What does Veeky Forums think of him after that documentary. Is he now /ourguy/?

What does Veeky Forums think of him after that documentary. Is he now /ourguy/?

youtube.com/watch?v=90CkXVF-Q8M

Other urls found in this thread:

mudancasclimaticas.cptec.inpe.br/~rmclima/pdfs/destaques/sternreview_report_complete.pdf
youtube.com/watch?v=OJ6Z04VJDco
scholar.google.ca/scholar?q=climate change&btnG=&hl=en&as_sdt=0,5
corporate.exxonmobil.com/en/current-issues/climate-policy/climate-perspectives/our-position
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

>Veeky Forumss guy is not a scientist
is this a troll thread ?

seems perfect for the cultists on Veeky Forums

I bet this guy doesn't really practice what he preaches.
No skin in the game.

He's an asshole with a carbon footprint the size of Angola

this.

another Limo Environmentalist.

Humans are irrational creatures that care way too much about status. He's got money and he's got status, and people take him seriously. Nobody takes a hippie seriously who sits in a tent on the sidewalk and curses at big corporations, metaphorically speaking (see Richard Stallman). If this "Limo Environmentalist" invests enough of his personal fortune into the fight against climate change, into recycling and renewable resources, he will have done and accomplished more in a year than you will in a lifetime picking out plastic bottles from your trash and telling yourself you've been a good boy.

So it would be okay with you if we had an obese guy, with status and money, telling us to end obesity?

Not him, but I think it would be ok as hes right in the sense that him having status and money, even tho he doesn't practice what he preaches, has a positive effect on the masses.

Didn't take long for Gore's law to pop up.

This is addressed in the film. Why not watch it?

Can't watch it, too busy saving the environment by posting on Veeky Forums. What does it say?

oh fuck right off.

as if that somehow invalidates the message. climate change isn't happening because Leonardo DiCaprio lives large.

Individual people don't think about (or don't like to think about) what their daily actions do to the climate. Everything we do has some small impact, and it's a lot to ask of people to suddenly change the way they do everything with just conscious effort. It's one of the reasons why it's important for actually regulation to push people toward favorable actions. If the environmentally friendly option is more or equally economically viable, then we don't have to rely on people choosing to do the right thing out of the goodness of their hearts, which everyone knows never works.

Sounds like common sense to me. Appealing to people's innate laziness/stinginess is the sounds way to enact real change.

But how does he justify his own limousines, non-stop airline travel, and the spectacular amount of carbon he generates as a multi-millionaire superconsumer?

He can afford it, it even says in the movie that they paid a voluntary carbon tax for creating it. If an actual carbon tax was in place this wouldn't even be an issue. Awareness needs to occur in the general public for a carbon tax to happen since politicians reflect the ideas of the population. If I recall correctly in the movie they even mention how Obama was anti-gay marriage at first until the population changed their minds and then he was for it.

I agree desu that it is better than nothing, but it still feels kind of wrong. I do think it is good what he does, but still,

>carbon tax
Why has this always struck me as deeply retarded?

>burn some more fossilf fuels
>Melt some glacials
>kill some more polar bears
>contribute to further fucking up the apparently fucked up planent
>here is some money
>fixed!

is there something I am missing?

A carbon tax is one way to account for the actual costs caused by carbon pollution. The damage done by climate change is very expensive to the taxpayer and those costs haven't been taken into consideration so far when setting a price for fossil fuels. Charging the actual cost for using these fuels helps increase the interest in alternative sources of energy which are actually cheaper with all things considered.

mudancasclimaticas.cptec.inpe.br/~rmclima/pdfs/destaques/sternreview_report_complete.pdf
I should have included an actual study instead of just paraphrasing what's stored in my memory. this helps explain in much further detail than I'm capable of.

>helps increase the interest in alternative sources of energy which are actually cheaper

So it's a way of fining people for their stupid behavior, and giving that money to other people in the hopes that they will invent something which might _eventually_ help stupid people do the same things they were doing, but at lower environmental cost, eventually removing the need for said fine?

There has to be an environmental policy where the retardation is at least slightly better hidden.

>carbon pollution
Wew, nice chemistry! The only carbon pollution is too many people. I would rather the church of AGW address overpopulation and massive third world immigration into the first world than try to reduce the first worlds standard of living while the high priests of AGW like DiCaprio spin their dogma and propaganda.

