (critical race theory)
The simple fact that it's become a political stereotype, that you associate science and anti-science with one of two political "poles", and that you don't immediately recognize the rhetorical nature of this, and become skeptical about your own assumptions, is a bad sign.
Daily reminder:
Leftists think Glaciology is SEXIST SCIENCE
The whole thing is nonsense - the idea that "global" temperature is going up is impossible to measure. If you measure the temperature at 100 places, and 51 of them have warmed a degree whilst 49 have cooled a degree then on average everything is slightly warmer.
A global temperature average is like a global height average...it is totally meaningless as data.
Daily reminder:
Leftists think war vets use carbon fiber prosthetic limbs as a form of "hegemonic homosociality"
>>71713089
go vegan or stfu
Daily reminder:
E=mc^2 is a "sexed equation that PRIVILEGES the speed of light" because light is so MALE
Seriously, it's fucking embarassing to be on the Left these days.
>>71713089
Gravity is an illusion.
>>71713089
Tyson can't even explain gravity, all theories of gravity fail at the quantum scales, and even at the very large scales (although the explanation there is "dark matter", a failure to observe the full mass of a galaxy, rather than a failure of gravity theories).
>>71716276
>I'm a Left winger, background in STEM
Calling bullshit. What field?
> Even global warming is misleading; the globe warms and cools, it's always done this. The proper term is "anthropogenic warming"
These mean the same thing. And 'global warming' is accurate because it represents the global average. The clue really is in the name.
>>71714210
>he fell for the Thorium meme
>>71713089
I actually believe in global warming and I consider myself a right wing extremist.
From my research it seems big business that has a huge financial stake in the global warming question has infected the conservative movement. One of the original climate denier theories came out of a superpac run by the Koch brothers. They have a huge stake in maintaining the climate denier theory.
We as conservatives must pick and choose our battles and we can't win again scientific facts. Scientific facts is what separates us from the liberal muh feels.
>>71713089
>answering a question with a question
nice way to deflect
I find it's best to just completely disregard everything this man says. What, with how little wisdom he has and his naivety in epistemic issues.
>>71716922
Strawman: The Post
>>71716949
>Calling bullshit.
On an anonymous indonesian basketweaving board?
>What field?
Computer science. I'm an intern for a data analytics firm. I get to spend the next 7 months of the contract working on information storage solutions, custom modeling applications built to the specifications of program personnel. That's an embellished way of saying that I am the technical assitant to every lab and field staffer. I'm the gopher for the scientists that hired my firm. I spend most of my time troubleshooting problems in equipment connecting to database storage. Primarily.
>These mean the same thing
No, they're distinct things, because climate cycles prior to the industrial revolution had nothing whatsoever to do with Anthropogenic warming vectors. There is no political issue if anthropogenic vectors are not something we can impact through regulatory regimes.
As for my credentials being a leftist, like I said before, it's hard to be a leftist these days. I'd like to find a third position without defaulted to some idiotic like anarcho syndicalism. The Left is joke, and I don't know where else to go ideologically at this point. I've read tons, but I guess I never really tried very hard to develop a politics that fits the problems of the times we live in.
>>71713089
You have to be more specific, OP. It's not that right wingers are all anti-science. The wealthy, powerful, intelligent business elite who finance and direct the Republican party all are pro-science as a method of understanding the truth. It's just that the party's base are fantastically stupid AND religious and this combination is what leads them to reject science in favour of scripture as a way of understanding the truth.
So, to rephrase your question, Why are stupid, religious people so anti-science?
The answer seems obvious.
>>71713089
Because if science disagrees wit your believes it has to be wrong.
But that is not right wing specific, look at the left ad how they are pushing transsexualism despite all the evidence that it is a mental illness and should be treated by a psychologist not by a doctor who cuts your dick off.
>>71717523
Be a patriot fellow burger.
>>71717223
>From my research it seems big business that has a huge financial stake in the global warming question has infected the conservative movement
You didn't research the government-industrial complexes PUSHING "climate change" regulation? There are bigger interests pushing those regulations than the small players like the Koch brothers that leftists constantly harp about as bogeymen. Take for instance the resitance from "devloping" countries like China, India, most of Africa -- the countries leftists in the West hold up as "the most impacted by global warming". They conspicuously DON'T want to be part of international regulatory regimes that negatively impact economic growth in their countries, and view such attempts as forms of economic warfare conducted by the West, to freeze economic disparities and development at the current inequality. But that's not a narrative or position you'll ever hear in the West, where people are constantly propagandized in the social justice aspects of "climate change". That's the essential fraud, and the big red flashing light that should tip everyone off to the political fabrications and embellishments in play. Not saying that MUST mean that anthropogenic warming DOESN'T exist, but the political rhetoric on the Left in the West is something that most leftists are blind to, despite "environmentalism" being a sacred cow tenet of most leftist sentiment. The anti-GMO movement being the most salient example of scientific consensus being completely thrown out the window when it's not economically convenient to international competition; GMO's are found in all forms of modern and ancient agrculture, yet the left believes there's something especially evil and "socially unjust" about modern GMO, while they deny the third world the ability to meet population food and development goals through such science. Or the resistance to nuclear power, while embracing bullshit like "clean coal" -- coal kills millions more per year.
>>71717899
>Be a patriot
For what? Our country died long ago. We live in a re-animated corpse, puppeteered by international finance and globalists.
>>71715803
Scotland is virtually untouched outside of the central belt, and even the central belt has masses of forested land.
