Global Warming

You are mistaken to rely on scientists so much, considering that there has been a rise of pseudo-scientists.

I mean that it's easy to make a scientist fake data by simply only paying them when you get the results you want.

Because the Earth is going to become incompatible with our civilizations and, as a result, those civilizations are going to end. Also? India isn't our enemy. They're an English-speaking Democracy who are boosting the ever-loving-fuck outa our economy.

It's not easy. In fact, it's very close to impossible. Peer review isn't a talking point. It's the proof that the science is accurate. And it's overwhelming.

Why bother? What good is plebs discussing it? Why are they even discussing this with the general public?

Well "global warming" is a bit of a misnomer - the effects are manifold, from increased rates of erosion in tropical areas, increasing ocean acidification, changing rainfall patterns (including seasonality), changing fire regimes, temperature and humidity changes etc.

To those who shriek against it: If you want to be robustly anti-science and throw out something like a "(((they)))" because you're either too lazy, too stupid or too wilfully ignorant to appreciate simple physics and mathematics (shit, even Boyle noted that adding CO2 increases the heat held in a tube in the 1800's) combined with the overwhelming number of peer-reviewed journals (which you are welcome to critique), then your loss. It's called being delusional, and if you're fine with that then by all means, don't let me - or anyone else - stop your internal deceits.

I wasn't really referring to India, and India is more neutral then ally. And boosting our economy? India is one of the countries who all of our jobs and businesses went to,

Call him an ugly faggot. Always works.

vostok ice core samples. But remember sometimes you cant redpill stupid.

e-education.psu.edu/earth104/node/1267

There is no real motivation for peer review. it costs more and doesn't serve a purpose besides proving that something is indeed a fact.

When you have people that rely on this ambiguity as a source of income, an easy way to keep the income flowing is to add fake data to confuse the peers.

In the sense that you're referring to: yes. The pollution causing global warming has a shit-ton of effects that are every bit as big a problem as the increase in temperature.

But to the people who see "misnomer" as "lol not really warming": No it isn't. Global temperatures include the oceans and atmosphere. The aggregates are increasing steadily. That causes extremes in weather that sometimes result in dramatic cold fronts.

You don't even know how to reply to a post. You have absolutely no idea what the fuck you're talking about, Vladimir.

The opinions of the masses are as rumblings emitting from the stomach. What difference does it make if these rumblings are produced by their upper or their nether regions?

Ok we need to have a thread where I go ahead and demonstrate to you the massive benefits to the USA that India provides, right now. Start it and link to it. Yes: they take some low-level service jobs and are driving down the artificially-inflated costs of healthcare. They are a fucking gold-mine, to the USA.

Where is the fucking science. Saying the words science out loud doesn't do shit.

We simply do not have a single scientific model that works well enough to show it is real. Burden of proof. The 97% of scientists agree thing is misinformation because there are many kinds of scientists, and many of them have no clue how the variables involved work, nor have they done dick to research the theories. They aren't even being scientific to "agree" because a real scientist would say they don't know without a very stable model.

Aside from that, a lot of the "evidence" used to support it is actually support against it. The maps showing where the worst bits are might match the population of the US somewhat, but what about China and India? Why don't they have worse spots than LA for example?

Look at any hysterical article talking about the numbers and do your own math. When we are supposedly gaining avg temp of X percent since Y date, then the current avg should be XY... it never is or we would have all caught on fire and died decades ago.

Find a single, sourced article that agrees with global warming hysteria and click the sources and read for yourself. That will wake you up lighting fast if you have any ability to discern shit studies and data manipulation from solid studies.

show him this

Attached: 105-year-old article about climate change.jpg (720x960, 63K)

and this

Attached: tumblr_o6oxd9ANCU1r77owco1_640.jpg (640x461, 134K)

You can't, there are those that are doomed to follow.

>global temperature
You might want to add 'average' between that since simpletons like Trump think a freezing US midwest disproves the whole thing (meanwhile it climbed to 50C for the first time in my area).

i wonder what will happen when the methane is released from all that permafrost in the arctic ?

