so i'm a relative newfag to Holla Forums, visited halfchan since 2012, Holla Forums since 2014 and Holla Forums since a few months now, and a few weeks ago i saw a thread about climate change and what i got from it is that the people here don't believe in man made climate change. i myself do believe in man made climate change, for the following reasons:
one of the main sources of power in this world is energy in the form of fossile fuel. the majority of the trade in fossile fuel is in hands of the kikes, so how would they benefit from people using less oil?
today a temperature of 24 degrees celsius was reached, and 2 weeks ago we had a heatwave that stretched 4 days. statistics show that this is something that returns only once every 1000 years. also, this winter will most likely be the 4th winter without any significantly cold temperatures, the last 3 years the temperature hasn't been below zero for more than two consecutive days, and if it has been it was not very far below zero.
most of the proof against climate change seems to come from politicians who live a very comfortable life in the pockets of (((oil companies))), like that one guy who brought a snowball to congress as "proof".
so tell me Holla Forums, why is man made climate change a hoax? and why should i keep on consuming fuel from the jews? is there anything wrong with reducing ones CO2 footprint? i'd be happy to hear your answers, and i hope you've got some substantial proof so i can look forward to a nice cold comfy winter.
Holla Forums's view on climate change
If it is true, most of the deaths will be in poor countries anyway.
ASIA FOR THE ASIANS, AFRICA FOR THE AFRICANS, WHITE COUNTRIES FOR EVERYBODY!
Everybody says there is this RACE problem. Everybody says this RACE problem will be solved when the third world pours into EVERY white country and ONLY into white countries.
The Netherlands and Belgium are just as crowded as Japan or Taiwan, but nobody says Japan or Taiwan will solve this RACE problem by bringing in millions of third worlders and quote assimilating unquote with them.
Everybody says the final solution to this RACE problem is for EVERY white country and ONLY white countries to “assimilate,” i.e., intermarry, with all those non-whites.
What if I said there was this RACE problem and this RACE problem would be solved only if hundreds of millions of non-blacks were brought into EVERY black country and ONLY into black countries?
How long would it take anyone to realize I’m not talking about a RACE problem. I am talking about the final solution to the BLACK problem?
And how long would it take any sane black man to notice this and what kind of psycho black man wouldn’t object to this?
But if I tell that obvious truth about the ongoing program of genocide against my race, the white race, Liberals and respectable conservatives agree that I am a naziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews.
They say they are anti-racist. What they are is anti-white.
Anti-racist is a code word for anti-white.
Well for one there's the whole carbon credit scam, that's suspicious. Irregardless if it is influenced by man, there is absolutely nothing we can do to stop it now short of a scientific miracle, so why give a fuck?
Wrong thread?
If you'll take a real look you will see no less oil is being used. Oil consumption has been climbing steadily, and will continue to do so.
It's use is being taxed more, that's the only change. The money goes to who knows where. All sorts of regulations, bureaucracies and control systems are being put into place around all of this.
Also notice how they are not focusing on real pollution at all, megacorporations dumping poison in the ocean etc. That's because these people don't care about the environment at all, they care about controlling plebs in any way they can.
When it comes to the science itself, it's all bogus. It all comes from a few people with some magic computer they claim can predict the climate hundreds of years from now. They are consistently wrong when trying to use it for next year though.
That a few highly propagandized "scientists" go along with this bullshit is proof of how coopted the western academies have become. You can't expect much more from professors, they are just drones teaching stuff they've been taught, but you should be able to expect more from the research departments.
That said, there is nothing wrong with reducing your CO2 footprint, there is just not any evidence it has any effect on anything. What you should resist is people telling you you need to give them money and control because of it. Also, if you want to worry about the planet, worry about real pollution.
The kind they don't talk about.
I don't know if it's true or not.
What I do know is that the government has no power over it. I'd like to see alternative sources of energy become a bigger part of the US energy grid, just so we can start the process of de-funding the Saudis. However, at this time wind and solar cannot produce enough kilowatt hours to make those sources of energy practical, and no amount of taxing or Government subsidies can change that.
Climate change is a natural phenomenon and the climate has been changing for billions of years.
SLIDE THREAD
The changes in global temperature correlate almost identically with solar activity. Look it up. It's not fucking hard.
Climate change is natural and has happened throughout history. Do humans affect the environment? For sure, but I'm not sure on what the extent is. The science is untrustworthy because it is the fat vs sugar fiasco all over again. Pursuing alternative energy sources to reduce sandrat power is necessary. I think we should definitely be concerned about deforestation, animal and plant extinction, and other environmental issues.
The oceans are going to sink California, the east cost, and all of japan by 2100.
WE'RE DOOMED UNLESS YOU BUY MY FILTERS AND MAXIMUM MALE VITALITY(TM)!
survincity.com
Radioactive decay, primeval heat, and the sun are all that is keeping the earth warm. Our temperatures are linked to this.
Additionally large volcanic eruptions cause the earth to cool for some reason.
Lastly Methane is far more of a greenhouse gas then CO2. CO2 is needed for plant life and has very little affect compared to everything else.
Now I am not saying to make CO2 for the fun of it. But it is way less harmful then it is made out to be and some might argue beneficial since the earth is losing its radioactive and primeval heat over time
The data tells you it's bullshit. The reason for the scan are pretty obvious. 1. Controlling atmosphere requires global governance ( I.e. more unelected bureacratic elites in control of taxdollars) 2. Controlling CO2 means controlling and limiting industrial production (meaning control over which countries ascend economically and which wither) 3. Limiting industry and economy controls military might and prevents changes to the world order 4. It creates a global financial market that puts control of energy use in the hands of Western financial firms
We need to get Fuji and Yellowstone to erupt goys, we can stop global warming!
it is a jewish scam to sell carbon credits & limit white nations. these carbon credits also fund the jewish zog one world army.
climate change is a myth
the change in the climate is due to the massive change in the position of the earth relative to the sun. the earth does not go back to the exact same position each and every year as it orbits the sun & this has a huge effect on temps.
