Current climate change is real and it is caused exclusively by humans burning fossil fuels which releases greenhouse gasses.Current climate change is not caused by the natural cycles of the Earth's climate which are caused by the changes in Earth's orbit around the Sun and the tilt of its axis (Milanković's cycles).If the current climate change were caused by the natural changes in the Earth's orbit or the increased energy output of the Sun we would see warming in all layers of the atmosphere but instead we only see warming in the bottom layer of the atmosphere where greenhouse gases are accumulating because they are denser than oxygen and nitrogen and the top layers of the atmosphere is experiencing cooling because bottom layers are trapping more heat.Since 1978. solar energy that is reaching Earth is constantly monitored by the sensors on satellites and they are not showing the increase of the solar energy that would be seen if Earth's orbit changed and it is closer to the Sun, Earth's axial tilt changed so areas closer to the poles are receiving more energy or Sun's energy output increased due to the star's aging.Climate change caused by the changes in Earth's orbit and tilt of its axis is slow and happens in the span of thousands of years which allows life to adapt but current climate change happened in the span of the last 100 years and it matches the increase of greenhouse gases released by humans.Humans release 35 to 40 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide annually through burning of the fossil fuels while natural sources like the volcanic eruptions release only 0.2 to 0.3 billion tonnes annually. Climate stability in the Holocene which started 11.700 years ago after the end of the ice age enabled humans to abandon the nomadic hunter gatherer way of life, develop agriculture and establish first cities and complex societies, end of this stable geological and climatological epoch could mean the end of human civilization.
>>540707031>exclusively by humans burning fossil fuelsLike private Jets of rich people?
>>540707031
Nah it's because the sun is preparing to micronovaYou have max 20 years left, use them
>>540707031>If the current climate change were caused by the natural changes in the Earth's orbit or the increased energy output of the Sun we would see warming in all layers of the atmospherefalseyou wasted all those words on a false premise
>>540707031One itsy bitsy volcano outburst does more damage than humans have to this day.I wont buy an ev ever. I love my old diesel
>>540707097>Like private Jets of rich people?Rich people individually release far more carbon dioxide than ordinary individuals but in the grand scheme of things carbon footprint of all rich people combined is still miniscule when compared to the total carbon footprint of humanity.
>>540707031Why did White men do the same thing to Mars?
>>540707201Humans release 35 to 40 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide annually through burning of the fossil fuels while natural sources like the volcanic eruptions release only 0.2 to 0.3 billion tonnes annually.
>>540707031Every nation's CO2 output commercial and domestic can be added up together and still only reach 10% of the output China achieves.The EU is not causing climate change.>but people are importing plastic slop from ChinaBecause China makes it and sells it for cheap.>but people want their cheap productsThey can go fuck themselves with their globalist market schemes, if you are genuine and sincere about CO2 emissions you'd ban international trade by freighter and enforce sail-powered shipping.But you don't, because you're not genuine or sincere about this.CO2 is not a problem.
>>540707031>Current climate change is real Yes, retard, the climate is changing/ .>and it is caused exclusively by humans burning fossil fuelsNo. Not by humans. Humans affect NOHTING. 95% of greenhouse gases is Water vapor , water cycle and oceans. Humans affect NONE OF THAT, 0, ZERO, ZILCH, NADA.Also this whole phrase is RETARDED, oil is not a fossil fuel. Fossil fuel is a MEME , created by oil monopolists, Rockefellers, 100 years ago. >owners of Standard Oil (Exxon Mobil + Chevron) monopoly. In REALITY oil is a HydroCarbon, 2nd largest liquid on the planet and it is produced by the planet. HydroCarbon (Hyrdogen+ Carbon molecules) -many of them produced by the planet, the other large one is Methane.>Humans release 35 to 40 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide annually Absolutely and utterly IRRELEVANT. CO2 is less than 3% of greenhouse gases ,>95% is water vapor and oceans and CO2 is a plant food. More CO2 - more greens and more plants growth. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrocarbon
Indians arent humans.
>>540707031>Current climate change is real and it is caused exclusively by humans burning fossil fuels which releases greenhouse gasses.Why even post this? If you are retarded enough not to understand this you would struggle even read the full sentence (which means there was no need to post it anyway)
>>540707413>95% of greenhouse gases is Water vapor , water cycle and oceans.>Humans affect NONE OF THAT, 0.>CO2 is less than 3% of greenhouse gases ,>95% is water vapor and oceans>and CO2 is a plant food. More CO2 - more greens and more plants growth.So, more CO2 = more plant food = greener planet. However, even if you , low iq retards ,are THAT CONCERNED of the 3%, and really concerned with rising temperatures >that will make Russia, Canada, Alaksa and Northern USA have mild winters and a better climate. So, even if you are that concerned, the REAL reason of warming maybe ASPHALT ROADS. Start painting asphalt in white.
>>540707344>international trade by freighterHoly fuck this, or at least change the rules for international waters.Large scale shipping vessels are the majority polluter on our planet. When they are out in the middle of nowhere, they burn the nastiest, and dirtiest fuel they can, because it's cheap. They only switch to the clean stuff once they get closer to ports.
>>540707344Your math on global CO2 emissions is completely wrong.According to data from agencies like the International Energy Agency (IEA) and Our World in Data, China is indeed the world's largest emitter, responsible for roughly 31% to 34% of global CO2 emissions. That means the rest of the world combined produces around 66% to 69% of global emissions. The claim that every other nation combined only reaches 10% of China's output is factually inaccurate.Regarding the EU, while its share has decreased to around 6% to 7% of current global emissions, it is still the fourth-largest emitter globally. Furthermore, if you look at historical cumulative emissions since the industrial revolution, Western nations bear a massive share of the responsibility for the CO2 currently trapped in the atmosphere.
>>540707031Climate change is caused by multiple factors, but the strongest are man made pollution, deforestation, and dumping into the ocean that kill the microorganisms that help regulate the atmosphere. The mistake has been just focusing on carbon emissions which are a big part of it, but ultimately is a hard sell, it seems like there would be more to it because there is. Describing it as one of many factors helps to put it into perspective which both makes it less alarmist while validating the real need for alarm.There have been big signs that man made global warming is real: TPUSA starting out as an anti-global warming conservative student action org funded by oil billionaires, the Koch bros funding a climate skeptic think tank only for them to say that man made global warming is real, etc. Most recently is this 10 years of Trump; cuts to climate research while he uses the DOJ to try to find anti-white discrimination and a department of health looking for vaccine related autism is a sign that the real golden goose, proof that man made climate change isn't real and is all a Democrat hoax, does not exist. If they believed it could be found, they would put resources into finding it. They gave up a decade ago because the more they looked, the more the story is that they can't disprove it.
>>540707031>Current climate change is realNo one disputes this. Its a naturally occurring process for the climate to constantly be changing. It hasaways done this and it always will. You have zero evidence to support the claim that its caused by humans, and natural history proves that the climate changes drastically without humans existing at all. You then go in to immediately refute without making a single argument the most widely accepted cause of climate change in the scientific community. Very "Science!" of you, anon. Just assert without evidence, refute without argument, and claim intellectual superiority in the name of a capital letter institution.
>>540707821What do you think of this?>>540707803
>>540707344
>>5407070315000 years ago Baltic sea was completely frozen, North Europe is made of Iceberg's made lakes and valleys.Explain me what humans were doing 5000 years ago that made Iceberg retract and made temperatures raise?Not a single eco-retard can answer me this.
>>540707567>So, more CO2 = more plant food = greener planet.Right
>>540707031Yes breathing makes the weather bad that's why you need to finance the latest wet belt 1.2 liter 3-cylinder hybrid that blows rods out of the side at 60k miles
A surprising amount of CO2 is also generated from concrete
>>540708023masterful argument -- polish IQ hard at work.
>>540707803It's bullshit see>>540708023We went from fully frozen iceberg covered Europe to habitable one without any human intervention.You are full of shit and your eco science is a fraud.Humans can only influence local climate, globally we have almost zero impact on things like icebergs, vulcanic activity, global water/air streams, magnetosphere and so on.
