Truthfully, is climate change an issue that we should concern ourselves with...

youtube.com/playlist?list=PL82yk73N8eoX-Xobr_TfHsWPfAIyI7VAP

>Truthfully, is climate change an issue that we should concern ourselves with?

Things that climate change has influence on...

>animal/insect migration
>pathogen/ infectious disease rates
>soil composition
>patterns in weather
>flooding/sea levels
>increased occurrence/ aggregation of sinkholes
>plant survival rates
>atmosphere composition

By the National Geographic
It wasn't a projection, it was a "what if all ice melted" hypothetical scenario, but the mental image remains strong.

This.
Potholer54 is probably the best representative for the importance of scientific literacy we've had in a long time.

I think we should try to combat it, but not to the point where it harms economic growth.

Fossil fuels are much better than solar and wind. It's madness to suggest that we should abandon fossil fuels any time soon.

I would love for a Nuclear push though.

It's one of the few issues today that presents an actual existential threat to humanity, it is very important.

There are two reasons you see mixed messages:
-Scientific illiterates on both sides that only bring it up for political reasons. One side incites unrealistic panic that the entire world will be underwater in five years, the other plugs their ears and yells that it's a conspiracy by scientists to get rich, both of which are laughable.
-Intentional misinformation from gigantic corporations involved in coal or petroleum. These groups spend enormous amounts of money hiring foundations to publish contrary results, lobbying politicians, etc. It's comparable to how tobacco companies in the 80s and 90s tried to cover up smoking's health concerns.
What sucks is that they don't actually need to prove anything, they only need to make everything confusing enough that it appears to be a "controversial issue," because this causes everybody's political leanings to kick in and turn the entire thing into a clusterfuck.

Invest in green energy today or doom your kids to a hellscape. hard to chose

>whoa there lad I understand this is something that will steadily choke the human race out of existence but let's not do something as wild as raising taxes or investing in new technology

...

>let's have another climate change thread
fuck off
look in the archive next time

Climate change is absolutely fake you retards!, I've read TONS of shitposts and watched countless youtube videos made by the most edgy people who can tell me that it is fake without even needing to get a PhD(a meme) in climatology, Can't you see it? It's an ABSOLUTE FUCKING MEME made by the jews to steal the money you spend on funding it, I don't even need to waste my time looking at graphs and reading a thousands of papers and proofs about it because i know they are all fake!, I know this because i visited the most TRUSTWORTHY magicians sites on the dark web and they told me it's fake, it's a more than enough proof to debunk a shitty meme like this!, and even if i did not, I would still know that it is fake because i pray to god and jesus every night and know in my heart that god would never do such a thing to humanity, our emperor trump will save us from those satanists scientist with their "climate change" memes, ALL HEIL OUR LORD AND SAVOIR EMPEROR TRUMP!.

Let fossil fuels be depleted
Move to nuclear energy + hydroelectric (where viable)
Invest in alternative energy research (not green job shit, like new renewable energy technology research)

9.5/10 post

don't even start with that "Who is to say..?" bs. The answers are out there, publicly available from the most reputable sources. If you're being a brainlet and are too lazy to do research and want sci to spoon feed it to you, check the archives. Anyone with an appreciable amount of intelligence should be able to come to the conclusion that it's real.

Veeky Forumsence and mathematics are social constructs. therefore, climate change is social construct. now go back to >>/x/

Hail Trump, Hail Victory, Hail (((Our People))).

...

Seconding Potholer54, watching his videos decades ago is what got me interested in climate change, I used to not understand the evidence at all and thought it was bullshit. His videos are by no means a complete introduction to the issue, but they are very good and basic at introducing the evidence and why it's important.

Skepticalscience is also a great website with a large variety of information on climate change, with links to literature sources on the subject. There are numerous pages debunking common misconceptions about climate change, such as the sun's role, or that CO2 lags temperature, etc. I wish the website was updated more often though, looking back on some of the articles there has been new papers published that could be added to the information there.
skepticalscience.com/

^ this is a good answer, OP.