/thread
Here's my views.
Climate change is real, but that's just because of the planet changing.
Man made climate change is bullshit but on the off chance it is real, it only accounts for about 5% at most of the actual change.
It's a power grab for global institutions like the UN
It may be more useful to question the proposed solutions than the "scientific consensus" on the matter, because none of their solutions would do much of anything.
A lot of people want the US to reduce carbon emissions. They say global temp will rise by 2.6 degrees otherwise. But based on their own numbers, even if the US went to ZERO emissions from 2050-2100, that would only change world temp by 0.2 degrees. Is that really worth it? Not a single person drives a car so that temp rises by 2.4 instead of 2.6 degrees. (These numbers come from a Cato study that I don't have time to find, but you get the idea).
You should not /thread your own comment, user. That place is due to another user that thinks your point is /thread worthy.
/thread
Solar Flaring Heats the Earth.
The solar Flaring operates on 11, 110, and 1100 year cycles.
You can see the 1100 year cycles in the first two pictures.
& you can see the 11, and 110 year cycles in the 3rd pic.
Notice in the temperature chart, that the earth heats every 1100 years, right at the peak of the C14 cycle.
C14 is a radioactive form of carbon which is created during high solar activity.
————————————————————————————————-
Global Warming is a Hoax to destroy this nation while China rises, and to make money off of carbon credits in the carbon emissions market - futures market.
What pol believes currently, current year edition
- global warming is a political power grab by globalists who are pushing local governments to bend the knee to the United Nations.
- co2 contributes very little to global temperatures and is actually the bi-product, not the driver, of increased temperatures.
- Sun spot activity has been directly correlated to global temperatures for as far back as we can measure. It should be fucking obvious that the massive fireball in the sky has a big impact on climate.
- Sensor data across the globe has been intentionally falsified to support the global warming hoax, in fact people don't even call it "global warming" anymore because it has been btfo so hard.
- Being able to tax energy consumption would be a massive benefit for control structures in place to further supress and rob their citizens, for the purpose of controlling them. All productive activities that create our standard of living require energy, and this would be another "income tax" that hurts everyday people more than corporations.
- Reading material: "The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels" this is a good book because it short circuits the very core of the righteously indignant leftoids who classify "climate deniers" as immoral and evil people.
Nice anecdotal evidence. The total surface area of the Earth is 509 million square kilometers, but you just referred to an area of 41,543 sq km.
You are literally too stupid to evaluate this topic.
Lurk more.
We can probably agree that too much pollution is bad, and cutting down on the amount of toxins we pump into our environment is a good idea. (See Beijing for what happens if you don't.)
However, claims that mankind is causing the world to heat up range from exaggerated to outright lies. From doctoring the sensor data to create an illusion of a heat spike, to the 97% claim (all scientists who agree that pollution affects the environment are categorized as believing in global warming for this argument.)
Also, don't know if anyone here is old enough to remember this, but in the 70's they were pushing global COOLING, claiming that 97% of scientists agreed we were about to enter a new ice age.
AGW doesn't exist.
Your first chart is wrong; you can't use HadCRUT as serious data because Hansen has invented all of its numbers.
AGW is a kike scam
Taking care of the environment is something only Europeans do. We will continue as stewards of the environment. This could also be said to show how climate change is targeted at white/european countries.
Links to proof this data is fake? shlomo.
You are justifying genocide.
I remember global cooling. Now you will notice they've all gotten directives about not saying global warming anymore either, a term that will be memoryholed in the same way.
Now it's "climate change." Sort of clever actually, as it's completely ambiguous.
Climate change is a meme made up to cripple western industries while chink/pajeet industries are free to do as they please and burn tires and people to get ahead.
sjsu.edu
How about some real science based on the original model for the runaway greenhouse effect?
Tldr: Venus is 93% co2, earth is .0004%. Venus atmosphere is 90x the mass of earth's. Doubling our current co2 would increase avg global temp by a fraction of 1degree C. Climatologist models arbitrarily boost their ∆T by a factor of 2.5.
This is all assuming that solar activity doesn't have a greater impact than we currently believe.
i've got my money on biogas, it seems to have plenty of advantages
1. Kill yourself.
2. Read what was written, not what you imagined.
3. HadCRUT is nothing but fabricated data, moishe. The only valid temperatures are satellite data.
He's a bot
of course it's not by far useful as evidence but it's what i notice about the weather.
The climate has alway changed retard, the question is "what affect on the global climate are humans having with their localized pollution and release of various gasses into the atmosphere?" Which as far as we can tell, globally, is insignificant. Local, to pollution source, environmental affects are much more worrisome. Salting your own earth is a dumb dumb move
It looks to be a very sharp rise in temperature that seems directly linked to human industrial activity. You can be scared by this or realize in a broader historical sense that this was the first time we realized that we could change an entire planet's weather. We could do this on Mars if we needed to and any other body. Raising and lowering it's temperature as needed.
I do plan on buying an electric car, solar panels and peak-usage storage battery bank. I even like the idea of having a rain catch, vegetables, eggs ect. Like some kind of eco-homesteader. living for free or close to it without having to commute to work or take part in mass media, consumerism. It's something that appeals to me. It feels like a healthy cyclical trend to go this way.
I get that it is good to be skeptical and cool to be cynical but contrarian views aside there are objective truths I'm aware of.
...
Here's your answer:
Carbon tax
I was an Environmental Science major years ago- they are pushing this shit hard in Universities. It's a scam to get a global tax for their world government.
man made climate change is bs
pollution, on the other hand, is an actual problem
You really don't get anything. For sane people objective truth is supposed to have something to back it up beyond prophecy.
With enough effort wind and solar can produce almost enough to satisfy demand but that isn't the main problem with them.
Video related.