Alba gu braith
>>71717523
I don't doubt you being a leftist. I did doubt your scientific credentials when you say 'Even global warming is misleading'. I'd agree that AGW is better but global warming is still valid. The whole switching to calling it climate change was to appease retards who'd take snow in April as proof that AGW is a con.
> China, India, most of Africa -- the countries leftists in the West hold up as "the most impacted by global warming". They conspicuously DON'T want to be part of international regulatory regimes that negatively impact economic growth in their countries, and view such attempts as forms of economic warfare conducted by the West, to freeze economic disparities and development at the current inequality.
China and India have both made commitments. Their sticking point is they need to keep polluting to catch up to the west. While they have a point, its a shortsighted way to look at things.
Because of the religious fervor with which liberals push the apocalyptic stuff and the attachment of morality to the issue. whatever happened to recycling and decreasing pollution is good because helps the environment? Now it's all about some weird religious devotion to a theory most acolytes don't even understand.
>>71713873
Now post the chart where earthquakes follow a similar pattern pattern
Actually it's a bit more correlated
>>71718111
You like to read don't you? Read the letters from diplomats and soldiers, not the books by cucks out to make sheckles.
It'll change how you see this country.
>>71713089
> universal law
> locally specific phenomenon
JUST
>>71718309
>China and India have both made commitments
Vestigial lip-service commitment, after decades of massive pressure. None of them have ever abided by the commitments, nor will they, nor can they, nor should they. Whether you were a government principal in one of those countries, or the average middle class guy just trying to make money and send his kids to college, you would have zero interest whatsoever in agreeing to lose opportunities for economic growth on what amounts to a bunch of database "quants" making computer models that never risk interrupting the hundreds of millions in grants from progressive governments to prove that their legislation is scientifically necessary. Any science that relies almost entirely on mathematical or computer models, SHOULD be regarded with extreme skepticism. The LHC and other massive boondoggle projects are great examples in other scientific fields where government essentially maintains the demand for positive research, and the research is only nominally experimental or practical. Just do this one thing to illustrate what I'm talking about:
>make a list of the predictions that climate scientists have made in the past 30 years
>calculate the percentage of predictions that came true without requiring a new theory or a god-of-the-gaps EXPANSION of the initial hypothesis. It's primarily a scam science that uses academic socialism to perpetuate it's own existence. Even the human genome project delivered more on it's promises than climate science has.
No one can say AGW can't exist, or doesn't exist, but no one with any intellectual honesty who follows the IPCC working groups can say that climate science has a clue what the cause and effect relationships are, and they have no basis for claiming that we're facing apocalyptic conditions.
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2420783/Worlds-climate-scientists-confess-Global-warming-just-QUARTER-thought--computers-got-effects-greenhouse-gases-wrong.html
>>71718933
I was raised by vets. I come from a military family. The country I was raised to want to defend doesn't seem to exist. I don't say that lightly. My people exist, but the country my ancestors fought and died for in some cases is gone. I hate to say that and sound that way, but I have no idea how we get that country back; our enemies will wipe us out before letting us restore what we were.
>>71713089
Global warming is a thing and it's all natural.
Two videos for everyone to consider, regarded anti-science dogmatism on the Left:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vf86QYf4Suo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=10156&v=6GzNATrGH7I
Not your sterotypical left-right tropes.
>>71719344
That sort of attitude is common amongst vets since WW2 ended. From the korean war onward vets have felt worse and worse about their role in society. It's late and I need to head to bed, if you're still interested in a chat about this email me at
[email protected]
>>71719729
sure, thanks anon
>>71716276
>he simple fact that it's become a political stereotype, that you associate science and anti-science with one of two political "poles", and that you don't immediately recognize the rhetorical nature of this, and become skeptical about your own assumptions, is a bad sign.
underrated post.
Specifically, start at 2:00:00 into this video, the skip ahead to 2:08:00 and listen to where he specifically discusses three points
>the influence of subjective Baysean priors
>the datset assumptions used as priors
>the lack of experimental.observational data in the computer models
The statistical relationships from a science that relies so heavily on statistical models instead of primarily on observation, is what creates the statistical weakness and predictive incapacity of current consensus. THe caveat no one ever mentions about "consensus", is that it's consensus amidst rather absurd amounts of assumptions and lack of observation. So great, we have consensus that IN THE LITTLE WE CAN KNOW, it all seems to be very alarming. We never discuss, specifically, how little we actually know.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=10156&v=6GzNATrGH7I
The whole video is worth a watch, but those are the two big takeaways.
>>71713089
>when your enemies hold you down and form a conga line to fuck you in the ass one after another until you've got cum leaking out of your eyes; you win
>>71713089
>do you believe in gravity
Do you believe in mathematical abstractions being more than just abstractions to facilitate equations? This is the same NDG who says "we don't know what gravity is".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Efh4bu4rcbs
>>71718479
Lazy fuck. Do it yourself.
>>71719202
>Vestigial lip-service commitment, after decades of massive pressure.
Given the US refused to rafity treaties up til very recently why the fuck should the chinks or Indians have?
China has made commitments that it will reach by 2020. Not far enough but as I said above, why the fuck should developing nations do jack when the US til recently didn't?
And all this shit about 'losing opertunities'. This is scare mongering. Green fuel, batteries, decentralised power, recycling, thorium. These are all new industries that can and will replace the coal industries in India and China.
The science is more than computer morels. You realise we had science prior to the 60s right?
It is beyond ANY doubt that co2 traps heat. How much, and whether this will lead to positive feedback aren't certainties yet.
