Let's be honest here Jow Forums, we all know that climate change is real...

Back in ancient times, they blamed a pantheon of gods, be it Roman, Greek, Babylon, Mayan, Inca or Aztec. In the middle ages they blamed God, in the 15th and 16th centuries they blamed the Devil and Witchcraft, in the 19th century they blamed British and French colonialism. Now they blame everything on global warming.
It's cyclical! The earth's ecosystem is dynamic and it ebbs and flows just like other dynamic organism.
I remember back in the late 60's and 70's the leading scientific and environmental minds were CONVINCED we were heading for an ice age, just like the one that happened thousands of years ago. Oh, that happened to be preceded by a period of warmth, and so forth and so on.

it really is not a problem. earths temperature has always been in flux. if we lose some coastal territory its not that big a deal, we will gain farm more arable land than we will lose if the vast siberian steppe becomes productive

I think you'll find if you keep accepting this climate change pap YOU will be the ignorant indoctrinated SHEEP. Garbage In, Garbage Out, as they say in the biz!

the sea ice of the north pole is constantly changing and has no effect on the water levels.

the ice covered continent of Antarctica will take thousands of years to melt even if we raise the temperatures to by 10 degrees and made the rest of the world uninhabitable

>we all know that climate change is real
This isn't the way to get a serious discussion about this here. Climate change & global warming are both serious misnomers stemming from the scientific community's inability to create a "catch all" meme like term for a huge;y multifaceted problem.
>why do we have climate change problems, and which countries are to blame for it?
Because we can't/won't stop shitting the bed constantly. All countries have a hand in it, some much more significant than others. I don't think there is a solution that'd ever actually work, because we view robust economies & ample elbow room as being far more important than anything, and you'll always have niggers whining that "well that shithole country gets to make a higher profit margin by being an unabashed shithole, so I don't see why we can't act like a shithole too".
Hopefully we'll be expanded out into at least this local planetary system a bit before the ecosystem starts collapsing from all the pressure we continually put on every interlocking piece of it.

Using rivers for nuclear disposal (while very very bad) doesn’t have a direct carbon footprint. The carbon footprint of the average American is amazingly high compared to the rest of the world. Even Europe is better due to superior transit systems. The US could make a dent

Very low quality b8
SAD

/Thread. Fuck off lefty cunt

You're a fucking anti-American. Parts of America are literally being erased from the globe because of climate change and you're going to go out in public and deny it. Leave this country you traitor. RIP East Island.

WTF are you even /threading you mongoloid shitter. Only lurk from here on out faggot.

>we all know that climate change is real
see the problem I have with climate change is that they mention fossil fuels with it and fossil fuels is a marketing term invented by Rockefeller in the 1800s

so FUCK OFF WITH YOUR BULLSHIT

can we focus on serious environmental threats like FUKUSHIMA now?

What have you done to stop global warming? Did you give up your car and air travel, go vegan? It's always someone else's "money" kind of like socialism. That fat fuck algore has a giant fucking energy sucking mansion but because he cuts himself a check, its all good. If you stupid libshits could disconnect the commies from your climate change crusade it might work, but faggots just claim global warming for redistribution gibs. kys faggot

Are you denying that the Poos' abundant fecal pollution is not having an effect on the global health of the world?

There is no proof of man made climate change. In 40 years, every model of climate change based on human activity has been proven incorrect.

See why you don't ever use misnomer terms to start these discussions? The very real problems that create & contribute to shit like the holocene extinction get completely ignored because of pedantics.

It's also a fact that people age, break down with the pass of time and die...
It's also a fact that people are aware of this.

From these things they project their existence line over the current state of the world and their potential life spans.

There are issues of wealth, shelter, food, dreams that are immediate and weight so much in an individuals life.. there's also tremendous ignorance in all of us - it's a multi-variable problem but it says basically that:

Average person dosen't care, knows will die and someone else will have to take care of it - or simply dosen't care as death is associated with non-existence, permanent separation of biological expression in this universe, no way to suffer or impact the future as dead..

It's inevitable given this and given how much worse the actual landscape of humanity consciousness is, consumerism, materialism, don't-give-a-fuck'erism that we'll keep triggering irreversible chain reactions that will trash the earth and increase suffering in the world overall.

It's a /thread because it's a distraction thread. I am helping new fags know what a /thread is. This is a non issue that is being slid because it distracts from current events that needs more attention. Also fuck off you kike faggot.

>This is a non issue
Literally fuck your own face you smegma sucking retard.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocene_extinction

If you don't think every other species here plays a part in how the ecosystem as a whole has evolved over millennia to make this planet comfortably habitable for us you're a fucking brainlet.

Global climate shift is a real thing yes.

But there's this dumbass misconception that it's going to really effect the 1st world in any real way beyond maybe a few hundred pounds/dollars extra a year in living costs.

Sure a few million Africans are going to fucking choke to death on their dustbowls, but they did that to themselves and it's a net positive.

