Is it true Cred Forums doesn't believe in climate change because Trump said so?

Have you been to a Chinese city recently? With smog levels that are so severe, you need to wear doctors asks, they're doing jack shit.

*masks

>You literally didn't even counter his point. You just went on an autistic tangent.

Gary Johnson made the argument that we shouldn't do anything about climate change because "the sun will blow up a few billion years anyway."

youtube.com/watch?v=xaDl8MkcHsE
youtube.com/watch?v=xaDl8MkcHsE
youtube.com/watch?v=xaDl8MkcHsE

Miami was already supposed to be underwater. So no, I don't buy any of the fearmongering.

>muh warming will make more and bigger hurricanes
>hasn't been a significant hurricane since Sandy

They're not obligated to begin reduction until 2029.

We can have this conversation again in 12 years (if Cred Forums is still here). Screencap this thread and we can see who's right then.

I think it's a grossly overrated problem when we already can't compete with CHYNA and other countries that don't follow any rules for human ethics to begin with.

WORLD IS SHIT SO WE SHOULD MAKE IT EVEN SHITTER

WHAT A FUCKING BRILLIANT ARGUMENT YOU STUPID HOMO FAGGOT

I GUESS YOU LOVE HAVING SUPER STORMS AND HAVING MIAMI UNDER WATER!

Belief in climate change is irrelevant.
Trump is strong on energy independence, this includes renewable energy which will combat climate change in itself.

WE SHOULDN'T DO ANYTHING BECAUSE WE ARE LAZY

WE SHOULD DESTORY THE PLANET BECAUSE WE GOT MARS

WE WILL ALL TELEPORT TO MARS AND SAVE THE HUMAN RACEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

i dont believe in climate change because science says its bullshit

its called the weather you dumb faggots, get over it.

>WE SHOULD DESTORY THE PLANET BECAUSE WE GOT MARS

isn't that what Gary Johnson said?

You know, switching gradually to a green economy is probably the best for the economy and the stability.
Green energy is becoming more and more affordable, and it's even competitive (depending on the type and the local situation).

Not relying only on fossil energy make your economy more robust ans less sensitive to the price variation of petrol or gaz.

Even if you do not believe in climate change, you should still want to switch to a green economy.

There is indeed climate change (the climate of our earth has been changing for 4.6 billion years since it first formed), and hell maybe by some metrics the temperatures are getting hotter (although most people who have been alive for thirty plus years do not detect any tremendous rise in temperatures and also we're coming off of an ice age) but there is no substantial evidence that proves beyond reasonable doubt that increases in global temperatures are directly cause by human activity. Also, the doomsday, nightmare scenarios dreamt up by some climate scientists have never come true. Miami isn't going under water, neither is Manhattan any time soon. We aren't just saying this because Trump said it, we've been saying this for much longer before he even announced later. If someone comes up with conclusive truth that rising global temperatures are directly cause by human activity and will thus affect human life as we know it, that will be the day I start getting behind global warming hysteria.

No. Trump says he doesn't believe in climate change because we (quite a few people, actually) don't believe in AGW alarmism. And then he calls it a Chinese hoax to put his own unique, hyperbolic branding on the thing, when in fact climate change industry is very much a product of western world socialism. I'm quite sure Trump doesn't believe his talking point.

>Belief in climate change is irrelevant.
> Trump is strong on energy independence, this includes renewable energy which will combat climate change in itself.

REPEAL EPA
BELIEF IN CLEAN COAL
REVOKE PARIS AGREEMENT
OIL TYCOON ON ECONOMIC TEAM

WOW TRUMP IS SO GOOD FOR THE CLIMATE

TRUMP WILL STOP CLIMATE CHANGE BY NOT BELIEVING IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

>implying scientists can't be per$uaded into fabricating data

I didn't say 'don't do anything'. I said kill China.

>97–98% of the most published climate researchers say humans are very likely causing most global warming.

Source:
pnas.org/content/107/27/12107.full.pdf

If 97-98% of doctors told you that you had a disease, would you go with the 2-3% that told you you didn't?

>I didn't say 'don't do anything'. I said kill China.

NUKE AND KILL BILLIONS

IT WILL SOLVE ALL OF OUR PROMBLEMS

PEW PEW TRUMP WILL NUKE EVERY COUNTRY WE HATE PEW PEW PEW

AMERICAN COWBOYS BLOWING UP

not an argument

>because trump said so
Or because for the past 50 years they have invented one "big crisis" after another, have always been wrong and their solution is always to give government more power and increase taxes.

Nevermind how they are now retroactively changing the numbers on old measurements to make it seem like if the global warming was real.

2 cents have been deposited into your account.

Good work.

taxing the fuck out of everyone and putting these ridiculous regulations is just going to make big business set up shop in china, africa, india etc where they don't have to worry about these regulations, not only will that cost us jobs and tax money, but it's not going to do shit to cut down carbon emissions or anything since we're being outproduced

>taxing the fuck out of everyone and putting these ridiculous regulations is just going to make big business set up shop in china, africa, india etc where they don't have to worry about these regulations,

Other countries are starting to regulate pollution as well. You clearly aren't paying attention. You think climate change only effects China? It effects the planet.

Any scientist that can with certainty state that there is a direct or indirect link between the climate/temperature and human consumption is either lying or mentally ill or trying to get laid. Correlation does not imply causation. Science is, in essence, opinions. Some opinions carry more weight than others.

>You think climate change only effects China? It effects the planet.
'climate change' doesnt effect anybody

its called the weather cycle you dumbfuck. global heating and cooling are natural phenomenons that have been recorded for all of recorded history.

you are saying the sky is falling, because its raining outside. you braindead child

Calling someone a liar is not a valid argument.

Looks like those carbon taxes sure are paying off!

>weather cycle

I didn't know they had cars during the dinosaurs........

Way to sidestep the point like a true kike shill.

>Looks like those carbon taxes sure are paying off!

YOUR RIGHT WE SHOULD LET KOCH BROTHERS HAND IT

Go back to fucking Reddit Jesus were infested

Is it true that people on the left really are presumptuous cunts that have no clue how to into economics?
youtu.be/dCrkqLaYjnc
youtu.be/ap6YfQx9I64

Climate researchers would say that. If they didn't say that they might have to find real jobs.

are you retarded?

is that supposed to be an argument?

Neither is inventing a percentage of scientists so to perpetrate an appeal to popularity fallacy.

Take note, kids. This is what happens when you drop out of high school, enter an echo chamber, and fail to comprehend your own data points.

Do you believe that vaccines cause autism too?

99.99% of scientists don't agree that climate change is man-made, 99% believe that it is occuring whether it is man-made or not. The man-made bit is shilled hard by celebritiy scientists and liberals

where is your argument?

you are literally crying about the weather you dumbfuck.

But its not false, you are the one accusing thousands of well-educated people liars with absolutely no evidence to support your claim. You think its a myth? Lets see your research. No, not some other persons biased research from some unlicensed academic journal, lets see YOUR research. The experiments that YOU conducted. Whats that? Yeah, thats what I thought. You have AT BEST just as little evidence to support your claims as the people you accuse of lying. You only beleive what you want to believe.

But do you believe that vaccines cause autism or not?

thats not an argument you autist

According the shillarys emails climate change denial is funded by the koch brothers, but I'm an optimist anyways.

no, what kind of retard thinks that vaccines give you hereditary disorders?