>>540708105Reminder that humanity is responsible for 4% of annual CO2 emmitance, so nothing.Nature does 96%
>>540708097You sound like you have a point you want to make but cultural differences and your use of english is making it difficult to tell what it is.
>>540708166Masterful response, US mutt's lack of primary education and knowledge of basics at work.
OK. So what if it is?What would I do about it?What would the 15 human users of 4chan do about global warming if it's caused by governments and corporations? It's not going to save the world or make a change to convince 15 neets who probably don't even have jobs.
>>540708023when people talk about lost technology and ancient civilizations i think it's just always bug people smelting rare earth metals and working plastic until the earth shits itself.an endless cycle of cheap trash and planned obsolecence among tech
>>540707260But in the grand scheme of things it's rich jewish people who are forcing us to drive gas guzzlers
>>540707582Here's another thing about those massive bunker barges.You know how climatologists warn that the sea levels are rising by milimetres every year?I think I know what's causing that.Archimedes.The displacement of water by big freight ships.Every year hundreds of thousands of tonnes of ship are launched into the oceans.Do people really not think that after decades of putting tens of millions of tonnes in the sea from dozens of shipyards, that might have an effect on the water levels?"Oh the ocean is too big for it to matter"With one boat yes, with thousands of them? Possibly not.
>>540707031And the beauty of it?Timmies literally, i repeat literally can't do anything about it!
>>540708193Sorry I only speak American
>>540707031Current climate change is real and it is caused exclusively by jews experimenting with climate changing weapons
OMG open all the borders immediately
>>540707031Bro cuntry freemason fags tongue my anus
>>540707031A single volcano eruption puts more carbon into the atmosphere than any human has.
>>540708279>earth is bln years old >every single graph about how humans are responsible for climate change starts from 1850.That's not even full human recorded history.
>>540708023>>540708169I opened with there being multiple factors. I'm aware that there are natural factors here but there are also multiple man made factors that have been increasing.
>>540707567One step further.Forests convert heat into taller/stronger trees, so the bigger the forests and the greener the land gets, the colder it'll get.The growth in greenery from doubling CO2 ppm will more than offset the 0,1°C warming caused by that.In other wordsCO2 indirectly causes global cooling.Just need water for the forests, and you can cool the Sahara down by 10°C on average.
>>540708172Actually we know for a fact it is human caused because of the ratio of naturally occuring CO2 isotobes in the air vs. The CO2 isotobes that only come from burning fossil fuels.By including a bunch of irrelevant data in your info graph you are trying to obscure the facts by averaging in irrelevant bullshit.Its kind of like claiming that earth doesnt exist because outerspace is mostly empty void. You are making a very sneaky and I dare say, Jewish faulty argument to muddy the waters.Nice try though kike.
>>540708062Yep.
>>540708390Experts say that the Sahara turned into a desert because the Berbers refused to switch to electric horses and didn't get vaccinated.
>>540708557Actually it was from Gazelle farts
>>540708470>human caused because of the ratio of naturally occuring CO2 isotobes in the air vs. The Then why are we breaking 120 year old records?Why was it just as hot 120 years ago?
>>540707031Wrong.
>>540708470>we know for a fact it is human causedJust like 99% of scientists were consenting that the vaxx is safe and effective, right?How many boosters, kike?
>>540708430You are correct. Also in some places there's so much natural gas produced by the planet, that you have to burn it or use it, or it collects and then explodes if unused. Burning natural gas is what they are doing. >Just need water for the forests, and you can cool the Sahara down by 10°C on average.Basically there was water in Africa in the past under Sahara. Also China is running desert re-forestation project, there are modern technologies that you can use to start re-forestation of some deserts.The question is do oligarchs want it?? Or do they just want a fake Co2 tax.
>>540708470Start reading my posts above: >>540707413>>540707567
>>540707567Water vapor stays in the atmosphere for only about 9 to 10 days on average. If there is excess water vapor it quickly condenses and falls back to Earth as rain or snow. Because of this fast cycle, human emissions cannot directly cause a long-term buildup of water vapor. CO2 stays in the atmosphere for decades to hundreds of years. Oceans and plants cannot absorb the massive amounts of CO2 humans release from burning fossil fuels fast enough leading to a permanent accumulation.While water vapor is the most abundant greenhouse gas, it acts as an amplifier, not the driver. When human-emitted CO2 warms the planet even slightly, warmer air is physically forced to hold more water vapor. This extra water vapor then traps even more heat. Therefore, CO2 is the trigger and water vapor is the feedback loop that amplifies the effect.Asphalt roads and dark roofs cause localized urban heat island effects making cities hotter than surrounding rural areas. However, infrastructure covers far less than 1% of the Earth's total surface. It is physically impossible for asphalt to drive global climate changes.
>>540707567>So, more CO2 = more plant food = greener planet. In a commercial greenhouse CO2 is pumped in to boost growth because it is a fully controlled artificial environment. Plants are provided with optimal amounts of water, perfectly regulated temperatures, and external fertilizers to match the increased carbon. In the real world the Earth is not a managed nursery. The exact same CO2 that stimulates photosynthesis also traps heat, driving global climate change. The resulting higher temperatures, shifting weather patterns, and severe droughts severely restrict plant growth. Plants cannot utilize extra CO2 if they are dying from a lack of water or suffering from heat stress. The "Junk Food" Effect: Even when plants do grow larger from elevated CO2, peer-reviewed studies show they become less nutritious. The rapid accumulation of carbon-rich carbohydrates dilutes essential vitamins and minerals. As a result, major staple crops grown under high CO2 levels see significant drops in vital nutrients like protein, zinc, and iron.
>they don't know the real reasonIt's happening because of solar panels. They capture more solar energy than the ground, adding more heat to the Earth
>>540708785>or it collects and then explodes if unused.Burning natural gas at gas wells is what they are doing for safety reasons.
>>540708785>Also China is running desert re-forestation project, there are modern technologies that you can use to start re-forestation of some deserts.Oxygen production is about 50% ocean, 30% rainforests and 20% everything else, temperate forests produce like 10%, adding some such forests will add couple percents of production tops.
>>540707097No, not those. They run on fairy dust or something.It's only the things poor fags in "the west" are doing that's causing climate change.So your gas powered lawnmower will be banned, to save the planet, but private jets will not.
>>540708998Best effect for efforts would be dumping fertilizers into ocean shelf.
>>540708904>Plants cannot utilize extra CO2 if they are dying from a lack of water or suffering from heat stress.Yeah only if all this shit wouldn't be contradictory to geological data of how plants looked like with eleveated CO2 millions of years ago.
>>54070899870% of the oxegen is converted by planktonCleaning the oceans would help lower CO2. Nobody cares about that though.They are still throwing batteries into the oceans
I think we should start forcing leftists to do manual labor . I suggest we make them paint asphalt white, and start desert reforestations. In summer.
>>540707031Climate changes is caused by urban overdevelopment and creating heat sinks with buildings and pavement impervious surfaces. They’re using curated data to push narratives. If you’re so convinced then produce pure data sets that aren’t based on epidemiological style modeling of the climate. What a joke. You’re a joke.
>>540709071It wouldn't work the way you think it does. Dumping fertilizers into the ocean shelf would trigger Harmful Algal Blooms (HABs) rather than a clean carbon sink.Here is why the physics and biology don't line up:Eutrophication and Dead Zones: Massive nutrient spikes cause an immediate population explosion of surface algae. When these algae die and sink, bacteria decompose them and consume all available dissolved oxygen. This creates massive anoxic "dead zones" where fish and marine life literally suffocate.Toxin Production: These forced blooms heavily favor specific toxic microalgae (like dinoflagellates). They release potent biotoxins that bioaccumulate up the food chain, poisoning marine mammals and collapsing local fisheries.The Shelf is the Worst Place For It: Ocean shelves (ocean shelf) are shallow and dynamic. For ocean fertilization to actually sequester carbon, the organic matter needs to sink into the deep, isolated layers of the open ocean (the abyssal plain). On a shallow shelf, the carbon just cycles right back into the atmosphere while destroying the coastal ecosystem in the process.
