Global warming

Bunch of Americans ITT that are able to think only in terms of American political discourse.

OP is a kike, using social pressure and attempting to shame rather than addressing any of the points made by any poster.

Show israeli flag you disgusting greasy faggot
How's life on the diaper brigade?

Convince me, using examples and reason, that the warming over the past 170 is due to increased levels of CO2 in our atmosphere. I agree that it has become very political, and continued discussion of that particular aspect is boring. I want rational arguments on phsyics (not politics, or meta-science).

What fucking point?

> a bunch of shitskins will die global warming good I don't care lol

This argument?

Surprise, cyka.

I notice that you aren't posting in Chinese, meaning that you can do ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to prevent climate change.

Attached: us vs china.png (740x393, 40K)

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Jews_in_Russia
Probably still a kike

All Russians jews emigrated to USA. You are the kike.

They can't because CO2 in the atmosphere today got there in response to the warming that happened during the MEDIEVAL PERIOD

Food waste produces a bunch of methane, which contributes to global warming greatly. Try buying food that your are actually going to eat.

Why aren't you calling for your ally China to stop emitting? American energy production emissions are dropping due to natural gas replacing coal as a principal source of energy production.

Oh right, because you're allies with China and an enemy of the west, so their COAL emissions don't count towards total atmospheric CO2 content, right?

Quick send me a check for a million dollars. I will make a Rube Goldberg contraption to stop the devastating results of global warming in 100 years.

And there in lies the problem with the global warming wackos. If you honestly believe global warming is an issue and will have profound effects, start spending our money to build sea walls and move people inland. There should be no more government funding for any infrastructure predicted to be underwater in 100 years. Most of NYC and DC need to be defunded and allowed to slowly crumble forcing people away from the shore.

>you're allies with China
Ah, yes, I am personally an ally of China, and Xi Jinping is my best buddy.

Go fuck yourself. China is a cyberpunk anti-utopia next door, I wish they fail as a state.

AGW isn t real, its just a method to suck more money out of people, decrease already low western birth rates, to accept more invaders due to that lie and to initiate centrally planned economies to strip more of that sovereignity.

There is obviously some correlation between global temperature and atmospheric CO2. The question is causation (like you say). You say the CO2 increase we have experienced comes mostly from the ocean due to warming (by some other cause), and that the delayed reaction we have seen over the past 170 years (ish) was caused by the medieval warm period (c. 950-1250) ?

Why aren't you bitching on a chink forum if you're so concerned about this? Why aren't you calling for WAR with China if you believe in GLOBAL WARMING? The west has done much to curb emissions, while China is RAMPING THEIRS UP. You're either a kike or a retard, and either way you're a disingenuous hypocrite. Fuck yourself

Attached: 1510339537581.jpg (1200x7222, 1.57M)

No the real reason, is increased heat from the sun(sun cycles), there have been higher concentrations of co 2, but it has never led to some sort of extreme heating. I mean the middle ages were warmer than our time periods

I believe that atmospheric CO2 increases in concentration after the temperature increases, with a lag time of about 800 years because looking at 400,000 years of model data from ice core records, it's never not happened that way. I believe the oceans are releasing orders of magnitude more CO2 than human activity due to warming that happened before the industrial revolution, and that most of it isn't even detectable to us as an increase because the plants eat it up. That's why there's been a 30% increase in the area of leafy vegetation covering Earth's surface since the 80s when they began surveying it with satellites.

If global warming is real and ice caps melt as a result continue to melt because it's getting warmer then sea level rise would be visible is this correct?
Port aurthur

Thanks for the infographic. Can't say I trust it, but always fun to read.

Melting ice does not cause water to rise. Basic physics.

No it isn't. Its as simple as power hungry leftists tricking people into being unable to see the forest from the trees for the sake of centralizing government power over every aspect of a nation. Its pretty obvious at this point.

Attached: 1558270547154m.jpg (1024x986, 99K)

The other thing that bothers me is that American liberals handwave volcanic activity as unimportant, or not a large contributor, when the IPCC does not include data for unknown unknowns or many known unknowns in their calculations for human CO2 emissions. By some estimates there are up to 10,000,000(!) UNKNOWN submarine volcanoes, of which up to 10% are active. CO2 emissions notwithstanding, the superheating of deep ocean waters that occurs drives ocean currents and contributes to climate phenomenon such as el nino

Global warming is a non problem compared to the destruction of the environment. When the bees are gone and the fish all float on the water we will all die.

