Alright bros I need help with the whole climate change argument and some redpilling...

Alright bros I need help with the whole climate change argument and some redpilling. How can you argue against the rise in carbon levels and it’s relationship to sea level rise?
Please give me a good argument for this shit.

Attached: 89CCAAEE-DA63-45BF-8F65-0B38B473B0E1.jpg (1024x938, 95K)

Other urls found in this thread:

skepticalscience.com/argument.php
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

carbon is relative to the sea level

get out of the house and have fun.

Because sea levels don't rise when most of the ice is already in the water, infact the sea levels should lower as the ice melts. Try it with a glass of ice water retard.

If anything it's a good thing, humidity will raise and plants will get huge.

>How can you argue against the rise in carbon levels and it’s relationship to sea level rise?
how does carbon make water expand?

You're screwed.
After every ice age,the ice caps melt and the sea level rises.
They're pulling a chicken little on you saying that THIS time it's caused by humans, unlike the last 5 times when it was natural.
It's a cum hoc, ergo proctor hoc fallacy. You want to reason with the unreasonable, which is stupid. The best you can do if they're dangerous is shoot them.

Imagine being such a brainlet that you come to Jow Forums, to as, the uneducated masses of ignorant, uninformed dolts, about something which they have an infantile understanding of.

See, what you really want is just for the people on Jow Forums to confirm your biases for you, tell you what you want to hear so that you can then jerk yourself off about how contrarian and smart you all are for not having a clue. It's truly pathetic.

Attached: 1518576740959.jpg (1170x742, 70K)

Not gonna spoon feed but you gotta dig into the earths atmospheres life history in essence
I mean for starts you can go on the great oxygen extinction, before that time the atmosphere was oxygen free and extremely green housed
From there you can draw the lines and see that our atmosphere today is still going through ripples of these drastic changes and has created a low/high carbon, dust and other gas cycles
Pretty interesting how much is free to look up

Dude .
Seriously?
What if the ice is on a fucking land and that get melted? Then it would raise the water.
That’s essentially what North Pole and South Pole are

It doesnt. Its trapped in glacial caps that are melting and being released. Thats the correlation.

Almost correct. South Pole and Greenland...

Tell them they're correct and ask when will they stop being hypocrites and sell their car a stop breathing?

There is almost zero land in the north pole retard, it's all shitty islands, hello dis is canada speaking You know, the country the north pole is in. HELLO SANTA WHAT THE ICE DO.

The weight of the ice pushes down the landmass. Adding more water to the ocean would add mass to push down on the ocean floor. This is why despite all the alarm, sea levels are only rising by millimeters per year.

he said for the fifth time as he posted on Jow Forums and didnt follow his own advice

get out of the house and have fun.

>Is the earth warming?
Yes.
>Did man help cause that?
Probably.
>What can we do about it?
Nothing.

The arctic permafrost started thawing and releasing the stored methane in it years ago, that was the point of no return.

The good news is that global warming has a number of benefits that no one talks about. Canada and Russia especially will come out way ahead in the next few hundred years as more of their land becomes useable. The reason the left hates it so much is all their power bases are right at the ocean's edge and will be the first to suffer from sea rise. Inland rural areas will actually be better off.

Posting this again because most of Jow Forums's arguments and their counterclaims can be found

skepticalscience.com/argument.php

Look up Marc Marano. He has a couple of books about the climate change hoax.

Me personally I’d attack the scientific community in general- most scientists massage their data to get the results they want, most will use the Texas sharpshooter fallacy to paint the picture they want... that’s why less than half of all scientific studies can actually be reproduced by other scientists. It’s just a sham like any other big institution. The Corbett report just had a 2 part podcast about how about the scientific community is.

>good argument
but there isn't one.
i mean sure, you wanna shill for the koch bros or some other corporate entity, ensure they make a few more pennies out of it while fucking you hard up the asshole and destroying the world for your kids... well then yeah, you can go hard on grand solar minimum, commie or world government conspiracy, Co2 is actually good for plants, or any number of number of dumb bullshit theories that make no fucking sense at all.
this would make you both a cuck and a massive cunt at the same time - that said, most denier bullshit is from the right so you'd be in good company.

And not a single point made... you must be really smart.