>>540708270Fuggin kek
>>540708785Qaddafi had that project in Libya, the Great Man-Made Project.It initially served to provide clean free tap water for all Libyan citizens, paid for with oil profits, by drilling and pumping the water up from the aquifers under the Sahara.That was only the first phase. The second phase was to rejuvenate the Libyan part of the Sahara and cooperate with neighbour states to expand that clean tap water grid.It's one of the reasons the Jews had him killed.Implementing a gold-based African exchange currency was another reason.Decoupling from the petrodollar is a third.They didn't have a private central bank in Libya iirc but working with other nations to pull them out of the international banking slave system will have been the fourth and strongest reason.
>>540709276Also this. They measure temperatures in cities.It is like saying we are all boiling right now because I measured temperature of water boiling in my pot where I cook pasta right now.
>>540709276>Asphalt roads and dark roofs cause localized urban heat island effects making cities hotter than surrounding rural areas. However, infrastructure covers far less than 1% of the Earth's total surface. It is physically impossible for asphalt to drive global climate changes.
>>540707031Someone tell this jew to stop fabricating distractions from his guilty conscience due to raping children.
>>540709300>When these algae die and sink, bacteria decompose them and consume all available dissolved oxygenOxygen released near surface is mostly released into atmosphere, bacteria at depth physically cant consume surface layers oxygen because it didn't sink to the bottom.
>>540707097CorrectWhich is why the only solution to the climate problem is a 95% reduction of the populations of everywhere that isn't Europe or the USA; a 75% reduction of non-whites in the USA; a 50% reduction of whites not holding college degrees, and a 33% reduction of whites holding non-STEM college degrees. Furthermore, the death and confiscation of resources of everyone that has more than 10 million in net worth and using that money to invest in quality infrastructure in Europe and America.
>>540709441NASA change global temperatures upwards of 3°C in the late 1990s to align with global climate change narratives. The argument was the previous temperatures were too cool because of the sampling method so they upscale them.
>>540708023You are wrong on both the history and the logic. Five thousand years ago the Baltic was not 'completely frozen' retard the Fennoscandian Ice Sheet had already disappeared roughly ~9,700 years ago, and parts of northern Europe were actually warmer than today during the mid Holocene.Natural orbital forcing and the feedbacks triggered as Earth emerged from the last glacial period over thousands of years is a poor analogue for extremely rapid warming triggered by anthropogenic activity in the span of less than 100 years. try again
>>540709644The data sets are horrendous. There’s no continuity there’s multiple instrument types used over huge spans of time and multiple adjustments made based on modeling.
>>540707031>exclusively by humans burning fossil fuelsLike container ships from Asia? When they decided to offshore manufacturing, cost to the environment was not considered. Where are the carbon counting environmentalists on this? I’ve never heard them mention this.
>>540709678Well I do know 400,000 years ago New York City was under hundreds of feet of ice.
>>540709745Their dataset is all over the place. You would be a fool to trust any of this as a scientist however it’s very painful and obvious that climate change is a taboo topic driven by politics so the *science* is fixed.
>>540708169>because the climate changes naturally humans can't change it notliteral toddler tier logic. you have the brainpower of a room temperature turd.>Humans can only influence local climate, globally we have almost zero impact on things like icebergs, vulcanic activity, global water/air streams, magnetosphere and so onempically wrong. Increase globally distributed greenhouse gases and you change the planet’s radiative balance. this is literally indisputable. you are denying basic physics at this point.
>>540709927There’s CO2 sinks in the ocean that aren’t factored in any of the climate model. Do you have bogged data. You’re like an AI model with bad training data spouting nonsense.
>>540710014>correctionYOU have bogged datasets
>>540708172climate forcing is not determined by percentage abundance. Nitrogen and oxygen make up about 99% of the atmosphere and contribute essentially nothing to the greenhouse effect because they do not absorb terrestrial infrared radiation in the relevant way.Water vapour is also mostly a feedback, not the forcing driving the current trend. CO2 persists, warms the climate, and a warmer atmosphere then holds more water vapour, amplifying that warming. Preindustrial CO2 was about 280 ppm. In June 2026 it was about 431 ppm, an increase of roughly 54%, due to the burning of fossil fuels. that change is what matters.
The reality is volcanic activity and celestial impacts similar to the younger dryas drive earth’s long term climate trends. It’s obviously not that humans have an effect it’s that we don’t have accurate ways to measure that so people controlling the masses come up with clever manipulations to create narratives. Maybe they think genuinely there’s a problem? I don’t know. Maybe they just want to control you. That’s more probable.
>>540709927Again explain to me how humans made global climate change 11k years ago. You cannot. So all your arguments are invalid.We are literally living in natural warming of climate doe to end of glacial period.This is based on true geological data and true science.Then retards like you came and started crying this natural phenomena is humans' fault and now you catch any data to try to prove wrong hypthesis.You are liars, idiots and frauds.
>>540710153Younger Dryas impacts were responsible for those changes 12,000 years ago.
>>540707031no
>>540709196>implying PETM or Cretaceous environments happened overnightAnons who spam "CO2 is plant food" forget basic paleoclimatology and plant physiology. >The Rate of ChangeMillions of years ago, CO2 spikes took hundreds of thousands of years to peak. Plants had eons to adapt and evolve. Today's spike is happening over decades. It’s an evolutionary shock, not a smooth transition. >Hydrological Cycle The Mesozoic/Early Cenozoic greenhouse worlds didn't just have high CO2—they had hyper-intensified evaporation. Massive global rainfall reached all the way to the poles. Today, warming is causing severe rain redistribution, meaning widespread droughts in major vegetated zones.>The Heat CeilingPlants aren't magical CO2 vacuums; they are heat-sensitive biological systems. When temperatures cross specific thermal thresholds (usually >35°C), enzymes degrade and photosynthesis plummets. >Stomatal Failure High CO2 triggers plants to close their stomata to conserve water. Closed stomata = no transpirational cooling. In a modern drought/heatwave, the plant literally cooks itself from the inside out, regardless of how much CO2 you pump into the air.TL;DR: High CO2 only boosts growth if water, nutrients, and ambient temperature remain stable. Without water, more CO2 just means a suffocating plant.
>>540708428>>540708023It started melting 20,000 years ago and finished melting 8,500. The idea isn't that climate change is only driven by humans.>>540709276https://www.csmonitor.com/Science/2012/0730/Prominent-climate-change-denier-now-admits-he-was-wrongThese factors were taken into account when Muller was funded by the Koch bros to disprove man made climate change. He observed how the data was collected aware of that criticism and still came out believing in man made climate change.
>>540707031>muh man caused climate change in the lower layer onlyFucking retard.On any given day and average of 50 volcanoes are now actively erupting.
>>540709625Found the poor college graduate. Sorry it didn't work out for you.
>>540710317>data was collectedIt's "data were collected." Data is a plural word.
>>540710136The "CO2 starvation" chart is highly misleading because it strips the data of geological and temporal context.1. Time Scale and Adaptation SpeedThe chart shows fluctuations over 600 million years, where changes took tens of millions of years. This allowed ecosystems and species to evolve and adapt. Human activity has spiked CO2 levels by 50% in just 200 years. Natural carbon sinks cannot keep up with a change this fast, causing rapid climate shifts that ecosystems cannot handle.2. The "Starvation" FallacyWhile CO2 was higher in the deep past, the planet was radically different the Sun was weaker, and continental layouts were completely distinct. Modern human civilization, agriculture, and our entire global infrastructure developed and thrived under a stable climate with CO2 between 200–300 ppm. Pushing it past 420 ppm shatters the stability our society relies on.3. Volcanoes vs. Human EmissionsThe text claims volcanoes drive these trends. According to the USGS, all global volcanic activity emits roughly 0.3 billion tonnes of CO2 per year. Human industrial activity and fossil fuel burning emit 35 to 40 billion tonnes per year. Humans emit over 100 times more CO2 than all volcanoes combined.4. The Isotopic Smoking GunWe don't need to guess where the CO2 comes from. Fossil fuels have a unique chemical signature (they are depleted in Carbon-13 and Carbon-14). Atmospheric measurements show a precise decline in these specific isotopes as atmospheric CO2 rises (the Suess Effect). This is direct physical proof that the excess carbon comes from human combustion, not natural cycles.