The problem is also self-correcting, no need for you to worry.

Good news, everyone!
modernfarmer.com/2015/01/plastic-eating-mushrooms-save-world/
large.stanford.edu/courses/2016/ph241/chang2/
There's no such thing as an intractable problem. I have faith that even the Jewish question will be answered one day, in a more satisfactory way than "build a big fire and throw them all on it."

>Global warming is a non problem compared to the destruction of the environmen

Global warming IS changing the environment. A lot of insects are going extinct or start invading new areas.

Provide source

That is a pretty good argument. I need to go read about Vostok core samples now. I wonder how accurately they can 1. determine the levels of CO2 and temperature, and 2. date those figures. If it can be incontrovertibly be proved that CO2 follows temperature, then that is a pretty good argument. Also a bit curious about the "diminishing return" of the warming effect of CO2 from s infographic. Would be cool to get some more credible sources on this.

>can’t grow crops in a desert
Have you been to Southern California? It’s a fucking desert that we turned into highly productive farm land.

sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0006320718313636
nationalgeographic.com/animals/2019/02/why-insect-populations-are-plummeting-and-why-it-matters/
scientificamerican.com/article/as-insect-populations-decline-scientists-are-trying-to-understand-why/

For starters

>Global warming is a non problem compared to the destruction of the environment.
What a strange comment. It's a form of environmental destruction. What do you think it gonna happen to the fish when coral reefs and plankton die off in even greater amounts?

They cross reference Vostok with antarctica and sediment samples from various rivers and sea beds, as well as tree ring data (which is now infamous due to michael mann's cherry picking, unethical data adjustment, and unrealistic extrapolation)

Now get ready to invest at least the same amount of effort to irrigation and fertilization globally.

When are you fucking morons going to understand that the Earth's climate is always changing and humans can do absolutely nothing about it. Co2 is minimal factor in climate. The Earths temperature raised 20 degrees when exiting the younger dryas 11k years ago and you're worried about a couple of degrees. We know what this is about. You want to take whitey down a notch... better find another way because this will fail.

None of these can prove a definitive link to CO2 or global temperatures. It's just as likely the fallout from the >1000 nuclear bombs that a bunch of psychos detonated in the atmosphere over the last 60 years or so (which also caused much of the cancer epidemic that tobacco was blamed for since it pulls radioactive elements from the soil and incorporates them in its structure). Try again.

Can you show me proof that global warming or higher CO2 is bad for insects? Because examination of the fossil record shows insect life to thrive during warm periods. Not only that, but some GW advocates state that insect-driven epidemics will get worse due to climate change. So which is it?

I found these. The source agency seems credible. Not sure where on their site this was pulled from though. Also it doesn't specifically say anything about insects.

Attached: 2.jpg (498x352, 32K)

>Earth's climate is always changing

When are your fucking morons going to understand that when you're driving a car you're always moving so it's OK to floor it and accelerate to 100 mph while driving through a town.

and this

Attached: 1.jpg (475x349, 29K)

pnas.org/content/115/44/E10397

> when a canadian fag has more sense than burgerlanders

you are still fags, though

This makes sense, the years between 1800 and 1950 were the years of unchecked expansion, before people realized that maybe you shouldn't slash and burn millions of acres of forest just because

>Muh crops
Vegetables are for ugly people

>Have you been to Southern California? It’s a fucking desert that we turned into highly productive farm land.
Yes, by unstustainably draining all the groundwater. It ain't gonna last.
grist.org/article/californias-water-crisis-has-put-farmers-in-a-race-to-the-bottom/
iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/ab1a5f

What a great analogy, completely sold it.

Had to correct my dumbass mistake

twosides.info/european-forests/

Just saying.

Attached: 231gmn.jpg (394x291, 18K)

I'm getting the impression that the more the AGW consensus contradicts reality (lack of warming, ie. their predictions are shit), the more (primarily media generated) hysteria sets in (enter Thunberg). Also they are bringing in this secondary argument regarding biodiversity (habitat reduction, extinction etc).

well just fuck you in the ass. nothing will change unless we nuke the chinese. they are the fucking problem you piece of shit.

>pnas.org/content/115/44/E10397
You're a fucking faggot
There is nothing in this report linking the increase in temperature to the bugs not doing as well. It's only documenting that they were not able to catch as many in consecutive seasons.