>>71719490
Did you know that most of the addiotioal co2 in the atmosphere is from human sources? This is known because the isotopes from burning fossil fuels is unique. It has decayed by a known quantity as it has been under the ground for so damn long. We know this. We also know that co2 traps heat.
>>71719543
>GMO
Is this relevant?
>3 hours
No fackin way.
>>71720107
Without having watched this I assume a lot of the assumptions you mention are prior to the 70s? There is a very good and obvious reason for this anon.
>>71713165
He's technically right, depending on how you define species.
Beyond the science. It's a politically motivated tax-scheme that is going to be used to enslave the world under a global "Green Communism" and as AI tech rapidly develops in the coming decades, humans will be culled by means of forced sterilization (probably via viral nanotech) or by force. They'll justify this, claiming it's necessary for the continuance of the species and the safety of the planet.
If you can implicate & tax Carbon, you can control everything by proxy.
>>71713587
what evidence? please show me ANY evidence that the earth is warming and that man is causing it. the only evidence that even comes close is the satellite temperature data, but even that doesn't show significant rise in temperature. and it has been admitted that the whole data set is invalid because they adjusted temperatures upward. the data actually showed we were cooling so they just changed the fucking data.
please, for the love of god, show me ANY EVIDENCE.
>>71720956
Where have you been living in the lase decades? You obviously don't want to consider evidence otherwise you would have done so.
BTW arguing that the science behind climate change is ideology driven is idiotic if you obviously ignore evicence based on your own ideology.
>>71720414
On my phone or I would
>>71713089
Head of IPCC is a railway engineer not climate scientist. Boatload of scientists on expedition to prove ice melting get trapped in growing ice. No warming for nearly 20 years. Desperate alarmists claim warmth trapped in ocean but too deep to measure. Nope not there either. Leaks of manipulated data. Alarmists claim "model" is wrong. Get paid to say climate change is real buy house right on Beachfront eager for those rising sea levels. Global warming untrue, rename to climate change ie weather. Al Gore has dirtiest mine if you consider carbon dirt.
>>71714684
What evidence though?
There are lots of simulations and models, and whiny celebrities like DiCaprio, but no evidence.
The sea levels haven't gone up, the polar bears aren't starving, the summers aren't hotter.
Just a bunch of hysterical idiots with confirmation bias freaking out whenever it gets a little warm.
>>71713873
So has the industrial Revolution been going on for millions of years, or have we found proof of ayylmaos visiting our planet?
>pic related shows that co2 and temperature have been changing throughout history, and far before the industrial revolution.
>>71721111
still waiting on links to ANY evidence that proves global warming.
>>71713089
Who the fuck cares.
Flood this world with toxins and let it sink under the oceans.
>>71713089
Scientists were wrong about gravity for centuries, though
>>71714871
His power comes from all the reddit bookmarking bootlickers who suck his asshole in a vain attempt to appear smart to their peers who are doing the exact same thing.
They -believe- he knows stuff, and it's trendy to suck nigger dick right now.
>>71713430
The “97 percent” statistic first appeared prominently in a 2009 study by University of Illinois master’s student Kendall Zimmerman and her adviser, Peter Doran. Based on a two-question online survey, Zimmerman and Doran concluded that “the debate on the authenticity of global warming and the role played by human activity is largely nonexistent among those who understand the nuances and scientific bases of long-term climate processes” — even though only 5 percent of respondents, or about 160 scientists, were climate scientists. In fact, the “97 percent” statistic was drawn from an even smaller subset: the 79 respondents who were both self-reported climate scientists and had “published more than 50% of their recent peer-reviewed papers on the subject of climate change.” These 77 scientists agreed that global temperatures had generally risen since 1800, and that human activity is a “significant contributing factor.”
Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/425232/climate-change-no-its-not-97-percent-consensus-ian-tuttle
Denying climate change is like denying the effects of multiculturalism, you don't notice them before they happen to you
However if climate change IS man made, it's just effective way to get rid of population here
Wildlife will eventually return once the wipe out happens
>>71721311
As I said before, you obviously don't want to consider evidence. I don't have time to waste on this b8.
>>71713089
YFW WHEN THE ELITES ARE JUST DOOMSDAY PREPPERS TRYING TO FILL THEIR COUNTRIES WITH MORE PEOPLE SO THEY WONT BE FUCKED IF TENS OF MILLIONS OF US START DYING
>>71713470
>>71714819
>"I'm jealous that a black man is more successful than me."
>>71720848
>forced sterilization
Nothing wrong with this, but it should be done to people who are already breeding recklessly. For example keeping a Somali mother with 10 kids in first country is insanity.
>>71713873
>temperature is only going to rise in my lifetime
i really hate this, i'll have to go to canada if i want to be comfy. Wish a volcano or two would errupt.
>>71721299
Nights
Particularly winter nights are warmer. But most of that can probably be attributed to urban blight
Summer highs haven't had the spike that everyone pretends that they have
>>71713089
I prefer lying to others, I'll make money from climate changes. The more aggressive changes the better.
>>71721403
1. You don't trust publications advocating climate change.
2. You trust publications deyning climate change.
3. You claim climate change is ideology driven.
4. Your source is clearly politically biased.
5. You cannot prove or disprove claimate change yourself.
To sum it up: You have to believe what you read. As do others. Just don't be too sure, you are right, because you could not be.
>>71721476
Every time you smile hopefully at a White person
Pretty much nobody denies Global warming at this point. The main discussion to be had is whether increasing the co2 in our atmosphere is actually a bad thing for us as a species. people who arguments against the latter are usually characterized as "global warming deniers" and shut down any discussion of the topic.
