Honestly how can anyone still believe in Global Warming in 2019? It’s nothing but a hoax by the Democrats to get people out to vote for them.
Honestly how can anyone still believe in Global Warming in 2019...
Grayson Nelson
Nathaniel Butler
So stupid It's embarrassing
Chase Collins
not just for votes it's to increase taxes for everyone but the industries and nations (china) that dump the most into the air
Colton Roberts
Either would be great desu.
Global cooling? Time to go a-conquering and carve out an empire to the south.
Global warming? Amsterdam vanishes and takes the Randstad with it.
First steps for the betterment of humanity.
Leo Wood
Donate Today!
Its another Dems Scam
Sebastian Roberts
Winter, how does it work?
Anthony Thomas
*sends cold winds south*
>nothing personal kid
Parker Thompson
Goyim, it’s called climate change now. Get with the program.
Daniel Price
Look at it this way. If it weren't for global warming it would be -24° on Tuesday.
Angel Cruz
>how
Because large energy and oil companies got together with google in 2002 and created a huge campaign to popularize anthropogenic climate change and start obtaining special green energy regulations to maintain their newly created oligopoly (like half of the oil companies in the world MERGED TOGETHER in the later 90s, just before this point.
If you have enough money and hire enough people, you can start pumping and dumping massive amounts of "studies" on an issue, and then you can create a "consensus" with your corporate shill scientists, which is what big oil and big energy has done.
These companies have been reaping billions in profit every year, from "climate change" technology, sales, and from regulations preventing competition with them, every year since.
they own the media, so the media actually convinced people they are 'fighting' big energy as they line its pockets.
'green' and 'energy star' are inventions of the Energy Oligopoly.
Wyatt Stewart
I usually don't shill for the failing NYT but this guy has the right idea
nytimes.com
Nathan Lopez
Winter, how does it work?
Ethan James
>How can you be racist against blacks? I know one black guy who's really nice!
This is what you sound like
Charles Lee
The "scientific consensus" created on purpose by the big oil an big energy is just like the 97% chance for Hillary to win, yes.
Imagine if there are barely any studies on a subject, but they don't say what you want them to say, and you realize that if they did say what you wanted, you could make a lot of money.
If it were me, I'd be too poor to do anything about it. But if I was the Big Oil and Big Energy oligopoly, I'd hire scientists to devise new studies that support my agenda, and after a while, since i'm the only one doing it, the "consensus" is what I want it to be. I've paid for 10,000 studies, and only 10 existed before, I can now claim that 99.9% of all studies on this subject support my view.
This is what happened, not in quite as an individually mischievious way, but rather as a consequence of the ease of being able to hire a science team to say what you want said.
Michael Gonzalez
Evan Hall
Camden Young
op's argument is a shill strawman designed to be knocked down.
The real problem with the claims about 0.04% vs 0.0371% co2 affecting the world's climate differently is that experimentation suggests that co2 DOES NOT noteably alter the temperature of an environment differently with changes in its concentration that are that minute. Instead, experimentation suggests we'd have be pumping out exponentially more co2 than we are to have any affect.
There is empirical evidence that large concentrations of co2 act as a greenhouse affect, there is no empirical evidence that if you change that concentration from (random number) 70.00% to 70.001%, that the world will end, and that .001% is the human contribution.
In reality there's much less than 70% co2 in the air, more like 0.04% of the atmosphere is composed of it.
The anthropogenic argument states that the .001% added on to the 0.04% of co2 in the earth's atmosphere is going to end the world, but whenever this is tested in a lab no difference is shown unless you literally put a heater on one box, and not a heater on the control (lol).
Michael Perry
Is the weather strange for the past couple of months? It's like there are 2 days of 10° and then the next day it's -10° for another 2 days then it's back to normal and it starts over. The weather feels a bit "fake" lately.
Ayden Barnes
Unpredictable weather is a norm in most places around the world, with some exceptions, if your weather stops changing that's when you should be concerned.
Joshua Thompson
In the 30 years that I'm alive I have never experienced weather that changes from 10° to -10° then again to 10° in 3 days.
Also everyone I talk to is shocked about the weather lately.
John Foster
Source: a goat's anus
Jaxon Jackson
Oh look, another graph stripped of context and used to lie to people:
>Key Points
>Heat waves in the 1930s remain the most severe heat waves in the U.S. historical record (see Figure 1). The spike in Figure 1 reflects extreme, persistent heat waves in the Great Plains region during a period known as the “Dust Bowl.”
Gavin Cox
The only difference between climate change and season change is the time scale. Both are equally natural in origin.
Ryder Morales
Might actually want to read the source of that graph so people can stop claiming the opposite of what it actually shows.
epa.gov
Carter Watson
>It’s nothing but a hoax by the Democrats to get people out to vote for them.
It's actually a hoax to funnel tax dollars into Dem-connected "green" companies, who then donate money to Dem PACs and politicians.
Jaxson Allen
I hear ya
Lincoln Gonzalez
Keep posting dumb shit like this and people will believe the opposite. Almost as if it were a shill tactic...
Nicholas Gutierrez
I have an 85yo grandfather.
last xmas I asked him, what was the weather like when you were a teenager?
his reply, exactly what its like now!!!
Juan Johnson
>if global warming WHY COLD?
archive.is
fucking faggot retard