But do you believe that vaccines cause autism or not?

What he said isn't untrue. he should have elaborated more though, cause people think he's a tard now

basically, the Western world developed much earlier than China. along with this industrialization came lots and lots of factories, and with lots and lots of factories came pollution.

now that we've realized wtf we're doing and the effects it is having (which are real, though I think the extent is exaggerated) we are taking steps to decrease pollution. but because the whole earth feels the harms of pollution, we're trying to impose these pollution minimizing policies on the rest of the world as well

because China is in the midst of their industrial boom, they aren't having this. they pretty much told the West to fuck off, we polluted a bunch to create flourishing societies and began dealing with it after the fact, they should be allowed to do the same.

China is sneaky bastards though, I wouldn't doubt they've manipulated studies to make GW seem more pronounced than it really is. Reason being we would further change our policy, whereas they don't give a fuck about any pollution or what we tell them todo

were you vaccinated?

Yes. Like many children.

Do you believe that vaccines cause autism or not?

well, something clearly caused you to have autism.

But do you believe that vaccines were the cause, or not?

Aren't we coming out of an ice age anyway? Wouldn't it be reasonable for the globe to be heating regardless?

I didn't before but fuck, you've convinced me.

As opposed to when you sell yourself into debt slavery and all you get is a degree in political 'science' and a seasonal job as an internet record corrector.

> doesn't believe in climate change because Trump said so?

No, theoretically climate change is true.

but we have not seen any real examples of it outside of models that have flaws and bias to make them "CONCLUSIVE"!!

In reality we have seen the climate go against every prediction and model that the climate changers have made .

As well the 'solutions" are not logical and responsive . All the building of solar panels and wind turbines actually add more global warming , using the energy production we have now to its full extent with added pollution controls as we move to nuclear and hydro would be the logical move . But that is not what was done , a whole slew of needless regulations and taxes and offshoring to China.

The reaction of those in charge does not make sense if it was real , so you question the science and those who profit.

Yes we are. however, relative to current Co2 and methane levels (two major factors in determining temp) we are still quite a bit higher than we should be

i dont know what caused you to have autism, but i do know that autists (such as yourself) should be systematically exterminated by government funded right wing deathsquads.

>well educated people

If they were so educated they would be able to write a publication that would use scientific data to convince me.

They haven't.

>But its not false
The "overwhelming opinion" meme has been widely discredited, so yeah, it is.
>you are the one accusing thousands of well-educated people liars
No, just those specific climate scientists who fixed data. Other scientists not involved in the field of 'research' who simply go along with politics' conventional wisdom aren't particularly important to the debate.

>Lets see your research. The experiments that YOU conducted
That's the issue. There is no experiments that could possibly be conducted to prove a thing about the AGW narrative. It's a predictive , theoretical proposal, based on a garbage in, garbage out computer modelling, with the even the most mild predictions of the proponents of the theory itself proving out to be wrong.

Having an even basic understanding of scientific principle requires one at that point to seriously question the theory.

I'm sorry user, but you're still not answering my question. Insults don't count. You said so yourself.

Do you believe that vaccines cause autism or not?

You are leading me to believe they do, user. I haven't seen this type of autism in quite a while.

I believe in global warming and I'm an avid trump supporter, I just don't give a shit about climate change.

please keep all posts on topic. post quality is very important.

do not derail threads.

haha pic related it's the average pickup truck drivin', gun ownin', school avoidin', white trash loser on Cred Forums.

Im so happy you are not a scientist, you clearly don't know how to interpret data.

Sadly enough you get to vote on scientific issues though.

See how that can go wrong in the long term?

I am simply trying to determine whether you're able to leave your echo chamber using a metaphor, user. You'd understand this if you didn't drop out in 9th grade.

So, do you believe that vaccines cause autism or not?

>using a metaphor
>You'd understand this if you didn't drop out in 9th grade.
>he said whilst misunderstanding what a metaphor is
priceless

dont you have crayons to be eating, kid?

wew thanks for correcting my record.

>Doesn't believe the man made global warming story, as presented
Personally, yes. Others might disagree.

>Because Trump said so
No. Why, do you believe in it because Hillary said so?

Yes, I have a crayola 12-pack I'd like to get to later today.

But for now, I'm asking whether or not you believe that vaccines cause autism.

Good for Gary Johnson...

I tell people I don't believe in climate change because;

A. It triggers Commies.

B. I don't care about climate change since my country has no effect on it.

I only agree with it when discussing third world migration.

>moving goalposts

and im asking you to keep posts on topic.

now, where is your argument?

I will present an argument on climate change after you tell me whether you believe that vaccines cause autism.

what the fuck are you gonna do against climate change that doesn't involve nuking india and china libshits

do you think solar panels in a country of 300mil is going to matter vs polluted, poo filled shitholes with populations of 1 billion

this is why no one takes libshits seriously, the problem lies with shithole countries not the west

"They're not smart because I disagree with them"
Nice fallacy

>The "overwhelming opinion" meme has been widely discredited, so yeah, it is.
First of all, where are you gettinng this information from that the statistics are false? Even if its not "overwhelmingly the majority" you would have a hard time finding a source that says its not the majority opinion. And even if its not the majority opinion, that wouldn't prove its false. You would essentially need to do your own research to prove that. This is what I mean when I say you have AT BEST an EQUALLY valid claim to climate change being a lie as you do to it being true, at which point your opinion is based soelely on what you want to believe.

No, just those specific climate scientists who fixed data.
Where the fuck do you get this retarded information? You just claim scientists fix data without any proof, do you know how fuckin hard it is to get statistics published in an academic journal? No? Thats because you aren't a scientist.

That's the issue. There is no experiments that could possibly be conducted to prove a thing about the AGW narrative. It's a predictive , theoretical proposal, based....
So is literally ALL of scientific research. Science can only prove correlation, never causation. This includes any research which would suggest climate change is false. But we have a resounding amount of evidence that suggests it isn't. And that evidence isn't "complete garbage," it has a certain level of validity that shouldn't be ignored. You are essentially calling sceintific research bad for being scientific research

this thread is about climate change, not vaccinations or your autism.

please keep your posts on topic. thread quality is very important to us. you must refrain from derailing threads.

This.

Leftists want to push the global warmi- erm, "climate change" meme down your throat to tax you (and force "climate refugees" on you) but they want to keep the bad trade deals that enable most of our stuff to be made in CHAYNA.

No thank you.

Do you believe that vaccines cause autism?

STOP.

Leave that pupper alone. First and last warning.

This. I went on a whole rant about it last night. Hillary was going full retard on how we need to just switch now, nothing gradual, just fuck our miners and oil riggers up instead of training/transitioning them to work in the green field.

She's about as dumb as abolitionists pre civil war.

Not quite. They just believe their own propaganda. They really do honestly think that we are killing Gaia and that solar panels and wind farms will save her.

Even if he did (which I doubt), what bearing would that have on anything?

Nothing. I was just going to tell him to kill himself if he did.

do you believe that negroids are subhuman?

unlike your false claims of global warming being influenced by mankind or pollution, its scientifically proven that the negroid is subhuman.

Only in overall numbers

The US puts out twice as much carbon per capita than China

Doesn't matter if global climate change is influenced by man or not. It would take a world wide, complete halt to stop climate change. Even if the US of A does and all of Europe, what about china, japan, india, south america, russia and the rest of the world?