To me the best solution seems to be fusion power. instead of all of this boiling water shit traditional energy generation relies on.
We already know how to generate electricity from superheated plasma instead of using it to boil water like most traditional energy generation, but still haven't figured out how to maintain a stable fusion reaction without a massive gravity well acting on it like the sun.
it'd be nice if we could somehow ship CO2 from earth to mars to change the climate there
They want to put an end to industrial civilization, ie the era of the white man. What better way to do that than to choke off the fuel supply?
CO2 doesn't cause significant warming. The reason the world has gotten warmer is because humans have effected the water cycle with massive irrigation and paving projects. Water vapor is also a product of combustion. We increase the average humidity by maybe one percent, and that water vapor, which is a far better GHG than CO2 could ever hope to be, causes warming. But unlike CO2, which sticks around for hundreds of years, water vapor falls out as rain within a few days. This means that there will be no runaway warming, as if it gets so hot that it starts to hurt our economy, the economy will contract, meaning less combustion, less irrigation, and less paving.
Man made climate change is real, this is obvious. The whole biosphere is compromised by human activity and has been for quite a while. Natural climate change is also obviously real.
There's two reasons innocent people deny it: Either they get sick from lefties politicizing the issue, lying about it etc. and thus assume an overly defensive position or they are brainwashed by (((technocapital))) and pushing for cancerous growth.
The sad reality is that we live in one planet and some degree of world government is required to ensure nobody ruins it. Aryan nations killing or enslaving anybody who starts trashing our mutual home counts and is sufficient as world government for this purpose.
All of this is true even if the earth is fucking cooling btw.
Many of the top scientists involved have been caught lying. It's not as bad as they keep projecting. However it is real. Claiming it's not makes you look stupid.
Nothing really.
Back in the 90s the answer to environmental damage (such as climate change) was to depopulate.
"World population must be stabilized and to do that we must eliminate 350,000 people per day." – Jacques Cousteau 1991
This would actually solve (or at least vastly improve) all environmental problems. We started work on reducing the population explosions in 3rd world shitholes (and succeeded in the first world) Soros and other (((globalists))) ended these policies and have pushed the solution out of the Overton window and they promote the scam of carbon taxes instead.
Now you know just how evil these kikes are. They'll kill the planet because they hate whites so much.
1. There is no rise in temperature.
2. Reported.
Nope, we can’t.
Nope, we can’t.
lol venus lol jupiter lol mercury
Good goy.
NO, YOU’RE NOT. IF YOU WERE AWARE OF THEM, YOU WOULDN’T SAY THAT AGW EXISTS.
Reported.
Except no data says that.
lol, false dichotomy
Not a word of what you said is true.
from what ive gathered from my 5 years at uni apparently climate change is a thing, theres very little that can be done to stop it, the changes probably wont affect us in our lifetime except for some crazier weather, polar bears are fucked and large sections of the planet are going to go underwater again over the next thousand years
the problem is the problem is politicized and kikes are making money off both the petrodollar and investing in bullshit 'green' energy
nuclearpoweris both the most efficient and environmentally friendly source of energy besides solar but solar technology is a load of bollocks still, it takes 5 years of consistent running for a solar panel to produce the amount of energy used to produce the fucking thing in the first place
thorium reactors are a start but ideally we want nuclear fusion
clean, efficient and safe limitless energy produced by artificial stars here on earth
Carbon taxes
Cow farts can now be regulated in California.
This means taxes for a hoax, termites emit an order of magnitude more methane than cows.
But you can't tax them like you can a farmer.
archive.fo
foxnews.com /science/2016/09/20/cow-farts-can-now-be-regulated-in-california.html
...
Humans have about 3% influence on global climate. Even if all of mankind was to reduce it's "earth-polluting" over night, say, cut off all oil and electricity and rid the earth from cars and man-made trash, it still would change next to absolutely nothing. Our climate depends on the axis of the earth's rotation, distance from earth to the sun, and other factors that have been present in all of human history (and before humans existed). You think Greenland is covered with ice today because the vikings polluted the planet with any gas? Bullshit.
Source: mother is a hydrologist.
you could if you bumped Mars closer to the habitable zone needed for liquid water, crashed an asteroid belt of ice heavy rocks onto its surface and cultured an organic mold that produces alot of waste organic gas under the surface for about half a billion years
then Mars would be practically Earth
Wow, sounds convincing, let's go right now and do it, you and me
carbon taxes are bullshit
pulling spending research grant money from the militaries research into gay rape gas and spending it investing in nuclear fusion would do more for the environment than a carbon tax
im being ironic lad
point is you could terraform Mars but with our current knowledge it would take about a billion years to do it
FUCK OFF REDDITOR
FUCK OFF REDDITOR
FUCK OFF REDDITOR
FUCK OFF REDDITOR
FUCK OFF REDDITOR
FUCK OFF REDDITOR
FUCK OFF REDDITOR
FUCK OFF REDDITOR
FUCK OFF REDDITOR
FUCK OFF REDDITOR
FUCK OFF REDDITOR
FUCK OFF REDDITOR
FUCK OFF REDDITOR
FUCK OFF REDDITOR
FUCK OFF REDDITOR
FUCK OFF REDDITOR
FUCK OFF REDDITOR
FUCK OFF REDDITOR
FUCK OFF REDDITOR
FUCK OFF REDDITOR
FUCK OFF REDDITOR
FUCK OFF REDDITOR
FUCK OFF REDDITOR
FUCK OFF REDDITOR
FUCK OFF REDDITOR
FUCK OFF REDDITOR
FUCK OFF REDDITOR
FUCK OFF REDDITOR
FUCK OFF REDDITOR
FUCK OFF REDDITOR
FUCK OFF REDDITOR
FUCK OFF REDDITOR
FUCK OFF REDDITOR
FUCK OFF REDDITOR
FUCK OFF REDDITOR
FUCK OFF REDDITOR
FUCK OFF REDDITOR
FUCK OFF REDDITOR
FUCK OFF REDDITOR
FUCK OFF REDDITOR
FUCK OFF REDDITOR
FUCK OFF REDDITOR
FUCK OFF REDDITOR
FUCK OFF REDDITOR
FUCK OFF REDDITOR
FUCK OFF REDDITOR
FUCK OFF REDDITOR
FUCK OFF REDDITOR
FUCK OFF REDDITOR
FUCK OFF REDDITOR
FUCK OFF REDDITOR
FUCK OFF REDDITOR
I used to be very against the dismissal of Climate Change until recently, info from here made shit click.
