Is Climate Change real? Is it caused by people? Can we really slow it down/stop it by switching to clean energy? Will it really have catastrophic effects? How soon?
>>7706899
Every fucking day with this.
thanks op
>>7706899
Bring yourself up to speed on the latest findings by watching the following:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4EZMkNSWdxo
>>7706899
> Is Climate Change real?
Every year that passes, the theory that increasing temperatures are an indication of long-term climate change gets gradually more and more plausible.
It requires a judgment call to decide if you want to call it "real". To be cautious, you would say that the statistical evidence gradually increases each year that we continue to have temperature increases.
(There's also the separate question about whether the temperatures are increasing, but there is very little support for the theory that thousands of scientists worldwide are engaging in a massive conspiracy to falsely publish temperature data.)
> Is it caused by people?
Temperature change has many factors. Human activity can certainly be one such factor. The more precise question is: To what extent is temperature change caused by human factors versus non-human factors?
Attempts to answer that question precisely are very difficult, because weather and climate are extremely complex systems. However, there is a growing opinion among scientists that the extent to which humans are causing the temperature change is "noticeable".
Now, does "noticeable" mean "humans are 20% of the cause", or does "noticeable" mean "humans are 80% of the cause"? Scientists have mathematical models to explore this question, but unfortunately, the various models being explored are coming up with significant differences in deciding just how much of the temperature increase is the result of human activity.
>>7706899
>Is Climate Change real?
Obviously it is. Observations are easy to see.
>Is it caused by people?
Likely the majority of it is.
>Can we really slow it down/stop it by switching to clean energy?
Yes, but we won't. Developing economies don't want to stay underdeveloped forever. We used cheap dirty energy to get where we are. Other countries aren't going to accept us pulling the ladder up behind us. Western nations can be as clean as they want but if China, India, Nigeria, and the rest of the developing world don't also change, our changes won't slow things down much.
>Will it really have catastrophic effects?
Depends on who you are. If you live on an island barely about sea level, your island is going to disappear. If you live in the bayous of Louisiana, there's going to be lots of change. The water rise will be catastrophic for many. Beyond that, changing weather patterns will harm so, might benefit others. Hard to know for sure what will happen since weather is complex. The big danger whose probability is unknown is the runaway greenhouse effect from something like melting permafrost releasing massive quantities of greenhouse gases that had been locked up in it.
>How soon?
It's a frog in a pot type situation. Probably won't be any quick dramatic changes until after years and years of gradual changes. At some point something huge like the collapse of an Antarctic ice shelf will happen but that's likely decades away.
>>7706899
No Jesus would never allow that. Don't fall for the liberal lies anon.
>>7706905
It's not like it's important or anything.
>>7706899
>yes
>yes, although how much exactly is dubious humans have a pretty big share of the responsability
>maybe, but some of the worst damage is irreversible
>life on earth and human civilization won't end, but most of the world will become pretty shitty
>50 years, a lot later than most doomsayers predict
>>7706899
>Is Climate Change real?
Absolutely. Any decent dataset will show a strong warming trend between decades.
>Is it caused by people?
Most attributions I've seen put human activity at 90-110% of observed warming.
>Can we really slow it down/stop it by switching to clean energy?
We couldn't stop it entirely by doing that - our emissions have committed us to some pretty bad warming (unless we start extracting CO2 from the atmosphere).
But yes, unless we stop adding fuel to the fire it's going to just keep getting bigger.
>Will it really have catastrophic effects?
>How soon?
That's much harder to answer - there are many different ways it can affect us, and they are hard to predict.
In the long run, rising sea levels are going to seriously fuck us up. But it seems like that's going to take a long time.
Ocean acidification is already impacting a bunch of ecosystems, but so far nobody cares.
Worryingly, the warmer climate has already started to negatively impact food production, so that's likely to become a major issue in the near future.
>>7707187
>is climate change real?
the climate is changing yes, but the misnomer about man made global warming has completely failed in every possible scientific test. increase in emissions has no known correlation to increase in global temperatures surface or otherwise.
>is it caused by people?
yes, those who invented this obvious hoax
>can we slow down/stop it?
we don't have the technology to stop large shifts in the environment. Reducing CO2 emissions is just an excuse to ring more money out of people
>will it have catastrophic effects?
if you believe all the "research" published, global warming has already caused catastrophic effects. Namely drought, wildfire, hurricanes, and according to some, the syrian refugee crisis.
>How soon?
see above
Yeah, it's all a conspiracy man.
And remember, any data that backs it up is part of the conspiracy.
No one's ever been able to go out and measure the true data because thermometers and notebooks are also part of the conspiracy.
Please cite your answers or provide some kind of backing. We have answers varying from "110% human contribution" to "it's a hoax for money" to "hard to measure currently"
>>7706899
this shit again
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BiKfWdXXfIs
You might be interested in this. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-lLgA9C1G4c
You know how i know climate change is real? I literally just took this picture, I live in minnesota.
