>>8523374

CAN'T STUMP THE TRUMP

no one denies climate is changing. The right tends to deny humans are the cause. I'm more or less in the middle, I think humans are contributing but the evidence of it is vastly overblown. There's a reason Veeky Forums gets trolled by so many climate change threads, because most people claiming the evidence is undeniable are just parroting others. In any case, it is a far cry from being established science.
you're the one crying about differing opinions.

>In any case, it is a far cry from being established science.
That's bullshit.
What criteria would you need it to meet to be considered "established science"? It's already very widely accepted by experts in the field.

this, the long term projections still need 100 years of validation. the climate catastrophe stuff is at best equivalent to string theory at this point.

>no one denies climate is changing
HAVE YOU FUCKING BEEN ON THIS BOARD IN THE PAST EVER

>There's a reason Veeky Forums gets trolled by so many climate change threads
IT'S BECAUSE THERE IS AN ENDLESS SUPPLY OF ASSHOLES WHO DENY THAT THE CLIMATE IS CHANGING

HOLY FUCK

>It's already very widely accepted by experts in the field.
so was ego depletion...

models are also all over the place.

get the fuck off of my board

you're comparing yourself to /pol/ and calling yourself a moderate

I have news for you you brainwashed smug piece of shit

tbf you guys are the extremists when it comes to this. you are taking the more extreme position.

>get the fuck off of my board
>my board

consider killing yourself

Models are irrelevant in linking humans to climate change.

skepticalscience.com/10-Indicators-of-a-Human-Fingerprint-on-Climate-Change.html

do you have anything worthwhile to contribute?

if not have fun with your shitposting i guess

>which is something /pol/ denies as well, so it's in line with their beliefs.

underrated best post! /thread

"waaahhh someone believes something different than I do"
go fuck yourself

So was evolution.

Why should I put effort or thought into my posts when you refuse to do the same? Let's shitpost together, friendo.

Also, kill yourself.

why are you such an extremist edgelord?

the comment was about the severity and timing of outcome given trends.

why is it that you can only call yourself a moderate when you compare yourself to the literal scum of the earth?

>What criteria would you need it to meet to be considered "established science"?
the evidence
The evidence itself. you do realize what an argument ad populum is right? tell me, what irrefutable evidence is there that humans are the cause? saying it's very widely accepted just reiterates my earlier point about the most ardent supporters having little knowledge of the subject. Again, I do believe that humans are very likely to be contributing to climate change. I would even say that it's likely that the contribution is significant (i.e. speeding it up by some factor), but saying that it's almost a certainty and comparing it to gravity is a huge intellectual failure.
Ironic that the people arguing strictly emotionally would tell me I don't belong here.
Try a little something called objectivity.

not him but because moderates aren't extremist enough to label the other side of the spectrum literal scum of the earth. not everything /pol/ says is wrong.

>tell me, what irrefutable evidence is there that humans are the cause?
Parading around your ignorance of climate science is not a convincing argument.

ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/wg1/WG1AR5_Chapter01_FINAL.pdf

tl:dr Greenhouse effect via basic physics, humans being the main source of net increase in greenhouse gasses via radiosotope analysis, greenhouse gasses being the main source of radiative forcing via radiative spectroscopy, and much much more!

I can't wait to watch this world burn. Honestly what a time to be alive. You get to see a species that has evolved for over hundreds of thousands of years to kill itself.

We are LITERALLY standing at the beginning of the end. Literally the point of no return.
How can you not be hyped for this?

iktftbhf

Nothing personal is actually the first thing that comes to mind. There's no hatred involved. You actually get to see the end of human race. How cool is that?

/pol/ is never right

This. There is irrefutable evidence yet it's still refuted.... Fucking madness

This is what people should be protesting, NOT FUCKING DEMOCRACY.

ecologists have determined that extermination mosquitoes would have no negative effects on the biosphere

I see no reason not to believe something analogous with /pol/tards

literally name one good thing that /pol/ supports

Please don't tell me there are people still walking around a month after the votes.

bullshit we're not fucked, we need to build tens of thousands of nuclear reactors using uranium we rip out of the ocean and start ripping CO2 out of the air and converting it into carbon fiber and other useful carbon things. We need to get pro-active on stopping CO2 build-up god damn it! None of this faggy cap and trade shit.

The typical tinfoil hat denier is boring to me, the conspiracy logic and cherrypicking is the same every single time, but your kind is fascinating. You think you're being "objective" and "neutral" when in reality you were just intelligent enough to realize that the denier blogs you were reading were probably bullshit, yet not intelligent enough to actually go look at what scientists are actually saying. Is it because you were scared you wouldn't understand it, or did you try to understand it and failed?

what arguments

this is not an argument

this is me done arguing

this is me telling you that you are literally garbage

try a little something like get the fuck out

weathermen can barely predict tomorrow's temperature and whether it will rain, and you expect me to believe they can predict the entire global climate?

good joke

why don't you just kill yourself.