If it actually mattered, the hyper rich oil companies actually would not push so hard, as their money is going down a family line.
Otherwise, planet systems have weather cycles on a massive scale. A few hundred years. Evidence from like 1200 showed the same shit happened then.
Anthropomorphic climate change is a scam.
Certainly any change in a system will have an effect, but we're looking at a scaling issue. You have to realize how large the atmosphere is in comparison to the earth's surface and how much Carbon we're actually putting into the atmosphere. A drop in the bucket might be an exaggeration.
There's also the "CO2" part of it. Have none of these celebrity scientists, bureaucrats, or activists heard of the Carbon Cycle? Or are they choosing to ignore it?
The obvious answer, if one is so very concerned about their own "Carbon Footprint", is to plant some fucking trees…
But no, let's have carbon taxes, raise fuel costs, hold expensive conferences for "activists" to show off stone aged solutions to the "Carbon Problem" while they sit in airconditioned halls thousands of miles from home (they flew there, btw.. In private jets many of them) listening to proposals for more taxes to "save the earth". Lets top it all off by making expensive cars that turn into incendiary devices after 10 years. That'll show that evil CO2 who's boss…
The whole climate debate seems like a waste of time for me because even if it were true, it's completely impossible to implement the necessary reforms.
umad faget
wew lad
i think one of the driving ideas behind climate change is that there is too much co2 for the trees to convert, which might be true with deforestation and all. maybe boycotting tropical wood and soy stuff and palm oil from the amazon might be a good ide
...
well yeah
eat too much soy and its like giving yourself estrogen injections
and palm oil causes obesity
That's why I suggested planting more trees if we must believe that CO2 is actually a problem.
It's far less expensive and who doesn't like that smell of fresh air when you get a lot of trees together in one place.
In combination with your suggestions, I think it could be a useful "other option" to suggest to normies who are worried about New York City sinking into the ocean.
...
And the amazon jungle is beautiful
and kikes are filling their pockets from this.
If we all went back 1000 years ago you would be asking, how can people really not believe in hell? All the scripture says it is there and all the evidence points towards the fact that if you do not follow the rules the world will burn and the only way to avoid it is by paying for indulgences and obeying massive regulations on everything from the food that you eat to the people you can marry.
Today however, how can people not believe in global warming, all the science says it is there and all the evidence points to the fact that if you do not drastically change your ways the world will burn and the only way to avoid is by paying taxes on your main source of energy and obeying massive amounts of regulation on everything from the cars you can own to the businesses you can manage.
And oh by the way goy, all your favorite celebrities are saying this is the most pressing issue of the day so you better not question anything, just shut up and obey the new church of science where an elite group of people in brussels can tell you what is fact and fiction and back it up with totally truthful and scientific reports
Sinking New York into the ocean would be a far better option tbh
biogas is methane cow farts CH4 natural gas what ever you call it
Interestingly enough, Mars is still within the habitable zone. Its lack of magnetosphere is the greatest hinderance to habitability (followed hotly by gravity). Atmospheric creation isn’t that difficult, comparatively.
Found your problem.
It’s not.
It’s not happening, so it’s irrelevant.
All AGW liars say otherwise (and they’re wrong).
Weather is getting milder.
Ice is expanding.
Not according to any sea level data we have.
Anthropogenic. You’re talking about furries.
The difference is that hell is real and kikes will burn in it.
they make alot of money deforesting the Amazon using literal slaves from Brazils shittiest shanty towns to slash and burn the forest to raise that cheap soy and palm oil which they then sell to US food conglomerates and companies like monsanto that then use it as a basis for most food products and pharmaceuticals because its cheap even though they cause hormone imbalance, obesity, cancer and heart disease
How about some fucking oxygen?
Project harder
sage because off topic
You’re not making your case very well, redditor.
Prove it
It’s funny that this is the same argument.
not in the research papers ive been reading
apparently they're using antarctic krill as a good indicator of annual sea ice fluctuations and the krill are all disappearing because the ice is shrinking too far back to land and refreezing in winter and thats disrupting the krills breeding season
if the ice caps melted entirely and stayed melted Arabia, Pakistan, the netherlands are just a few places that largely go underwater
I share the same sentiment. You're never going to get any honest response to it while kikes rule.
Then your papers were written by someone fellating James Hansen, because you’re wrong. All measurements show expansion. We just had the shortest melt season on record and the earliest end to the melt season on record.
Good thing that isn’t even remotely going to happen, then, huh.
lol fucking no
You mean Bangladesh.
They deserve it. But again, sea level is rising at 0.63mm a year, globally. Nothing is actually happening.
"Sage because off topic" -
You don't know how to sage properly, for one.
yeah you know why
we're entering a mini ice age for the next 25 years because of sun spot activity
some english astronomer correlated sun spot activity with much much colder weather and astronomers not that long ago noticed decreased sun spot activity
so mini ice age - refreezing of the poles for now and we're going to see the opposite of what you'd expect of climate change apparently
sunds farfetched i know and im no astrophysicist but check it out for yourself it made sense to me when i heard it
na Pakistan too
unless im confusing the Tethys sea with the region where the himalayas are now
well not soon
but you know all those polar bears getting stranded on ice bergs photos i could explain that if you like its just it would be a wall of text
Less krill would be a sign that lower temperatures are killing the krill. Cold means less energy available to absorb and more energy required to maintain metabolism in northern climes. I've never understood papers that argue that equate less life with higher world temperatures. Polar bears and krill don't eat ice.