Until you can get the entire world to stop producing agents that cause climate change, nothing will undo the end result. I believe in Climate Change but am smart and mature enough to realize it is a moot point.

Get back to me when we have clean renewable energy that can power cars, heat houses and provide jobs.

Not sure per capita really applies here seeing as China alone accounts for some ridiculous proportion of all global emotions (something like a third to half).

No. IQ tests are skewed based on economic equality. Crime rates are also based heavily on income levels.

More than likely, you just hate poor people. I do too.

There is no "undoing the end result" anymore. We're 30 years past that. Now, we're just trying to stop the seas from rising 20 feet instead of 15.

You see this thing? This thing is a trick question. At first it was global warming, and all "evidence" pointed towards that. That's what Trump didn't believe in. Then suddenly it became climate change. Why the change in terminology? Because the world isn't just warming up. Temperature wiggles up and down constantly and climate change finally results in an Ice age.

Tl;dr
The earth's temperature is in constant change faggot, it's not getting only warmer.

so we shouldn't do anything because china won't either? in that case why the fuck do we do anything?

About a third, but the US still accounts for 1/7 of total emissions and is only 4% of the world population. We're also second in overall emissions.

I think climate change is the greatest threat to global civilization we have ever faced, and that no one is actually taking it seriously because it isn't possible to solve without ruining first-world living standards. Liberals pretend they care, but they are just using climate change to push their own agenda without actually addressing real solutions.

>IQ tests are skewed based on economic equality.
false.

any more lies you feel like telling today?

I don't give a fuck. The effects of "le climate change" are minuscule on the grand scale. The only threat is pollution that directly effects us our our immediate environment; such as dumping chemicals into a river, like the EPA did. I don't give a shit about the polar ice melting by 0.5%, etc. Geological records showed that Earth's temperature was even hotter during medieval times, before combustion engines were even invented. Earth goes through heating and cooling stages naturally, and human involvement in it is largely irrelevant.

Also, like this user said; the Chinks, Poos, and other countries pollute way more carelessly than us, so it's irrelevant. The next volcano eruption would put more carbon into the air than us, anyway.

The ones that stand to profit from climate alarmism are leftist bureaucrats who use it as a boogeyman to get votes, and the green/carbon tax industry. Also, look at Solyndra for example. The Dems threw tons of money at a solar panel company, and they wasted most of it on luxuries for themselves.

>Graph shows clear trend between income and scores

>only look at the top and bottom gap!

No. But do you believe that vaccines cause autism?

OK, imagine the USA gets wiped off the map tomorrow. Zero emissions. What changes?

>humans caused hurricanes

This is another thing enviro-cucks do. Every time a natural disaster happens, they blame carbon emissions for it. It's the ultimate boogeyman.

Your argument make no sense.

Because china pollutes a lot, it is ok for us to pollute and we should do nothing?

You don't have any understanding of ethics.

>There is no "undoing the end result" anymore. We're 30 years past that. Now, we're just trying to stop the seas from rising 20 feet instead of 15.

Exactly. To add unto your informed point, climate change is still a naturally occurring phenomenon that happens over a period of centuries. It would have come about regardless, but much much later.

Within five centuries our planet will look completely different than it is now. We fucked up, and we can't fix it. Only delay it as you pointed out.

notice how a nigger from a 160,000-200,000 income household is still dumber than a white person from a >20,000 income household?

thats because niggers have thick apelike skulls, that hold over 10% less brainmatter than a white person. this is scientifically proven.

reallys makes you think, huh

>The very top of one trend line barely touches the bottom of another
>Thus showing that while money does have a slight effect, race is stronger to the point that all the money in the world is not enough to overcome it.

It's like you are unable or unwilling to read statistics correctly...

Does all of America jumping on the green bandwagon actually save the world?

Yes or no?

And if not, what is the rationale behind following the proposed plan?

The information is appreciated user.

What are your opinions on whether vaccines cause autism?

This.

Climate Changers say all sorts of funny stuff about lakes drying and states going underwater in 50 years. Never mind the fact that the Chinese and Indians are working overtime on polluting this planet. With people like that our icecaps should be gone already according to these grant scamming scientists.

Just dont use hairspray tho and save the whales senpai.

Sorry but I took several genetics based classes in my undergrad. You're not going to get anywhere with your pseudoscience and conspiracy theories, and I already know you're too retarded to be taught so don't even try.

...

>believing the medical jew
>not believe vaccines indirectly cause autism
>believing autism is genetic

laughingbirds.jpg go take yer meds

actually you are wrong.

rs236330 is a gene strongly expressed in neurons, including. hippocampal neurons and developing brains, where it regulates neuronal morphology. rs324650 is a gene involved in neuronal excitability, synaptic plasticity and feedback regulation of acetylcholine release. East Asian populations (Japanese, Chinese) have the highest average frequency of beneficial alleles (39%), followed by Europeans (35.5%) and sub-Saharan Africans (16.4%).
ibc7.org/article/journal_v.php?sid=312

Following the world distribution of the major gene of intelligence, recently discovered by Volkmar Weiss, we notice that in Sub-Saharan Africa this gene is practically non-existent, as its carriers amount to 1-2% of the population whereas in many regions of Eurasia the gene can be found in almost 50% of the population.
v-weiss.de/C2orf16.pdf

New findings are generally concordant with recent work that brain structure may vary significantly across populations of different racial or ethnic backgrounds. Single nucleotide polymorphism in the neuroplastin locus associates with cortical thickness and intellectual ability in adolescents. Common variants at 6q22 and 17q21 associated with intracranial volume are more common among Eurasians.
plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0013642
nature.com/mp/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/mp2013197a.html
sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289608001074
nature.com/ng/journal/v44/n5/full/ng.2245.html
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/SNP/snp_ref.cgi?rs=rs10784502

i guess professor (((goldkike))) didnt tell you the truth. hmm

No.

Because it makes it less worse, for the foreseeable future. It's already going to be bad. If you're in your 20s, it's going to be bad in your lifetime. Maybe your parent's lifetime.

Eventually we will hop to the Moon/Mars/Satellites and colonize space, but until then, Earth has to be not terrible.

Alternative energy is supplementary at best. You need a hard fuel to run a nations backbone.

I agree we could have more of it but its not magic and pixiedust. Some people do not have the provisions for some types of energy.

Those are SAT scores, not IQ. You realize those measure very different things, right?

OK, so why are you pursuing these things under a false premise that doing so will save the world?

news.com.au/technology/science/experts-concerned-that-advances-in-genetic-sequencing-are-giving-rise-to-neoracism/story-fn5fsgyc-1226828291896

"On average, Asian-American kids have bigger brains than white American kids, who in turn have bigger brains than black American kids. This is true even though the order of body size and weight runs in the other direction. The pattern holds true throughout the world and persists at death, as measured by brain weight."
rense.com/general79/dut.htm

huh

This is very true and as an old piece of shit I remember all of it.

They first said the earth was cooling
>Did not happen

Then they said the destruction of the rain forest would destroy the entire earth
>Did not happen not to mention that algae in the ocean creates 2/3 of the oxygen on the planet not fucking rainforests

>Now they say the earth is warming
Is it? I dont fucking know and I dont fucking care because they are all pandering pieces of shit.

