When the fuck will factories have pumped out enough CO2 for us to not have ice cold winters anymore? I'm sick and tired of freezing for 9 months every year.
OK, now half world is uninhabitable so we need to come up north. 1 billion Indians on their way.
>>540836981gulf stream will collapse and you will turn into siberia
>>540836981CO2 is not a thermostat
>>540836981Based on past climate data, warm poles would require a minimum of around 1 part per thousand atmospheric CO2. That's less then half the current level, and getting there would require about 4x the increase as all of industrialization has done so far.
>>540838167>That's less then half the current level,The current level is less than half of that, rather.
>>540836981two more weeks
>>540838167Pseudoscientific gibberish. CO2 is not the cause of gw.
>>540836981>Global warmingIt's warm every summer. And EVERY SUMMER: same discussion
>>540836981oh is sweden not supposed to be cold or something, dipshit?go back to rapistan if you like the heat so much. cold filters out niggers.
>>540836981http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/19962/climate-emergency-hoaxsee river stones in europe from 500 years ago severe drought heat waves>500 years ago>500 years agohttp://www.google.com/search?q=river+stones+europe
>>540836981some things to consider>96% of CO2 is natural in origin>an increase from 350 to 420 ppm is a 20% CO2 increase, but also just a 0.01% decrease of non-CO2-content>earths magnetic field has weakened since we started measuring and is (anti)-proportional to CO2 increase (99% correlation)>effects of geomagneticism appear to be neglected>climate models consistently predict wrong and are reassessed>thousands of climate researchers work on these models (hence 99% consensus)just sayingearth is warming up (objective) and co2 content appears to be up (ob/subjective)cause and effect are not proven, it is (still) correlation, not causationalso, fuck greenfaggotstheyre bad at science and math
>>540838695It's one of the factors determining the planet's equilibrium surface temperature. It's both highly variable in concentration and stable in the atmosphere, so unlike other big factors (sunlight is pretty steady, water precipitates out when it becomes concentrated), it can shift the equilibrium a lot and hold it there. There are records both of past temperature and past atmospheric CO2 concentration, and they correlate pretty well.Generally speaking, Earth has two climate modes: icehouse (what we're in now, with permanent ice at the poles) and greenhouse (no ice at the poles, the climate has been here about 3/4 of the time). The current atmospheric CO2 level is about the lowest it has ever been. At levels of around 1 part per thousand, the climate shifts to greenhouse mode, with less temperature difference between the equator and poles, and vegetation at all latitudes. These times are characterized by increased plant growth and animal diversity, e.g. the dinosaurs.
>>540839184>earth is warming up (objective)It's not objective at all. What is Earth's temperature? how do you measure it?https://arxiv.org/abs/0707.1161
>>540839383we dont actually know if CO2-content pushes temps or if temps pushes CO2-contentyes, you heard me
>>540836981I went skiing in July, I was great. Have considered not being a virus breeding sodomite?
>>540839446digital measurement systems since the 1980s, rolling averagesits direct observation/measurement and real hard data, not reconstructed soft dataits pretty hard to argue against, but you do you, fren
>>540839383Generally speaking. CO2 is the RESULT of warming, and NOT the CAUSE.
>>540839446>What is Earth's temperature?The average kinetic energy per particle of the lower troposphere.>how do you measure it?Thermometers.>https://arxiv.org/abs/0707.1161That paper seems to misunderstand everything it brings up. While it would be fun to go through, it would take a while. Can you state a single point in your own words which you think is correct?>>540839549It's a positive feedback. They push each other. Which means that adding CO2 feeds into the positive feedback. Past major increases of CO2 have been from things like major volcanic eruptions.
I read somewhere that there's these things that like CO2, plants or something. Maybe plant people are responsible for all this
>>540836981Cool it with the anti semitism
>>540839612wtf is a "digital measurement systems"? measurement of what? how? lol there is nothing to argue bc you're not presenting any argument.agw is anti-environment.
>>540839768At the current CO2 concentration, plants have a hard time extracting it from the air to form sugar, decreasing the efficiency of photosynthesis. Increasing the CO2 level increases plant photosynthesis, which removes CO2 from the atmosphere. Which means that putting a given amount into the atmosphere results in less than that amount staying there. The planet has already seen significant greening from the industrial CO2 emissions.