Just to add my own two cents: the nice thing about science is that there's empirical evidence that backs everything up. It's easy for politicians (on both sides of the argument) to make stuff up or take scientific conclusions waaaaaay too far, but the people who actually devote their lives to study climate science all say it's going to be a huge problem. Like I wrote, the nice thing is you can go to school and get the knowledge to understand the science first hand. Not to mention every major scientific organization in the world warns about the dangers of climate change, so ya, it's probably something we should all worry about. If you're worried about the biased funding argument, I'd again point to the empirical evidence. That stuff just can't be swept under the rug. Deniers try that but it only works on the people who are scientifically illiterate.

GUYS.

climate.nasa.gov/evidence/

Okay?

Nice try kike libtard. No one believes ur (((NASA))) (((Science))). Fucking leftist scum, I'm not listening to ur drivel. Trump won, deal with it, soon (((NASA))) wil be defundead and ur precious (((climate science))) will cease to exist, we won, real science won, deal with it kike. go back and cry to you globalist masters, u have no power here anymore. fuk you shill. ur models r wrong, ur (((science))) is wrong, u have been blown the fuck out over and over again by experts like monckton, singer and watts, u kno, real scientists who know watts up. no one believes ur tampered government data, renewable shill. fossil fuels are necessary for all life, u can't stop global warming even if its real kike, ur propaganda from obama won't help u anymore! TRUMP MAGA! u lose faggot!

The proof is in having a not shit memory and paying attention to the world around you. To the fucking sky. How ignorant do you have to be to believe all that chemical shit we launch into the atmosphere won't change anything. How unaware of your own self, how far away from reality must you be to delude yourself into thinking our actions don't have an effect on the world around us.

Fucking idiots, I swear.

>Truthfully, is climate change an issue that we should concern ourselves with?

No. Dress cooler in the summer, and warmer in the winter. You'll be fine.

Economic growth is going to be harmed either way. The question is whether harm now will reduce harm further in the future. Economists say yes. Even something as simple as a moderate carbon tax can result in a met savings of many billions of dollars through disincentive alone. That revenue can then be spent on further mitigation research and tech.

If you don't care about the future of your children, then no, you don't need to care about it.

Quoting what user wrote: Cult and climate priest are not ad-homs and I do not resort to personal attacks, it's pointless on an anonymous cartoon image board. The scientific method in the case of AGW is not being followed, it is simply weather monitoring and not on a geological time scale because the "science" is in its infancy. The climate is cyclical and there are an infinite number of variables that go into it not just man but all life on earth. CO2 is being cherry-picked as the sole culprit which just happens to be critical to life on this planet and a by-product of spent fossil fuels. If the science was legit it would need to lend as much weight to every other factor, water vapor, plant cover, volcanic activity, solar activity but also thousands of other factors. To say these are all being modeled correctly in computers is ludicrous, the margin for error makes these models ridiculous. Entertainment at most but to start basing tax on? Preposterous! With that tax already in place and ramping up, 'big oil' for the most part is just required to pass on any of that burden downstream to the end consumer, the oil shill funding argument is dead. Global fascism is what AGW is spawning through what to me looks like a religion. It has all the markers of a religion not a science, I've pointed these out, why is that? CO2 is not a pollutant, calling it a pollutant equates to calling life on this planet a pollutant. Most of the AGW (science) is projection. It cannot claim with certainty that any anomaly in climate or weather over the last 100 years is man-made, it is just an idea. Even then to think it can pinpoint mans contribution to such a hypothetical scenario is laughable. That this movement has gone ahead and seeks control of CO2 emissions on a global scale downright scary! The fanaticism and levels of belief amongst its follows give it the appearance of a religion more than science Science stands on it's own, does not need fanatical or draconian enforcement

Yes, we should be concerned with climate change.

Yes, climate change is real.

Yes, the liberals are still idiots for opposing nuclear power, the most efficient green energy there is.

No, there is not much we can really do to stop it at this point. Even if the USA instantly became all green energy, including cars and planes somehow, we still have China and the 3rd world countries contributing to global warming, and we can't undo the damage already done. Honestly, our best bet is just finding the best way to deal with the damage, through levies and GMO's and stuff like that.

It won't be as bad as people make it out to be though. It's not like you'll get flooded all of a sudden, the Earth will just get more crowded as the people living near the ocean need to move up, and some people starve from famine and stuff. Certainly not world ending though.

Your method of speaking is not the way to prove something good sir

>Cult and climate priest are not ad-homs
Of course they are.