> "I have no idea how ecology and meteorology works"

- the post.

That's very informative user. I appreciate the links.

What are your opinions on autism, and whether vaccinations cause it?

So go live in a hut innawoods, cuck; and don't breed.

You can never make enough solar panels to power the entire US. You would have to invest in thorium and nuclear reactors, and leftists are always shitting on them. Either way, we're gonna die due to entropy, unless you can mine more uranium from other planets.

>If you're in your 20s, it's going to be bad in your lifetime. Maybe your parent's lifetime.
I've been hearing that the icecaps would be melted and the major cities would be flooded by 2020 ever since I was in elementary school.

Either this shit is going to hit the fan all at once or it's utter bullshit.

>Do pigmentation and the melanocortin system modulate aggression and sexuality in humans as they do in other animals?

>Pigmentation of the hair, skin, cuticle, feather and eye is one of the most salient and variable attributes of vertebrates. In many species, melanin-based coloration is found to be pleiotropically linked to behavior. We review animal studies that have found darker pigmented individuals average higher amounts of aggression and sexual activity than lighter pigmented individuals. We hypothesize that similar relationships between pigmentation, aggression, and sexuality occur in humans. We first review the literature on non-human animals and then review some of the correlates of melanin in people, including aggression and sexual activity. Both within human populations (e.g., siblings), and between populations (e.g., races, nations, states), studies find that darker pigmented people average higher levels of aggression and sexual activity (and also lower IQ). We conceptualize skin color as a multigenerational adaptation to differences in climate over the last 70,000 years as a result of “cold winters theory” and the “Out-of-Africa” model of human origins. We propose life history theory to explain the covariation found between human (and non-human) pigmentation and variables such as birth rate, infant mortality, longevity, rate of HIV/AIDS, and violent crime.

sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191886912000840

hmmm

rt.com/news/scientists-discover-brain-gene-518/

wow would you look at that..

newobserveronline.com/leftist-lies-destroyed-as-scientists-discover-the-gene-which-causes-brain-size-and-intelligence/

really warms up the old thinker, huh?

Intelligence is genetic and heritable.
Differences in intelligence between ethnic groups are due to genetics alone.
Better education will not change differences in group intelligence, they'll always remain.

Human intelligence up to 75% inheritible
telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/12061787/Intelligence-genes-discovered-by-scientists.html

Human intelligence is highly heritable.
nature.com/mp/journal/v16/n10/abs/mp201185a.html

Scientific consensus is that IQ tests are not racially biased.
sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289608000305

Very poor Whites are comparably intelligent to very wealthy blacks.
jbhe.com/features/49_college_admissions-test.html

Black children raised in White households have similar IQs to black children in black households.
psycnet.apa.org/psycinfo/1977-07996-001

The average African IQ is estimated at 79.
sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191886912003741

The average African-American IQ is 85, compared to the average White IQ of 100.
udel.edu/educ/gottfredson/reprints/1997mainstream.pdf

The white-black gap in SAT scores, a proxy for IQ, is increasing.
jbhe.com/features/49_college_admissions-test.html

Genes for large brains, linked to high IQ, are common everywhere except Africa.
wsj.com/articles/SB115040765329081636

Intelligence has at least a 40-50% genetic basis.
articles.latimes.com/2011/aug/10/news/la-heb-genetic-study-intelligence-20110809

IQ scores are the best predictor of success in Western society.
psychology.uwo.ca/faculty/rushtonpdfs/PPPL1.pdf

IQ is 75% heritable among Whites.
psychology.uwo.ca/faculty/rushtonpdfs/PPPL1.pdf

France's IQ drops 4 points per decade because of African immigration
sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289615001221

You may not change the name. It is called "Global Warming". It makes me laugh when leftists try to rebrand the name of their discredited bullshit to try to keep it alive. GLOBAL WARMING IS A DISCREDITED MADE UP IDEA. If your computer model shows global warming, you get funded. If it doesn't, you don't. Fake computer models can say anything and are not science.

Not an argument.

The ice caps are already melting at faster rates every year. Migrations have started, and they will continue throughout your life time.

news.vice.com/article/doomed-by-climate-change-kiribati-wants-migration-with-dignity

Within the next 20 years, coastal cities in the United States will begin to flood.

It may surprise you to know that I am not against conservation. That's partly why I am opposed to the global warming narrative, as I believe it is overhyped bullshit that when it inevitably comes to pass that their apocalypse fails to appear, it will result in public distrust and apathy towards real environmental concerns.

>France's IQ drops 4 points per decade because of African immigration
>sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289615001221

wow. science is racist

Climate change is a meme.

Hillary is still going to lose in November.

Climate change is real. What is either not real or not a big deal, is atmospheric CO2 driven climate change.

The temperature of earth has barely risen in two decades despite CO2 levels continuing to climb and not slowing down. This decoupling suggests one of two things: that either the relationship doesn't actually exist, or that it's logarithmic instead of linear or super linear, as was previously assumed. The relationship being logarithmic actually makes a lot of sense, as there is only so much spacebound IR from earth in the frequencies that CO2 can absorb, so there is a sort of ceiling to how much energy retention atmospheric CO2 can do without a change in earth's IR emission (which would only happen do to a change in stellar output). Compounding this is that increased temperatures and CO2 levels both increase the photosynthetic activity of algae, and to a lesser extent terrestrial plants in wet biomes.

Original models for the effect of CO2 assumed not only an endlessly linear effect on temperature, but that it would be accompanied by a compounding water vapor effect, which in reality did not manifest to any significant degree. In other words, the "runaway global warming" people were totally wrong.

Historically, global temperature and atmospheric CO2 levels have been strongly correlated, but CO2 peaks lagged temperature rather than led them, and thus the meaning and mechanism of this coupling is unknown.

Jewish and East Asian intelligence is a really good way to trigger white supremacists.

Any racial realist should understand that whites literally aren't better at everything and only are better at SOME things, and that focusing so much on supremacy is bad for whites in the long run because it inherently justifies white genocide.

Racial pluralism is the way to go.

rs236339 is not the label for a gene, it's the label for an SNP. I wouldn't expect you to understand the difference, though.
They are also a bunch of separate ad hoc papers with no unified point between them. The Weiss paper is not even published anywhere.

>godlike

>science is a jewish conspiracy!
opinion discarded.

Climate change is a lie to cripple American industry. Stop being a bleeding heart liberal

In the '70s the envirocucks were saying that we'd be in an ice age by now.

The meme constantly changes.

Trumpkins are delusional; what'd you think?

Yup, whatever Trump says goes.

Oh look it's another globalist plan to relocated """" refugees""""". Take note everyone. The """""" refugee"""" crisis to places like Europe has no plans to be stopped. They will simply change from """""" Syrian refugees"""""" to """" climate change"""""" refugees.

>Within the next 20 years, coastal cities in the United States will begin to flood.
Yeah that's what I said. I've been hearing that for 20 years now and nothing has happened.

Exactly what I mean man. Been hearing this shit for decades. God damn hippies.

It's simple. Stop trading with china. Stop buying with china. China ignores patents, safety laws, and is grossly negligent of human life. Fuck china. Ban all chinese goods until they mature as a fucking people.

>my kosher science class said that phenotypes don't effect a person's physical traits, haha, nice try racists!