>try a little something like get the fuck out
yes little one, keep doing this for decades to come, this way of reasoning people will SURELY sway them to your views :D

You see? This is this thread everytime. I'm not here to argue. I'm here to shitpost and make things worse because by god I don't see why you faggots should have the monopoly on being giant unthinking assholes. I'm doing this because it's shit, you're shit, and I don't anyone to come away not believing its shit because believe me its shit.

No different then the people who think GMOs are evil and that vaccines cause autism. All of them read their science from shitty blogs to confirm their beliefs.

fuck my views

fuck converting you

just get out

the future doesn't need you, just kill yourself

Physicists can barely predict a coin flip and you expect me to believe they can predict it will land on heads half of the time on average?

Good joke

shouldnt you be whining on your tumblr or something?

foxnews.com/entertainment/2016/12/07/michael-moore-calls-for-protesters-to-disrupt-trumps-inauguration.html
reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-inauguration-idUSKBN13W2HQ

shouldn't you be in your safe space?

...

where's that suppose to be? the place where everyone believes without a doubt that climate change is real?

maybe you should give Climate Hustle a watch youtube.com/watch?v=nXBzjBE9l5Q

you're the one trying to shut down all opposing opinions

I'm happy to discuss with you but all you want to do is tell people to kill themselves

western civilization

Maybe you should kill yourself

and blindly linking something and saying it says something without quoting or citing is not an argument either. I'm not reading 150 pages just because you're too lazy to form your own argument. try again with page number citations and actual statements.
>tl:dr Greenhouse effect via basic physics, humans being the main source of net increase...
This, again, is nothing I disagree with. It's generally accepted that greenhouse gasses change climate. It's an obvious fact that that humans are contributing greenhouse gasses to the atmosphere. Can you quantify the effects of this? How much faster is the climate changing? How bad would the consequences be? how fast would it increase (or not increase) if humans contributed no greenhouse gasses?

>went to fox news facebook page
>HAHAHAHA THIS WILL HURT LIBRULS HAHA XD
Are conservatives really so retarded that they would pick an idiot to dictate the nation's policy on a vital topic JUST to spite liberals? Don't they realize that worsening of the environment affects them too?

I'm not trying to shut down your opinion. You can have it. Just get out.

im not here to discuss, I'm here to make your thread shit like you make my board shit

have you considered just ending it all?

well i can assure you that wont happen

maybe you can pray to the climate gods that global warming will come kill me :)

my thread? you must be mistaken or have gotten confused somewhere down the line, i didn't make this

Interesting. I have a counteroffer. Get out.

The models are "All over the place" because they're based on different contexts. Obviously a prediction for what will happen if we burn all available fossil fuels is going to look different to one where we don't.

>What criteria would you need it to meet to be considered "established science"?
>the evidence
That's not very hard - basically all of it is public and can be downloaded off the websites of the groups who collected it.
What do you want to see? The IPCC synthesis reports are a pretty good place to start if you're okay with something a bit wordy.

>saying it's very widely accepted just reiterates my earlier point about the most ardent supporters having little knowledge of the subject
I said it was widely accepted by CLIMATOLOGISTS. That's not the same as doing a headcount on a bus.

>good joke
The actual joke is that most people can't tell the difference between climate and weather, but consider themselves experts on both.

>maybe you should give Climate Hustle a watch youtube.com/watch?v=nXBzjBE9l5Q
Well that's fucking embarrassing.
Cfact? Really

>Can you quantify the effects of this? How much faster is the climate changing? How bad would the consequences be? how fast would it increase (or not increase) if humans contributed no greenhouse gasses?
All of that is covered in the report they linked.
You asked for the damn evidence, you don't get to whine that it's too long for you too read.

and yet somehow, you're the only one still in it

it's like you came in and everyone left because you make the world around you a worse place

>All of that is covered in the report they linked.
>You asked for the damn evidence, you don't get to whine that it's too long for you too read.
literally not an argument
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority

>baww muh future i wont even be part of baww
lmao the non-egoist salt itt.

>>>>>>

>The models are "All over the place" because they're based on different contexts. Obviously a prediction for what will happen if we burn all available fossil fuels is going to look different to one where we don't.
and what assumptions are taken. sorry but all models are wrong, and these have yet to demonstrate their usefulness.

>How do you know there's a sun?

>It's right over there just look.

>I don't want to.

>You asked for the damn evidence, you don't get to whine that you don't want to look at it.

literally not an argument
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority

Stop being an idiot. They're not putting themselves in harms way just to spite liberals. They legitimately don't believe in man made climate change, AND the appointment spites liberals. They wouldn't support Muslims nuking the US just so they can say I told you so.

remind me which authority did i appeal to?

if i'm the only one still here why are there multiple people responding to me? are you saying i'm just samefagging, including as you?

