Does Jow Forums still think science is a hoax?

The only science that (((they))) allow are those sciences that help their narratives. The moment a science doesn't do that, it will be considered a psuedo-science or even a conspiracy.

>have you learned how to understand
What the fuck kind of statement is this? Do you mean
>Do you now understand ...
or do you actually mean understanding is something that can be learned? It doesn't work that way, Jamal. You either understand something, or you don't. When you do understand it, you did not "learn to understand" ... you "came to an understanding". Go the fuck back to... wherever you came from.

youtu.be/X6TnThVUe9k?t=28
>Just move higher xD

>man made global warming is science and not just lobbying by carbon credit rackets, electric car manufacturers, and alternative energy companies

(((Just pseudo-science.)))

Attached: file.png (358x267, 286K)

>The conclusions from this methodology can be flawed
Oh really? How are they flawed?
>Well, the methodology failed to consider that God is the one changing the temperature
Oh wow user you proved us wrong!
Putting aside how pathetic your whataboutism deflection is (that has literally nothing to do with whether or not science is real), China has lower emissions per capita than America does. They also are curbing their population growth.
>hey guys we discovered that the basic underlying concept was absolutely correct and the ultimate conclusion was also absolutely correct but our numbers were slightly off by an inconsequential amount
k
>hahahahahaah fuck you white people, we WILL replace you =)!!!!
>omg white people, you need to sacrifice your comforts for the future of this planet. DO IT RIGHT NOW!!!!
and where did this strawman come from user? Did you get tired of pretending that science is fake so instead you have to invent fake statements that I didn't make so you can argue against them?
>we WILL replace you
I'm white and so is my wife so literally what are you talking about?
>Go the fuck back to... wherever you came from
I came from /sci/, on a little website called 4channel.org

Yes, (((global warming))) is still a Jewish scam.

>the sun has caused climate change for billions of years except in the last 30 years

Attached: sun.png (677x555, 152K)

>Venus is warmer than Mercury because it's closer to the Sun
literally you right now.

>All ready too late ... start moving people to higher ground

The level of self delusion and faux catastrophic shrieks they imbue!

Move to higher ground then, Yang gang. Leave our beaches.

You're literally a spastic

Attached: ch.png (654x1040, 241K)

Scientism needs lies to exist.
If you admit the truth, you would not be able to get your worshippers all whipped up.

The Apocalypse is what's coming.
Nothing will stop it.
God's wrath looms large in your future.

Attached: image.jpg (1275x1650, 350K)

Not literally, figuratively

Attached: 1520059552184.jpg (926x875, 176K)

you realize the sun has already been ruled out as a potential cause right? Solar variation hasn't correlated with modern global warming + the upper atmosphere is actually cooling (which wouldn't happen if the sun were just getting warmer, but would happen if the lower atmosphere were trapping more heat due to more GHGs)

>China has lower emissions per capita
per capita doesn't mean shit when the planet is on the line. RAHOWA now for climate stability!

So what's the scientific hypothesis about the greenhouse effect. What is the independent variable and how do you manipulate it. What is your control environment. Do you have a planet Earth where you add fossil fuels and another one where you don't? Then do you control the sun, stars, ocean, trees, wind, etc. To make sure those things aren't affecting contaminating your experiment? Then do you compare the two planet earths to determine if, in fact, the increase in fossil fuels creates a "greenhouse effect"? Or do you just state your hypothesis, then build models and algorithms that confirm your presupposition? Exactly! Pseudo-science!

problem is you keep chasing that conclusion no matter how wrong you are.
models haven't predicted anything and fail to capture realty.

Even Bernie is for genociding niggers to fix the climate. How can a Jewish Bolshevik be wrong?

how does insulation work?

Fucking hell I have never read such bullshit, fuck off back to redit you dumb cunt

Attached: soy boy.jpg (474x512, 30K)

Scientific racism is an example of a mocked science. It's problematic to conclude that some races are smarter than others.

Of course the Jewish guy is the one talking bout genociding niggers. It's fine if he does it though. If Trump would have said that. Imagine the fucking reaction of the kike media.

>he never took science after elementary school
>he still thinks that the entirety of science is done with controlled classroom experiments that your teacher sets up
YIKES!
Also like 200 years ago they did experiments with boxes in the sun that had different concentrations of CO2 in them to confirm the greenhouse effect but then again you would only know that if you were functionally literate and if you were functionally literate you wouldn't be a Jow Forumstard

"its not earth thats in trouble, its the people that live on it (oh no), and it will be here long after we've all gone the way of the dodo"

youtube.com/watch?v=sqb18uXNgTI

hmmmmmmm idk, maybe you could explain it to me. Specifically what is Venus insulated by and how does that insulation work? And is that insulation increasing on Earth at an extraordinary rate, because if so that might be what's causing recent warming.
>Fucking hell I have never read a scientific article about anything ever because I am too stupid to understand how science works. Fuck off back to /sci/ you intelligent dick
k

Attached: Greenhouse effect.png (2000x1392, 817K)

you mean trapping more heat due to water vapour right?

perhaps it's fucking atmosphere brainlet.