I think that he only says that so that he doesn't look like a big polluting jerk.

Unfortunately, the warming of the Earth isn't really bullshit. Carbon Dioxide emissions / taxes aren't as big of a deal as Methane, though.

The problem is that our CO2 emissions and the subsequent warming of the Earth means that Methane pockets are being released in areas like Siberia. This causes a runaway effect, and fringe economic scientists have already stated that there is no turning back.

For more information, see en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clathrate_gun_hypothesis

I have no desire to harbor refugees. That is why I am arguing that climate change is a problem. It will have severe economic consequences on you regardless of whether you believe in it.

That has to be bullshit.

We actually have eco laws that dont allow us to pollute without a care

China has all the factories and doesnt give a shit about pollution

environmental scientists, not economic* :)

>Jewish and East Asian intelligence is a really good way to trigger white supremacists.
actually its not.

look at the 'civilizations' theyve created and compare it to whites.

Nah, I don't believe in climate change because we would have to be completely wrong about the laws of thermodynamics for it to be possible.

The fact that climatologists pretend re-radiation in carbon dioxide's spectral band is uniquely evil and all other blackbody radiation must be removed from their atmospheric model to prove AGW is just icing on the cake.

I don't think human activity has anything to do with it, and more than anything I couldn't give less of a fuck about it. But politicians just can't stop finding new ways to steal my money. Fuck them, fuck this bullshit.

>I download thumbnails and only think of people as strawmen of my imagined conspiracy theories

>aren't as big of a deal as Methane, though.

In the atmosphere, methane decays to CO2 with a half life of 7 years. Stop believing memes.

epin copypasta I made and keep posting in these threads because you people can never come up with answers that aren't "just google it m8 like a lot of scientists agree but never published their methodology or anything, they just agree so appeal to authority":

Prove it is:

A: happening (which I don't doubt)

B: can be directly linked to human actions like burning fossil fuels

C: post specifics, how the parts the humans are doing is actually significant. Like what percent is our fault.

D: post specifics, about just how fast "climate is changing" since "global warming" is no longer the meme term. I want real statistics like "we are getting X warmer every year and I will have to worry about it in Y years becuase Z happened and is devastating"

E: post specifics, about just why I should give two fucks if hipsters faggots have to move their shitty cities 2 miles inland while I pay for retarded infrastructure that would probably cost more

F: if all of that is all real and shit, why I would care if it's as tragic as the lefty faggots think, when they're all just destroying our countries and children's futures with mass immigration of mudslimes and taconiggers and increased socialism to support these subhumans

G: Explain how wind turbines that are complete and utter shit, cost more fossil fuels to build and transport and assemble and shit than they save over their lifetime and only work in wind, but not too much so you have to use tradition power sources anyway, how solar isn't complete shit that get ruined by dust and only works during the day, without clouds or fog or any retard with an umbrella is within 20 miles

H: Explain why we should be pouring billions of my taxpayer money into this when it is proven the private sector is many times more efficient than any government grant program or research fund. If a company makes and patents the next big innovation in energy, they will quite literally become one of the biggest companies in existence

>A greenhouse gas decays into a less bad greenhouse gas

Is that supposed to dismiss the idea that Methane is harmful?

I am aware of the clathrate gun.

It ain't happening because global temperatures have stopped rising despite a continuing exponential rise in CO2.

>Where the fuck do you get this retarded information?
>the IPCC data fixing allegations
How fucking clueless are about the actual debate?

>So is literally ALL of scientific research
>based on a garbage in, garbage out computer modelling
No, it specifically is not.
>And that evidence isn't "complete garbage,"
You did not understand the meaning behind my use of this word. Any computer model is only as good as the data and formulae that's input into them. The models climatologists have created, those (all of them) which over the years failed to predict reality, were obviously not comprehensive enough to predict a system as fantastically complex as the whole environment. Computer models predictions are the ONLY weight there is to the Anthropomorphic Global Warming narrative. That the weather changes proving a dynamic system does not cut it.

>your whole post, in fact
I get it. You scientifically illiterate and are just going along with the herd.

It decays STOICHIOMETRICALLY into methane. And so while even a little methane would be bad if it stuck around forever due to is much higher absorbance, it decays into a meaningless amount of CO2 relative to existing atmospheric composition.

Al Gore got rich from global warming. the 'clean energy' folks will make a fortune. follow the money folks

Says the guy who had only just finished with his "I'm a big deal. My professor told me race is a social construct and you're all dumb racists because science" spiel.

But it is.. We've had an annual mean of +0.8C since the 50s and it's climbing.

I don't have any interest in spending time trying to convince you. Sorry

>We've had an annual mean of +0.8C since the 50s and it's climbing.

Not since the turn of the century it hasn't...

+0.7C*

>>science is a jewish conspiracy!
>opinion discarded.
science isnt a jewish conspiracy, because it proves you wrong.

your lying kike professor, was a jew though. pure coincidence

Except there is no real evidence to support that humans are the cause of any weather changes.

I believe it's not real because of data, not because some person told me so

>Lower IQ
Literally no evidence supports this.
>intelligence is genetic. Kek. You do realize that better care, diet and education drastically increase IQ right? How do you explain black people with genius level iq? You have a black president ffs.

I never said those things. You only imagined I did because that's how paranoid, delusional and retarded you people. I only said I took some classes in genetics and your Cred Forums shitposting is psuedoscience but you've already imagined that I'm some sort of agent provocateur in your conspiracy theory.

data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs/

That looks like it's increasing to me

I believe in natural climate change not affected by humanity, not man-made climate change, because that's what many credible scientific sources agree on. You should try not swallowing bullshit sometime, it's bretty nice.

Likely because there is so many of them unified in their goal to fuck over the world.

>literally cherrypicking articles that suit your agenda
There are many more articles, and the scientific consensus in general is that every source you stated there is wrong

I believe in climate change in the aspect that it's natural.

I do believe we should stop polluting Earth but I won't do anything that comes out of any politician's bullshitter mouth including Trump's.

[german cuckposting noises]

You're doing it again.

>Everyone who disagrees with what I have been taught is wrong and furthermore labels X, Y, and Z based on my own political biases and bigotry.

I see... so the entire scientific community refutes racism.. yet somehow science proves you right because you found a few unrelated papers, and only you are smart enough to put the pieces together?

>the jew control science! They only allow what you want them to think

>except for these papers, they prove me right! even though theyre unrelated to each other and let me draw my own conclusions, but this is all just propaganda anyway!

EVERYONE has to see this comic.
xkcd.com/1732/

hahaha and what are my political biases? What did I call anyone a bigot? You're doing it again.

It is true that none of you are educated and know anything you're talking about. That's all I've said and I'll leave it at that.

>so the entire scientific community refutes racism
actually they dont.

turns out (((bill nye))) and science nigger arent actually scientists.

huh, makes you think

Clathrate Gun has been debunked over and over. Even assuming the temperature rose 10 degrees celsius over the next century, which is the most extreme proposal put forward, we still wouldn't destabilize the clathrate deposits on the oceanic shelves, let alone the sea floor.

Also, you're misrepresenting methane. It's a powerful greenhouse gas, but its presence in the atmosphere decays completely within 10-24 years (depending on the methane), unlike CO2.