Fuck yeah. Let’s hope.
Stop taking An Inconvenient Truth as fact.
they're using krill as a measure
krill need sea ice above them in order to spawn and you're right they dont like cold water thats too cold
so they want to avoid the interior, but if the sea ice recedes and they head further into the interior to spawn they fuck it up and the eggs all die
I'm not I know something about the polar bears from a report i wrote
If you scale CO2 as a distance compared to volume of the atmosphere .
Travel from LA to newark via air and the amount of CO2 as a distance is you don't quite get to the end of the runway.
it surely is, methane is a way worse greenhouse gas than co2 so if you burn it you will get energy and you turned a pretty bad greenhouse gas into a lesser greenhouse gas that will eventually be used by plants
Assuming you aren't a shill
You do know that temperatures haven't been increasing for almost a decade now and that (((their))) explanation for this is that it's somehow hiding in the ocean even though that defies the laws of physics, right? There's also a lot to gain by the further weakening of white countries (which are the only ones that actually give any fucks about this topic btw) industrial and economic power macing them easier to fill up with 3rd worlders and easier to destabilize. And we also rely on fossil fuels because they are the most efficient source of energy at the moment, they also know that they can push all this shit without anyone actual threatening to not use fossil fuels since how can they? If you want to see them repress something that actually threatens fossil fuels look no further than nuclear power, even Jill (((Stien))) opposes it while saying we need to cut down of fossil fuels. Also your shitty anecdotal evidence can go out the fucking door since that's what you do when presented with the "It's not getting hotter in my area" argument (also it's not where I live).
In summary I don't know if it's anthropomorphic or not I'm being honest since the models they use to prove it are shit, those same models can't make accurate predictions of temperatures in the past, a model only being useful for proving a theory and not working outside that parameter seems to me not just a poor model but also seems to be built with an agenda. This plus the political motivations and way it's pushed in the mainstream since the kikes know that whites have a deep cultural love for nature leads me to lean on the side of it not being real, but even if it was why should I honestly care all that's going to happen is a bunch of fucking niggers are going to drown.
...
This is 3 surrogate markers removed from global temperatures. Krill>Ice>Arctic>World. That alone is garbage science. Especially since the data on krill seems to be based on a few papers guessing bout the life process, guessing about population numbers, and then guessing this is caused by global warming. Even if all Krill research is correct, hypothesizing a virus devastating their populations would be valid. This a stupid way to measure global warming, but very lucrative to Krill scientists and global warming alarmists.
If you look back at the 90s when global warming started being pushed, the agenda becomes very clear. Some NYT kike wrote a book about it and his central premise was "hey us (((whites))) need to stop having kids, bummer but what can we do" and even twenty years ago I could tell it was obvious bullshit.
We were told in the mid 1990s that by 2010 we'd all be underwater, no debate, the science is settled. they've consistently backpedaled since then because the whole thing is a scam to get shekels from carbon credits and generally handicap the first world.
Wind and solar are great in areas that have reliably enough wind or sun (i.e. small Baltic Sea islands for wind, Arizona desert for sun) to justify the cost of building the facilities, but they're not the only game in town when it comes to alternative energy.
The future of alternative energy is molten salt reactors, a "safe" form of nuclear power. American technology but was never widely implemented in the US because anti-science leftists wet their pants at any form of nuclear power, so now China's got to lead the way in actually building these new power plants.
you find water and co2-rich comets and asteroids and plow them into the surface of mars, makes it much easier. transporting anything out of Earth's gravity well other than our own asses and what we need to survive a tip elsewhere is a losing proposition.
you are absolutely 100% correct in this statement
im not an arctic marine biologist specialising in extremophile entomology
they're not blaming global warming they're blaming reduction in sea ice, they dont claim to know whats causing the sea ice to reduce because they didnt do that research in the paper
life process is pretty solid though laboratory and field observations
and population numbers they assess through the abundance of cetaceans that feed on krill which i also agree is a bit dodgy
Nice vid. Any idea on cost of a wind turbine to production in kilowatt hours?
Solar power gets pushed a lot, but the cost of installing and maintaining solar panels can't be recouped without Government subsidies.
We can't afford to have a Kariba dam situation like they have in Zimbabwe. Where cost of maintenance > electrical output
archive.is
Stay triggered faggot
Alotta edgy alt-righters want to believe that the environment has no problem absorbing anything people do to it, that Earth can never be overpopulated, that climate change is just another conspiracy theory, and that science in general is bullshit. Of course, these sentiments are NOT based on reasoned arguments.
Environmental destruction, overpop, climate change, these are a real challenges for mankind that really need to be addressed by truly rational people. The environment is fast changing. The oceans are being fished out, denuded of their life, forest are growing too young to support their ecosystems as old growth forests are cut down, riparian floodways are being simply paved over, and otherwise beautiful, necessary wilderness and countryside is turned to exclusively human use. The climate is changing, both by human induced and extraplanetary (solar) stressors, and we have already turned the corner where the balance cannot naturally be maintained, where atmospheric carbon must be technologically sequestered in order to prevent planetary carbon cascade. Finally, overpop is neither a joke nor a conspiracy theory. This planet can support a 500 million people - when it is in tip-top shape, which it is not. Current estimates for Earth maximum natural planetary carrying capacity are dependent upon the state of the environment, and the last scientific accounting I heard placed Earth's current sustainable pop at below 250 million. We have more than 8 billion living on Earth now, (and 90% of them want to live the resource-intensive West.)
In other words, we're fucked. And to top it off, our leadership is not working together to build a better world, but instead are mind-fucking each other up in weird satanic rituals, and then circling each other like wolves, some intending a nuclear exchange to force their New World Odor, others attempting to keep the peace, and others only interested in nationalism. There are some topics which all people should work together on, esp. environmental remediation, climate change mitigation, and strictly tackling the overpop problem. But nooooo, it's all just a big fat conspiracy theory…
Pull your head outa ass, you dickheads. Stop boffing yourselves with adamant childish denial.
t. you
There are none so blind as those who refuse to see.