I didn't pay much attention to the church of AGW at first because I thought they were trying to just suppress emerging economies and prevent them from industrializing. Now I see they want to turn the lights out on the first world which I suppose isn't surprising.

There is no replacement for fossil fuels yet that can scale up in time so as they deplete the carbon pollution will natural decline through a die off. Enabling new age religions and their churches as this happens will just compound an already serious problem, fossil fuels will be burnt until it is no longer efficient regardless of whose pockets are lined in the process, feeding parasites along the way is asking for trouble.

Hope you have some evidence for the claims you're making from scientific literature, it would be rather foolish to believe everything you read from blogs on the internet.

>suppress emerging economies and prevent them from industrializing.
>turn the lights out on the first world

These both seem like actual ways to reduce environmental impact, desu

Everything else you said was hard to hear through the pants you are wearing on your head, though

Why do poltards think they belong on sci?

I see the church is out in force ITT!
>from scientific literature
I believe in science but don't start pasting reams of the AGW church dogma, the only "evidence" put forth so far is computer simulations that have all been proven wrong so far. I know you have faith but seriously, the end of days climate doom prophecies are just that, prophecies.

>it would be rather foolish to believe everything you read from blogs on the internet
And yet here you are on a Mongolian finger painting board trying to garner converts!

>actual ways to reduce environmental impact
Well go ahead and turn off your lights, unplug your computer and reduce your impact, stop being a disgusting hypocrite.

>poltards
In a lot of ways the church of AGW resembles the Nazi Youth movement more than the "deniers".

youtube.com/watch?v=OJ6Z04VJDco
Here you go, feel free to browse the rest of his videos too, you might actually learn something about the scientific method. You should already know this stuff being on Veeky Forums and all but eh can't blame a /pol/tard for thinking they know everything when their dogma says they're "always right", right?

>turn off your lights, unplug your computer and reduce your impact, stop being a disgusting hypocrite.
True story, I probably have one of the environmentally lower-impact lifestyles of a first-world urban dweller.

I still use my computer to help the greater good, donchaknow.

Also, you seem mad.

>the only "evidence" put forth so far is computer simulations

It's just in the computer, dude, that's not real, lol!

This is you.

You do realize that incredible amounts of science in may fields beyond environmental modeling is conducted and corroborated in "computer simulations?"

Absolutely. He clearly wants help and doesn't know how to fix himself.

Good film. The end actually gave me goosebumps. It made me think about all the shit I consume. Why do steaks have to be so tasty tho.

They offset the footprint by donating.

The carbon tax isnt a bad idea desu. The money doesn't actually do anything. What happens is it raises the price of the good proportionally to the negative impact it has on the environment. The problem is accurately calculating the footprint, and hopefully whoever calculates it isn't corrupt. Not to mention lobbyists will never let it through.

What pissed me off most tho was their fucking energy talks. Solar and wind will never work. Nuclear is the only way to go.

...

Seems like you're trying to cover up the stink of your obvious bullshit but don't wanna admit that you have zero evidence.
oh well.

Nope

see
Also try to be less obvious with your samefaggotry :^)

>p-ppoltard D:
>heres a youtube video as evidence
SJWtards are so predictable these days. Maybe your tiny leftover brain melt away due to global burning and its hitlers fault ;)

>CLIMATE CHANGE IS A HOAX PLEASE BELIEVE ME!!!!!
>no evidence
k

Why do climate change deniers make me so angry? I don't mean the /pol/ rusesters, I mean the people who actively propagate it in real life. I don't get this angry with any other issue.

Evidence for something that doesn't exist? Yeah it's curious why there is zero evidence anywhere...

Same reason santa claus deniers and tooth fairy deniers make you so angry I guess. You'll learn once you grow up.

>I don't mean the /pol/ rusesters
>I don't get this angry with any other issue
try harder next time laddie

>buy my zero evidence bullshit or ill keep calling you by a boards name
be my guest. im just here to enjoy your tears.

>climate change
>troublesome as much as it is depicted and caused by humans alone
>not a new mean of business built on the natural evolution of earth ignoring serious problems such as deforestation and water pollution for some more Co2, that even helps crops growth
definitely not, you go

I called you a /pol/ rusester, not /pol/. Next please.

back to your church of AGW schizo freak

scholar.google.ca/scholar?q=climate change&btnG=&hl=en&as_sdt=0,5
Nope, no evidence here, prove to me that gravity exists btw. Pro tip: you can't know nuffin.

oh wow. that global cooling really seems like a serious threat. what are we gonna do guise ???