>>71720848
>It's a politically motivated tax-scheme that is going to be used to enslave the world under a global "Green Communism"
>>71721605
That's exactly it, urban blight.
Many of these weather stations are in areas that have been built up and asphalted over.
There isn't any concrete proof, just memes.
This isn't to say that polluting for pollution's sake is good, everyone should definitely make some effort at reducing the impact they have on the planet, but this totalitarian mindset these enviromentalist statist faggots have is just that.
>>71713089
Haven't you read any of the global warming threads on pol?
Why do you faggots keep on making the same thread?
Climate has been changing continuously since before life even existed .
So the term in itself is retarded.
In earth's history there have been many periods where CO2 was much higher than it is now and with much higher average temperatures.
At times the atmosphere had a CO2 concentration of 2000ppm compared to 400ppm now and there was no runaway global warming like the faggots predict now.
If it did not happen then, why would it happen now?
Even if we kept on burning fossil feuls at the current rate it would take atleast another 500 + years to reach 2000ppm. And even then it would still not be a problem. In fact it would be better for earth if it was that high.
Industrial scale greenhouses pump in CO2 at 1800 - 2000ppm which makes plants grow faster and bigger. Which is why the earth was covered in dense jungles when it had the same concentrations.
Most of the fossil fuels we use today were formed in those eras. The plants absorbed CO2 from the atmosphere, died and was deposited in sediment.
When you burn fossil feuls, it just releases the CO2 back into the atmosphere where it originally came from.
Global Warming/Climate Change is scam to dupe morons into giving their rulers even more money. And money to do what exactly?
>>71713089
>Global Warming
I thought it was "Climate Change".
I'd probably believe in it if you could actually specify what you're talking about and demonstrate it.
>>71719490
This. Earths climate isnt perfectly stable. Its normal for our planet to warm up and cool
>>71722022
It also doesn't help that according to the scientific consensus of 1970-90 we should be living in a desert wasteland or a frozen tundra right now. But nothing has really changed in any way that matters to normal people.
The only solution I hear for a problem they refuse to clarify is "raise taxes" and a refusal to specify what these taxes will be spent on.
At least here in Upside Down Land.
>>71721418
>Constant whining about population stagnation
>Constant whining about climate change caused by increased populations
The left confuses me.
>>71713089
If the current human understanding of gravity is to be believed then the space ship I am shitposting from 50ks above sydney is imaginary!
>oh shhhiiiiiiiiiiiittttttttttttt
>neil "I don't believe global warming preceeds an ice age " tyson is a hack all he does is sit looking through a telescope and read numbers they are the fucks that declared ultra violet radiation with hawkings to be black holes
(before hawkings rescinded his life work because einstein was proven to be a fraud)
>einstein is kenya level scientist using magnets to cure the gay.
>>71722022
It is global warming in the summer, and climate change in the winter.
>>71713873
Hi moron, has anyone actually told you that CO2 trails temperature in those graphs by 600+ years?
The correlation is reversed - go check it out for yourself.
The earth's temperature rises first and then only after 600+ years, CO2 rises. Why? Because the amount of CO2 released by the oceans naturally dwarfs human output. And the warmer the oceans get, the more CO2 they release.
>>71721980
Yeah but just a slight increase in atmospheric CO2 would negatively impact not just human beings but other animals, and 500 years isnt long enough time for human evolutionary adaptation.
Hence its probably better to cut on emissions where possible, even if you believe global warming is a meme.
>>71720492
>why the fuck should developing nations do jack when the US til recently didn't?
Because they pollute far more than we do.
the majority of scientists know full well we are in the beginnings of an Ice Age.
>>71721311
>>71721444
This is like the seven year old claiming his dad bought him a nintendo 65 but he can't show it to you or he'll go to jail
the sattelite data disproves global warming.
>for the young kids
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming_hiatus
Carbon Tax =
What we exhale is Co2 carbon
Carbon Tax == Breathing Tax
The people on the political side of AGW, nearly to a man (and many of the scientists as well) say out of one side of their mouths that we need to reduce the "carbon footprint" and out of the other that [spoiler]the[/spoiler] "we"[spoiler]st[/spoiler] needs to take more refugees. Watts up with that?
>>71722452
they get paid for saying both things.
>double money
>>71713992
Underrated
>>71713992
Exactly. And because we cannot control it, it's quite a risk to tamper with it.
Of course you wanted to say: We have no influence on it. Hopefully you are right. Unfortunately, you don't seem to.
>>71713089
Gravity can be independently verified. Climate change can't be cause they don't release the raw temperature data
>>71723069
Here'y your data: http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/sources/
Have fun.
>>71723187
"Raw" data, this is the adjusted data for the masses
>ITT people want hyper simplified evidence UNDENIABLE proof that we can negatively influence the most complex system we have by throwing random chemicals and aerosols at it for centuries of human development that have highschool level chemical reactions with shit in the atmosphere
>on a website that believes Hitler didn't try to kill the Jews
Wew lads
>>71720492
>Given the US
If you want to completely side-step the point I was making mentioning that, about the economic incentives, disparate perceptions in the developing world, in conjunction with the more sober view of climate science as a discipline not sufficiently accurate/sound enough to base the economic future of billions of people on for the next 40 years...
>Is GMO relevant?
Is the OP asking about right wing vs. left wing science denial? is that not the the subtext of the entire thread, the politicization of science and the relative levels of strategic denial by either end of the spectrum?
