GIVE US MONEY OR THE WORLD WILL END

whoops

>>>/pdfs/5878

What the hell kind of message is Gore going to pull in this flick? Is it just going to be autistic screeching about "Muh Climate Change Deniers" and "New studies suggest the world will end in 2030 now instead of 2010!" Or is Gore going to claim that the doomsday predictions have been wrong since we have "taken action" against global warming?
Or is Gore going to admit that doom saying over climate change was a retarded idea, that has only enabled countries like China to pump out pollution while American go jobless due to de-industrialization?

I fucking hated that shit in school. In my Junior High it was fucking constant "MUH GLOBAL WARMING" everyday. It didn't help that my mother tried to force my sister and I to actually sit through the first one. I actually stopped recycling most of my trash at school just to spite these people. It was amusing to have kids watch me throw out something, freak out, and pick through the garbage to recycle it.

His message is to scare people into leaving coastal properties and then buying it up cheap.

see
livescience.com/22417-aerosols-stop-global-warming.html

...

IN TWENTY FUCKING YEARS YOU'LL BE DEAD THINK OF THE CHILDREN DONATE NOW DON'T HAVE KIDS PLANT TREES AROUND THE WORLD BUT QUIT DRIVING CARS STOP USING SO MUCH ELECTRICITY BUT FOR THE LOVE OF GOD MAKE SURE YOU WATCH BY 2 HOUR DOCUMENTARY IN 1080P ON BLU-RAY

that was before St. Obama saved the planet
now that Adolf Drumpf is president after the election that Putin hacked the world is totally going to end again

WHICH BY THE WAY COMES IN A NON-BIODEGRADABLE PLASTIC CASE YOU FUCKING POLLUTER

She had green eyes too. What a shame. But it was funny hearing her tell everyone about her daughter and never mentioning the father. Oh, except the time she told us about him stealing a car in highschool to go joyriding.

...

Documentaries have ceased to matter, capitalism has already condemned us.

...

K I N O
I
N
O

They showed us a video on how the world would be after fuel runs out. It looked so cosy. Roads not clogged up with traffic. Everyone riding bicycles. I couldn't wait.

Warm winters? Even the retard who wrote that shitty movie The Day After Tomorrow didn't think that would happen.

I remember that, and bunch of teachers going on about how the world was going to end in 2012, because the Mayas were really the most advanced civilization since they 'invented' the concept of 0, calenders, and maps for ship navigation by using constellations.

I mostly remember the promises that by 2010 we would be living on the moon and driving flying cars. Instead we got gender neutral bathrooms and refugees welcome.

Imagine how this would have played if HRC became president

Exactly the same?

releasing a sequel like this is pretty gutsy of them.
I hope it causes a significant number of normies to re-watch the first one, see Gore's predictions of worldwide catastrophe by the year 2010, and realize the whole thing is a load of shit

the inconvenient truth this time is that we literally elected hitler as president of the USA.

What happened with the ozone layer's hole?

It's been patched up with the cum of fappers like you.

I'm not watching a hour and 20 minutes of this. Give me the cliff notes version.

I've fucked it, lads.

One of the biggest hints that these faggots were lying through their teeth, is the fact that almost all of the initial proponents of (((AGW))) are themselves part of the mystical 1% society the envirocommies are so autistic about, and that they all own beach homes.

I had a college teacher tell me the same thinga year ago, that a meteor is coming and 90%ish of life would be wiped out.

Just go to the other hemisphere, while one is winter, the other is summer. Though that would suck to admit as it would mean you cannot cry about "climate change" when half of the world is experiencing summer.

...

What did he mean by this?

synergy
rollingstone.com/tv/news/al-gore-plots-climate-change-special-with-fat-joe-steve-aoki-w493033

...

Too bad it'll be staffed with shills so no one will try to debate/destroy Al Gore

That's expensive, goy. And the moon is far from Tel Aviv.

It means that you, the kino employees and the ones that deliver kino have to drive a car and release CO2 in the air to give him schekels.

No. You'll be Muslim or dead.

all thats known for sure is that the earth will warm, oceans will rise, and weather will become more unpredictable

As someone who likes the cold, im against climate change

Al Gore will use the profits to help stop global warming, he certainly won't use the money to buy million dollar beach side houses.

trumpalumpalumpkins are fucking cancer

It's a good thing nobody who has any kind of science education thinks that newsweek is a reputable scientific journal, then.

You people are scientific illiterates. Next time read the scientific literature and not a tabloid, you mindcucks.

Your teacher wasn't wrong. The real danger will come from space.