Man made global warming is unfalsifiable and therefore not scientific. If you think this isn't true, please explain how we measure climate sensitivity and the effect that radiation has on it. If you can do that, you can explain why all the scientific models are consistently wrong and how to fix them.

What you are talking about is Science and not science. It is mainly a grift to get grand money from governments so people can pay for their salaries.

>perhaps it's fucking atmosphere brainlet.
hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm very interesting user! Are you saying that the makeup of a planet's atmosphere affects that planets ability to retain heat? So, for example, if a planet's atmosphere were to radically change in a short period of time, that in turn would affect that planet's ability to retain heat?
hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm tell me more user!

Attached: CO2 levels.jpg (299x168, 10K)

Politicized occult beliefs are not science, OP.

Bitch I'm comin for you.

Attached: 5575863.jpg (259x194, 16K)

yes just like earths atmosphere which besides o2 and N is mostley WATER VAPOUR which is an insulation.

yes but the WATER VAPOUR levels haven't changed much (except slight increases due to global warming). Y'know what has changed a lot? A 33% increase in CO2 and a 300% increase in methane.
Now I'm just a brainlet user but is CO2 present on Venus? Is that part of the insulation on Venus? Would a huge increase in CO2 increase the insulation here on Earth?

Attached: Screenshot from 2019-09-06 21-11-02.png (290x462, 78K)

>goy look, temperature rise with CO2 increase, we emit a lot CO2, it's obvious we are culprit of global warming, even a little kid would connect the dots
>trust us, we know what we are doing, science is settled!

Attached: complicated much.png (1920x1080, 1.05M)

If you are stupid enough to change your life based on a single study, you get what's coming to you.

You're such a fucking faggot. Just fuck off already and stop shitting up this board, it's already bad enough as it is

Attached: radiation.png (609x614, 126K)

...

It's never just one study.

Right, when it's dozens or hundreds of studies you start to pay attention. Again, unless you're a fucking idiot, in which case you still pay attention to single studies like a retard.

increases in CO2 and temperature are not correlated in anyway,.
we've had 2.5 percent more co2 in the air year after year since 1988 and the temperature has gone up .1 degree.

Attached: 6a010536b58035970c016760a72e44970b.png (1143x880, 289K)

Leading argument is a straw man. Not gonna bother reading the rest of your poopoopost.

Anthropomorphic climate change activists become extremely personally offended when you have questions about the data, how it was gathered, or how it can predict the future when it's constantly been shown to be incorrect.

I'd call them a religion, but most Christians, Hindus, or even westernized Muslims don't get super offended when you ask them similar questions about their holy texts.

The anthropomorphic climate change crowd behave more similarly to a cult.

Attached: Climate Change over the years.jpg (600x398, 59K)

>graph with 3 axes, one completely unlabeled and with no frame of reference

Attached: 1565558372114.gif (273x258, 940K)

which one do you need help with?

The climate cultists are very similar to relgious organisation with their end of the world rhetoric.

>data for 17 years

That's really not much data for something as huge and slow moving as the climate system

the black is clearly labeled on both ends the temp is red and the blue is humidity.
along the bottom you'll see a timeline.

The completely unlabeled CO2 scale that looks like it was added in paint?

it shows a rise in co2 and no rise in temperature.
that's the point.

>global warming is about to fall on my head you guys

look at the ends magoo!

I wanna sniff her li'l spergy muff

Without an actual scale it's completely meaningless. You could have drawn the beginning and ends at the exact beginning and end of the temperature, labelled the black numbers the same, and concluded completely differently.

You can't just combined datasets from two experiments because they both had years as the X axis....

>that's the point.

You're completely ignoring time-lag of temperature changes. Just think about simple systems like the interactions between the seasons and lakes; it can take weeks and months for lake temperatures to start responding to the changing seasons because they are such huge thermal masses.

Son you must be literally retarded to think that the central point of all energy and life in our solar system for the last forever is more significant to our world today than a century or so of burning stuff we find lying around the place.
>that said, one car one man is far from sustainable - also we can't eat as much meat as we do

Attached: 1493850512004.jpg (976x649, 73K)

>no rise in temperature
Are you blind? What are you talking about? It goes from 0 to 0.2.