>>540839446>https://arxiv.org/abs/0707.1161thank you for this, will look into it(but it is not this day)
>>540839915>we need more CO2Plant person post
>>540838080Don't tell the "carbon credit" traders. Their fake economy will collapse.
>>540839818as opposed to an analog system, which is less precise and requires humans to tend to it, and humans are lazymeasurement data from 1980s can be considered to be <1% inaccuratemeasurement data from 1850s can be considered to be within ±3% accurate
>>540839549>we dont actually know if CO2-content pushes temps or if temps pushes CO2-contentjesus fuckin christwe discovered this when we zoomed in on algore's presentation, retardtemp changed, co2 ppm respondedEVERY SINGLE TIME
>>540839987Plants are important for humans, you see. Earth's biosphere has generally done better in warmer times.
>>540836981Swetards are about to find out what the AMOC is
>>540839697>The average kinetic energy per particle of the lower troposphere.Particle of what? There is no such data. >ThermometersThermometers where?>That paper seems to misunderstand everything it brings up.How so?>Can you state a single point in your own words which you think is correct?Read the paper.>It's a positive feedback. There is no positive feedback. CO2 is not the cause of gw, it's the result.https://notrickszone.com/
>>540839697>positive feedbackyes, but to what degree, another feedback loop may easily eclipse it (such as the aforementioned neglected geomagnetism)
>>540840038gibberish
>>540840058you are just as convinced of temp pushing CO2, as the greenfaggot is convinced of CO2 pushing tempunlike either of you, i admit to not know
>>540839697the earth's climate is absolutely dominated by negative feedbacks, and co2 is one of them
>>540840142if that is gibberish to you, then you cannot possibly have understood and read that study you linked
>>54083698195% of CO2 in the atmosphere is from natural sources.Only 5% of it is man-made.But only man-made CO2 is a greenhouse gas.Only the 5% man-made CO2 drives 100% of global warming.Of course.
>>540840194Henry's law, niggerpretty simpledecreasing temperature increases the solubility of a gas in a liquidincreasing temperature decreases the solubility of a gas in a liquidthis is why when it gets hotter, the co2 ppm increasesit is simple fucking physicsI know co2tards dont really subscribe to the whole physics thing, but sorry dumbnigger, this is an unassailable fact and anyone who tries to tell you otherwise is a liar or a retard
>>540840100>Particle of what?Air. Air is made of particles. Temperature is the average kinetic energy per particle of a substance.>There is no such data.There certainly is. People have been recording air temperature for a while.>Thermometers where?Near the surface of the Earth. You know, where people live.>How so?https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=fractal+wrongness''>Read the paper.So no. You might consider understanding something before using it as a reference.>There is no positive feedback.Water can hold less CO2 as it gets hotter. Increases atmospheric CO2 increases the equilibrium surface temperature. As the temperature increases, CO2 moves out of the oceans and into the atmosphere, which further increases the temperature. Adding a given amount of CO2 to the atmosphere, or increasing the temperature by some amount causes further increases, which is what a "positive feedback" IS.>>540840126How is geomagnetism supposed to influence temperature? It doesn't interact with electromagnetic radiation, the fluxes of which determine the equilibrium temperature.
>>540840321It's in equilibrium with the top few hundred meters of water, idiot. We're putting 30 billion tons of CO2 into the air every single year. That's doubled atmospheric CO2 since the Industrial Revolution. CO2 is opaque to heat radiation and that makes it harder for the planet to cool down. We've known about this since the 19th century.
>>540840317>But only man-made CO2 is a greenhouse gas.>Only the 5% man-made CO2 drives 100% of global warming.All of it is a greenhouse gas. But the CHANGE is what results in a CHANGE in equilibrium temperature.