Yep.
Nope.
Nope.
Reported.
Said the cocksucking faggot who believes in AGW.
It's probably bullshit but what could be done about it anyways? The future of carbon emissions is completely in the hands of China/India, not the Western world. The Globalists want to use it to create a carbon-trading market.
Blindly invert liberal positions to come to the "truth".
see this
And that "last scientific accounting" was babling from your kike professor in kikedemia.
No. You are fucked for beeing moron.
Stop smoking ganja. Go and hug some tree. Write this BS on reddit, Beatle.
The solution is to kill lots and lots of people.
THE INDO-CHINESE SMOG BELT
THE RAINFOREST GENOCIDE BELT
White people harvest trees then plant more.
Always have wood under this thinking.
Chinese use anything they can to produce electricity to get more shekels from the world.
24 degrees?! Sounds comfy AF
My Jewish professors wouldn't admit to the truth of overpop, and would have failed me for my assertion, but for the overwhelming documentation of proof in my Thesis. Although they refused to admit it, they were forced to acknowledge that it could be demonstrated using a large number of metrics, and that those metrics show that Earth is greatly stressed, well- beyond her maximum natural human carrying capacity. So, the assertion that overpop is a Jew-inspired conspiracy theory is utterly incorrect. In my experience, Jews want the West to carry more people, not less, for political and social reasons. Yes, Overpop is real, and it impacts everything.
I really don't care one way or another about global warming. Mainly because there are no solutions. I mean, what are you going to do? Slap on a retarded carbon tax and heavily regulate our industries? All that does is raise prices, destroy entire job sectors, and doesn't even solve the problem because all that "dirty" production is just being done in china instead.
And furthermore, people that go crazy about global warming have no way to handle it because you can't regulate other countries. You'd need to get every country on earth to agree to completely cuck their industries and manufacturing. Nobody is going to do that. And by far the worst polluters are going to be china and other developing countries like India. The global warming problem isn't really something America can fix, because we're only making a fraction of the pollution.
And to go even further, there are LEGITIMATE things that could be done to help the environement, that leftists will WOW JUST WOW about or completely ignore. For example, one of the best ways to combat global warming would be to prevent overpopulation, and overpopulation is a problem that's occurring with population explosions in the 3rd world, mainly africa. And these population explosions are occurring because we pump their countries full of aid money (aka international gibsmedats). So the best thing you could do to combat global warming would be to pull funding from Africa and let the nogs die out and return to a stable population at a lower threshold.
On phone but I've seen studies that global climate change could cause a freeze of the higher latitudes causing desolate winters similar to what we had 14 kya.
If this is the case it would make sense that the (((UN))) would be trying to stop climate change because there is only one race, Europeans, which thrive in these sort of zones. The lesser races now inhabiting those areas would be dead in a decade and their offspring probably wouldn't even make it through gestation.
If this is the case nature will fix the bloodline problem because only the purest of Europeans will survive and thrive.
That's why we need to start fracking in higher climates, have larger cattle farms and do as much deep sea drilling as possible very quickly.
Because there is a huge reserve of frozen methane across the deeps of the oceans, once that starts to melt, we'll get our "Global Warming" which will cause excesses moisture build up limiting the amount of sun the world will get, causing a freeze.
This is why I say Climate Change is not real because if we do something about it, whites will not get their chance to have a very "white" world.
Who cares?
If we fuck ourselves in the long term, fuck it, let's burn.
If we don't, good, we can live a little longer before jamal al bagdhid caps our ass with his homemade grease gun after ours are taken away.
Kill yourself, you fucking retard
Fuck off nigger
I don't know what to believe either way but I hope the Maunder Minimum anons are right.
FIMBULWINTER
EBOLA Africa & Asia, problem solved.
Pollution and other effects on the actual biosphere are real enough. How permanent and damaging they actually are is somewhat unknown. It would be better to not do it nevertheless. But what this has to do with the climate beats me. We don't understand the climate, and no one have shown they are able to predict it.
Stop listening to the people lying to you at university. This is just prophecy that some idiots are pulling out of their asses. I'd like you to take a step back and think a bit about the absurdity of someone telling you how things are going to be in a thousand years. Don't believe what someone says just because many people appear to accept that person as an authority.
Except completely different. Sci-fi is fun, but keep it real.
This. It's just the same religious system updated to counter the age of enlightenment. We were on a good roll for a while, but now universities and academies have nothing to do with science or real progress and should be viewed more like temples of some sort.
They've been changing their narratives and explanations for decades now to fit with the fact that their projections are so comically and consistently wrong. But they are updating it to be so ambiguous and vague that anything fits.
This goes back further than that. I remember in the early 80s how we were all going to live on a glacier today. Also we would be fried from the terrible holes in the ozone layer. Do anyone talk about the holes in the ozone layer anymore? I guess they magically fixed themselves.
Well, that rules you out then.
Feel free to attempt to prove any of the bullshit propaganda you are parroting. I'd settle for you showing it's probable.
We're all in it together, aren't we? A big happy multicultural family, gotta help each-other out. Fuck you.
It's real, but not in Europe.
Whites will be replaced by africans & muslims.
Mars cannot be terraformed in this manner; I thought everyone knew this. Mars's tiny magnetic field does not prevent ionizing radiation from blasting its atmosphere off into space, which is probably where most of its water went too. Pic related.
Martian colonization would likely need to be almost entirely subterranean Doom style for this reason
Water always takes the path of least resistance.
cuck
Water detected.