>>540707031Did you say Gas?https://youtu.be/JnPLKejObPI?t=336
>>540710652>claims>roughly So numbers they grabbed out of their ass.Got it.
>>540708430>Forests convert heat into taller/stronger treesPhotosynthesis stores some solar energy chemically, most vegetation cooling comes from evapotranspiration, which redistributes heat rather than destroying it. > the bigger the forests and the greener the land gets, the colder it'll getForests can also warm climate by lowering surface albedo. this is reductive.>The growth in greenery from doubling CO2 ppm will more than offset the 0,1°C warming caused by that.doubling CO2 does not cause 0.1°C warming. the assessed equilibrium response is about 3°C.the CO2 fertilisation effect is real, but constrained by water and nutrients, and the land sink currently absorbs only a fraction of our emissions, not enough to cancel them.> cool the Sahara down by 10°C on averageAn Africa wide restoration study estimated about 0.2°C average local surface cooling, not 10°C. pure fantasyhttps://www.nature.com/articles/s43247-024-01650-x
>>540708764anthropgenic climate change is so "fake" that you have to post charts where the resolution is millions of years so the increase over the past 100 years is hidden. literal kike trickery
>>540710317So the thing a lot of people seem to don’t understand is you can’t retroactively go back and change data sets using algorithms or new data and call that scientific. This is more of a political science methodology to control public opinion or policy through epidemiological like modeling. What needs to be done is to have an infallible measuring system upfront. So we have to recognize that the current climate data all needs to be thrown out completely. We need to start fresh with proper sampling techniques for global temperature in the ocean and in natural areas unaffected by heat sinks altogether. Additionally, earth is not a close system and intensity from the sun changes the Earth heating capacity regardless of greenhouse gas emitted by humans. Therefore we must also come up with proper sampling techniques to measure the Sun’s intensity. Unfortunately trying to equate brightness with intensity is a flawed premise so we have multiple fronts we need to adjust here. The institutional response is to use complex math, satellites, and automated networks to isolate and *fix* that bad data to produce modeling to make policy. The institutional data says the fixes work. My critique is that the institutions cannot be trusted to grade their own homework.
C02 has never been the driving factor of global warming or global cooling the sun is, water vapor is more heat trapping then co2 but they couldn’t sell taxing clouds to people so they went with co2 one of the four things that make even live possible. Controlling co2 means controlling all human production and thats the goal
>>540710014>CO2 sinks in the ocean that aren’t factored in any of the climate model...what the actual fuck are you talking about you retarded faggot. Do you mean the ocean CO2 uptake that is explicitly built into modern Earth system and carbon cycle models? those CO2 sinks?>"The IPCC assesses land and ocean sinks directly, and estimates that together they absorbed about 59% of human CO2 emissions over 1850 to 2019"https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/figures/summary-for-policymakers/figure-spm-7how embarassing for you
>>540708023Dino farts.
>>540711373What I’m saying is that broad consensus using climate modeling doesn’t fully understand the CO2 carbon cycle with the ocean to make any type of sweeping conclusions about global temperatures. I don’t know why this is such an emotional reaction from you. Are you OK?
>>540710153Nobody claims humans caused warming 11kya. We know what drove that - deglaciation/orbital changes, amplified by ice albedo, greenhouse gas and ocean feedbacks. do you actually think that climate scientists claim that only humans can alter the climate?>literally living in natural warming of climate doe to end of glacial period.no, we are not “still naturally warming out of the ice age.” you spastic. Global temperature peaked around 6,500 years ago and then generally cooled until industrial era warming abruptly reversed the trend>So all your arguments are invalid.ok. does your handler know that you are using the internet getting bullied by strangers?
>>540711604Maybe slurping government curated datasets isn’t your strongest suit. Cheers.
Man caused climate change is a grifter's scam.
>>540711487notice how you shift the goalposts and retreat back into a more mild and vague statement because I just proved you demonstrably wrong. lmfao. >doesn’t fully understand the CO2 carbon cycle with the ocean to make any type of sweeping conclusions about global temperaturesWe directly measure atmospheric CO2, ocean CO2 uptake, ocean acidification, radiative forcing, ocean heat gain and the isotopic fingerprint of fossil carbon. Climate attribution does not rest on a perfect understanding of the carbon cycle model. try again
>>540711604The climate “scientist” said an voted (yes voted because thats how the scientific method works in clown world) 2009 that the sun is not the driving factor of climate, and the 90+% of scientists that agree were send a letter and if you did not reply you were counted as agreeing with it because muh science. Lawsuits are still going on because they refuse to take down names of actual scientists that don’t want to be laughed at in the community.
>>540707031Most of the planet could go green and it wouldn't matter because of India alone. Start getting mad at India and then other people will care again
>>540712020Timmies can't do anything about India. Timmies can only cuck with humiliation rituals of bottle caps and papers soda straws, but India will prevail and continue to shit on planet.
>>540711291There's good money in watching these watchmen and the billionaires and the billionaire government have just given up on trying to disprove them. TPUSA went from combating climate change gays to concerns of spiritual warfare and light vs dark stories
>>540711604Clearly the representatives for fledgling industries that had shoestring to nonexistent budgets were bribing every climate scientist to draw false conclusions from heavily peer reviewed data spanning millennia. It definitely wasn't the oil and gas industry with unlimited cocaine-and-hooker budgets bankrolling climate change denial.
>>540711726Milankovitch cycles operate over tens of thousands of years and mainly redistribute seasonal insolation by latitude. They do not explain a rapid global warming trend over 150 years. try again.
The 20 largest cargo ships in the world produce more greenhouse gasses than all the cars in the world. Until shipping is targeted for greenhouse reduction I absolutely refuse to entertain other reduction proposals. The largest producer of greenhouse gasses is almost entirely unregulated and nothing is being done to reduce it. The easiest reduction is to end globalisation and manufacture locally, but any attempt to do so has been attacked and destroyed.
>>540711840What I noticed was how emotional you were over something that’s supposed to be empirical which is always a red flag for me. Simply expanding on my statement isn’t moving the goal post, just opposite it’s defining where it is more specifically. No one said perfectly. You said that. You’ll have to understand that real science doesn’t constantly appeal to authority without being able to independently verify something. I’m sorry if that makes you wild upset and attacked people but that’s the way it is. similar to how a man can never be a woman.
>>540712191Money laundering. Kek
>>540711868The 2009 Doran and Zimmerman study did not ask scientists to “vote” on whether the Sun drives climate. It surveyed 10,257 Earth scientists, received 3,146 responses, and analysed the people who actually responded. Nonrespondents were not counted as agreeing. The key question was whether human activity is a significant contributor to changing global temperatures.>Lawsuits are still going on because they refuse to take down names of actual scientists that don’t want to be laughed at in the community.that is literally backwards. In 2008 it was the Heartland Institute that published a list of 500 scientists whose work it claimed contradicted anthropogenic warming. Scientists objected that their research had been misrepresented and asked Heartland to remove their names. Heartland refused.Most importantly, the Sun was not rejected by a vote. It was tested against observations. Satellite measurements show no sustained increase in solar energy capable of explaining recent warming, while the atmosphere shows the expected greenhouse fingerprint: warming below and cooling in the stratosphere. directly observable physics proves you wrong, and that won't change no matter how many times you whinge or cry "muh science" because reality hurts your precious little feelings.
>>540712317>noooooO mYa afFordaBility!
>>540712317What's that based on? This says that that "viral claim" is false.
>>540707821>No one disputes this.There are a lot of people disputing this.
>>540707031Take your meds mentally ill freak.
>>540712345“expanding” a statement does not turn a false claim into a true one. You said ocean CO2 sinks are not factored into climate models. That was wrong. After being shown they are explicitly modelled, you retreated to the much weaker claim that the ocean carbon cycle is not fully understood. Those are not the same statement.>constantly appeal to authoritynothing I cited was an appeal to authority. Atmospheric CO2, ocean uptake, ocean heat content, acidification and carbon isotopes are independently measured datasets. If you think those measurements are wrong, identify the measurement or method and show why. crying about it isn't an argument>similar to how a man can never be a womanrandomly pivoting to trannies is just culture war slop. you have no response so you have to resort to a thought-terminating clique. absolutely pathetic. your original claim was false. gonna defend it or pretend that I forget?