But let's just start with this one fact: No one can "take" American jobs. The USA is the most entrepreneurial nation in the history of the planet. Give us a healthy economy and a surplus of labor? You better fucking believe that someone'll come along who can make money off that labor. You can't "take" jobs from the USA. You can only hurt our purchasing power, and depress the value of our workforce. But whether it's in the mayo factory, IT help-lines, solar-panel installation or what-the-fuck-ever? Americans will take the labor pool and figure out how to profit off of it. The idea of someone "taking" our jobs is a fucking joke.

i farted under my covers the other night and it felt global warming I was like HOLY MOLY!

Good answer

and then ask him, if climate change was such a huge threat why are billionaires buying oceanside property and why isn't the UN forcing Brazil to stop deforesting the Amazon rainforest?

If climate change was such a threat we would be culling the African population in its entirety to save the planet, not giving them money to reproduce endlessly.

Attached: maxresdefault.jpg (1280x720, 104K)

>We simply do not have a single scientific model that works well enough to show it is real
We collect data from shit-tons of points. Then figure out an average. Then do the same thing next year. Then plot them, and draw a line that shows a trend that increases.

Of course we have the data, you fucking idiot.

JFC I SAID I DON'T FUCKING KNOW

thats his argument against action. as long as they are doing nothing so our impact would be miniscule

I NEVER SAID THAT I THOUGHT IT WAS REAL AND NOW MY RIGHTIST CUNT FRIEND IS LEAVING BULLSHIT.

I didn't say they were taking them- I said the businesses were doing it of their freewill.

Just point out the absurdity over the notion that Somehow we're going to stop a global catastrophe at this point unless you destroyed a third of the human population. The idea that an American president is going to make any difference is just a political weapon and nothing more. The problem is pretty much out of our hands at this point if there is one.
Also this:
>If climate change was such a threat we would be culling the African population in its entirety to save the planet, not giving them money to reproduce endlessly.

>Muh shekels

Attached: jew.gif (204x255, 1.8M)

Can't we just kill all the useless sub-humans in African? Then spread some biological weapon to finish off the commies in China?

China builds most massive Hydro electric installation in the world to cut down on coal and oil energy used.
Massively invests in public transportation.
This retard amerimutt still thinks they are doing nothing and aren't aware of the problems.
Meanwhile in the USA some retard gets elected that denies it's even Happening.

>why do banks still give 30 year mortgages to properties on the coast? Investment analysts must be so stupid. Global warming

>Charge them for 30 year mortgages
>Disaster destroys the houses
>Bank didn't know exactly when this would happen so took the chance on getting as much out of it as possible
>Insurance rates have gone up the entire time
>Bank, Insurance are loosely connected and both win in the event of disaster

Attached: 1411583969094.png (450x553, 374K)

>The science is in
Where? Show us the science. The professor at my faculty actually travels the world measuring ocean levels. No surprise, no rise.

Global warming is real, but it's certainly overblown by the media. We don't actually know the reason it's happening either, co2 could be keeping the heat from escaping but what's more concerning is the effects it has on the ocean. Co2 raises the toxicity of the ocean which could be damaging to life on the ocean.
Even if fossil fuels weren't destroying our environment we should still be working towards more renewable clean energy as our current systems aren't sustainable with the amount of energy we use.

China is the worst of all the contributors to "Global Warming"

>Co2 raises the toxicity of the ocean which could be damaging to life on the ocean.
Are you on drugs?

Sure: I care about making money. Don't you? I like stuff--it's pretty nice.

You have an internet connection, retardasaurus. Start with the sixty-three thousand results for "scholarly articles global warming proof." Lemme know when you've gotten through those, list your complaints, and let's go from there.

Generally the earth goes through phases of heating and cooling

>quotes me
>my quote doesn't use the word data or anything that means data
>calls me a fucking idiot because "of course we have the data"

Do you know wtf a model is? It means that scientists test out ideas they have with different variables so they can try and figure out what variables are involved, the point of a model being that it should be able to predict an outcome if the variables involved are, in fact, involved in the outcome.

None of their models are accurate enough to suggest CO2 has anything at all to do with temperature changes we are seeing. Not a single one. Some are better than others, but none are close enough to perfect to say, yes, we figured out the cause. Perfect is impossible with something like this of course, we we expect results within a certain margin of error. When the model says, for example, if we are using this much CO2 producing energy, then at this date, the temp should equal an avg change of .5 degrees... and then over a long period, with the DATA you mention, you compare the actual to the predicted, and they don't even remotely correlate... something isn't right with the models.