I read somewhere that while this is true, Mars was losing its water and atmosphere over billions of years. Weak magnetic field will erode Martian terraforming efforts, however not by much. If there was a way to free a lot of some trapped gas from soil to increase atmospheric density and then just start using ice comets for water vaporing the atmosphere, that would leave us with Martian atmosphere for tens or hundreds of millions of years. However subterrean colonies will have to be the first step in the arduous journey to terraform Mars. There is also a problem of introducing biosphere and reinforcing very weak, but existent water cycle.
Among the biggest challenges of terraforming Mars is not its magnetic field, but whether it's feasible. 0.3g is not what humans evolved with, so it's very hard to predict actual changes that organism might undergo during colonist's lifetime and what mutations his offspring might undergo. Will Martians be thinner but longer? Who knows. You can't test these things reliably due to nature of gravity. Providing 0.3g will not pose a problem, another issue is logistics. It costs shitloads of money to launch anything into space and failure of supply mission is inacceptible. It takes from 1.5 to 2 or more years to reach Mars, depending on orbit type and energy expenditure you wish to undertake. Without organizing some sort of base in space and then on the Moon we won't be going anywhere. There has to be assured safe and reusable way of transfering resources to orbit, be it a large space shuttle or space gun. Once in orbit, it should be steered onto the moon. Moonbase should be equipped with mass rammers in the form of a gigantic EM gun. With this infrastructure in place, we can talk about getting industrial packages at a constant pace to any colony within Solar System. Colonization of Mars in the form of these pods like that famous scam MarsOne envisions is not a good idea. They'll never be fully self sufficient and without any infrastructure to provide them with help, it's just a matter of time before disease, power failure, crew incompetence or other disaster gets in the way. Colonization of Lagrangian points is more important than colonization of anywhere else with the exception of moon. Which one is better is debatable. Without that, there is no long-term, permanent Martian colonies.
A significant amount of research into climate change is bullshit, but from what I can gather, the consensus is correct in saying that we helped cause it.
Carbon trading just lets Jews screw over agriculturalists.
Just like the Saudi Salafist Sandniggers, sociopathic tea party/libertarian hymies don't care about the future of their children and the white race, and pollute to high heaven and back, even when it's inefficient and harms their profit margins.
Mainstream crony-capitalists still feel a duty to provide their children with full-time jobs in running totalitarian corporate republics, no matter if they hate gays or not. Commies are still buttfuck retarded.
Man made climate change is a crock of shit.
The earth warms and cools due to changes in the magnetosphere of the sun.
Regardless, global warming is good: more arable land for white people.
Wouldn't the winter last longer and the weather become unstable?
Anthropogenic climate change has been proven to be wrong. All of the failed predictions, in addition to the correct temperature record showing none of the predicted temperature increase, is all the evidence needed to show that it's wrong.
It's past the time to stop the lies and the malicious liars behind this fraud.
THE MODS PASTED COMMENTS FROM DIFFERENT PEOPLE AND SAID IT WAS ALL ONE IP
THEN ACCUSED THEM OF BEING SHILLS
V
THE MODS PASTED COMMENTS FROM DIFFERENT PEOPLE AND SAID IT WAS ALL ONE IP
THEN ACCUSED THEM OF BEING SHILLS
THE MODS PASTED COMMENTS FROM DIFFERENT PEOPLE AND SAID IT WAS ALL ONE IP
THEN ACCUSED THEM OF BEING SHILLS
...
Climate change is real, and it probably is man made. But the effects are bigly overblown. If we're gonna be exactly precise, we don't know what climate change will do, but prudence suggests we don't tamper with it.
Realistically it'll cause water levels to rise, which means less land for humans which is bad. Developed countries will be able to handle it, and it'll be very expensive but its not that bad, and for Russia and Canada it'll be a good thing.
The poor shitskins in Africa on the other hand are probably screwed. They'll lose a lot of land and don't have the economic capabilities to withstand it. This is where leftists threaten that the migration crisis caused by this will dwarf the rapefugees, but I still all the more reason to abandon this refugee policy.
The ionizing radiation issue is a problem whether the atmosphere can be maintained purely by way of gravity or not. Subterranean colonization will be the mode of living for millennia, supposing even that it's not abandoned for greener pastures quickly after the colony is established. Another problem with 0.3g gravity is: atmospheric concentration. The atmosphere will have to be volumetrically enormous compared to Earth's in order to provide high enough downward pressure to sustain the gas density necessary for any substantial bodies of organisms on Mars, and this exacerbates the magnetic field/solar wind issue. Creatures on Earth are smaller than the dinosaurs because of the change in atmospheric density. So, creatures not breathing or living in pressurized habitats will need to be much, much smaller and have much larger surface area to mass ratios to respire with, even plants. I doubt even Earth grass could live on Mars, even with much, much higher CO2 concentrations that might have deleterious effects on humans.
It was changing before man was ever on the earth.
Explain please?
that picture looks comfy as fuck
Even though climate change is bullshit, the effect of widespread destruction of natural habitats is not. Where have all the insects gone? All we have now are cockroaches. Seriously, when was the last time you saw a monarch butterfly? It's all fucking gone.
Man has some temporary effect on the environment, not the climate. Our influence on global climate is minuscule. People overestimate themselves while they underestimate the Earth and the Sun.
SAGE report
I know you got a dubs, but you're still wrong.
Here is the standard climate change rebuttal pic.
The ocean level has been so stable, its used to measure altitude.
"Climate Change" was just an excuse for (((them))) to create a carbon tax / scheme to make ez monies.
Great post. Reminds me of econ grad school where we covered environmental economics. I wasn't woke then and took climate change somewhat seriously even though I had my doubts. Class went like this:
No that's stupid user because reasons. We NEED a carbon market.
Not that's stupid user because nuclear power plants melt down and will poison the earth.
No matter what, there was an obsession with using a carbon market place. All the literature the professors read was (and is) pushing the carbon trading markets. Learned in that semester that what was important to them wasn't lowering CO2, it was this fucking market that they wouldn't shut up about.