This is the exact same shit they pulled with the rain forests, another fucking scam with a bunch of retards circle jerking about how they're saving the environment as they sip their lattes and play on their iphones.

Think of the billions of euro that went to saving the rain forests and they're still being cut down to this day.

...

Holy shit, I remember this.
Thank you for the good memories. I'd call up my old teacher and ask him why he was so fucking wrong about it all but it turns out he died in '03.

The rainforests being preserved was about saving rare species, and keeping a bio-diverse habitat. It's more wankery than anything as the people that live near those rainforests use them to make a living.

However, global warming is a pretty established fact. The fact that Al Gore is a fucking retard that is just as scientifically illiterate as someone like Steve Crowder doesn't make it any less valid. If you doubt this is the case, then we can have a debate on the science, but the effects of CO2 have been theorized for about 100 years, and climate research has been ongoing for at least 50 years of that. There is good reason to believe that human industrialization and emissions have led to this rise in CO2, and therefore global temperatures even with decreased insolation, which we are currently experiencing. This, of course, won't last long, and things will truly be uncomfortable by the end of the century. Of course, that all depends on where you live. If you live in Europe, or the US and Canada, then likely you will be fine. The same for many other areas around the world. But rest assured, your children and grandchildren will be paying for it in other ways, such as increased immigration, rising food prices, and even war over resources. No, the human species will not become extinct. We are good survivors. Even third-world island nations won't die out. But there will be hardship due to rising sea levels and the climate change associated with that warming.
So what can we do? Well, it seems nothing now. There was a time when we could have done something, but now it seems that best we can hope for is a stop in the rate of warming, which might be difficult seeing as how we're now also seeing methane come out of the permafrost. This is going to become a feedback loop, and we can't stop it. All we can do is hope to adapt and maybe in the future we might find a way to suck the CO2 out of the atmosphere. You and I will be too old for it to really hurt us. We will have made our money, had our families, and so on. This only really matters if you're really young, or you plan to have children.
So don't think this is as bad as Al Gore makes it out to be. It's not. But don't think for a second that it isn't happening. It is, and as long as you're a childless westerner, it's also irrelevant.

I'm not saying that climate change isn't happening or that the rainforests aren't being cut down, I'm saying that the people pushing it are scummy cam artists and you'd be wise not to believe a word they say.
A bunch of kikes in Hollywood aren't going to fix the ratios of gas in the atmosphere.

I'll tell you what would though, I nice big plague, a virus of some sort to sweep through and decimate Africa and India and China and the US for good measure.

Well sure. Al Gore is definitely a scummy fuck, which is why you shouldn't get your science from him. Instead, get it from the scientists themselves, not in public, not in magazines or interviews, but look at their data, and look at their peer-reviewed articles published in reputable scientific journals.

I was going to make a joke about gas chambers, but I'm not that clever.

I would rather not. This would likely start WWIII. Mass-dyings are not the best thing for progress. They also fuck with the economy big time.

Wrong.The only change in climate is natural changes that occurred long before modern technology existed. Shove your propaganda up your ass and smoke it.

Then I guess climate science from the last 50 years is wrong and random user on chinese cartoon imageboard is right? Pray tell, how do you know this?

...

So thousands of researchers across multiple scientific disciplines all faked their data so that it fits exactly one theory, some of which has nothing to do with climate science. Is that what you're telling me? They came up with the global warming conspiracy almost 100 years ago?

Yes, because in science you really only get big by agreeing with things we already know and not by discovering new things.

Listen, you're letting your ideology cloud your logic. The proposed solutions for global warming may not be to your liking, and you can say you disagree with those, but you can't really disagree with facts. Feel free to propose your own solution, or even say that you'd rather like it this way, but you can't say it isn't happening without backing it up with good evidence.

...

Climate change is real, it's just that:

1) Humans have no real influence over it
2) It goes in cycles.
3) This will happen regardless of how many Priuses and Windfarms crop up.

Can you please post evidence that anyone has actually been threatened with "expulsion" or whatever?

Again, you're conflating politics with science. No scientific paper ever claimed that you had to give up anything or do anything. Get your head out of your ass and into a book, nigger.

JUST SHUT THE FUCK UP AND BUY MY BUMPER STICKER YOU STUPID GOY

no

i never really got into the whole global warming thing so i'm not going to give an opinions based on nothing, i'm just going to say the ones who produce most emissions are the chinese and i've never seen one anti-GW activist going after them

Because they're communist, user.
So they must be doing something right! Besides, communists obviously can't pollute the environment.

Also none of them are against illegal immigration, which destroys the environment more than anything else in America.