>>7708216
Undeniable evidence.
>deniers on suicide watch
>>7707564
>Absolutely. Any decent dataset will show a strong warming trend between decades.
RSS and UAH datasets.
>>7709064
>>7709071
>>7709064
How desperate is it when you have to hide everything before the highest extreme on a graph to pretend that there's even the barest downwards trend?
Y'all are practically Dynamo, it's like magic up in here.
>>7706899
We could link to metastudies showing both the answer to be yes to both questions. That swayed some, but not too many.
We could link to statements from the national academy of science of basically every first and second world nation affirming the ACC is real. That sways some, but not too many.
I guess something new to try would be linking to Exxon Mobil admitting ACC is occurring and support a carbon tax.
http://corporate.exxonmobil.com/en/current-issues/climate-policy/engaging/climate-policy-blog?parentId=039c6ab5-f17b-4183-82d9-439eb752660f
>>7709088
Yeah, just replying to myself because I realised the actual graph would be more useful.
>>7709078
You're right, we'd better not cherry pick anything.
>>7709084
Shell wants carbon taxes too.
So do people believe that all the employees of oil companies are in on an evil conspiracy?
>>7709105
>Years Before Present (1950 AD)
Someone call Penn and Teller, we got fucking Houdini over here!
>>7709078
Got it.
Yes, at least mostly, possibly but it may be too late, yes, it is catastrophic right now.
>>7709117
Silly, it stops before 2050. Stops at about 2015
>>7709122
>This just in, height doesn't increase with age.
Conspiracy theorists, folks.
>>7709105
You do realize that Richard Alley, who measured the source data for that graph, affirms ACC right?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Alley
>>7709127
The x axis is in 400 year increments, and it's in distance from 1950. The GISP2 measurement ends at about 1850.
>>7709141
Jesus Christ! That's why the next-to-final bar on the graph is marked -100 and the GISP data ends at about -150, making it 1850. From there it is updated with Hadley CRU data.
Get over it.
> UnSkeptical Science says this is cherry picking data: >>7709064
> UnSkeptical Science says this is not cherry picking data: >>7709078
>>7709168
typo
>the GISP data ends at about 200 years prior
>>7709168
Climate change is real, and most of the climate change that we are experiencing right now is caused by us. We can tell the GHG's we emit are raising the earth's temperature due to the change of CO2 ppm and the increase of carbon-14 found in that extra 100 ppm increase since the 1700's which indicates that the fossil fuels we emit are raising the earth's temperature. The consequences of this depends greatly on how much we heat the earth, anymore than 6 degrees Celsius, then we are in some deep, deep shit, but less than that we will most likely be able to survive, some of us at least. The most dangerous possibility is the release of methane clathrates from the oceans, which could kill us off easily.
>>7708216
Dude, you probably know this, but it's just El Niño this year. No global warming will ever change Minnesota.
>>7706899
It's real.
Probably nothing will happen.
>>7706899
No, it's a jewish conspiracy. You should burn petroleum products in your backyard constantly to thwart them.
>>7707187
Don't believe this libby faggot op hes blowing it out his ass
Believe me and trump, your buds: climate change is real but theres ben no warming for 20 years and its not caused by humans its because we are coming out of an ice age. Also, we are going into an ice age so theres nothing to worry about.
The only way to make america great agane is to drill baby drill. Coal, natural gas, shale, crude, everything. If it is hard then drill it. And burn it ;). Just look at china, theyre economy is skyrocketing and they are the biggest burner of coal in the world!
>>7707952
tried watching but couldnt. does that guys nose have a name?
>>7708016
interesting. i would have thought melting of ice sheets and the resulting redistribution of weight on the earths crust would have destabilized it leading to quakes, but the idea that the temperature of earth interior is affected by global warming is new to me (although youd think the effect would be negligible 5000K+/-5 due to global warming)
>>7711475
>but the idea that the temperature of earth interior is affected by global warming is new to me
I don't think I've heard anyone else making those kind of claims, so I'd be cautious.
>>7711477
>I don't think I've heard anyone else making those kind of claims
thats what i said. why be cautious? im not a scientist. i can say anything
>>7708016
This needs to be investigated using magnetohydrodynamic computer models.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetohydrodynamics
I don't know any more...
Watch this, its a minute long. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w-gdS-nc9lA
1st time in 200 years - suggesting the climate was much different 200 years ago - the climate could just be resetting itself
>>7706965
Only informative post in this thread. Thanks, anon.
For these, who taunt the idea global warming is caused by man:
Stop being so smug about it.
PRAY that you are wrong. Because if it is caused by man, it can be fixed. If it's a fully natural process, we're totally fucked.
So if you think you are right, you should fucking grieve and not flaunt it about happily.