>im just here to enjoy your tears.

Take your pedophile cartoons back to

>next please
wow, deep, please consider suicide

It is just the computer dude!
The climate doom prophecy is based entirely on a simulation of the future, This is not science, well the only scientific part is the computers themselves but like the old adage goes, garbage in garbage out. Compounded by the fact these simulations have never been right, are biased from the getgo and the computer technicians and climate priests paychecks rely on a predefined output of doom or they are out of work. This is AGW and nothing more except for of course the massive dogma bombardment on populations who have let their critical thinking guard down and are swept away by the drama of it all. Like any religion the church is working its way towards the children with scary stories who are helpless and have no critical thinking skills. Classic extortion of the worst kind.

I would rather just educate the children on fossil fuel depletion, what energy is and why some people want to control it, and most of all, the dangers of religion and how to identify new age religious movements through a study of history and the role occult has played in it. Guard against fear mongering tactics with reason and of course real science and the scientific method.

It is just the computer dude!
The gravity doom prophecy is based entirely on a simulation of the future, This is not science, well the only scientific part is the computers themselves but like the old adage goes, garbage in garbage out. Compounded by the fact these simulations have never been right, are biased from the getgo and the computer technicians and gravity priests paychecks rely on a predefined output of doom or they are out of work. This is gravity and nothing more except for of course the massive dogma bombardment on populations who have let their critical thinking guard down and are swept away by the drama of it all. Like any religion the church is working its way towards the children with scary stories who are helpless and have no critical thinking skills. Classic extortion of the worst kind.

I would rather just educate the children on the way god makes things be on the ground, what the flat earth is and why some people want to claim it's round, and most of all, the dangers of religion and how to identify new age religious movements through a study of history and the role occult has played in it. Guard against fear mongering tactics with reason and of course real science and the scientific method. But don't take my word for it, jump off a cliff and test this (((gravity))) yourself.

>doesn't have PhD
>can't be scientist

I can demonstrate gravity and even if I run 5000 tests, it always confirms it's existence with numerical accuracy.

Time to bring your hard evidence with equal scientific credibility so we can decide if we should stop making fun of you or not :^)

Bullshit, you can't prove gravity exists, there is LITERALLY no evidence for it. It's all computer simulations. Fuck off you round earther.

The hard evidence is in the failed simulations of doom coming directly from your simulated climate scripture. How you draw an analogy between gravity and repeated failures of climate doom simulations is beyond me but the burden is on you no me. I am simply observing repeated failures of your prophecy and yet your church keeps running around screaming the sky is falling and scaring the children.

Another concern is the money pouring into the church despite these failures of the theory and jumping straight into questionable conclusions, it should shut its collective piehole, refund all that money and reexamine the hypothesis. Perhaps setup a Sunday school for the children and teach then how to spot and burn climate heretics on stakes might be faster though. Never before was there such a rush to prove an obtuse theory, what's the big rush? Oh yeah, sky is falling...

You have yet to show proof that gravity exists, post discarded.

I'll bite, link me those scientific articles that spelled doom and gloom. You said they exist so let me see them. Where are you getting your information from?

No you are discarded and the post is still there.

That's your realm, not mine. Isn't that the point of the thread, we should all watch a Hollywood stars opinion on why his meme is an all important topic of discussion and we don't watch his propaganda piece and act right away to curb our "emissions" earth will die a quick and painful death?

This is what happens when the flock starts to covet idiots. I hear tell he didn't even know what a Chinook was and thought his climate meme was melting Alberta when he was there filming his latest blockbuster.

I know the tar sands are a bit of an eyesore but more importantly, why are we scraping up all that earth to siphon out tar goo in the first place? Yes, the real threat here is fossil fuel depletion and demand not a climate change nightmare. Why all the obfuscation? Smells like....bullshit.

So you have no proof that scientists ever predicted doom and gloom, guess the scientists were right after all ¯\_(ツ)_/¯.

So which part is bullshit?

1. CO2 is a greenhouse gas

2. CO2 has the highest radiative forcing of the greenhouse gases (this is calculated from infrared spectra)

3. man significantly increases the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere, while natural mechanisms absorb slightly more than they emit

Conclusion: man warms the earth through the greenhouse gas effect

>X does Y
>therefore only X causes Y and nothing else
>even though it doesn't manifest through data

>therefore only X causes Y and nothing else
Where did I say that?

I don't know why you even bother, he's clearly just trolling. I don't think there's a single denier actually in this thread.