That's because the Chinese suppress information and freedom of speech. They literally tell people that when there's fucking smog outside it's just "dusty". As for the outside world, yes some activists might pester China, but it won't do anything because China doesn't want to stop industrialization. The same goes for any other country that relies on heavy industry. Nobody wants to take an economic hit.

Those things feel nice to say, but they aren't supported by the evidence. Humans are the main drivers of CO2 increase today, and that is currently the source of warming. Remember that we must also account for albedo and insolation.
As for the cyclic nature of this process, sure the Milankovitch cycle does exist, but we aren't exactly there yet, so this warming does not fit into that cycle you mentioned.
This is the one thing you've got right, but mostly because you cannot effect change at this level, and even if you could, it's too late now. Warming is on a feedback loop now. We cannot re-freeze the permafrost or make the ice caps stop melting.

Assuming you're being serious, do you have any links to studies conducted to support the Human-driven CO2 increase?
Because I want to read that shit.

fixed it

...

But then you'd be dead, user. :^)

Or you could just buy a fucking Prius already?!?!?

Literally thousands of them. This is the first article to mention it, as far as I know.

rsc.org/images/Arrhenius1896_tcm18-173546.pdf

Seems the idea of global warming has been around for a bit. At this point, of course, people had no way of knowing if this stage of warming would fuck things up to make it colder again or not. We found that out later on, almost in the 70s, and by now, it's a pretty sure thing.

im an engineer XD

i rather buy a Tesla

...

I would not buy a Tesla, not because they're not great cars, but because of their practices regarding software and other such things that are hostile to the people that buy them.

I'm currently interested in the Chevy Volt, however. I heard that's a nice commuter car.

Have you ever lived near a swamp or swampy area?

You do know that IQ is done on mean basis, so 100IQ being the average, so as you started throwing people into this hole you'd never stop til you reached one person left.
You'd also have to throw in a lot of women. :)

Yeah, but this big green Canadian faggot pretending to be Scottish chased me off.

I would completely believe climate change if everything I have been told about it hadn't been consistently wrong for the past 25+ years.

...

I remember half of the movie having nothing to do with climate change

Also i wonder what al says to the 31k scientists that all agree our pollution has had no effect on the environment, besides china?

...

Good thing that volcanoes can easily beat humans in co2 emissions, and that you can take niggers off the list and really put a dent in how humams destroy the environment.

Everyone who knows anything about the weather that it is largely related to how the earth orbits the sun. It goes in patterns every other decade, sometimes cooler, sometimes warmer, back and forth, back and forth.

But give me m-m-muh gorrilian d-dollars goyim and I'll save you, I p–p-promise!

I remember arguing with my Math teacher about this shit.

Bitch already hated me for hunting, cutting trees and being for responsible logging.

kill yourself

SHUT UP GOY THE SCIENCE WAS SETTLED IN 1975

"Electric Car Boogaloo"?

*sigh* i'm astonished that in literally 2017 retarded right-wingers still deny global warming.

I firmly believe anthropocentric climate change is real, happening and making bad stuff happen. That ice shelf that just broke off of Antarctica won't grow back. You're naive fools who think the narrative pushed by fossil fuel conglomerates is more believable than the science of climate change. You're literally parroting the lies of polluters because you hate government and any kind of responsibility for the human race re-terraforming the planet. Conservatives used to be into conservation until both political parties became complete whores for special interests.

That being said, I doubt Al is going to convince anyone new with this movie and so just like "Bill Nye saves the World" this is a huge waste of time. I also assume the secret elites have a plan in case global warming does present a threat and will depend on that. The silver lining in the meanwhile is that the places hardest hit by desertification are shitty parts of the world anyway.

We're always going to need some people to work hard labour and retail. Take it down to like 90, and you're golden.

It's funny because that graph stops at 1950. That is what year 0 is in climate science. You'd know this if you ever read anything about it other than propaganda pushed by science deniers. Of course, that graph also doesn't say where the temperature sources were measured or if they are a single or multiple proxy. What we do know is your graph can't be trusted as it has already shown to be doctored simply by the fact that it claims yerar 0 is "present", which I guess can be whatever year you want, rather than the accepted practice of 0 referring to 1950. Nice try, but link the original study and not a doctored graph from the heritage foundation.

...

...

Except you've yet to produce a single peer-reviewed study from a reputable journal that claims that. It's funny how if you don't read the science you end up looking like a fucking retard.

>(((peer-reviewed)))
>(((reputable)))
OY VEY ITS SETTLED SCIENCE LISTEN TO MY COUSIN MORI TALK ABOUT IT

...