>without having watched this
watch it, why are you bothering to explore and debate the subject if you're going to be lazy. Bookmark it and watch it over a few weeks if you're short on time.
> assumptions you mention are prior to the 70s?
I specifically references the IPCC working group conclusions from 2007-2014. I even provided the time codes for relevant points in the video link, so you could just skip to those points instead of spending the full 3 hours. Seems like you're just skimming my posts and not thinking hard enough to understand what I'm saying, then writing large amounts of text in reply.
Don't cruise control, or the discussion loses all nuance and becomes a waste of time.
>>71723426
>knowing what /pol/ is like but being here anyway
>being on /pol/ AT ALL and taking umbrage
You're obviously just here because you enjoy shitposting. Or you have a mental disorder. Or you got banned from reddit. Regardless, you don't belong here if anything /pol/ does shocks you.
>>71714283
red herring
>>71722487
Okay, then, it makes slightly more sense than people who support immigration of people who will throw them off rooftops the minute they get into power.
At least the AGWers can have some fun with the money before they die from their city sinking into the ocean.
>>71722286
Adaption?
It is not some poisonous gas. You are breathing it out right now.
You will not even notice a difference if it increased to 2000ppm and neither would animals. It would make a difference to plants however, they will grow much faster and bigger.
In total CO2 makes up only 0.4% of earth's atmosphere. Of that 0.4% humans only contribute 0.008%. So even drastic increases in CO2 levels are minor in the greater scheme of things.
>>71723421
And what's the problem with that?
>>71713089
hes kinda right, global climate change is a force of nature, just like gravity, neither are anthropogenic
>>71723426
>people want hyper simplified evidence UNDENIABLE proof that we can negatively influence the most complex system we have
A highly accurate model that can predict future changes without revision would fulfill this criteria. Now if you want to tell me that it's unreasonable to demand that no revisions can be made then I would respond by saying if you're still at the point where you need constant revisions to your model to make it work then you don't have an accurate theory for how earth's climate operates and can only offer an educated guess at best.
>>71724194
Actually, this is how science works. A theory is tested and if it has flaws it is refined.
Earth's climate is a tad more complex than for example calculating a rocket's trajectory.
Calling it an "educated guess" is off the mark and deliberately belittles the scientists' work.
>>71713089
>>71724590
I'm aware that's how science works. The problem isn't with science or it's method here, it's the fact that policy is being implemented based on what is essentially an incomplete theory. Were man made climate change solely in the realm of the scientific community then there wouldn't be a problem with them putting forward incomplete or less accurate theories. However we have sweeping global scale policy being implemented in the name of these currently half baked theories which is not how good policy should be formed.
>>71713165
Lmao abos and Danes are the same XD !!!!!!
>>71713447
How many legitimate scientists ever appear in public debate about anything? Nuclear energy? Materials science? Genetics? Most scientists are not good at speaking so that lay people can follow the argument. This is why the science educators & such that CAN speak intelligibly get their gigs; Hawking, for instance.
And as for shitposting, of course you can fool a fooler, hoax a hoaxer etc. /pol/ is nothing special.
>>71723426
>ITT people want hyper simplified evidence UNDENIABLE proof
Carbon regulation will transform our lives and give governments almost absolute power, the evidence has to be overwhelming it can't just be what a bunch of scientists(that chase government grant money) believe
>>71723732
>implying I'm shocked
>>71724194
>A highly accurate model that can predict future changes without revision would fulfill this criteria.
The problem is we don't have this, as it is the most complex system on the planet - every element feeds back into it in some way. It would be like asking for one to have the entire genetic code mapped and every gene + gene combination fully understood.
We might very well not understand the planet entirely - ever.
>and can only offer an educated guess at best.
And this is fine, because we know that a specific chemical that gets released into the air reacts with a chemical in the air - because we took science glass in grade 7 - and over a long period of time that shit has an effect. The earth either begins to counter balance it in some way, or it reacts to this new phenomena, or both. The outcomes of these we can't prove are positive, but we can speculate the very real negatives of them and the likelihood they come to pass. Many times we are right, sometimes we are wrong.
When you do a risk/reward analysis on climate change - if it's real / manmade or man influenced and we do nothing, the outcome could be as bad as extinction of man kind. If climate change is not man influenced and we do nothing, yeah we don't have to invest money in solar panels. But if it is influenced, we have the solar panels and don't go extinct, and if it's not influenced then we spend some money but don't potentially have to rely on a series of nuclear reactors or burning coal to generate electricity.
When the discussion of "LEL WE CAN'T PROVE IT'S REAL SO LETS DO NOTHING" comes into play, then the discussion switches to probability and a decision matrix. Renewable resources have additional benefits beyond it - both commercial (new technologies from R&D) and political (self sufficiency / fuck foreign oil)
>>71713764
Because while the world's average temperature IS increasing, this doesn't mean that every location will always be warmer all the time than it was before. Some locations will even be cooler. And these apparent anomalies gave rise to so many objections - spurious and otherwise - that the term "climate change" was adopted to try to head off these distractions from the main point. And more recently, the term "anthropogenic" was added for similar reasons, to try to head off the spurious objections like 'solar cycles'.
>>71724831
So what's the alternative? This is not about the life-cycle of a tadpole. It is about changes in our climate on such a scale that it will affect billions of people and harbours the danger of wars and the downfall of civilisation.
What if they are right? What if there is climate change? What if we do have to act now? What if in a hundred years the catastrophic changes have come to pass?
If you are right, it won't happen and our children will tell their grandchildren about the climate craze.