DID YOU EVEN READ WHAT YOU ARE POSTING?

Also, the abstract is weasel-worded in such a way that all it really says is that they couldn't catch more bugs and they don't know why, but can we please have grant money for studying environmental impacts of glowbul warming?

I find the biodiversity argument slightly more convincing btw.

It's a jew tactic, when they can't win an argument they move the goal posts and/or add a timeline, move it up, or make it more urgent.

Ironically, their predictions have generally been too conservative where they've been wrong.

Attached: sea_ice_prediction_med.jpg (500x375, 26K)

They are growing NOW because since the end of the era of expansion people stopped slashing and burning. It's a shame the Asians and Latinos won't get on board with environmental stewardship and will eventually need to be culled.

The ice has been receding in a two stepes back, one step forward cycl for the last 11,000 years since the start of the interglacial. Can you show that it would not be melting at the same rate with no human influence.

Any (((coincidences))) I should know about, or are you characterizing the method?

The latter. It's a rhetorical debate strategy called pilpul, designed for silencing opposition when you don't really have an argument. Muslims also have a versions of it called taqiya, muruna, and kitman possibly among others.

>There is nothing in this report linking the increase in temperature to the bugs not doing as well
control + f temperature = 72 results
>pointed out, tropical species that evolved in comparatively aseasonal environments should have narrower thermal niches, reduced acclimation to temperature fluctuations, and exist at or near their thermal optima. Consequently, even small increments in temperature can precipitate sharp decreases in fitness and abundance. These predictions have been verified in a variety of tropical reptiles, amphibians, and invertebrates
>Studies documenting declines in insects have focused on temperate species (10–13), and have identified climate warming, along with habitat disturbance and insecticides, as primary causal mechanisms (9, 10).

>lack of warming
really nigga

HAIL HITLER !

ECOFASCISM NOW !

PUNCH A POLLUTER IN THE FACE !

Attached: 1560046822589.jpg (850x1206, 280K)

Its increased after 2009 though. Also, just curious, how do you think they obtained ice coverage data prior to the satellite age? "mean range of IPCC models" is not very convincing. Also, I am not skeptical that the temperature is changing (subsequently reducing ice coverage), I am skeptical to the alleged cause.

Attached: 3.jpg (840x578, 46K)

The entire northern hemisphere is owned by white people. Canada, Russia, Scandinavian nations - all white. If the equatorial regions can't grow crops, the northern areas can and will, and those white countries will simply trade to others in more southerly regions. Russian siberia alone could probably feed the entire fucking planet and then some once it's thawed out.

The people who get hit hardest by global warming are niggers in africa, pajeets in india, and chinks in china. Coincidentally they are all producing most of the worlds' pollution too. Something you retard liberals ignore or gloss over.

What about it? They're not my people, they're not related to me, I do not give a flying fuck what happens to their countries. My welfare is for my kind. Your suicidal altruism is only marginally effective when there's enough resources to go around. When there isn't, and you ask me to sacrifice myself and my people for the sake of others, you will get exactly what you deserve.

sciencetrends.com/insect-pest-species-rapidly-evolve-and-not-just-to-chemical-pesticides/
So the insect population momentarily declines while the hardier ones survive and the population can adjust to natural, regional temperature fluctuations. It's a good thing the insects aren't a "one word, one people" type, or they might actually go extinct if the temperature shifted a few degrees.

Well, it suddenly drops off a cliff right around the time our industrial output goes nuts. Can I absolutely prove the connection. Nope, but how else do you explain it?

Attached: Kinnard_2011_sea_ice_med.jpg (500x375, 27K)

Average it out over the past 20 years, and yes, no increase. nigga. Meanwhile CO2 has increased from roughly 365 to 410, implying this alleged very strong causal relationship might be misunderstood.

Attached: 4.jpg (768x443, 95K)

Again, provide evidence that this is out of the ordinary, or due to human involvement. Prove the poor bugs are only sweating due to my steak and my truck, and also explain why I should give a fuck when the Chinese and Indians don't and my leaders don't care enough to fight for it?