>>540840419>Water can hold less CO2 as it gets hotter. Increases atmospheric CO2 increases the equilibrium surface temperature. As the temperature increases, CO2 moves out of the oceans and into the atmosphere, which further increases the temperature. Adding a given amount of CO2 to the atmosphere, or increasing the temperature by some amount causes further increases, which is what a "positive feedback" IS.this only works when you ignore other aspects of physics, such as the co2 ir absorption curve being logarithmic, meaning at low concentrations, co2 has a much higher capacity per unit change...but once you start riding up the asymptote, the IR absorption increasingly saturates, this directly means that over ~450 ppm the contribution is basically negligiblepeople who respect physics and the scientific method dont leave shit out so that they can tell a tall tale>How is geomagnetism supposed to influence temperature? It doesn't interact with electromagnetic radiationyou forgot about>in a perfect vacuum>being completely stationaryso once we try to reconcile this with reality, we again see that you are lying, because space is not a perfect vacuum, especially not near the planet, and absofuckinglutely NOTHING in the entire universe is stationary, so your assertion once again falls apart, co2tard
>>540840321i dont disagree, but that is a synthetic laboratory observation
>>540840451lmao holy fuck, now the seas dont mix>We're putting 30 billion tons of CO2 into the air every single year. That's doubled atmospheric CO2 since the Industrial Revolution.this is where you start lying and telling us that correlation is causationthe industrial revolution came basically at the end of the LIA and when we started measuring glacial extent, it was at a relative maxima because of that
>>540836981Have you considered going back to your homeland if it's too cold for you?
>>540840604>this directly means that over ~450 ppm the contribution is basically negligibleNope. It still increases the optical depth of the atmosphere in those wavelengths, slowing the radiation time and increasing the energy stored in the atmosphere. Still a positive feedback.>>in a perfect vacuum>being completely stationaryUse your words. What specifically are you claiming to happen? Elelctromagnetic radiation passes through magnetic fields without interacting, because it does not carry an electric charge.
>>540840419>How is geomagnetism supposed to influence temperature?im not sure, but the correlation appears real>Earth’s Diminishing Magnetic Dipole Moment is Driving Global Carbon Dioxide Levels and Global Warming https://www.scirp.org/journal/paperinformation?paperid=58677that paper construes it as the weakening magnetic field affecting the oceans ability to retain CO2
>>540840797>https://www.scirp.org/journal/paperinformation?paperid=58677Can you state a single point in your own words which you think is correct?
>>540840784if such positive feedbacks existed, we would not be here on this planet discussing them>What specifically are you claiming to happen? this is where I again remind you co2tards that you cant into physics, and you start ignoring physics when it contradicts the half baked assertions of professional grant writers that always knew they had to tickle the fancies of the bureaucrat approving the grantit was well known in the 90s and 00s that if you wanted to get your grant approved, you just wrote some global warming mumbo jumbo in therezoomers dont remember this shit cuz they werent born yetjust like they dont remember how comfy the sun was 40 years ago when the magnetic field was way stronger
>>540836981it’s an El Nino year so that means colder winter and spring for North America
>>540840867yes>your mom told me to tell you to not to forget your lunch boxim out, faggots, cheers
>>540840476>tell me about water vapour retard
>>540840924that quite often happens when a climate discussion turns to physics and discrepancies start being revealed
>>540840894>if such positive feedbacks existed, we would not be here on this planet discussing themWhy not? "Positive" feedback does not mean "runaway" feedback. >this is where I again remind youSo you don't actually know what it is that's supposed to happen in your model.
>>540840759Yeah OK and maybe Charlie Kirk's neck was just going to explode at that exact moment anyway.>the industrial revolution came basically at the end of the LIA and when we started measuring glacial extent, it was at a relative maxima because of thatThe thing that's bringing us out of an ice age is the fact we've doubled CO2 in the atmosphere, retard. That's not a good thing. Our crops need late ice age conditions to grow. Most of the planet's history is too hot for us!It's frankly insane to fuck with the climate of the earth. It's not like we have another one. We need to shut down all oil and gas production on the planet with military force. Yes a lot of people are going to starve as a result. Better than the Earth becoming uninhabitable for us.
>>540840476If there was an equilibrium before human emissions, why was their climate change?Climate didn't just start to change in 1850. It was changing before.A hundred years before, a thousand years before, a million years before.Colder than today, hotter than today, and yet we survived, even without technology or any culture.Always changing, never at equilibrium.