If you are wrong, our grandchildren would probably want to have a word with us.
Fear should never be the source for legislation but in this case, there is more than just "educated guesses".
>>71725319
>Fear should never be the source for legislation but in this case, there is more than just "educated guesses"
Even then, fear of what is essentially the apocalypse or human extinction is probably a good idea.
What if it's shit like this that is responsible for the fermi paradox? Intelligent life is inevitably parasitic and destructive, making it's homeworld inhospitable before it can reach the stars?
>>71713741
Does anyone have evidence of scientists making those demands? The wealthy will not be on the hook, indeed when are they ever held to the same standards.
As for speed of change, Communist China is replacing their oldest, dirtiest coal power stations so quickly, their demand for Australia's dirtiest thermal coal is falling rapidly. In a recent year (2014?) China installed over 30% of the world's green power hardware in that year.
>>71713089
Prove gravity exists :^)
>>71721301
And if you look closely, you can just make out the red line going almost vertical (on this scale) at the very right-hand edge of the chart. Unlike anything in the previous 400,000 years. Cause for concern, perhaps?
But, I don't really care what happened back then, desu, I care about now, when we need to grow food and stuff.
>>71725472
Probably you are right and there is no future for us but at least we can try :)
And as I said before, it is not bogus but strong scientific evidence. And that the implications are quite nasty maybe could add a pinch of fear and maybe that is what is needed to get us going.
>>71725137
>The problem is we don't have this
I'm aware it's a problem and if we don't have it then we shouldn't be taking action based on stabs in the dark as to what might help the situation. Instead of funding ideas that may or may not work we could instead fund further research to determine exactly what will work or if it's even necessary while pursuing other technologies that could be viable fossil fuel alternatives without government assistance.
>When you do a risk/reward analysis on climate change
Using risk vs reward as a basis for action you should take is a pretty ridiculous way to approach potential problems. Under the same global warming logic I could make a case that we need a space battleship for destroying asteroids that might impact the earth because the risk is extinction and the cost while astronomical is still finite compared to the infinite cost of destruction. This is of course a silly solution to a problem that while it may exist doesn't require anything on the scale of what I've proposed. Knowing exactly what the problem is is the first step in formulating an appropriate solution which is a step we seem to have entirely skipped in the case of man made climate change.
>>71725319
There are plenty of solutions that don't hinge on idiotic concepts like carbon credits or government handouts for "green" technology that's only green in the sense that it doesn't burn fuels when it's sitting next to you. Nuclear is a perfectly viable solution to long term energy needs and modern reactors are incredibly safe.
>>71721327
They've been pretty OK since Newton, so the 17th century?
>>71714055
The parasite class? Fear-mongering? Oh, you mean "Trump". OK, I get you now.
>>71723550
Cause it's fucking three hours peddled by 'skeptics' How about you wurmise the irrefutable points that PROVE it is all a scam. Even just abridge the key points of contention?
You talk about flawed methodology while totally skipping the most basic level physics of it all, that co2 is a GHG and human activity is directly responsible for the observed increase in co2.
All your talking points are just that, nothing more. The theory behind greenhouse gasses and the greenhouse effect are well known. Everything else is just a distraction.
>>71714210
Where are you planning on storing all the radioactive material from the end-of-life thorium reactors? In the Netherlands?
So what if the fat nigger said something.
Look at the evidence and make up your own mind,these people aren't a priest class.
They're media liberals,that's all. Bill Nye or Neill deNignog Tyson have contributed nothing to human knowledge.
>>71714129
do you even know who milutin milankovic is, you dumb ass faggot?
>>71721534
>Trees planted on asphalt, gravel, and clay
People really don't think before writing this shit.
>>71725710
Yes, I agree. We would need to basically reinvent our industry and way of life. Nuclear wouldn't change enough because our current way of life just puts too much of a burden on the planet.
If we would truly want to stop climate change, radical measures must be taken. Your "idiotic policies" are idiotic because they are cosmetic. I agree.
>>71713089
You can prove gravity at home with a stone. While I do believe in anthropogenic climate change, this is a retarded argument to make.
>>71714404
You have it backwards. Warm climates cause higher CO2 emissions, not the other way around.
>>71726097
And why is that?
>>71713089
>https://www.quora.com/How-does-the-fact-that-we-are-still-in-an-ice-age-affect-the-climate-change-debate
>>71725710
>Under the same global warming logic I could make a case that we need a space battleship for destroying asteroids that might impact the earth because the risk is extinction and the cost while astronomical is still finite compared to the infinite cost of destruction.
You understand we are, right now as we speak, trying to harden the protection on every piece of electric infrastructure we can incase we have a Carrington Class event, right? It's an ongoing thing.
The odds that NASA put out while ago were something like 10-15% over the next decade that we could be hit with a solar flare that would basically, EMP the entire planet.
We do nothing and get hit with the EMP? We spend years and trillions fixing infrastructure. Tons of people would die in the process because basically everything goes back a couple hundred years and urban centers are not sustainable without modern. But if we install all this extra protection and we don't get hit, we wasted money. It is a 90% chance that the EMP won't hit us, so why bother, right?
Now if you replace technology with outright extinction - is the 90% "not going extinct" still worth it, or is investing some money in solar panels a good idea
>Knowing exactly what the problem is is the first step in formulating an appropriate solution which is a step we seem to have entirely skipped in the case of man made climate change.
We know exactly what the problem is. It's pumping shit into the air. Every single renewable resource / green energy has been pumping less harmful shit into the air, or not at all. That is the problem and solution in 100% of every explanation, and even Climate deniers counter that point themselves "CO2 emissions can't hurt the planet"
>>71713089
Global warming is a reality, man-made global waming is a myth.