How bout you warm my globes with your mouth, bitch?

Indeed. You can't make a model based on the last 50 years and expect correct results.
I wonder why the (((IPCC))) refused to work with "actual" geologists, they know more about Earth' history (through ice core study for example) than a climatologist.
Also "climate science" is like "social" science, a joke.

Research done in the last 50 years != data only being 50 years old. This is why they use proxies and reconstructions.

>I wonder why the (((IPCC))) refused to work with "actual" geologists
You're going to need to source this, and you might be interested in knowing that the IPCC is not the only organization that deals with climate research.

Well, that's funny, because reconstructions take ice cores into account. What are you on about?

Says the man that doesn't know anything about science.

Most of the Ice is on land you pillock.

Except they don't, and you sourced this claim from some faggy facebook post, brainlet.

Doubtful.

You know who's responsible for destroying the earth goyim? EVIL WHITES LIKE YOU! Better castrate yourselves right now if you want the world to survive. And leave those innocent Africans alone, they have the RIGHT to have 8 or 9 children. The African population boom is not an environmental problem at all.

Better to trust people like in right? By the way, where exactly does 'anti-climate change propaganda' have a platform? I only see the rich telling us to stop breeding and to stop having industry.

le ebic trole

Did Mike Matei draw this?

If they went after a real killer, pollution, then I would have maybe not thought it was a scam even back then. There was real data and health/breathing issues but that would have put pressure on China and India to not get the globalist's labor orders at dirt cheap prices.

The arctic is not one giant slab of ice that cleanly floats on the water's surface. Most of it is submerged. Not that it matters anyway, because it isn't going anywhere and I'm eager to hear settled science's new excuses in another 20 years.

Seriously, don't be That Guy

is there anything more cucked than the modern right, or "nu-right"? they're useful idiots who believe whatever they're told & live only to lick corporate boot. their beta male degeneracy is sickening.

Yeah, goyim. Agree with your peers. You don't want to be on the wrong side of history, do you?

So I take it you haven't paid attention to the president of the United States, who claims, among other things, that climate change is a hoax made up by China. As well as other politicians who think that because it snowed one time, global warming must not exist, ignoring, of course, the mountains of peer-reviewed research that is available in abundance.

Pollution is a problem, but so are carbon emissions. You don't have to go after one or the other. The truth is the truth, and the truth is that human activity has increased CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere very quickly and this will result in warming. We knew about this more than 100 years ago.

I thinking about Antarctica and Greenland.

They're good goyim.

Reminds me of that classic Jew joke, just with a few words swapped

"Professor, should I be worried for 5 years time?"
"Oh, absolutely, you need to watch out these next 10 years. Without a doubt, the ice caps will entirely melt in the next 20 years. From there you can expect daily floods, tornados, droughts and even firestorms sometime in the next 30 years. You might be able to survive up to 40 years from now, but in 50 years time it's basically going to be the apocalypse. Did I tell you what's going to happen in 60 years yet? How about 70?"

...

Guy McFaggot is not a climatologist and has published none of his claims in reputable peer-reviewed journals. He is just as bad as a faggot claiming that it isn't happening at all.

Niggers, read a fucking book. Stop trying to do science if you don't know what you're talking about. REEEEEEE

Nice appeal to authority, drumpfyrina.

You don't know what you're talking about, but you pretend to. I don't claim to be a scientist, but the real political motive behind this garbage is clear as day. Everything "climatologists" have ever said seems to be wishy-washy, inconclusive bullshit that has had no tangible effect on my life as a layman. People aren't going to throw away their children and suffer economically so readily. I certainly fail to see how subsidizing shitholes while we're forced to cut down on our 'carbon footprint' is going to save the planet. Even if they were right, the doomsayers must be autistic if they don't understand what they're asking us to do, and why a person might not be so keen on throwing everything away just because hey were shown a few graphs.

It's not appeal to authority. Someone posted McPhaggot as a "pro" side, instead of simply posting an actual climate scientist, you know, the people actually doing the research. As for him not publishing, that means he has not opened himself up to actual inquiry or published data. None of his claims should be taken seriously or as a substitute for what the scientific community is claiming. You wouldn't tell your doctor to fuck off and stop appealing to authority if he tells you to lower your cholesterol level, so please stop using fake fallacies to cover up that you don't know shit about climate science or any science whatsoever.