>>540841063It hasn't been hotter than this before in the history of the human race, so, over the time scale you're talking about, you're wrong.We did not exist a million years ago. In the Eocene and Pleistocene it would've been too hot for us.
>>540840925It's a much stronger greenhouse gas than CO2, but unlike CO2, it can enter and leave Earth's atmosphere via phase change. So while it provides a positive feedback to other equilibrium changes, it can not drive equilibrium changes itself, since it is always close to equilibrium.
>>540840967so ive suspected>never mind that i did actually summarize their conclusion with my own words >>540840797>that paper construes it as the weakening magnetic field affecting the oceans ability to retain CO2
>>540841018>Why not? "Positive" feedback does not mean "runaway" feedback. your problem is context, you cant even imagine a situation where it would be a negative feedback, lmao>So you don't actually know what it is that's supposed to happen in your model.you're the one pushing anti scientific garbage from the people who make models that fail after a decade or two of run, deciding that omg this is real instead of correctly understanding that the model should not predict catastrophe in such short order and this 100% means the model is shit and far short of replicating realitythe correct model necessitates a good working solar model in order to have anything resembling medium to long term predictive capability, because the entire solar system's energy equation is absolutely dominated by the sun
>>540841035>The thing that's bringing us out of an ice age is the fact we've doubled CO2 in the atmosphereyou absolute dumb fuck, this was taking place before we "started dumping tons of co2 into the atmosphere"if you're that goddamned stupid that you are either completely ignorant of or feel the need to lie about this, you deserve to have a pack of feral niggers break into your house and rape everyone inside>We need to shut down all oil and gas production on the planet with military forcethe levels of retardation know no bounds
>>540841158The upper atmosphere has got cooler, not hotter. If the Sun was driving it, it would've got hotter. The reason it's cooler is the higher concentration of CO2 lets it cool more efficiently. This is what global warming predicts.
>>540841109>It hasn't been hotter than this before in the history of the human race,this is just another lie backed up by data and methodology manipulation
>>540841158>you cant even imagine a situation where it would be a negative feedback, lmaoI mentioned one just up this page. >>540839915>you're the one pushing anti scientific garbageI'm not the one who claimed that movement or vacuum has something to do with how geomagnetism is supposed to influence planetary temperature. Really, how dies that work? Are miracles or clowns involved?
>>540841241>okay fine, one more postthats conjecture, im sorry>my source beingyou sound like a teenage girl parroting what they heard in a school book
>>540841240No, it wasn't. The average temperature of the earth has been quite stable over the last 11,000 years before the Industrial Revolution hit. There have been regional shifts but they happened slowly over millennia and rarely varied by as much as 1 degree. We are way out of anything humans have ever seen before by now.Please take Exxon Mobil's cock out of your mouth, the planet is burning.>>We need to shut down all oil and gas production on the planet with military force>the levels of retardation know no boundsIt's just obvious. Global warming is an extinction level threat. Its better for a billion people to starve than to leave an uninhabitable earth.
>>540841400Here you go you retarded planet trashing oil company whorehttps://www.nasa.gov/general/nasa-satellites-see-upper-atmosphere-cooling-and-contracting-due-to-climate-change/https://e360.yale.edu/digest/upper-atmosphere-cooling-study
>>540841402>over the last 11,000 yearsHumans have been around a lot longer than that. It wasn't "history" since nothing was written down, but keep in mind the referents for what you're talking about.
>>540841109If you compare data gathered by the same methods only, then it has been.
>>540841241this retard knows nothing about stratospheric coolingyou cant into physics, nigger
>>540841119sounds like bullshit
>>540841332another dumb climatenigger having a problem with physics being brought into the discussion
>>540841468>quotes a school bookQED
>>540841480Yes, it was colder during the Ice Age. That was also incompatible with human civilisation. It's never been this hot in our history. It's our shitting CO2 into the air that's preventing a return to an Ice Age, but we're massively overshooting.