>than a century or so of burning stuff we find lying around the place.
Yeah I mean how long did it take to get that stuff into those places, like millions and millions of years? Burning it in only 100 years should be fine, right guys?

>hey guys we discovered that the basic underlying concept was absolutely correct and the ultimate conclusion was also absolutely correct but our numbers were slightly off by an inconsequential amount
Give us an example.

I’ll give you one to counter your semitism. Plate Tectonics is almost entirely wrong, if not a hoax. There aren’t such a thing as tectonic plates. Subduction doesn’t exist. The sea floor isn’t spreading. There isn’t a middle school classroom convection cell driving all these fake plates underneath each other. Ironically the sea floor spreading to move continents, the basis of the original theory, was created by an expanding earth believer and was part of an expanding earth theory. The expansion was dumped for subduction. This began the fallacy of plate tectonics. This was before they mapped the ocean floor. The Pacific Ocean floor completely and utterly debunks plate tectonics. 100%. The theory is dead yet it’s not. Because science doesn’t ever change. It drags its feet into dead ends because of all the money and credibility involved which would be lost if they were wrong. Acknowledging an expansion event or two would not be a minor adjustment. Plate tectonics is the best example because it doesn’t require a PHD or fancy maths. And yet you and many others will choose to ignore this and continue to hopelessly parrot and believe in the mistake (or the lie). That’s why you’re not worth saving and most of you deserve to be executed

>WAAAHHHHH stop teaching us science! Science is shitting up this board, we have too much science as it is!
9 of the 10 hottest years on record have taken place in the 21st century (and the other was 1998) but I'm sure it's all a big coincidence

Attached: Screenshot from 2019-09-06 20-39-01.png (609x543, 100K)

>China has lower emissions per capita than America does. They also are curbing their population growth
Yes China is doing well to curb population growth. We really need to work to put an immediate stop to population growth in Africa, India and Indonesia.

Attached: 1463447314063.png (225x200, 77K)

>2014
Time to celebrate 50 years of lies!

global warming is caused by humans?
thats a hoax.

global warming as a natural occurance?
its real.

Do you care to dance? What know you of the Geological Temperature Record Romance?

Attached: Chili-Pepper-in-the-Shape-of-a-Woman--27029[1].jpg (800x916, 59K)

They become more unhinged whenever you point out that historical projections for climate change cannot even accurately account for the single largest contributor to the models discrepancy: clouds

DOI: 10.1126/science.1065837

>Plate Tectonics is almost entirely wrong, if not a hoax.
What the FUCK are you talking about?? Not a single thing you said had any evidence. Was this sarcasm too high level for me??

>Heh, I pointed out that the sun is billions of years old that PROVES that the greenhouse effect is fake!
do you really tell yourself this?
>Give us an example
sure. Svante Arhenius came up with the theory of global warming in the 1890s. The numbers have changed slightly but for over 100 years there has never been any credible attack on the underlying theory and now everybody who isn't braindead accepts that an increase in greenhouse gases will lead to a magnified greenhouse effect

>Does Jow Forums still think science is a hoax?
Don't know about /pol, but I never that since was a hoax. But then again, I don't find any evidence regarding anthropomorphic climate change to be terribly convincing. Given the sleazeball tactics they use to build support for their hot air these propaganda, it's fairly obvious that they're trying to divert attention from the scifi drama they claim is science.
Let's put it this way. If some group of engineers wanted to build a bridge for you, you'd want to ask some questions, see their CV, and have some indepth discussions about past projects. If they respond by accusing you of not believing in bridges, you might sense something was off. When discussing their past projects, it seems pretty obvious that their bridges don't actually bridge the water ways and valleys the project called for, but always end up too short by over 50%. The cheif engineer responds that rather than doing the hard work of actually taking measurements, they use measurements of other bridges, put them in their bridge simulator, and use the results of those calculations to build the bridge, noting that their models are improving and evolving all the time. Asking questions about the models causes them to sperg "Cars and people can't float through the air over a river or ravine! You have to build a bridge or people will die!" You'd dismiss them as dangerous lunatics.
As to the greenhouse effect, it is an oft spouted hypothesis that's supported by no evidence. Originally, in the late 70's, as leftists were pushing the new ice age, and Jimmy Carter, wearing a smart cardigan and looking like a Georgian Mr. Rogers, lectured us to keep the thermostats at 65F during the winter to save energy because we were running out of fossil fuels and would run out in the near future, scientists were sifting through new data from Venus. The Soviets had just slammed a heavily reinforced water heater on its surface, and NASA's shiny new drone fell into orbit.

>We really need to work to put an immediate stop to population growth
This. Why don't the stupid libtards promote widely available and affordable contraceptive use and abortion access? Heh, stupid libtards!