Theoretically the greenhouse gas effect is true. It is true. What we don't know is the magnitude, and whether it's large enough to even be meaningful.

Just posting this again so it can be ignored as always.

Obongo is mixed-race though

This comic is stupid horse shit. Even cursory googling will show you as significant dips and peaks in global temperatures over the last ten thousand years.

Faggot. Munroe is a dipshit and always has been.

This.

What's more unbelievable is the good goys who fall for it

>"Hey guys, thanks to all your efforts the hole in the ozone is closing itself and the chances of global warming have dropped dramatically! Don't pay any attention to literally everywhere in the world who never changed their policies and still use the same fuels they always have and are 40 times the size of our country because that's just pure coincidence!"

It wouldn't even be believable if entire countries were doing it, I don't know a single person who takes this meme seriously, but I don't know any cucks either.

This
>Now google ITER

Shouldnt global warming be considered.a good thing? We could roast the sandniggers without putting troops on the ground

I do believe in it just that the human factor has been exaggerated

Also There's no point in killing the citizens of Canada a underpopulated country with little in the way of pollution with overbearing environment taxes and regulations while places like China USA etc are where the pollution is coming from. Go for the actual problem not the small countries

>multiple sources saying that intelligence is genetic
>b-b-but there are some smart black people so you are wrong

You're a fucking retard.

The ozone layer thing was actually a really fucking big deal and was only averted due to sudden and comprehensive policy change.

The difference being that while the greenhouse gas theory is a dumb meme, CFC's catalyzing the breakdown of ozone is a reproducible fact.

woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut3gl

woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut4gl

>HADCRUT3 shows no warming since about 2000
>HADCRUT4 shows a massive spike right around the time of it's release

I wonder why that would be... Couldn't possibly be to do with the Climate Research Unit being founded on the premise of proving global warming, and not doing so would invalidate its reason to continue to be funded... But that's my own suspicions creeping in.

Here's the satellite data.

woodfortrees.org/plot/rss

Which does show a spike for 2016, but also a very similar spike around 2000. The 2016 one seems to have caused the other graphs to shoot right up, while the similar 2000 one not anything like as much - you would not even notice it in the graph unless you specifically looked for it.

What I am getting at is that I trust these "scientists" about as far as I could throw them. They are not above fudging the numbers to fit their theories when their career is on the line.

Your political biases are somewhat to very left leaning, just like most who come out of university, and it was me calling you a bigot.

This

Only a retard would claim that the climate is not changing has not changed never will change

But the effects of humans are not fully known. Personally if we're affecting anything at all we are merely speeding up something that is inevitable.

>We are really just coming out of the ice age. The world for most of its history was far far warmer than it is now
t. Father is geologist and knows how to read data about the earth millions of years ago

And yes. Climate scientists usually cannot into geology and everything that goes into analyzing how the world was before humans existed which is really nescesary for determining whether this is some catastrophic apocalypse or part of a natural inevitable cycle

When you average a bunch of different kinds of measurements into a shitty graph with a confidence interval as large as your entire signal, and then compare it to modern data taken with entirely different instrumentation, you are deliberately distorting results.

Additionally, when your sampling frequency is slower than oscillation in the signal, you lose peaks.

That graph is 100% horseshit.

Current temperatures are higher than they were in the 1900s, but they are not higher than they were during the medieval warm period for example.

I believe in climate change
I dont believe it's man made

This

I'd like to add to all my other posts that I do believe that pollution should be reduced in the long run whether it is having a serious effect on the climate or not simply due to human health and genetic health of offspring. It is very possible that increased chemicals etc have lead to the kind of fucked up people that are responsible for rampant degenerate behaviour. Increases of cancer rates wierd mental conditions faggery etc.

Their own site states that you can cherrypick their data to fit your narrative:
woodfortrees.org/notes#trends

woodfortrees.org/plot/gistemp/from:1979/offset:-0.43/mean:12/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:1979/offset:-0.29/mean:12/plot/rss/mean:12/offset:-0.10/plot/uah/mean:12/plot/gistemp/from:1979/offset:-0.43/trend/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:1979/offset:-0.29/trend/plot/rss/offset:-0.10/trend/plot/uah/trend

It even says at the bottom:
>If you look at the trend data, you can see the current trends in °C, between 0.13-0.17°C/decade, or, if it continues at the same rate, between 1.3 and 1.7°C per century.

I believe in climate change, but I believe its existence is being used by ((them)) to further their agenda.

nice bait OP

Ii agree with you; that was a sincere compliment for once

Global warming is a lie made up by the Chinese.

>MUH GLOBAL WARMING DOOMSDAY PROPHECY DEATH CULT

The climate is changing always has been changing always will change until the day earth is completely destroyed

t. Millions of years of geological evidence

I think the whole we can reverse warming by doing this and that is part of the delusions many on the left have. They literally think we can control nature and disregard the evidence that the planet would be warming up and has been warming since the ice age whether humans ever came down out of the trees or not

So the answer is yes, then

>MUH RAMPAGING SARCASM
>ANYTHING IS WRONG IF I PUT "MUH" BEFORE IT

Yeah, and that applies to you as much as me.

Even if for some retarded reason you dont beleive in climate change there is literally nothing wrong with environmental protection and energy/resource efficiency
>better destroy my ancestral homeland and health of future children for mr goldbergs profit margins
>americans

>within five centuries our planet will look much different

It has before and it will again

If humans are around in 20,000 years they will be panicking about the planet cooling

fact is, no one is taking climate change seriously, not even the so called 'climate alarmist leftists'.
They will though, and soon.
But by then it'll be too late. Its already too late really. It's actually kinda sad - a real tragedy.

If it helps you sleep at night you can say that.

Yes, but I'm not the one who said "0.13-0.17C/decade increases are the trend."

I'm not implying that you did it maliciously, more so out of your own bias. And I'm pretty sure that these guys know more about it than me so I'll take their word that it's going to increase by a steady 0.1C/decade.

>there is literally nothing wrong with environmental protection
you mean except for it neutering our businesses and creating job loss, GDP loss, and chinas rise to power.

fuck the environment, this planet is a finite resource. we have to advance as fast as we can (and kill subhumans to more efficiently use resources) to then move into space colonization.

>but they are not higher than they were during the medieval warm period for example.
This is absolute BULLSHIT. Maybe in some small regions, yes it was hotter, but globally - absolutely not. You are in serious denial if you think the Earth has ever had a higher GLOBAL temperature than it does now.

What are you talking about
content.csbs.utah.edu/~mli/Economics 7004/Marcott_Global Temperature Reconstructed.pdf

>I believe in death cults and worship Bill Nye as my Lord and Savior.
kys

In the 70s they were panicking about global cooling.

>space colonization

Is that why Newt GingGrinch wants that moon base? Fuck, I thought he was interested in putting men back into space. My bad.

Fuck you.

The environmentalist movement BEGAN in the 60's and 70's. Global cooling, my ass.

>death cults

That's not right. Hell, that's not even wrong.

> tfw science illiterate retards also think we can just shoot the nuclear waste into the sun

>ad hominem

They do and I don't deny their claim. I do have a problem with how it is used though.

Saying "the temperature is rising by X/year" doesn't tell the whole story. That's an average over the entire chosen time scale. It does not provide context, namely that this is not a constant rate, it's not always a positive change, and it is only for the last 40 odd years of our history - the last one is particularly important given how often proponents of global warming theory hit back at "deniers" that they are cherry picking small parts of the temperature record and ignoring the wider trend.