>>540841402>The average temperature of the earth has been quite stable over the last 11,000 years before the Industrial Revolution hit.this nigger is too retardedat least get your retard talking points straight before attempting to engage with someone, you absolute fuckwit
>>540841575>It's never been this hot in our history.complete and total idiots believe this because they are incapable of understanding the data manipulation and methodology swindles utilized to make this assertion
>>540841402>It's just obvious.Earth has been getting greener. The carrying capacity has been going up.>Global warming is an extinction level threat.To some species that can't migrate to adapt to changing conditions, but those were going to die out at some point regardless, like nearly all species do over long time scales. Not to global species like humans.>Its better for a billion people to starve than to leave an uninhabitable earth.Sure, but there is no plausible climate change scenario that leaves Earth uninhabitable for humans. Regulations restricting energy use or food production directly cause human misery NOW, in service of avoiding this fictitious threat.
Any nigger who bitches about climate change and clean energy without also also for advocating for increasing the world's usage of nuclear power by multiple orders of magnitude is jew who wants to grovel in mud as an underclass serf while they profit from a chicken little sky is falling narrative
>>540841674>Earth has been getting greener. Not for anything we can eat.>To some species that can't migrate to adapt to changing conditions, but those were going to die out at some point regardless, like nearly all species do over long time scales. Not to global species like humans.You know what else was a global species? Anaerobic algae before they also choked on their own waste.>Sure, but there is no plausible climate change scenario that leaves Earth uninhabitable for humans.How uninhabitable does the earth have to be before we need to take drastic fucking action?What we need to do is very simple. We need to shut down all fossil fuel use. Everywhere. If people starve they starve.
>>540841527Do you know how rain works?>>540841575>Yes, it was colder during the Ice Age.We're in an ice age right now. It was colder during the last glacial maximum, but humans were around before that. And mammals did fine during the last greenhouse period when the poles were ice free.
>>540836981When we reach the levels that were needed for the medieval warm period, or when we reach the levels that were needed for the temperatures during the Roman republic and empire, or when we reach the levels that allowed the global proxy median temperature to be higher than now for almost the entire time since the start of the holocene.
>>540841840>And mammals did fine during the last greenhouse period when the poles were ice free.Did those mammals depend on C3 crop plants germinating below 13 degrees centigrade?
>>540841816>Not for anything we can eat.more co2 means a greener earth. cope, seethe, dilate all you want, that will not change this fact>fossil fuelonly fags call hydrocarbons "fossil fuels"
>>540841899>more co2 means a greener earth. Who gives a fuck? Humans don't care if the earth is green. Most plants aren't relevant. We care that it can carry our crops and provide oxygen and we can live in it.>only fags call hydrocarbons "fossil fuels"Coal isn't a hydrocarbon. Add chemistry to the things you do not comprehend.
>>540836981>winter>9 monthsThat's not how seasons work, Sven. Just because your spring is also cold, that doesn't make it winter.
>>540841876>the medieval warm period, Affected Europe only for a short period and we're way above that now.
>>540841816>Not for anything we can eat.See pic.>You know what else was a global species? Anaerobic algae before they also choked on their own waste.Not a temperature change, which was the claimed threat. The atmosphere being replaced by a poisonous substance does not vary by latitude.>How uninhabitable does the earth have to be before we need to take drastic fucking action?Costs should generally weigh against benefits. Reducing economic growth by 1% per year swamps the predicted damages from warming.>We need to shut down all fossil fuel use. Everywhere.That's silly. And wrong in a technical sense. But ignoring all that, you plan to win a world war with China to enforce that? >>540841879The ancestors of those crop plants survived that time, which is why they're around today.
>>540840451>CO2 is opaque to heat radiationNo, it's not. It absorbs a few specific wavelengths, it's translucent to most IR.
>>540842298And it's absorbing at those specific wavelengths to warm the planet up and increase water vapour which absorbs the other wavelengths.
>>540842192That doesn't tell you anything about total production, just fertiliser yields.>Costs should generally weigh against benefits. Reducing economic growth by 1% per year swamps the predicted damages from warming.We cannot undo global warming so we should treat it as having infinite cost. We should aim to reduce our total economy - not economic growth, the economy - by 75%.>But ignoring all that, you plan to win a world war with China to enforce that?Yes. We have to cut the entire world off from hydrocarbons and use military force to prevent any country burning its own gas, oil or coal.