Insightful. It also goes through phases of extinction and speciation. So extinction events being "whelp just something that sometimes happens for various reasons" doesn't make me feel a whole lot better when those reasons include "shit you could'a averted" and those extinctions include "your species."

Based Bill Gates was trying to sterilize africans through meds he was donating, wasn't he?

So you were talking about "scientific models," but you feel that I unfairly represented your comments because I discussed models based on data?

Were your parents disappointed when they found out that their son was retarded?

Ah, the good old appeal to consensus. Well, problem is there is no consensus, that's just propaganda. Also, your models consistently fail, so why should anyone believe your doomsday hysteria? Just to put it into perspective how utterly retarded you are in a way that everyone can understand: there are sixty-three thousand peer reviewed and published gender studies theses too. Now fuck off, UN shill.

>We simply do not have a single scientific model that works well enough to show it is real
Except yes, we do: ipcc.ch/report/ar4/wg1/climate-models-and-their-evaluation/

>The 97% of scientists agree thing is misinformation because there are many kinds of scientists, and many of them have no clue how the variables involved work, nor have they done dick to research the theories.
Evidently you've never published a paper in a scientific journal of repute. These journals exist as high standing because they have very high standards of submission and editing, with clear understanding of the literature and concepts. If you do not, the journal will not accept your paper. Additionally, you are welcome to submit critiques of papers to authors or journals, just contact the journal directly and submit a rebuttal. Should you wish to contact the author, please email the corresponding author with your queries and criticisms, it is an open, transparent process for large journals.

>Look at any hysterical article talking about the numbers and do your own math. When we are supposedly gaining avg temp of X percent since Y date, then the current avg should be XY... it never is or we would have all caught on fire and died decades ago.
I'm not sure what you're trying to say here, do you think there has been a catastrophic rise? This is an unclear statement.

>Find a single, sourced article that agrees with global warming hysteria and click the sources and read for yourself. That will wake you up lighting fast if you have any ability to discern shit studies and data manipulation from solid studies.
Yeah of course, if you have a solid background in the sciences and a deep understanding of the field you will be able to separate wheat from chaff spectacularly quickly. Doing this will tell you one thing: The chaff is largely comprised of garbage studies posted in crap journals, or anti-science tripe posted in physics journals regarding climate.

Incorrect. Appealing to science isn't an appeal to consensus. It's an appeal to demonstrable facts. Otherwise known as "a sound argument." The peer review part just ensures that it's also a logically valid argument.

When they can up with a solution that does not involve reaching into my wallet ill believe it then

>Appealing to science
The science isn't in yet, so you're not appealing to science. You're appealing to the consensus of the UN connected climatologists. No one is fooled by your bullshit anymore. You cultists are why people are losing all respect for science. Undeservedly, because science is not to blame for your religious hysteria.

Wake me up when one of your climate models are actually able to predict the climate. Which they consistently can't. Pure pseudoscience.

China ist also going through its industrial revolution, you know the shit us and eu had 150 years ago. Back when people here would die of black lung.
Aside from that China is only the biggest contributer because of all the shit they produce that gets sold in the the eu and us. Worst contribution comes from millions of freighter ships power installations and anything that needs give quantities of metal.
Saying it's Asia's fault is fucking simpel minded and brings noone closer to a solution of the issue.

You’re friend is right, where he is wrong though is that the warming is not happening as fast as he probably thinks it is, and ultimately the warming will produce a fairly pleasant tropical Earth

Friendly reminder
Jow Forums is filled with semi-literate 16 year olds who can neither write a logical proof nor recognize the fallacies and philosophers on the top of their board. They believe anything you put in an infographic with minimal research of their own and believe conspiracy theories that easily fall to Occam's razor(I'm talking about the (((Jews))) obviously). I'm pretty sure they would suck cock if you put it in an infographic.
If you look at site statistics you will realize that Jow Forums is literally all newfags trying hard to be neckbeards. Weird, why would anyone aspire to be a loser from Jow Forums? The site's population has tripled since gamergate in 2014 and Jow Forums has risen with the influx of all the newfags. The existence of this place is testament to the lack of quality education and critical thinking nowadays and our inability to take the internet seriously.