I'm sure it's completely inconsequential. Not even worth considering. I mean, how many tons of CO2 are in the air? How many tons are locked away in hydrocarbons? Surely it's fine if we convert all of the hydrocarbons to CO2, no effects at all, right?

It's honestly a good thing. Without climate change the global south would keep growing unchecked. But mother earth has recognized that that cannot be allowed. It'll be sad when billions are dying to food and water shortages, but we'll have only the globalists to blame.

Attached: oikX-qKk.jpg (600x314, 23K)

Yeah the whole clouds thing is a really big blind spot that the climate scientists still don't have a good answer for, but also don't like to talk about very much.

>If I keep saying lies then eventually people will believe them!
no mostly we just get tired of pointing out how fucking retarded you are.

Attached: global cooling.png (492x1250, 477K)

This right here. I've heard "cause muh science says so" way too often lately.

stop falling for the fake reglion of global warming
we are coming out of an ice age
that's all.

the sea level raise is dew to china making new islands and all the plastic in the water melting the ice
all the gas in the air is making our world colder in the winter and warmer in the summer up to 10 degrees

You can slow it down by planting trees improving the farms to greenhouses

and expanding forests

killing people, animal or insects doesn't do fucking anything but kill more plants

skip to 4hours 50
You lying fucking kike
bitchute.com/video/2Eiid3e9GnEX/

if you really knew science as I know God we wouldn't be talking like this.

But only in white countries right. Meanwhile we need to import millions of thirdworlders with higher birthrates per year or the social security ponzi scheme will crash.

Attached: EDf9rB6XkAEHsSh.jpg (650x522, 50K)

How does a carbon tax fight climate change?

How does offshoring polluting industry (which would be strictly regulated in the US) to China fight climate change?

How does letting in millions of low-footprint migrants enter high-footprint countries (and enabling them to produce higher footprints) fight climate change?

Attached: 6C5C0305-63B1-4DBE-9785-9BA3C08FF79C.png (1023x675, 1.29M)

A single paper, that was not concluding what you are concluding, does not prove your point. The fact that you think it does shows everything about your mind.

You must surely be made of straw, man?

Attached: Straw-Bales[1].jpg (1154x768, 569K)

>A single paper, that was not concluding what you are concluding, does not prove your point. The fact that you think it does shows everything about your mind.

I'm addressing the entire problem on which many dozens of papers have been written. It's an unresolved unknown in climate science right now. Given that rising temperatures increase humidity and create more clouds, it would be awfully important to know whether they trap more heat than they reflect sunlight away, or vice versa.

I feel that you have no clue about this

Science lesson? I guess so, why not.

I observe that CO2 levels are rising. I observe that temperatures have risen to some degree.

I decide to hypothesize that CO2 levels are related to temperature.

My experiment: Measure how much CO2 is released in the past, before humans. Measure how much CO2 is release in the future, (when humans produce CO2 by burning hydrocarbons, something that has not occurred in the past)

What happens next, user?

Just wait a little longer it’ll eventually be hot.

Are you seriously using this again? People learn about water at a young age your attempt at science doesn’t validate you

>But only in white countries right
"Hey guys I'm too stupid to understand science so I'm going to go off on a completely unrelated rant about racial minorities!"
wow there really is a high overlap between white supremacists and retards!

none of that has anything to do with whether science is real. First admit that science is real, then we can move on to talking about solutions, But also,
>How does a carbon tax fight climate change?
literally econ 101. As price goes up, demand decreases. If emitting carbon costs money, people will emit less carbon.

Holy shit this is so much worse

Science isn't a hoax. We have a rash of people bending it to their own biases and benefit and it's the greatest sin committed against science ever.

Attached: 1560581593280.jpg (1080x1168, 138K)

that's because we have globally cut down more trees for more farms
that increases CO2 which is good for plants but not for us

Get the fuck out
NOW. your fake shit woun't be totalerated get fucked

Here's a simple question:

Why WOULDN'T releasing CO2 into the atmosphere at a rate that it is not normally released at have an affect on the atmosphere?

Nothing you said in the first bit is false. And the temperature increase is just a coincidence?

HOLY SHIT ACTUAL BRAIN DAMAGE

>Just wait a little longer
or idk maybe pat attention to recent events

Attached: hottest years on record.jpg (900x506, 172K)

>Just wait a little longer it’ll eventually be hot.
>Are you seriously using this again?

Look, my original argument was that 17 years is way too fucking short to be making any conclusions about the climate system. That's as retarded as claiming the coming winter is evidence of global cooling.

And either way, if you look at the original post with the graph over the 17-year period (), it shows a 0.2 C rise in temperature, so yes, it did get hotter in the fucking graph that he supposedly proves it didn't