>The scientific method in the case of AGW is not being followed
Of course it is.

>it is simply weather monitoring
Do you know the difference between weather and climate? Do you know how they're related?

>and not on a geological time scale because the "science" is in its infancy
The geologicalclimate is studied. Its called paleoclimatology.

>The climate is cyclical
The climate is only cyclical when its inputs or mechanisms are cyclical. AGW is not cyclical because our emissions of greenhouse gasses are not cyclical and neither is the climate's response to those emissions.

>there are an infinite number of variables that go into it not just man but all life on earth.
There are an infinite number of variables in any science studying real life. Luckily science allows us to simplify and reduce a complex system to achieve understanding. It also helps that the climate is averaged over space and time, which reduces local chaotic behavior.

>CO2 is being cherry-picked as the sole culprit which just happens to be critical to life on this planet and a by-product of spent fossil fuels.
CO2 has never been claimed to be the only thing effecting the climate. It had been compared to the other forcing and found to be the most significant factor in the current warming. This does not conflict in any way with CO2 being essential for life. Too much CO2 being emitted too fast is bad for humans. This does not mean we should eliminate CO2, nor has anyone argued that we do so.

>If the science was legit it would need to lend as much weight to every other factor, water vapor, plant cover, volcanic activity, solar activity but also thousands of other factors.
What do you mean by weighted? All relevant forcings are measured and compared in the same radiative forcing units. They are empirically not equal.

All aspect of climate change is observable.

Hypothesis 1. CO2, CH4 and N2O have "greenhouse" properties in that they allow visible light to pass and reflect infrared light.
This is testable experimentally as 19th century physics. This is the basis of cavity ring down measurements
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cavity_ring-down_spectroscopy
In fact this is how you measure CO2, and CH4 concentration. You have super-reflective mirror and you bounce laser back and forth between the mirrors. The laser will attenuate exactly because of the greenhouse effect, and this tells you how much CO2, or CH4 is in your sample.

Hypothesis 2. Increase in CO2 after preindustrial is manmade.
This is again experimentally provable through analysis of CO2 isotopes, stable and not. CO2 from fossil fuel are lighter (more 12C compared to 13C) and completely depleted in 14C.

Hypothesis 3. If you increase CO2 concentration, you will enhance the greenhouse effect of the atmosphere.
This is again testable. How? Through satellite observation. You have the satellite orbiting the planet, you measure incoming radiation from the sun and then you measure outgoing radiation out of the earth.
srh.noaa.gov/jetstream/atmos/energy.html
Newsflash they don't balance, which means that 2nd law of thermodynamics and conservation of energy simply states that the Earth must be warming due to this imbalance

People who say AGW is not a testable hypothesis is a moron

>To say these are all being modeled correctly in computers is ludicrous, the margin for error makes these models ridiculous.
What is the margin of error then? To dismiss a model out of hand without even looking at it, to make up empirical, quantitative claims because of your feelings, is unscientific.

The rest of your tinfoil rant is not worth wasting any more time replying to, as it seems you can't write a single sentence without lying about climatology. You should be ashamed of yourself.

look at this $oro$ $hill with his SimpletonPseudoScience don't you know that ALL SCIENTIST ARE WHORES and it's a plot for a global carbon tax (living tax, since carbon is the element of life)? also ice can't just turn into water, any retard knows that, Al Gore is a MURDERER, carbon monoxide is plant food, and coal doesn't really exist. prove me wrong.
>criminal cartoonist John Cuck BTFO again
>warmist alarmist shills on suicide watch ROTFLMEOW

Absolutely. Everyone else here has been showing you the evidence.

But even ignoring that, consider that the things we can do to try and prevent climate change are beneficial to us in general in the long term.

Renewable energy and electric cars lead to a much more pleasant world than continuing our dependence on fossil fuels. Less pollution is objectively a good thing. Giving less power to the countries that produce oil is arguably a good thing, too, as there tends to be a lot of strife and conflict surrounding them

I don't care. In winter I'm pro warming, in summer pro co2.

OP said nothing about whether it's man-made or not, so all you need to say is yes, climate change is clearly happening.

m8uwot.dll

earth is a rhombus pls respond

earth is a rhombus pIs respond