Sure, I believe in gravity, but not in man-made gravity, that would be silly!
>>71726154
Warmer oceans release more CO2 in a shorter amount of time.
Global warming was made up by the Chinese to destroy American manufacturing capabilities.
>>71726284
And global burning of fossil fuel has nothing to do with rising CO2 levels?
>>71726368
#maga
>>71726389
Compared to the volumn produced by the oceans its not relevant.
>>71726461
>only the largest number matters
5+4+3+2+1=globalwarming... which means oh man, we gotta do something about that 5 and it'll solve the problem entirely!
>>71726389
Of course it does, because only so much of that extra CO2 can be absorbed by nature. But ask yourself, how much of the current "all time high" CO2 counts is from refusal of CO2 by the warmer oceans, and how much is from man?
>>71726545
More like
>ocean 10000
>burning fossil 1
Changing the 1 has no effect on the 10000 - nice try moron
>>71726023
Nuclear is a very good stopgap technology in this case that could shift into a permanent fixture with relative ease. If there is a problem it massively delays the effects and gives us time to formulate a good long term solution.
>>71726173
>You understand we are, right now as we speak, trying to harden the protection on every piece of electric infrastructure we can incase we have a Carrington Class event, right? It's an ongoing thing.
But here we have a known problem, a known solution, and an exact plan on what the effects of that solution will be. Much like building structures to resist earthquakes all the elements are know and we can use extremely accurate models to predict the exact effects as well as test them experimentally to some degree.
>Every single renewable resource / green energy has been pumping less harmful shit into the air, or not at all.
That isn't true though. Solar cells require many toxic heavy metals to manufacture as do lithium batteries. You've simply traded one form of pollution with a dubious global impact for another with a known and very real impact that's geographically isolated from you.
>>71713089
All the day bro.
>>71713089
>I am often asked if I believe in man-made climate change. I know reply as my masters have instructed me, "Do you know the current year?"
>>71726703
>toxic metals that can be disposed of safely is worse than endlessly injecting CO2 into the atmosphere for hundreds of years
DUDE COMEON
>>71726461
As I understand it, the problem is that manmade CO2 is added to the natural CO2-cycle and accumulates in the atmosphere because natural capacities to extract CO2 are limited. What about that?
>>71727217
>toxic metals that can be disposed of safely
The problem is obviously that in the places where most of these things are being manufactured they aren't doing that. If you have some cheap solutions to heavy metal waste disposal I'm sure the Chinese would love to hear from you.
>>71727348
So instead lets keep buying oil from shitholes in the world who are financing radical extremists people going around killing people, because that will save more lives :^)
>>71713165
Heis right. By scientistic race definition, human races are too similar to be considered races.
That doesn't mean we are exactly the same.
>>71713089
Oil interest groups carry alot of power in USA
>>71713089
Tell me in what way CO2 would cause global warming?
>>71727348
>The problem is obviously that in the places where most of these things are being manufactured they aren't doing that. If you have some cheap solutions to heavy metal waste disposal I'm sure the Chinese would love to hear from you.
Have you ever heard of oil spills you retard?
>>71713089
Why would i both to explain this to you, when you will just reply with a chart or some stats that makes no fucking sence.
The govement says it's true, that's why i don't belive in it.
>>71727812
Oil spills are not the problem. The problem is this is a non-issue completely fabricated by the Chinese to destroy western manufacturing, and the liberals just eat it up. Can you show me one piece of evidence that climate change is actually a problem?
>>71727505
I didn't say and if you'd read my posts you'd see that I support nuclear power which based on your earlier comments I can only assume you're opposed to.
>>71727812
>Have you ever heard of oil spills you retard?
What the fuck does that have to do with anything being discussed? How are oil spills relevant to the fact that banking on dirty Chinese solar panels to stem climate change is a shitty solution?
>>71727812
>Have you ever heard of oil spills you retard?
We actually had one of those here in Quebec. A train derailed and it killed almost 50 people and basically a huge portion of the downtown was destroyed and a ton more buildings need to be demolished cause they are just that fucked up with gasoline
Apparently the explosion was massive, like someone dropped a JDAM in the middle of this town
>>71725789
Here's your (you)
>>71727998
I'm not against Nuke, but it's also not exactly the best outcome. Way more preferable to burning coal.
>>71713089
Why try to turn a simple question with a yes or no answer into a game of "no you"?
>"Mr. Tyson, do you believe in global warming?"
>Tyson: "Do YOU believe in gravity?" *smug grin*
>"Yes. Do you believe in global warming?"
>Tyson: "Yes"
What ever happened to that clean coal stuff Obama was talking about during his reelection campaign?
>>71713089
that's actually a pretty apt comparison.
Because we have not one fucking clue how gravity actually works.
>>71727964
I've seen an animal species die before my eyes
Thats why I believe it
>>71727964
>The govement says it's true
What? Is the gov a hivemind now?
>>71727991
> fabricated by the Chinese to destroy western manufacturing
LOLOLOL, it wasn't totally the fault of greeddy capitalistis that moved the industries to 3rd world shitholes. It was definetely the fault of "libruls".
>Can you show me one piece of evidence that climate change is actually a problem?
How is it not a problem? You understand that our ecosystems are on a tenous balance. A mass extintion is a possible outcome in the centuries to come if we don't stop.
>>71727998
You were talking about environmental problems of solar panels. I mentioned one environmental problem of oil.