That's because science isn't about telling the layman something that affects his life. It's about studying the evidence and drawing conclusions from that evidence. Yes, the climate is changing and it's due to warming spurred by CO2. On this, the evidence is quite clear.
It's a good thing that nobody has ever published a paper claiming you should or shouldn't do this, because that's not what climate science is about. But if I'm wrong, feel free to point to a climate study that says this.
Again, no climate study has said this. This is conflating politics with science. There may or may not be a real solution to global warming and the subsequent climate change, but just because you don't like the solution doesn't mean it's not happening. If for some reason you have concluded that the same solution would be required given that the science is solid (it is), then that's your problem, and reality isn't going to change just because you don't like the conclusion.
The doomsayers, like Guy McPhimosis or Al Gore, are not scientists. Don't listen to them. Go and view the real science with real conclusions and see if you've got a better idea to deal with it, or maybe even conclude that there is nothing to be done. Either way, your feelings about the issue don't matter. Reality is reality, and global warming is real. Just like Christfags and evolution, this isn't going to change just because you really don't like the implications.

...

People only give a shit and comment about climate change in relation to politics. It wouldn't be on a single person's mind otherwise. In addition science is an industry, it is political, and it is pozzed. After looking at something that directly affects us all like the clusterfuck that is the medical industry it's hard to trust someone just because they're an 'expert', and it's even harder when any skepticism is met with, "you don't trust the experts? READ A BOOK, RETARD!".

And yet this has no bearing on weather it's true or not. Years ago, people used to comment on evolution in the same way, and yet evolution is true.
This is a serious accusation. Science does indeed deal with industry, and there are internal politics, but peer-reviewed research works because it's adversarial. Everyone is trying to shit on the idea you're trying to publish. This is why peer-review works. As for being "pozzed", I don't know what you mean, but you might want to provide evidence for this.
It's a good thing that's not what I asked you to do. Go read peer-reviewed research. This doesn't get published because people are experts, thought this is what qualifies them as such, but rather because they make concrete claims with plenty of evidence, or the best evidence available at the time. Fifty years ago we could not have said for certain what the effect of man-made CO2 would be, now we have a degree of certainty orders of magnitude higher than that.
No, read the research, but I'll humor you. What exactly is your problem with the current climate model? Or is it with something else entirely? Put up or shut up. You don't get to claim to be a skeptic if you aren't going to follow a line of inquiry that everyone else can also follow and answer.

(((Experts)))

top kek

You mean like when doctors told people to stop eating animal fats and start eating transfats because they're better for you?

If you don't obey doctors blindly you might as well go live in a cave or with the amish, user.

Can you cite a peer-reviewed paper that claimed this? And if so, was it an user on the internet or another scientist that dispelled this mistake? Of course, even if medical science was that full of uncertainty, it would be irrelevant. The facts are the facts.

The reason that source is disregarded is because they've doctored a graph, and it's quite obvious. You can't take something as a source when it's clearly doctored, else I could cite any shoped image as a source as well.
Except that's a real thing, and you'd know this if you'd eve read the scientific literature.

Here's the link cited in your graph:
ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo-search/study/11933

And here's what it says for year 0:
Awww, shit. It looks like you're an illiterate piece of shit that can't into google.

Not only that, but let's see where the data came from:
all subarctic to arctic land masses (including continental shelves)
north of about ~45N.

So not global temperatures. Can you be any more fucking retarded? Or did you think that kind of dishonesty would fly? I guess you and the Heritage Foundation did think that, after all, most people that buy their shit are looking for any excuse to back up their preconceptions rather than looking at the science.

Think Al Gore would invite me to bbqs if I bought a beach house next to his?

Literally it was real in my mind tier.

Because they're different sciences, retard. There are far more factors to take into account with lots of different little differences that make for high uncertainty. We only have one earth, so it's far easier to keep accounting for variables, especially over a long period of time. But go ahead and keep denying facts just because your fee fees don't like them.

Why dontcha chill a little bit, big guy?

Good science requires a control. So really you need to have more than one earth to get good data.

Why don't you read a book instead of having a nigger-tier approach to science.

Hey, numbnuts. We can make smaller models of areas we want to measure. The fact that CO2 is a greenhouse gas was established more than 100 years ago, and the idea that an increase in it could lead to climate change was too. We didn't need multiple earths for that.

Why are you so mad reddit? Don't you know that this is the designated shitposting board?

...

Science is the one thing I take seriously, and let's face it, you CIA niggers really believe your own shit unless called out on it.

You'll always be a brainlet.

Science makes me euphoric too, m'lady!

...

It's funny how they think the argument "MUH ECONOMY" makes any difference if we make the planet uninhabitable.

Meanwhile oil companies are given billions of dollars in subsidies every year and the U.S. spends trillions fighting wars just to build oil pipelines, but this spending never crosses your mind.