You've heard us complain about the cancer killing Jow Forums for years. Well, now we've reached stage 4 and that tumor's name is Jow Forums

youtube.com/watch?v=a_yfnQPaD_E

They think they are redpilled(cringe) but dont understand "redpilling" is just low-effort political indoctrination. They likely have no real understanding of world history, critical thinking, or philosophy. Their entire worldview is Jow Forums posts, infographics, and memes. They probably spend too much time on the internet and confuse trying to "btfo" an opponent with how an actual respectful argument should work in real life where they try and help the other person and their mother won't feel the need to smack their ass. These younger kids growing up on the internet are confusing banter for how arguments actually work or are never learning how to handle themselves in a discussion in the first place.
youtube.com/watch?v=Hhx6IfKrvEQ
youtube.com/watch?v=VM6HZqQKhok
youtube.com/watch?v=8NFy6Uc2BHs

Attached: dork ass losers.jpg (896x3660, 330K)

>Except yes, we do: ipcc.ch/report/ar4/wg1/climate-models-and-their-evaluation/

I do not see a single thing on this page mentioning where the data from these graphs comes from. I'll be honest, I'm quickly scanning them, not going over with a fine tooth comb, but not seeing it. These graphs might be very useful with context, but on their own they aren't much but pretty lines. Is there a page closer to the root of where these come from that I can look at? Some of these on their own look suspicious and cherry-picked.

Um how about it’s fucking cold af right now

What science Mr Jizzard?

Shut up crybaby doomer no one wants to read your autistic thesis
Drink more water and go to bed

I’m laying down in front of the Pacific Ocean.

Attached: 37B8859D-26E7-43B0-8857-0B7D583082B8.jpg (4032x3024, 1.38M)

>sayin the word “science” makes it true

It's real tho
The thing is the gay shit they propose isn't doing anything against it
They know that it will not be stopped
All these attempts to fight it are just people scamming stupid people for money while in a crisis

>literally pouring toxic waste into rivers
>trying

I remember this

You better hide those names otherwise people could look them up and find out was the backstory was on this
3 of these accounts had literally only 1 post and were created the day before
This thing also looks exactly what I immagine a chinese copy of western art wood look like, the eyes are not European

Let me explain the particular pathology of the "I fucking love science" plebbitor, and why he will always treat his chosen pseudoscience as some sort of weird religious dogma. Notice whenever you're arguing with any of the faggots, their argument always reduces down to "a majority of scientists think X" (debatable, but let's assume it is.) Now explaining why the plebbitor does this is easier than explaining why it's a retarded argument, so I'll start with that.

The simple reason is that the plebbitor is an oversocialized person. Someone indoctrinated into socialism from his birth. Probably born to socialist parents, before going off to socialist school. He never had a chance. To him, consensus is everything. Read Kaczynski for a good analysis of the mind of the oversocialized man. He can literally not understand the idea that the majority consensus might be wrong. This is like heresy to him. No - more than heresy it's something that will spark off a deep an existential crisis in his mind if he even let himself consider. It's an impossibility. So now you know why, but why is it a problem?

Well, consider the history of science. Science as an institution has never really been characterized by being majority right. In fact, the history of science is the majority being wrong. The majority is wrong, then an individual or a small group prove the majority wrong, and then progress is made. That's literally the history of our ENTIRE bulk of scientific progress. The merit of the academies has never been being right. It's been that science itself has had a very good mechanism for btfo'ing the majority (who are always retards in any societal class) and proving them wrong. Do you see how this makes the argument "most scientists think X" ludicrous in itself?

Which is why we've never based social policy on that... until now.

tldr. plebbitors suck

Attached: bsm.png (1920x1080, 3.45M)

imao I need more images like these.

Attached: 1529387662833.png (493x271, 145K)

Just tell him Brazil, India, and China needs to be stopped. He'll drop the subject fast.

stick your head in an oven, why do i get b& for some pony shit I've never head of wtf - - GET OFF THIS BOARD OR DIE