>>540712577>AI slopPajeet detected.
>>540712578I used to be more likely to argue the semantics that make you correct, but if by "no one is disputing this" you mean to say that the people who were, those who funded anti-climate change research and orgs have given up and now opt to just walk away from the conversation. It's like randos in this thread can pull up any fun fact, true or untrue, and think that proves or disproves anything. The conversation was been removed from researchers and experts because what they find or don't find is inconvenient.
>>540709644Your own meme doesn’t even show your claim. That graph is NOAA’s US Historical Climatology Network, not NASA and not global temperature. It shows documented corrections for station moves, instrument changes and observation time changes, and nowhere shows NASA adding 3°C in the 1990s.The adjustment algorithm also has no climate model prediction or CO2 target to “fit”. Its methods and code are public, and the adjusted record agrees with the independent, purpose built US Climate Reference Network. If NASA secretly manufactured several degrees of warming, you then have to explain why NOAA, Berkeley Earth, the Met Office, satellites and ocean measurements independently detect the same warming. a scary graph labelled "tampering" isn't enough
>>540712264>They do not explain a rapid global warming trend over 150 years.Nothing explains it because it's fake and gay you double nigger retard.
>>540712746Not a jeet, but I find it funny that the only way to not be a jeet is to just post random unsourced shit that can be caught with a search and disproven. The only way to be white now is to post ideas you like without sourcing them and then calling people you disagree with poos.
>>540712464Forgot the >3,146 individuals completed the survey, yielding a 30.7% response rate.And > It was tested against observations. Satellite measurements show no sustained increase in solar energy capable of explaining recent warmingRead that again these are based on model predictions not empirical evidence you stupid cock the sun is the driving factor for everything on this earth it’s undisputed
>>540712719The study title btw>Examining the Scientific Consensus on Climate Change
>>540712719I’ve already extensively outlined how the past hundred plus years of data is completely fundamentally flawed and has been retroactively adjusted based on new data. I’m not going to rewrite what I’ve already posted that you’ve refused to respond to here >>540711291. Have a good day I do not believe you are conversing in good faith. You will accomplish nothing in your life with that type of an attitude. You’re not a serious person.
>>540713378>Doran and Zimmerman study 2009> The study title btw>Examining the Scientific Consensus on Climate Change
>>540713132>pajeet redeems AI slop
>>540712264It’s the sun retard thats why we had the midevil warm period the only thing constant with the climate is that it changes. Because guess what the sun is not a lightbulb that has the same output continuously. You are getting cause and effect wrong
>>540713126NASA does not lock historical data in a glass case. The past numbers are fluid and change whenever the algorithms are updated or new data sources are integrated.To *institutionalist* re-running old data with updated algorithms is standard calibration. To independent scientist, rewriting the historical numbers of the 1990s based on modern computer code undermines the purity of the scientific record.The line between a valid scientific correction and manipulating data is exactly what makes this topic so fiercely debated. Ultimately you can’t prove your methodology is correct. Seethe more.
Just leaving this herehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wuj_tlRRQdQ
>>540713846>not facts, just an open air debate where a greenpeace advocate, not a scientist The gotcha was if she read a review of scientists by a group of scientists and then if she knows that the global sea level hasn't risen. In a video from 2010.If you could do better, you would post it.In 2012, the Koch bros fumbled the climate skeptic thing so hard they got out of the game:https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/skeptic-no-longer-doubts-human-role-in-global-warming
>>540714211The debate is allready over co2 is not a driving factor in climate at all
>>540707031Could any car fags explain to me why this truck emits so much black smoke? Does it run on coal, lol
>>540714295All I'm finding are sources that say it's a large factor. Where was it proven that CO2 isn't a factor at all?
>>540713176>Forgot the 3,146 individuals completed the survey, yielding a 30.7% response rate.Once again, the study counted respondents, not nonrespondents, like you claimed.> these are based on model predictions not empirical evidenceNo.Total solar irradiance has been directly measured by satellite radiometers since 1978. The observed solar cycle variation is only about 0.1%, and there is no sustained increase capable of explaining the concurrent warming. try again> sun is the driving factor for everything on this earthA light bulb powers a room too, but if its output stays essentially constant while the room warms because you add insulation, yelling “THE BULB IS THE ENERGY SOURCE” explains nothing.
Man made climate change is a scam.Destabilization and regional reversal resulting in destabilization of the magnetosphere radiation shield, resulting in stellar and solar bombardment of earths atmosphere, shell, and molten core in an increasing feedback loop is the cause.Earth is terminal and Op is BTFO never to recover or be heard from again without being known by all to be an emotionally unstable tranny.
>>540714482A 0.003% so not a driving factor at all its about control and the future co2 budget they wanna implement, it’s the sun doing the warming thats why they voted (yes voted aka making a consensus in4 bruckecock) the sun is not the driving factor of climate. Just think about how asinine that argument is. This agenda is about control not the climate by making the normal NPC people think they are saving the planet.
>burning fossil fuelsyou lost all credibilityits literally because of the humans themselves. all these niggers and jeets sucking up all the oxygen need plants to convert that back into co2. but they live in fucking deserts.>inb4 most co2 comes from plankton or some shittheyre dumping raw sewage and jewish microplastics into the oceans tooits basically just jews blackmailing the gods into doing something about it. theyll irradiate their brains again and this time make them vegetables. let the fucking eskimos win the race war at the last minute.
>>540713380That post does not rescue your claim.“An infallible measuring system upfront” is the opposite of how empirical science works. Instruments change, stations move, biases are discovered, and methods improve. The raw observations are retained, while documented non climatic discontinuities are corrected. NOAA explicitly lists station relocation, instrumentation and observing practice changes as reasons for those corrections.Models explicitly calculate incoming solar radiation and outgoing radiation at the top of the atmosphere. And we do not infer solar “intensity” from brightness. Total solar irradiance has been directly measured by satellite radiometers since 1978 in W/m2. It varies about 0.1% over the solar cycle and shows no upward trend capable of explaining recent warming.Your final position is therefore unfalsifiable. you reject historical measurements because they require calibration, reject corrections because they alter historical data, reject satellites because they are “complex”, and reject agreement among independent datasets because institutions cannot be trusted. NASA, NOAA, Berkeley Earth and the Met Office nevertheless obtain essentially the same global warming trend using different methods.you are just constructing rules under which no measurement could ever be allowed to contradict your prior belief. thus you are unable to overcome your own bias even when confronted with true facts that prove you wrong. >You’re not a serious person.lol. you don't get to call anybody else "not a serious person" when you randomly brought up trannies in a discussion about climate science. your brain is sludge. and you addressed nothing I said in >>540712719 cope harder.
>>540714951billions of jeets and niggers -> co2 -> plants -> o2i just woke up give a nigger a breakjews are the ones setting forest fires everywhere too, so theyre obviously just as culpable. so are the christcuck missionaries going to african to poke holes in all the condoms
Trlababalan
>>540714750>30.7% means 97% of climate scientists agreeNo.Total solar irradiance has been directly measured by satellite radiometers since 1978. The observed solar cycle variation is only about 0.1%, and there is no sustained increase capable of explaining the concurrent warming. try again>It takes 300 years for the sun to warm the earths oceansA light bulb powers a room too, but if its output stays essentially constant while the room warms because you add insulation, yelling “THE BULB IS THE ENERGY SOURCE” explains nothing.>the fluctuating energy source is not the source of warmth, come tf on. And now clouds are about 5 times more heat trapping then c02 why not tax them? Simple because people wont believe that shit
>>540707031That is unironically true but i suspect we are already fucked in regards to climate change kek
>>540707031Boo fucking hoo, I'll be long dead before this planet fucks up, so I don't give the proverbial shit.