>but globally - absolutely not

Sorry:

science.sciencemag.org/content/342/6158/617

It wasn't just in Europe like some like to claim.

It's not my burger friend, you are excellent consumers

Climate changes, sure, but the treaty trying to "combat" climate change are retarded

The impact of CO2 has been overestimated for 50 years now, all old models of Climate change have changed. There is a lot more to Climate than just CO2 and other greenhouse gases

not an argument

we could but that wouldnt be cost effective

Apparently you're retarded so I'll try again

Temperature measurements for current and recent periods have higher precision and temporal resolution than temperature measurements for older periods. As such, averaging together a bunch of data for temperature 10 thousand years ago will have much larger confidence intervals and show much less detail than data obtained over the last 100 years. The only valid comparison between ancient and modern temperatures for discussing variability over time is using a single method of data acquisition and the same number of samples for each time point.

What's more, your link just outright says they used smoothed data, which is completely scientifically invalid.

"Green" energy is a hoax. Nuclear is hte real solution

Oh, I'm sorry, because "fuck the environment... we have to advance as fast as we can (and kill subhumans to more efficiently use resources) to then move into space colonization." is a great argument. Cream of the crop.

Humans are having an extremely adverse effect on the environment.

Is it "destroy all life in 50 years" bad?
No.

But there isn't an ecosystem on the planet that has not been affected and that should be at least alarming to some

Why dont you all just admit it. You don't give a fuck about future generations. You don't give a fuck about Earth or the human species, or any other species on the planet for that matter. You've given up on everything beyond satisfying your own consumption. And by god you're going to keep gobbling it all up like a pig at the trough and fuck anyone who tries to crash your little party.

This.

And this.

acknowledging that my argument is superior to your non argument, isnt an argument.

>IQ tests are skewed based on economic equality
Then why do blacks on better economic situation (adopted) still fare worse than whites?

We could get helium 3 from the moon and have non polluting energy with no risk of harmful radiation

But we can't go back to space because they need mo money fo dem programz. And because we need le giant Technologicaly advanced army to protect us from ebil Russian (when in reality if there were ever a war with them or China most of us would be dead in nuclear fire)
The fuckng cost of the shitty F35 "Lemon" alone could have funded the set up of early lunar mining

Tell me this burgers: half your infrastructure looks like a third world country, your airports look like they haven't been cleaned or painted since opening I panic going over your bridges thinking they're about to collapse

And half this stuff applies to my country too

So tell me this

1. How come everything costs so fucking much to do now? Like the Apollo 11 mission cost less than what it takes to build a small bridge in the middle of buttfuck nowhere

What the fuck is your government spending fucking money on to be 20 trillion in debt but still have much of your country look like its crumbling apart?

Like 20 trillion that went who the fuck knows where. Your entire government should have been lynched by now

they wont have an argument, trust me

There are more trees in america now than there have been in its entire history. The world as a whole is greener than its been in a while. You're making mountains out of molehills

Runaway climate change is a fear-mongering meme pushed by the (((globalist elite))) to justify the violent seizure of power in the Western world and the establishment of their one world government.

After all, it's necessary to save humanity from annihilation. These lunatics were willing to sacrifice millions to the bloody altar of Socialism; expect billions to die when the climate cultists take up arms.

There's no risk to nuclear when you don't build plants on fault lines and the ocean, you fucking leaf

>(((smart money)))

So the wealthy elite prefer Hillary

Literally confirms our suspicions and is a reason not to vote for her

Nope. Sorry. No evil here.

America doesen't care in general. Only leftist fags whine about it. It's like what 15th or 16th ranked? Get that shit outta here

Even if it's as you say tell me why we should allow in and give equal treatment to these other races?

>believing man is having a real impact on climate change
Do your homework and research it. Every scientist in the field who isn't a shill cannot come up with enough evidence to even remotely link our greenhouse gases with global temp change. I still don't know why it is pushed so hard. Maybe it really was all political? Either way it's smart to invest in more renewable energy and less waste. But lying so much to people is wrong.
>tfw fellow profs and researchers chat about this all the time.

>Data points a natural climate change
What a blatant lie.

They are literally building new coal plants daily you faggot

>One prediction was wrong
>IT'S ALL A HOAX!!!
People like you make me reticent in admiting I am a conservative.

Out of 16 issues.

It's average iq you dumbass. There are rare high and low ends

You can find a few Asians and whites with 83 iqs. Yet it's well known these are races known for being "smart"

>these people consider themselves intellectuals

>I don't believe it because aome fringe corporate shill says it is bullshit.
FTFY

>just one
All the predictions have been wrong. Don't get angry when we point out some of the more ridiculous ones.

Every prediction was wrong you fucking nigger

There will be one day soon be a massive climate change related disaster that will convince everyone, and still nothing will be done.
People will only then realize what they really are.
I mean fuck, they're currently clearing old growth forests to rebuild fort mcmurray, for the conomy.

You didn't read the article.

>The only valid comparison between ancient and modern temperatures for discussing variability over time is using a single method of data acquisition and the same number of samples for each time point.

>implying the shit graph you posted shows us global temperatures in general

It is actually known fact that anyone who even attempts to explore the link between genetics and intelligence is shut down denied funding called racist etc. It's even gone beyond into stopping research into why people are autistic for example because "we're all equal we shouldn't try to make people smarter through genetics were all just equal and we should let these low intelligence people just be just because"

Except if you disagree with them. Then they're free to call you retarded

It doesn't show global temperatures. It wasn't supposed to. The point we're looking for is variability, not the absolute value. When you average a bunch of noisy data, you're going to end up with shorter or absent peaks compared to averaging a bunch of clean data.

The bleaching and slow death of the Great Barrier Reef is proof of climate change.

The "cooling thesis" was debunked in the 70s and it was suported by a tiny minority.
Using it to suport your logical gymnastics in saying something like "they said it was cooling and they were wrong, therefore they are wrong if they say it is warming" is super asinine.

There's proof of multiple reefs dying out over time. Jesus fucking Christ why don't you fucking retards look past one stupid article and try and wrap your head around the big picture. Now anyone will agree that our garbage is effecting our shit I'll give you that. But gases are not

Science is hard, you do experiments to try to provide hard meaningful data points to slowly build a model of a system. The more chaotic a system is the slower the scientific method is to figure out the underlying causes and model the system accurately. Social systems are even harder to figure out this way than weather systems.

For the chaotic systems where data is scarce we can still try and formulate coarse models.
>heat retention of the atmosphere is a product of it's chemical makeup
>we are drastically changing the chemical makeup of the atmosphere
>lets do less of that preferably

Maybe co2 global warming is capped years ago but increasing co2 encourages plant life which releases water vapor which is the main cause of warming. In that case the warming is coming from increased biomass which is arguably a good thing.