>>71728023
The train derailed in the center of town? It carried what?
>>71728361
We now how gravity works, and perfectly.
We don't now is why gravity works.
>>71726703
>implying localised heavy metal pollution is comparable to global CO2 pollution
You do understand that there are 100s of techniques, which your EPA outlines in great detail to remove sorbed contaminants from soil. The only barrier to this is governmental environmental legislation and whether it exists or not. The same can be said for carbon pollution except our only way of removing it from the atmosphere is to let nature run it's course and deal with the global consequences
>>71728178
I was wrong to assume then. I think at this point nuclear is highly preferable to solar. The only green energy I'd say has serious potential and no real drawbacks is tidal but there doesn't seem to be much interest in it and it's somewhat restricted by geography.
>>71728284
it was installed on every coal plant still in operation 15 years ago.
>>71728430
>The train derailed in the center of town? It carried what?
Oil.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lac-M%C3%A9gantic_rail_disaster
>We now how gravity works
No, we don't know "how" it works. We know it exists, we know what it does and what it will do under some circumstances. The "how" and "why" are the same thing. All we can explain is "Objects with mass are attracted to each other" - that is not a how or why, it's a function.
It's semantics but that shit is important
>>71728430
>You were talking about environmental problems of solar panels. I mentioned one environmental problem of oil.
So you made a comment that wasn't in anyway relevant to the discussion because at no point was anyone defending or even discussing oil. Gotcha.
>>71728430
I still don't see how this isn't just a completely made up issue to take the mind's of the masses off of real issues effecting people in the world today. I've said it once and I will say it a thousand time. Climate change isn't happening, stop trying to make people think it's actually happening.
>>71727690
>That doesn't mean we are exactly the same.
Doesn't that make us simply different subspecies? Abos and Danes can make fertile offspring so they're the same species, but they're clearly different in bone structure and numerous other ways.
>>71726097
With a delay of how long? If what you are saying is the cause then we can expect co2 to skyrocket soon no? But co2 is already at a million year high averaged globally and has been rising pretty consistently the past 100 odd years. Yes, it is true that >>71726284 but this time they are rising in sync, suggesting that co2 is forcing temp. As to >>71726664
see pic related. We can tell where co2 is coming from. That more and more is of human origin strongly suggests that human activity is the driving factor.
The earth can of course adjust to cope with this change but it will have to fundamentally change to do so and in ways probably not great for continued human existence, at least as we do today.
>>71727226
Bingo.
>>71727690
>By scientistic race definition, human races are too similar to be considered races.
And yet doges are separate sub species?
>>71713089
I know global warming is happening, you're an idiot if you deny that, i just doubt that humans are the main drivers of it.
Why do leftists ignore race and IQ? Do they just ignore evidence and lie to themselves? Why are leftists so anti science? Faggot.
Not one doomsday prediction ever made on the subject has come to pass.
The raw temperature data has never been released, only manipulated data such as the infamous hockey stick graph.
The widely touted solution to the proposed problem is a fucking carbon credit system. Oy vey!
Somebody tell me why I should submit to the doomsday alarmists who have never been right so schlomo can get some sheckels?
>>71728576
You are wrong. We now exactly how gravity works. We can even make perfect predictions based on mathematical models.
We simply don't know WHY it works.
>take the mind's of the masses off of real issues effecting people in the world today.
You do know climate change is The real issue? Everything else is just bread and games.
>limate change isn't happening, stop trying to make people think it's actually happening.
k m8, sure. As long as the oil tycoons are happy, so are you, amirite?
>Doesn't that make us simply different subspecies
No because the genetic differences are not very big.
>>71728882
Yes, because they were intentionally breed for thousand of years
>>71729080
>predict nominally small but potentially catastrophic gradual temperature and sea level rises over the next 100+ years
>b-b-bu-ut doomsday predictions haven't occured yet
>therefore climate change is made up by MSM
Get a grip you scientific illiterate cunt
>>71729462
Science is the cause of global warming. The only solution is going to be found in faith.
>>71729405
So how long does speciation take? Are euro and asian men the same as sub-saharan africans who carry no Neanderthal DNA?
>>71729462
How about those ice caps?
Just admit that it's an incomplete theory and that we aren't able to accurately predict anything based on our current models.
>>71729888
I'm not a biologist, you can search papers that talk about this.
>>71730181
Thin ice grows and retreats every year, it's not those that matter, but the ones hundreds of meters thick with thousands of years old
>>71729462
Geneticsfag here
>>71728765
Literally the only difference is colour of skin and facial structure so no, that's not enough to be a subspecies. That's like making a black cat and a white cat different species.
>>71729888
Speciation takes hundreds of thousands of years and takes complete isolation and divergent adaptations but that's not gonna happen because of immigration and interracial sex, and also because humans live more or less in similar climates with similar lifestyles. It's not like one race lives under water and another lives in Antarctica.
Also, speciation in the modern world is determined based on genomic differences and human races are not divergent enough on a genetic level to warrant different species or subspecies.
>>71725302
No no, you're stupid. The entire point of global warming was that the Earth was turning into a giant greenhouse that was trapping the energy of the sun. There is absolutely no reason for anything to cool off with that logic yet you say that's exactly what we're doing.
>>71713089
If these environmentalists really cared about climate change, they wouldn't support shutting down nuclear reactors, only to have them replaced by coal power plants or petroleum, which is far more polluted and detrimental to human health. No one buys their rhetoric when they don't even practice what they preach.
>>71713089
both are a jewish hoax
>>71730181