Obviously we know now that (((they))) want to use climate change to get sheckles, but at the time it was so damn confusing for me.
Taking a look at this graph, you can see an abnormal increase in CO2. The climate has changed before, but not this fast.
Imma give you another
Solar irradiance cannot serve as the explanation for climate change because only the lower atmosphere of the Earth has increased in warmth. If it was solar irradiance, all parts of the atmosphere would have been equally been warmed. By the fact that only the lower atmosphere has been disproportionately warmed indicates that green house gases are responsible.
climate.nasa.gov
Click on the link above and expand "Is the Sun causing global warming?" for more explanation.
How do you explain the rapid increase in temperature as of late?
They're altering the temperature record, making the past colder and then increasing the temperature as the record gets closer to the present.
...
KANKER
Nice dubs and an interesting post.
Moldbug is required reading for newfriends :^)
Climate "science" is not really scientific. The "climate models" are just regression curves fit to existing data. If you recall from high school, that is not a solution because there are an infinite number of regression curves for any set of points.
These models don't make any falsifiable predictions. How would the climate have changed in the 20th century in the absence of human greenhouse emissions? How would it have changed if emissions were doubled? Barring time travel and god-like geoengineering powers there is no way to test the models. Every few years the future predicted by the models diverge from reality and the National Academy of Science hands out a quarter billion to these schiesters to draw a new one.
That's like saying "water is wet". Climate is changing CONSTANTLY.
CO2 is actually very good. Makes plants grow like crazy. As a matter of fact, the rainforest have been growing back faster than we can cut them.
I remember a professor being confused about this since accoring to his god Al Gore, we should be Venus by now.
CO2 has an impact till a certain degree on global temperature. It has no other than plant food beyond that.
Disregarded for anecdotal evidence. And we had one of the coldest summers(Slovenia) and the "scientists" from (((NASA))) are still saying that this was the hottest year for 6 000 000 years straight. They are lying through their fucking teeth.
THEY ARE SUPPORTING BOTH SIDES RETARD, THE (((RENEWABLE))) AND (((FOSSIL FUEL))) INDUSTRIES
This is all a fucking ponzi control scheme for human bodies like the whole financial system for the human mind.
Their goals for newfags:
1. Create a new materialistic religion based on the cult of earth and the original sin of CO2, which is conveniently taxable. Aka judaism for the goys. Just don't breathe/sin too much white goy. The Black Mirror episode below is a good sum up of the concept.
2. Unite the whole ONE human race since we have to fight against oy vey THE DREADED CLIMATE. And since we have to fight it together, we need to ship 200 mil Africans into Europe.
2. Tax people on every shit possible so they have to get (((loans))) and get dependent on NWO government. This deprives you from means to rebel.
3. Agenda 21. Put people of the one human race under domed cities for complete control and mixing.
And marxism is the ideology that connects this under one roof. IT's named progress and enviromentalism though.
Of course the kikes will be in control of it all. See Gates foundation, where the average billionare gives up his whole wealth after meeting with Gates for 6 min.
Recommedned films/shows to give you an impression what they have in mind:
-Fifteen Million Merits from the show Black Mirror
-Soylent Green
-Logan's Run
-THX 1138
The shit they have in store is really mind boggling once you connect the pieces together.
As someone who has done extensive research on the topic, The leftist hijacking of the environmental movement is fucking infuriating, so I'll give my opinions on the matter.
A: global warming is good. It depopulates poor, shitskin countries, reduces the global population, and benefits northern i.e. white countries.
B: veganism and animal rights are fucking stupid, I laugh when people get sad about animals not getting "rich, fulfilling lives and quick,painless death". Tell that to the zebra getting disemboweled by hyenas while bleeding out for 10 minutes before dying.
C: nationalism is pretty tied to conservationism and naturalism. Communism and Capitalism are inherently selfish and short-sighted, whereas protection of the nation (including its wildlife) is a cornerstone of nationalism. Hitler was the first environmentalist, after all.
I hate it when kikes and dykes blame the destruction of the environment on white countries, when europe is the fucking posterchild for restoring the environment. the problem are the nations full of cockroaches and rats that breed indiscriminately, consume all their resources without abandon, then jump ship and try to infect countries which have fixed their overpopulation problem.
It's funny that environmentalism is the main thing that made me want to become a national socialist.
Eletric cars have the potential to be much better than oil fueled cars, so at least in that aspect I think we should drop it.
Aside from that, I don't really see the direct relation between co2 levels and global warming. Sure, there is a correlation, but the temperature fluctuated greatly in the last 2000 years, and what we are experiencing might just as well be one of those fluctuations.
There is also the solar cycle theory, but I don't know how credible it is, lots of user are fond of it.
TLDR: use petroleum only for plastics/policarbonates/other materials, not as fuel.
Thanks user
I think the impact generally on the environment has to do at least a little bit to the climate.
Warming or cooling?
Well the average might stay the same, but the fluctuations will get worse.
Winters are getting colder.
Summers are getting warmer.
I'm more worried about securing water and food sources - which pollution is starting to destroy.
Especially worried about the ocean rubbish gyres and fukushima.
CO2 dindu nuffin, I'm not kidding. It's the toxic chemicals humanity toys with that are responsible for the warming phenomenon. CO2 is harmless.
mars doesn't have a strong atmosphere and the core of mars is cool and hard unlike earths. There is no electromagnetic field surrounding mars keeping it safe from the suns radiation like earth has.
Massive overuse of pesticides is a real problem
The idea is to tax carbon.
People are made of carbon.
It's a work around for the goyim tax, i forget it's jewish name.
People themselves would be taxed for existing.
Correct me if I'm wrong user, but is that last graph illustrating the artificial corrections (i.e. corrected temp - original temp) versus known CO2%? In other words, is it showing that NOAA deliberately deflated and inflated the numbers in line with atmospheric CO2% variation to create an artificial graph that increases in temp in lockstep with CO2% increases?