China's people are hugely in favour of green energy, they signed up to the paris climate change agreement recently and started investing more in green energy than the US recently ft.com/content/8209e816-97de-11e4-b4be-00144feabdc0

The great barrier reef is objectively humanity though

xkcd.com/1732/

The reason people point out the great barrier reef is that it's massive compared to the next biggest. Definitely shouldnt be dying out as fast as it is

>and thus the meaning and mechanism of this coupling is unknown
Right, therefore we should slow down and try and lower our GEG emissions, thus paying homage to the precaution principle (environmental law), until we can say for sure "ok guys, pumping bilions of tons of CO2 will do jack shit to global temperatures, we are cool"

>Maybe co2 global warming is capped years ago but increasing co2 encourages plant life which releases water vapor which is the main cause of warming. In that case the warming is coming from increased biomass which is arguably a good thing.

Are you suggesting that Co2 suddenly stopped absorbing IR while simultaneously the water-holding capacity of the atmosphere ceased being dependent on temperature?

>Is it true Cred Forums doesn't believe in..
lurk more faggot.

Hey everybody, China signed a piece of paper! That will fix everything!

China does what China wants to do. They will smile, shake your hand and sign bullshit treaties then do as they please.

It's not the factories. It is the lifestile you guys take. Your average gook is too poor to have two cars, travel every year, eat at Wendy's, play his PS4, turn up his Mac and shitpost on Cred Forums

I am suggesting we know very little except the points I greentexted.

Maybe co2 is mostly inert at these levels, maybe we can just keep pumping for millennia.

Doesn't seem like a good plan to do so though.

See ft.com/content/8209e816-97de-11e4-b4be-00144feabdc0
'China’s investment in “clean” energy, including renewables and efficiency improvements, rose 32 per cent to a record $89.5bn, with about three quarters of that going into wind and solar power.'

I'm not saying there's a risk for nuclear at least not in our countries. We have plenty of Arctic wasteland where nobody can really live where we can build nuclear plants

The only problem really is storage of spent fuel

To be honest I just push the helium 3 because I want an excuse to colonize space

Who fucking knows now. With China producing more gases than us, it would be irrelevant to stop. Also, based on the fact that funding for that shit is based on results, and now everything is getting perverted in terms of scientific integrity, I don't fucking know what's true.

Anyway, MAGA.

>It doesn't show global temperatures. It wasn't supposed to

Why is it called "global temperature", then? And why not post the graph directly from the paper?

It's got less to do with not believing climate change exists
we just don't believe we can really do anything to affect it.

I mean I'm all for stopping somebody from dumping waste into a river,
but the regulations as far as polution go are beyond fucking insane.

>Maybe co2 is mostly inert

Inert? As in not reacting? Is this a joke?

So climate change. What a Bunch of dumb rocks you trump people are.

Yes I believe everything this great man says.

It's why I've decided not to vaccinate my children.

Yes.

Not that complicated or hard to do...

Can do shit like not vote trump

Scientific integrity is better than ever and gonna improve, the EU's looking to make journals free for a start

They should just turn Alberta into the place where all the garbage pollution spent nuclear fuel etc goes. A wasteland full of shot that nobody would miss.

Albertans are like fucking niggers who won lottery. All they can do is pump oil and now that the easy oil jobs are gone they're flooding in here now to live on welfare and take min wage jobs from our highschool students.

It's sad that the Fort Mac fire didn't spread and burn down cuckgary or edmonchuck too

Can always reprocess the fuel - carter banned it in the US for some reason but its done in france a fair bit

>The only problem really is storage of spent fuel

Put it back in the ground where we got it from

Or make use of it. Harvest helium from alpha emitters and power from beta emitters

That doesn't help your claim at all.

So embargo China. Go on. Do it faggot. I'd love to see an entire world's stock markets plummet to bronze-age levels in a week and barter or robbery becoming the only two ways to acquire eggs.

It was because muh nukes

Bloomberg has more money than them.

yes we are small and one country china is huge and doesnt give a fuck.

nope it is due to volcano's , duh.

It shows that the medieval warm period has been recorded at the same time on opposite sides of the planet, in both major oceans (a very large factor in the planet's climate).

How exactly does it not support my claim of it being a global event, instead of it being local to Europe and the north Atlantic as is claimed?

Climate change is real and is a fundamental aspect of Earth's existence.

Man-made Climate Change is bullshit perpetuated by the left for tax money.

Yeah like other guy says that just shows the temperatures around the poles really, the earth had a different orbit at this point in time so poles temp was affected differently.

Because it never says that the entire global average is higher than it is today. Because it wasn't. On average, the Earth is hotter than it's ever been.

It's been hot enough that we didn't even have polar ice caps you fucking idiot

Rosenthal et al. (p. 617) present a temperature record of western ***>>>equatorial

That paper is complete bullshit, ignore it.

>The findings support the view that the Holocene Thermal Maximum, the Medieval Warm Period, and the Little Ice Age were global events, and they provide a long-term perspective for evaluating the role of ocean heat content in various warming scenarios for the future.

The medieval warm period being a time when when it was possible to grow grapes in Scotland. Something that it is right now too cold to do.

For what reasons?

Because its central claim is physically absurd.

>Although documented changes in global surface temperatures during the Holocene and Common era are relatively small, the concomitant changes in OHC are large.

Now tell me, what has a higher thermal capacity, the surface or the ocean?

You can grow grapes in Scotland.
food.list.co.uk/article/39157-the-scottish-vineyard-making-its-own-wine/

Eh. I don't get it then

>food.list.co.uk/article/39157-the-scottish-vineyard-making-its-own-wine/

>Facing his first winter as a pioneering Scottish viticulturist, Trotter, who's Fife’s official ‘Food Ambassador’, isn’t at all worried about the threat of frost and snow. He’s quietly confident that his Rondo, Solaris and Siegerrebe vines can – as they do in Germany – survive near sub-zero temperatures.

He's using specially bred varieties.

>Man-made Climate Change is bullshit perpetuated by the left for tax money.

What's the logic behind the idea that man cannot affect climate?

Greenhouse gases, when released into the atmosphere (but only then) lose their heat-absorbing properties?

I'm actually curious. This isn't something I've really thought twice about.

>Now tell me, what has a higher thermal capacity, the surface or the ocean?

They measured both.

It springs from human arrogance. Our contributions to the atmosphere are a fraction of a fraction of a percent. The Earth is pretty damn big if you hadn't noticed.

You're missing the point. The issue with growing wine in Scotland isn't as much the temperature as the other stuff (sunlight, rain etc.).

You didn't answer the question. It's kind of important.

The ocean

>What's the logic behind the idea that man cannot affect climate?
It's not that man has no effect, its that man's effect is relatively small and not particularly long lasting.

>I'm actually curious. This isn't something I've really thought twice about.
Solid admission. Now begins you effort to question challenged opinions
youtube.com/watch?v=0gDErDwXqhc

unchallenged

Yep. So how the heck can there be a massive change in ocean heat content without corresponding changes on the surface?

you're so fucking dumb holy shit that post

that has nothing to do with what you were responding to.

>Man-mad pollution is irrelevant because CHINA DOES MORE THAN WE DO IN TERMS OF POLLUTION. Shooting ourselves in the leg won't do anything to stop them.

Basically, no matter what we can't stop man-made pollution as long as China's getting in the way of that goal.

What Gary "sucks his own" Johnson said has no relevance to this argument.

No it is the temperature more than anything. Common grapes don't like cold weather, which is why you tend to find them being grown around the Mediterranean. They like it to be warm and dry (neither of which apply to Scotland).

>Didn't answer the question

Obviously the deeper ocean, being a of larger volume, has more capacity for heat storage. What's your point?