>man warms the earth through the greenhouse gas effect
You are explaining the warming without including any other factors. The concept you're trying to sell is autonomous global warming so that you can try to convince us if we stop greenhouse gases the globe won't heat up anyway due to everything else. Atleast study your bullshit a little next time.

I don't know who you're even arguing in favor for. Even fucking Exxon admits AGW corporate.exxonmobil.com/en/current-issues/climate-policy/climate-perspectives/our-position

Made me feel bad about cheetos and the beef in my tacos at taco bell. Made me feel better about getting chicken sandwiches.

Has changing consumer habits ever worked? Seems that you need to change things from the top down rather than bottom up and people will just adapt to what's available.

I am explaining how man warms the earth through a certain effect. This does not imply there aren't other factors which effect the global climate, such as solar activity, orbital eccentricity, atmospheric and oceanic currents, albedo, etc. However it does prove man affects the climate. So you admit that.

Now, the biggest factors which have determined earth's climate over large time scales are solar activity and orbital eccentricity. These control the Milankovich cycle which leads to glacial and interglacial periods. Solar activity is currently very low and our orbital tilt indicates we should be at the end of the interglacial period. In other words we should be cooling, but we're not. The largest factors in the short term are atmospheric and oceanic currents. This is where most of the variability in climate lies. But they cannot explain prolonged warming over the timescale we're observing it. They create peaks and valleys (the most extreme are the El Nino and La Nina) but not a trend. Albedo has not fundamentally changed except at the poles, but this is not a large factor. The only thing that can explain the warming trend is the greenhouse gas effect. There are other factors that effect the climate, but they don't produce the trend. The moment anyone creates a model that does produce the trend better than the current one without the greenhouse effect is the moment that AGW fails. But no one has done so. This is all based on rather fundamental physics, and denying it is quite silly.

An idea isn't responsible for who believes in it.

kek

haven't seen that guy around lately

Literally what

>even when it manifests explicitly and an multiple ways throughout all data taken on the subject
*ftfy

>nobody takes RMS seriously
I'd say too many do. Just take a look at /g/.

Surely you are not hand waving "flys a private jet and owns sickass cars and huge houses with AC units" as "people to suddenly change the way they do everything"

Whether or not something is correct is not affected by the people that believe in it. An idea has to weighed by its own merit.

It's like the old chestnut that "Darwin repented on his death bed and said that evolution wasn't real". Even if true (it isn't) it wouldn't matter what Darwin had to say on the matter, the evolution of systems with hereditary features via natural selection is incontrovertibly true and has been found to be so by prolonged scientific analysis. The idea stands on its own, and no matter how many reddit athiests embarrass themselves over it, it won't stop being true.

See also "Hitler was a vegetarian" - vegetarianism has been found to be generally healthier than diets rich in processed meat and also results in a lower environmental impact. There's also the issue of animal welfare that most people cite as the reason for their choice. Those facts don't cease to be true just because Hitler was a vegetarian too.

>Conclusion: man warms the earth through the greenhouse gas effect
No you are not paying attention.
The conclusion is to foist upon the populations of earth a global carbon tax which is in essence a life control tax. We are carbon based lifeforms, we are heavily dependent upon fossil fuels for our very survival today.

It's a literal power grab and has nothing to do with reducing emissions because as I've stated the remaining available fuels will be burnt as long as humans roam earth, probably to the point of negative EROEI so what real purpose does this tax structure serve? The free market can dictate how much fuels are worth to people and offer up valid alternatives should they arise which looks doubtful already - but feel free to try something productive and look! What the market doesn't need is an enormous global bureaucratic parasite attached to it justifying it's very existence on new age climate doom scripture and trying to save earth. It is doing no such thing, it serves only to engorge itself and provides nothing in return.

I don't see anything in your rant that actually responds to the science.

>We are carbon based lifeforms
get a load of this guy

Accept the science and that it's a problem and only then can we discuss possible solutions to address it. You're skipping several steps here.

Actual cost = money spent + environmental impact
It's a way for dumb people to shift environmental impact into something they understand and care about - their personal finances. Still too complicated for you, I reckon.

>we are carbon based life forms
kek

what does that have to do with anything?

If you can't follow the science maybe you should stay off of this board.

Meant for

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Nope, it's meant for the science deniers. Contain your retarded global warming memes in

>people think global warking is real
Explain why it's cold in the poles then?

Does a pole look like a globe to you?
Duh.