Actually it’s because the people who promote it get everything else wrong and I’ve seen some videos from scientists who’ve explained why they think the main stream community is wrong. And considering they’re all lefties that makes sense because lefties don’t care about the truth, they only care about virtue signalling, like Richard Dawkins claiming we’re all African. Also the sort of people who advocate it on Jow Forums almost exclusively have memeflags so you know they can’t be trusted

No it’s actually a good thing. Civilization and technology flourishes in warmer temperatures and we can grow more food. The renaissance era is a direct result of a warming period.

(((reconstructed sea ice extent)))
By who, michael mann?

Arctic sea ice is indeed receding, but not because of CO2 as a greenhouse gas. The prevailing winds carry soot from Chinese industry to the north pole. This black soot deposits on top of the ice, increasing the amount of sun that is absorbed and thus melting down the ice even given a steady state temperature.

It would be perfectly reasonable to impose high tariffs on China soot producers if you were genuinely concerned about the Arctic ice melting (some people think it is good), but none of the alarmists talk like that. They want to kill your car, which really has nothing to do with the ice melting.

Why is your graph apparently at odds with every other graph I've seen? Where did you get that from?

>how do you think they obtained ice coverage data prior to the satellite age?
Care to tell me?

>The entire northern hemisphere is owned by white people.

I hope you have lubed your asshole for "climate refugees".

>If the equatorial regions can't grow crops, the northern areas can and will

And the soil is as good, of course. And the infrastructure is there already. And there are absolutely no other factors.

And Northern hemisphere has no port cities. Surely, right now sea levels are rising by something like 3 mm per year, but it's not like it's accelerating, right?

It's actually due to volcanic activity in the Gakkel ridge. Look at the huge hole in the arctic ice from summer 2009-2013 ish I believe, then look at the geographic location of this submarine volcanic mountain range. The warming is not "hiding in the ocean", it fucking originated there.

If you ignore the evidence that human activity causes the climate to warm, and that increased temperature extremes are harmful to tropical insects, like the study says, then no, I can't prove anything to you.
How can anyone prove anything if the science is all just (((bullshit)))?

Ditto for antarctica. It's being melted by a VOLCANO.

wattsupwiththat.com/2019/04/23/the-big-arctic-sea-ice-shift-of-2007-ice-refuses-to-melt/, supposedly data from
ftp://sidads.colorado.edu/DATASETS/NOAA/G02135/north/monthly/data/. I know that it is a "sceptics" blog, could be wrong, I admit.

It's caused by solar warming.
Anyone interested should,
A) Look at the "surprise" of NASA since the 70's every time they've sent probes to every planet in our system and they've been way hotter than expected
B) look at the electric universe theory
C) look at sonoluminescense

The sun will shed its outer corona for a few days and then reignite at a higher frequency.
Evil is incompatible and will be destroyed.
Neutrals will be relocated for a while.
Genuinely good people will upgrade with the sun and enter a higher density and a "Golden Age".

Emotions will be high during the transition, don't let yourself fall to your animal body - Rise above!

>If you ignore the evidence that human activity causes the climate to warm

Please enlighten us

I yield the point that the paper made, which is that temperature extremes can be harmful to some individual members of current insect species, But I also assert that the surviving hardier members go on to fill the ecological niche left by the ones that didn't make it. It's happened uncountable times, and it's no different this time just because a bunch of kikes misdiagnosed humanity as the cause due to their scheming greed, and liberals believed it due to hubris.

>Global warming is real
Sure, in the sense that the average temperatures have risen a negligible amount over a large period of time. People that claim they can predict how or even if the trend will continue are full of shit.

>and has negative consequences
No, not really. I live in a part of the world where the difference between summer and winter can be as much as 80 degrees celsius, so the idea that a change in the average temperature by a FRACTION of a degree, in over a century, is a big deal is just plain laughable to me. If the warming trend were to continue linearly (which I doubt) it would take about 1000 years before there are any REAL negative consequences. What have we got right now for negative consequences? An unusual migration pattern for a specific kind of South American frog, or something?

global warming is natural and poses no danger at all so get fucked eco tranny

>Evil is incompatible and will be destroyed.
>Neutrals will be relocated for a while.
>Genuinely good people will upgrade with the sun and enter a higher density and a "Golden Age".

Alex, I know you have been banned from social media, but Jow Forums is hard to monetize.

Attached: serveimage.jpg (1280x720, 100K)

>wattsupwiththat.com
Not really interested in paid shills
sourcewatch.org/index.php/Anthony_Watts

Your second link seems to show consistent melting on first glance.

Watch your back faggot.