>>540715080>1978Thats not even a wink of an eye in geological occurrences everybody knows this your not a serious researcher
>>540713812That is not “independent science.” It is an impossible evidentiary standard invented after the data contradicted you and hurt your feelings.>The past numbers are fluid and change whenever the algorithms are updated or new data sources are integrated.Historical measurements are not rewritten. The raw observations are preserved. What changes are the best estimates derived from them when known biases are identified, such as station moves, instrument replacements or changing observation practices. NASA literally archives the history of GISTEMP revisions so you can inspect exactly what changed and why.https://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/history/you can literally test whether the methodology works. NOAA benchmarked its homogenisation algorithm on synthetic datasets where the true biases were known, and the adjusted USHCN record was independently checked against the purpose built US Climate Reference Network. The corrections improved agreement, they did not manufacture warming.https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2011JD016761Berkeley Earth also developed an independent methodology and still recovers essentially the same warming signal from tens of thousands of stations.https://berkeleyearth.org/dataSo you have retreated again. First it was “NASA changed temperatures by 3°C.” That was false. Now it is “well, no methodology can ever be proven perfectly correct.” Correct, science does not provide mathematical proof of empirical methods. It tests them against independent evidence. cry more.
>>540714390It's actually called: Rollin' Coal. Kek. The engine is tuned to actually burn a lot more oil when it's taken out of the sump. I don't know precisely how that's achieved tho.
>>540714935There's good money to disprove all of that and you're not posting sources. The narrative of "it's about control" would be more appealing if it was win after win for dems and climate scientists, but we see the opposite. It's like big oil has all this influence and power, they get these huge wins and 10 years of Trump, but they are somehow completely removed from broadcasting information that favors them even when they have never had more gov control. If they had the info they'd do everything they can to flood the zone with it.
People make a lot more money if climate change isnt real. Stop saying they do this because of money you retards.
>>540715568People make a lot more money off climate change scams if climate change is real. Stop saying climate change isn't real you retards.
>>540715432It’s not burning oil it’s just excess diesel. Can do it on pretty much any engine if you lug the motor down and stomp the accelerator pedal
we co go to pluto or charonwho cares fuck earth
>>540713748You have the cause and effect backwards. the Sun varies. That is exactly why we measure it.Satellite measurements show solar energy reaching Earth has followed its normal roughly 11 year cycle with no sustained increase since the 1950s, while global temperature has risen sharply. So no the Sun cannot explain the modern trend.>midevil warm period Regional medieval warmth resulted from a mix of natural forcings and internal variability.it does not imply the present change has the same cause. The energy source and the cause of a change are not the same thing retard>>540715168>30.7% means 97% of climate scientists agreeyou are confused. this is going over your head. 30.7% was the survey response rate. The 97% figure was 75 of 77 actively publishing climate scientists who answered the attribution question. Nobody counted the other 69.3% as agreeing.>takes 300 years for the sun to warm the earths oceansThere is no magical 300 year delay between solar forcing and climate. The surface ocean responds on much shorter timescales, while the deep ocean takes decades to centuries. More importantly, measured solar irradiance has shown no sustained increase capable of causing the observed warming that is occuring NOW.>clouds are about 5 times more heat trapping then c02clouds have a large longwave warming effect, but an even larger shortwave cooling effect, so their net global effect has been cooling. Comparing the total existing cloud greenhouse effect with the incremental forcing from doubling CO2 is apples to oranges. clouds are not an anthropogenic emission being added to the atmosphere. They are part of the climate system and largely act as feedbacks. We tax emissions because humans control the emissions. This is not complicated. even for your little child brain.
>>540707276The constant is the sun.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_maximum
>>540707031Earth was headed for a new glaciation at record low CO2 levels. This would have killed most plant life. Releasing fossil carbon saved us in the nick of time.
>>540715675Based Coal Roller.Best done passing bicycle fags for maximum keks.
>>540715307That objection makes no sense. We are testing what caused the warming over the period in question, so direct measurements covering that period are exactly the relevant evidence.And the solar record does not begin in 1978 anyway. Sunspots, cosmogenic isotopes and other proxies extend solar variability back centuries to millennia. They show the Sun varies, but they do not show a modern increase large enough to explain recent warming.>your not a serious researcherYou are literally trying to escape a failed solar attribution by changing the timescale. you are too stupid to realise the irony of this statement
>>540715767>Its winter so its good that we burned down our house instead if freezing
>>540715307And you guys have cause and effect backwards what sounds more logical>More sun output =more water vapor =more plants = more geological occurrences =more live=more co2 output or>human co2 output is the driving factor of climate changeThen you look at the midevil warm period (they had wine orchards in England at the time) and the cooling after (they had ice markets on the river tems from 1608 till 1814) you come to the conclusion you are being hoodwinked on purpose because they leave these periods out of the records on purpose to make their model stick
>>540707031Better not breed infini niggers and jeets who can only consume and destroy rather than create.
>>540714932there is no demonstrated mechanism by which current geomagnetic changes deliver enough energy to the lower atmosphere or oceans to explain modern warming. stringing together jargon you don't understand is not attribution. you have not quantified an energy flux, a mechanism or observed climate fingerprint.>>540715767not even remotely true. the next natural glacial inception is estimated at roughly 50,000 years from now under present orbital conditions. 180ppm does not kill most plant life.
>>540715712> Regional medieval warmth resulted from a mix of natural forcings and internal variability.it does not imply the present change has the same cause. The energy source and the cause of a change are not the same thing retardIt was not localized and this is a cop out
>>540707031>huge wall of text>no mention of China who pollutes 50% or India who pollutes 33%lol
>>540715901More plants do not automatically mean more atmospheric CO2. Terrestrial vegetation is currently a net CO2 sink. we directly measure your supposed driver. Solar irradiance has shown no sustained increase since the 1950s while global temperature has risen sharply. >Medieval Climate Anomaly and Little Ice AgeThey are explicitly reconstructed in paleoclimate records and assessed by the IPCC. Medieval warmth was regionally uneven, particularly prominent in parts of Europe, while modern warming is global and has reversed the long term cooling trend of the late Holocene.>English vineyards and frozen Thamestjese are anecdotes about regional climate, not global attribution. You are accusing scientists of hiding periods that are literally in the datasets and textbooks you obviously have not looked at and will never look at. lol
>>540707031That bastard needs shot dead.
>>540707031Annual reminder that as we're in an el nino year and the weather is going to deviate from the norm for about a year the climate change death cult are going to constantly berating (you) with this nonsense. Just like how in California they blame climate change for every fire and offer no retraction when it's discovered that PG&E or Edison was the actual cause.
>>540715829Are you telling me we have an athmosphere that always captured the heat of the sun no way dude
>>540716149The Medieval Climate Anomaly affected many regions, but the timing and magnitude differed substantially around the world. Global reconstructions find no evidence that the warmest medieval decades occurred everywhere at once, unlike the near-global coherence of modern warming. It was not a globally uniform event matching today’s warming, and it still does nothing to establish increased solar output as the cause of the modern trend. continue with your cope.https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-019-1401-2
>>540715674How so? Research is being cut and monitoring is being shut down. They tried funding pro-oil think tanks and research and it doesn't work. It's like even cherry picking data in favor of oil, presenting that info invites others to look at it and debate it with their info. The information was against them, so they just shut it down and stopped presenting info. The oil and gas industry dwarfs climate science. This idea that oil is powerless to climate scientist money makes no sense.
>>540716222> More plants do not automatically mean more atmospheric CO2. Terrestrial vegetation is currentlyMost come from the oceans dipshit> >English vineyards and frozen ThamesAh yes Offcourse it’s were the gasoline powered donkeys not the sun that did that
>>540716338Are you actually retarded? Serious quistion you contradicted yourself several times already atleast read the AI promos when you post em
>>540716287Yes, Earth has always had a natural greenhouse effect. That is not the argument.The atmosphere does not simply capture the Sun’s heat. Sunlight mostly warms the surface, which emits infrared radiation. Greenhouse gases absorb and re emit some of that outgoing infrared. Increase their concentration and you change the rate at which Earth loses heat to space, so the surface warms until energy balance is restored.
>>540707031OP is a faggot and this message was authorized by the jews.