>>540841109>It hasn't been hotter than this before in the history of the human raceWhy are you lying? It's been several warm periods warmer than now in the last 200-300 thousand years and just since the start of the holocene there has been warmer than now for a large chunk of they time. If you want to check European temperatures by Greenland ice cores as proxy then the climate is positively cold. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32606396/
>>540842670That isn't true, though.Your link doesn't say it's ever been hotter than it is right now in our history, because it isn't.
>>540842045Not if you go by Greenland ice cores which is the best proxy we have for Europe, it's cold now compared to the medieval warm period. Even global proxy median is about the same as now, it depends on the model though.sweden's lacks many plants which used to grow here up until a few thousand or a few hundred years ago.They died during the cold periods in the last two thousand years and it's still too cold for many of them to live here in most of Swedeb where they used to be native.
>>540842423I corrected your claim, I don't see the point of your post.
>>540842747What?
>>540842967That's simply a lie. We're warmer than 1 degree above the 1800s now. That's an extremely fast rise and it's global. The medieval warm period was European only.It should be illegal to deny global warming and everyone spouting this bullshit should be jailed.
>>540843100I specifically talked about Europe and I explicitly stated that I did so you dimwit.Why are you taking about the 1800s anyway? We are still warming from the little ice age and they was most certainly true in the 1800s, I don't think you will find many climate scientists disagreeing with that statement.
>>540836981Move back to Morocco then
>>540840419Atmosphere of Earth (air) is made of many substances, so what part are you measuring? Where are you measuring it? How are measuring it? This is not a simple problem, as explained in the paper I cited, which you claimed "misunderstand everything it brings up" without an explanation. So, again, what has the paper got wrong?>So no. You might consider understanding something before using it as a reference.It's you that needs to understand something before claiming it as fact.> Increases atmospheric CO2 increases the equilibrium surface temperatureThere is no scientific proof of this. This is just an assertion.>How is geomagnetism supposed to influence temperature?Via the Sun and electric universe, which is the actual temperature driver of Earth.https://doi.org/10.11648/j.earth.20190806.15
>>540842634>That doesn't tell you anything about total productionIt tells you that productivity per acre is increasing, which is the opposite of what you'd expect if conditions are becoming more hostile to food crops. Pic related tells you about total production, which also includes changes in planting area.>We cannot undo global warming so we should treat it as having infinite cost.That's not how it works, at all. You cannot un-drink a cup of coffee, but in deciding whether or not to have one this morning, you do not assign it infinite cost. More generally, assigning infinite values in any optimization problem leads to silly results.>We should aim to reduce our total economy - not economic growth, the economy - by 75%.Oh, so you're just a misanthrope. Gotcha.>Yes. We have to cut the entire world off from hydrocarbons and use military force to prevent any country burning its own gas, oil or coal.Ladies and gentlemen, the environmentalists!
>>540843509>Atmosphere of Earth (air) is made of many substances, so what part are you measuring?The average kinetic energy.>Where are you measuring it?Near the surface of Earth, where humans live.>How are measuring it?With thermometers.>This is not a simple problem, as explained in the paper I citedThen quote the paper where it says this.>So, again, what has the paper got wrong?You know the India Google Street view meme where you pick a spot and see if there's trash there? Pick a spot in the paper. How about the second sentence of the abstract: "According to the second law of thermodynamics such a planetary machine can never exist." The second law concerns the movement of heat and limits of usable energy which can be extracted. This is unrelated to radiative equilibrium temperatures in a terrestrial atmosphere, where energy is modeled as flowing down its energy gradients, not up. The details here involve absorption and radiation spectra, emissivity, heat capacity, temperature, etc, not thermodynamic efficiency.>>540843509>There is no scientific proof of this.There is no proof in science, period. Proof is for math, not empirical investigations. Do you understand enough science to even ask the proper question here?>>540843509>Via the Sun and electric universe, which is the actual temperature driver of Earth.State how this works in your own words.>https://doi.org/10.11648/j.earth.20190806.15Wanna guess the error bars here?