>caring about the fate of the overpopulated, resource stripped, urbanized, globalized future
This. Humans are a blight on the earth. If not for global warming it would have been something else

Find peace with yourselves lest you forever fight against your certain demise

Do people leave the room when you enter it in real life too?

what are you trying to say here?

I'm trying to say that you're disgusting and that you should kill yourself.

when did this board get so many extremist brainlets? did Al Gore hire a bunch of spammers? this feels like a raid

No, it's just me. Fuck all of you. I hate you more than you'll ever know.

Did you even read what you just linked?
>An argument from authority (Latin: argumentum ad verecundiam), also called an appeal to authority, is a common type of argument which can be fallacious, such as when an authority is cited on a topic outside their area of expertise or when the authority cited is not a true expert.
It can be fallacious but is not always, its also only applied to people who have the appearance of authority without actually having it or someone with authority trying to dictate a domain they don't have experience in. It very much doesn't mean that any reference to authority is fallacious.

>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority
I didn't appeal to any authority. The fucking reports list the evidence that they're based on. You are free to read basically all of that evidence yourself, at no cost.

>did Al Gore hire a bunch of spammers?
If your understanding of science comes from listing to politicians, you are part of the problem here.

>and blindly linking something and saying it says something without quoting or citing is not an argument either.
Yeah, you're so "objective" that you asked for evidence and then complained when it was presented to you, in an easily digestible form, because I didn't "cite" it. If you won't read a summary of the primary literature, why do you want it cited? So you can ignore the cite? Yes, you truly care about the facts and are not defending your insecure ideology at all!

>Can you quantify the effects of this?
Yes, see pic from AR5.

>How much faster is the climate changing? How bad would the consequences be? how fast would it increase (or not increase) if humans contributed no greenhouse gasses?
Read the report. Or just google it. If you seriously never looked for the answers to these questions by what right do you have to claim an opinion about climatology?

Why do you insist on making this board worse with your shit opinions and your shit logic and your shit attitude. Get out. No one wants you here. You add nothing.

i hope by the time you're on your deathbed you'll realize how much time you wasted fighting a non-cause just because you were tricked by some fake news and politicized science

otherwise you'll just die unenlightened like all the other idiots

I hope you don't have the peace of a deathbed. I hope your children starve from food shortages.

>shit this
>shit that
>shit everything
this is why no one will take you seriously when you try to convince them of your position

did your high school not have a debate club?

I hope all the worst models of climate change are true just to know that those of you who denied it will suffer. I hope nations destabilize and nukes fly and locusts fly from the earth and I hope that you beg for death but that death does not come.

>They wouldn't support Muslims nuking the US just so they can say I told you so
don't you mean they WOULD support?

I am not here to debate. I am here to tell you to get out. I am here to tell you that you make the world worse. I am here to tell you that you are a bad person, on the inside and that God will not forgive you.

...

>>Where's the evidence?
>Here's the evidence
>>I'm not reading all that! Summarize it!
>OK, here is a summary of it
>>That's just your summary, where's the evidence???
>I already gave you the evidence
>>Argument from authority!!!
Am I getting memed or are deniers this stupid?

Interesting. Though if I may offer a simple, logical rebuttal:

get out

>God
oh wow you believe in climate change AND your imaginary sky friend

now i'm really convinced

>skywizards
>real
climate scientists, everyone

>I said it was widely accepted by CLIMATOLOGISTS. That's not the same as doing a headcount on a bus.
but, logically, it is. It is no less fallacious if the ones who believe it are scientists than if they are randoms on a bus. If multiverse theory is believed by most physicists does that make it real or even any more likely? Climatologist can believe anything for any number of things. If the major reason is the evidence for it, then say the evidence instead of simply pointing out the belief. Pointing to just popularity, no matter the group, is asanine.
>That's not very hard - basically all of it is public and can be downloaded off the websites of the groups who collected it.
>you don't get to whine that it's too long for you too read.
and you don't get to say "other's have already argued, therefore my argument is their argument". You also don't get to blindly link something without stating the points you're making by linking it. It's not that it's too long, it's that you're basically asking me to make your argument for you. I could read the whole thing and still have nothing to refute because you didn't make any points. You have a terrible habit of pointing to others to fight for you.
>all of that is covered in the report they linked
Then cite where, and specifically state your interpretation of what you're citing. You're not making any real arguments here, you're just basically making the "google it" argument.

...

Only so that I may believe that there is a Hell for you to go to. I couldn't fathom living believing otherwise.

It's real, they really are this stupid
>Haha why would I read somthing from NASA they are a bunch of rat jews Haha
>By the way here is and un-sourced excel graph that says youre wrong get cucked shill