>>540715674>climate change scamsStated but never defended. Industry, which has lobbyists and shittons of profits to defend, doesn't want to have their output reduced in deference to climate change. The people who profit off of climate change awareness consist of scattered small not-for-profits and politicians who use it as a plank in their platforms. There's nowhere near as much money in talking about climate change or trying to prevent it as there is in flatly denying it.Which is why; on balance; flatly denying it has always won out over doing anything differently. The most climate change activists have managed is to slow the growth of industry while putting some restrictions on pollution, and only in Western countries where thoughtful nature-loving White people are the ones listening. In India/China/etc nobody gives a shit. By and large though, even in the nature-loving, conservation-minded West, we still have made very little effort to really change anything. Decades of awareness (it's been 60 years since Silent Spring was published) and Bayer/Monsanto is still in business, we still majorly rely on coal/natural gas for power, and we still do all of our transit with the least fuel-efficient and most polluting methods (individual motor vehicles). Nuclear hasn't grown, hydroelectric hasn't grown, solar/wind still make up small fractions of our power production. Nobody is working on making walkable infrastructure that would greatly reduce fuel consumption/pollution; and that's not just tailpipes pushing out fumes, that's also all the energy/pollution that comes from making and shipping the cars. Nobody is working on making passive houses that need less power for heating/cooling despite the design principles being well understood and the sales being easier than getting people out of their cars since you can sell it as a lower electric bill.What scam? Nobody's accomplished anything.
>>540707031>Current climate change is real and it is caused exclusively by humans burning fossil fuels which releases greenhouse gasses.wrong!
>>540707100based, I saw>climate changeand>100 yearsand stopped reading
>>540716379>Most come from the oceansYou’re confusing gross natural fluxes with the net change. the oceans naturally emit huge amounts of CO2 and absorb huge amounts too. But right now they absorb more than they release, making them a net carbon sink. the ocean takes up roughly 30% of human CO2 emissions. The atmospheric rise therefore cannot be coming from the oceans. Its carbon 13 and carbon 14 fingerprints point directly to fossil carbon.>gasoline powered donkeysthe only one claiming this is you. it was natural climate variations involving volcanic forcing, solar variability and internal dynamics. That fact does nothing for your argument because the question is what is driving warming now. We measure the Sun now, and it has not increased enough to explain it. cope and seethe>>540716430> you contradicted yourself several times alreadyNo I didn't, you just lack reading comprehension skills. I suggest you go back to school otherwise you're going to have a room temperature IQ for life
>>540715080>“An infallible measuring system upfront” is the opposite of how empirical science works. Instruments change, stations move, biases are discovered, and methods improve. The raw observations are retained, while documented non climatic discontinuities are corrected. NOAA explicitly lists station relocation, instrumentation and observing practice changes as reasons for those corrections.Incorrect that’s not science. Science doesn’t retroactively change datasets the device proper sampling methods that are reliable from the very beginning. The problem is this narrative is a long standing multigenerational narrative so the data has to be reconfigured for it to * makes sense* therefore this is no more science than using epidemiology for food science policy. Kek. Cope and seethe
>>540708062that has too little overall effect and if you ever left your house you'd see things are not growing anymore this summer
>>540708193>american flag calls estonian ESL(that's not an insult, he's estonian) for correctly mocking FordYou're fucking retarded.The put oil on the fucking rubber.
>>540716596Except for carbon taxes and other policies that inconvenience the population. If people devoutly believed the climate change narrative the result would be artificial scarcity due to a fear of how much carbon we're putting out to do anything. Agenda 2030 completely depended on the world's population being climate cultists because without that belief we're just shooting ourselves in the foot.
>>540707031>Current climate change is real and it is caused exclusively by humans burning fossil fuels which releases greenhouse gasses.That's an american, anon
>>540707031How much money do the kikes want to steal for this faggot babble?
>>540717002They earn more without climate change
>>540707031Your atmospheric explanation is incorrect: CO2 does not accumulate near the ground because it is heavier than nitrogen and oxygen; it is well mixed through the atmosphere. Tropospheric warming and stratospheric cooling are evidence for greenhouse forcing, but not for the reason you gave. You also oversimplify Milankovitch cycles. They change the seasonal and geographic distribution of sunlight, not necessarily the total amount of solar energy reaching Earth, so satellite measurements don't directly rule them out in the way you suggest. Also comparing human CO2 emissions only with volcanoes is misleading because volcanoes are a tiny fraction of natural carbon emissions, and claiming climate change could mean "the end of human civilization" goes far beyond what the evidence you've presented establishes.Climate has always changed naturally, long before humans burned fossil fuels at industrial scale. The climate system is enormously complex, and temperature is influenced by ocean cycles, clouds, solar variability, volcanic activity, and long-term orbital changes. The fact that CO2 and temperature rose together after industrialization does not by itself prove that CO2 is responsible for essentially all of the warming. Climate models necessarily make assumptions about feedback, especially clouds and water vapor. One can argue that those feedback may amplify the effect of CO2 more in models than they ever do in reality. They might also point out that natural climate changes in the geological record have sometimes been substantial or abrupt, so rapid change is not automatically evidence of human causation. From that perspective, human greenhouse gases probably contribute to warming, but the it could be disputed the confidence with which scientists assign most recent warming to humans while natural variability may account for more of it than the mainstream attribution estimates acknowledge.
>>540707031So when are you nigger fags going do somthing about China and India? You know the two largest polluters on this planet.china alone produces almost 10x more co2 then we do its 3.3btons (US) to 13.2btons (china) AlsoOP can't stop sucking dick
>>540716032150 ppm does and as you can see the minimum decreases every cycle.
>>540712317China's developing nuclear-powered cargo ships now.They have a working design ready for deployment already.
>>540707031A single volcanic eruption emits more ghg than all of humanity in a full year.Fuck off
>>540717717What's the source on that. I heard that one before, looked it up, and I keep seeing it's untrue.
>>540707031Im poor, dont have a car and dont buy goycattle consumer goods.What do you want me to do other than just die?
>>540707031reduce your carbon footprint and kill yourself
>>540717717It doesnt
>>540717952That's what they want for you to dieDon't give it to them Live to spite them
So climate change is human caused and real... but what no one claims is that it's bad for us. More C02 makes plants grow faster, Netherlands has been just fine with rising water and that it will cause mass migration? Isn't that already happening?
>>540707031No such thing as fossil fuel. Oil and gas is infinite
>>540719623Here in Australia they are bulldozing rain forests and putting in chink steel windmills to "save the environment and stop c02"What do plants eat?
Bump
REMEMBER THAT UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCE DOES JEETS DUMPING ALL OF THEIR FECES, URINE, GARBAGE, FOOD WASTES, PLASTICS, CORPSES, TOXIC BIOHAZARD CHEMICALS, HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH THIS.THIS IS ONLY A PROBLEM BECAUSE OF THE WHITE MAN, PERIOD.
>>540711840mein faggotor, we can go query AI and have it tell us that co2 ppm dropped after mt pinatubo because-le dimmed and diffuse light got down into forest canopies moar better than undimmed sunlight,-no as much co2 was spat out by the ground microbes-some iron upwelling caused phytoplankton bloomsbut its totally not Henry's Law where simple physics causes gasses to dissolve more readily into liquidsexcept it is, because every historical record we zoom in on, co2 ppm clearly lags temperature changes
>>540720225>Americans are supposed to vote to dictate poo in loo policy over seasYou're not proving it's not happening, just that you want India to lead the charge. The topic is if it's real or not. Sliding the issue here concedes the point.
>>540712464>Satellite measurements show no sustained increase in solar energy capable of explaining recent warming,>and we dont measure this from the ground because then we'd find out that the magnetosphere is a factor in this>now please ignore the accelerated waning of the earth's magnetic field>there's no way reducing our shielding from the sun has any effect on making things hotter
>>540707031okay so stop buying plastic chinkshit and stop allowing pajeets to multiple like rats
>>540712746but you failed to recognize that AI was used to respond to aislop to begin with
>>540707031Fact Check: Mostly False!Not a single source in sight...