Siberia is going to likely heat up, and the UK is going to get a hotter climate, islands and coasts will change, some will sink into the ocean as time goes on, some more will have their ocean withdraw. But it's largely going to be an issue of the world is going to change, a lot of species will die, but our civilisations will live on. Do I want it to happen? No, it will cause unrest, migration and societal shifts. But
it's not the end of the world.

Why does the formation of the word matter? it's used to define polluting fuels that release certain compounds into the air en masse that are changing our climate over time.

Nuclear however is pretty much fine and safe for the environment; sure a few meltdowns here and there will kill a few people and fuck with the local ecology a bit; but radiation is fairly low impact, and the by products of the reactors are dealt with easy enough. They're far less impactful than hydrocarbon fuels are, and modern reactors are designed with shielding that means the ambient radiation levels don't even spike around the power station floor, let alone for anyone nearby.

Now old Soviet style shit is dangerous, and can be forced into a meltdown either by accident or on purpose with relatively little effort on the part of workers.

Why you need to do any of that? The real problem come from the fact that India, China, and Brazil us their waters to shit in, dump trash, and bury their dead.

>MNG3XtE
ur a fucking moron. People need to die before this overcrowded rock gets too hot. People like u

Attached: guts.jpg (203x203, 28K)

It's not real though is it, fucking NPC.

UK is actually likely to become cooler because the gulf stream will move.

You are right but I still think the problem can be solved. In the long term, sustainable technology will be cheaper because of better efficiency.
Why use oil to heat your house if you can just put some cheap solar panels on your roof?

In the long term yes, but in the short term we're going to get raped by Indian Summers and tropical storms.

So on the plus side Welly market and that fucking tarpit Weston might be worth going to.

The best way to combat climate change is to depopulate niggers and allow the rainforest to regrow.

Attached: ScreenHunter_15-Jul.-23-12.23-660x427.gif (660x427, 23K)

Everyone look at how painfully new this guy is.

Probably better to nuke them. Fighting off a nuclear hell gives us a better chance than having to deal with them.

That's healthy optimism also realistically at hand for the whole spectrum of humans.

I've travelled around country side - and every single decent person uses modern technology even in their rural style houses.

Human is rational and will make rational decisions when it comes to his comfort and lesser spending.

Major problem right now in many countries or regions of very development countries is the old electrical grid - which cannot at all carry the energy of eco-friendly sources to the public.

Another problem is % based taxation of already expensive technologies for energy.

Of course a poor country will be very unlikely to fabricate on its own such technology and even then it would also most likely have to import materials that go trough the same % based tax... so now what was already expensive for people became a luxury - so until we solve a lot of these economical problems we'll see narratives of death and fatalism be spread all over the place regarding energy and climate change problems.

As the nigger population increases having "global warming" destroyed seems like a great idea.

>why do we have climate change problems
Tragedy of the commons.

>and which countries are to blame for it
The US (cow farts) and China (industry). The latter is on fast track to fix their shit, but nobody can coax the US to do anything, we're stuck with the shitty parent.

For your schoolpaper: Most of people on this board take issue with the selective misrepresentation global temperature cycles and using "pre-industrial" comparison to the point of using 1700s little ice age anomaly as a starting point. All this in a system which has period of roughly 1000 years with random +- 2C patterns every 200 years. Most of climate research which does account for pre-industrial climate shifts are outright ignored.

Personally I think much more pressing issue is contamination of biological systems with plastic and heavy metals. Bees can survive shift in habitat when global temperatures rise above 2C, but they can't survive current levels of systematic presence of insecticides.

If its so real why isnt fusion research given more money?

(Because it isnt real)

It would be easier to fix if we diden't have a bunch of unhinged globalists trying to destroy the stability of the west

>I think much more pressing issue is contamination of biological systems with plastic and heavy metals. Bees can survive shift in habitat when global temperatures rise above 2C, but they can't survive current levels of systematic presence of insecticides
Look at the big brain on Bret.
Seriously, though, this shit is more than half of the problem. "Carbon footprints" don't really mean shit in comparison.
In maybe 1,000 years we might have either plastic lifeforms, or plastic will be a major component of existing lifeforms (if we haven't ruined this planet's ability to harbor more than microscopic life period). That's how much fucking plastic we're putting out there.

Right and this is why I think the only real solution is to spend everything we can into the development and research of such technologies.
People won't just degrade their prosperity to protect the environment. It's just not going to happen.

Why is there no Manhattan project for nuclear fusion?

We live in a global economical cycle where people are afraid to invest.
And most financial instruments to provide big gains are just speculations, derivatives and so on..

This is my humble and simple impression of what's going on... The rest I really dunno.

>Why is there no Manhattan project for nuclear fusion?
Because there's still a shit ton of money to be made from fossil fuels & natural gas; a continued return on the startup investments into those technologies.
We'll probably put off any serious kind of research into replacement tech until those wells are nearing dry, and even when we have them they won't get rolled out in mass scale until those other revenue streams are almost entirely tapped.

nope
youtube.com/watch?v=TCy_UOjEir0
you have a naive view of the world and what is really going on