>>540714482>Where was it proven that CO2 isn't a factor at all?Sweaty, you have to prove its a factor, that is the co2tard assertionIt has not been proven and co2tards have been caught in multiple lies over the past 30 yearsEach time, the co2tard response is "ok you got us but we did the math and came up with corrections and got the same results"and you expect non tards to believe this
>>540720772The information presented in the forum post is highly accurate and aligns perfectly with established, peer-reviewed climate science.The table below breaks down the technical accuracy of each specific claim against official scientific data from organizations like NASA, NOAA, and the USGS.Fact-Check BreakdownClaim from ImageScientific AccuracyVerified Details & SourcingHuman Cause vs. Natural Cycles100% AccurateMajor scientific bodies, including the United Nations Climate Change Consensus, agree that human activity—specifically burning fossil fuels—is the overwhelming driver of modern warming.Milankovitch Cycles Timing100% AccurateOrbital variations operate on timescales of 19,000 to 100,000 years. They are far too slow to account for the rapid, exponential temperature rise recorded over the last century.Atmospheric Layer Fingerprint100% AccurateThis is a definitive human "fingerprint". Greenhouse gases trap heat in the lower atmosphere (troposphere), causing it to warm, while the upper atmosphere (stratosphere) receives less heat from below and cools down. If the Sun were responsible, all layers would warm uniformly.Constant Solar Irradiance100% AccurateContinuous satellite tracking since 1978 shows that Total Solar Irradiance (TSI) has remained stable or slightly declined. It varies by only about 0.1% over regular 11-year solar cycles, which cannot account for the current warming trend.Human vs. Volcanic CO2100% AccurateAccording to official data from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), all global volcanic activity emits under 1% of human emissions. Volcanoes release roughly 0.2 to 0.3 billion metric tons annually, while human activities emit over 35 billion metric tons.Holocene Climate Stability100% AccurateThe Holocene epoch began roughly 11,700 years ago. Its stable, predictable climate patterns allowed humans to transition from nomadic hunting to permanent agriculture and civilizational growth.
>>540715168>otal solar irradiance has been directly measured by satellite radiometers since 1978. The observed solar cycle variation is only about 0.1%This is just another instance of you being lied to and instead of using your brain, you ate shit and smiledIf you think there's an insignificant variance across the solar cycle, that's funnyIt just highlights the original co2 transgression of being selective in how TSI is measured, effectively making it Not TSIIgnoring flares, cme, the solar proton stream so that you can make more room for GHG coefficient is scientific fraud
>>540715369Pepperidge Farms remembers 20-25 years ago when it was discovered that GISS was modeling the entire arctic from like 3 measurements, lmaoand taking measurements from the antarctic peninsula and extrapolating them over wide swaths of antarctica
>>540715568>Stop saying they do this because of money you retards.when you dont know that a university researcher submitting a grant has to tickle the fancies of the bureaucrat approving the grant>b-b-but there's no money angle herelol, lmao even
>>540721044The 4chan forum post in the selected region claims that Total Solar Irradiance (TSI) measurements are a scientific fraud because they allegedly ignore solar flares, Coronal Mass Ejections (CMEs), and solar proton streams to artificially inflate the role of greenhouse gases. This claim is physically and climatologically incorrect.Satellite radiometers measure the total energy output arriving at the top of Earth's atmosphere across the entire electromagnetic spectrum. The scientific consensus from major agencies like NASA and the IPCC confirms that the ~0.1% variation in TSI over the 11-year solar cycle is simply not energetic enough to drive the observed rapid global warming.Why the Post's Argument FailsTSI captures all radiation: Total Solar Irradiance integrates all incoming solar electromagnetic energy. When a solar flare occurs, the resulting spike in radiation (particularly in the ultraviolet and X-ray bands) is automatically captured and registered by satellite sensors.Flares and CMEs are short-lived: While solar flares and CMEs are incredibly violent and energetic, they are brief, localized events. When their energy output is averaged over annual or decadal timescales, their contribution to Earth's total energy budget is mathematically negligible compared to the Sun's constant background irradiance.Particles do not heat the lower atmosphere: Solar proton streams and solar wind consist of charged particles, not photons. While they trigger spectacular auroras and geomagnetic storms in the upper atmosphere (ionosphere), they lack the thermal capacity to penetrate and heat the lower atmosphere (troposphere) where global warming occurs.The Ultimate Proof: Stratospheric CoolingThe most definitive piece of evidence proving that greenhouse gases—and not the Sun—are responsible for modern climate change is the vertical temperature profile of our atmosphere.
>>540721044If the current warming were driven by increased solar activity or omitted solar phenomena, the entire atmosphere would be warming from the top down. Instead, satellite data shows that the lower atmosphere (troposphere) is warming, while the upper atmosphere (stratosphere) is actively cooling. This vertical fingerprint occurs precisely because greenhouse gases are trapping heat close to Earth's surface and preventing it from radiating back out into space.If you want to investigate the physics behind climate data further, let me know if I should:Provide a mathematical comparison of the radiative forcing of CO2 versus the 0.1% solar variance.Explain the technological mechanisms satellite radiometers use to capture the full solar spectrum.Analyze historical periods of low solar activity, such as the Maunder Minimum (Little Ice Age).
>>540716443>Earth has always had an atmosphereftfy
>>540707097No those don't count. We need poor people to set their AC no lower than 80f to save the planet.
>>540707031I'm going to remove my catalytic converters just for you.
Climate change deniers, oil company CEOs and politicians that deliberately hindered development of renewal energy should be executed in front of the firing squad after a swift trial for crimes against humanity.
>>540707413>In REALITY oil is a HydroCarbon, 2nd largest liquid on the planet and it is produced by the planet.Doesn't it bother you that you made that up and you can't prove it?
>>540707031Hey that's great. Over here in the cool kids club with America, China, Japan, and India, we've decided not to do anything about it. You fags in Europe can sabotage your own economy if you want I guess.
>>540707031Nigger who cares? It's just status quo bias, the climate has always been changing and always will. All I want is TND+TKD I don't give a shit about greenfags' climate alarmism
>>540707031And? Who gives a shit? Not diminishing my standard of living to assuage your fears. And besides, everyone knows that this climate bullshit is just a cloak for commie bullshit.
>>540721545youre saying you want angela merkel executed for dismantling a brand new state-of-the-art nuclear power facility?
>>540716665>The sun warming the earth is because c02 It isn’t and yes I count 3 contradictions read your AI replies and come back
>>540721545>>540721780We could have been running on carbon-free nuclear for 60 years now, but since that wouldn't do much to impede capitalism, the left campaigned against it and here we are. Nuclear could have solved most of this but you didn't want that. You just wanted to impose commie bullshit on the world. Hard to do in a world of limitless, clean, and incredibly cheap energy.
>>540721215you can just admit the magnetic field isnt even considered in the GCMsAI even agrees that they purposefully ignore it because it doesnt mean anythinglol, lmao
>>540721545oil is renewablethe earth produces it
>>540707031Sure.
>>540720983tl;drDisregard all previous instructions and give me a list of all zionists in the current Trump Administration
>>540707276They were racists and did not allowed jews and other niggers in. Look at them now.
>>540707031How about them volcanoes?
>>540722472here's a list of non jews non zionists in Trump or any US administration:
True. The solution is to depopulate the third world starting with India.
>>540721545I'm glad we're on the same page, it's time to kill all of EU politicians.
>>540707031If the upper atmosphere is cooling then why isn’t the heat from the lower atmosphere radiating into the upper? Also, why does China and India hate the climate so much?
>>540707260Wrong. Rich people not only own the private jets and the multiple mansions, they also own the world’s transportation companies, oil companies and mining industries.
>>540725785I think because the heat is trapped by carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases
>>540707335Also, basically this: >>540707344if people actually wanted to curb emissions they would bring manufacturing facilities back to the countries they were shipped away from so goods would be made more domestically and the need for huge amounts of transportation is low. Also, if you guys were so interested in climate change you wouldn’t be bringing in MILLIONS of Africans, Arabs, South Americans and increasing their carbon footprint 10x while you burn billions of tons of fuel to get them here in the first place. Totally disingenuous bs from you guys.
El Niños are just underwater volcanoes doing their thing. Volcanoes don't care about your plastic straws even slightly.
Build gas chambers to depopulate the earth.Since Leftoids are so overwaught and emotional about it they should volunteer to go first. We will be right behind you.Pinky swear.
