/lit/ - Literature

>NO YOU CAN'T PLAY GOD
>STOP TRYING TO PROGRESS SCIENCE!!!!!

>>15629314
>yeah dude we're going to, like, transcend our mortal souls lmfao what does that even mean? who cares lol only gay l*beral arts cucks ask questions, our computers will inevitably figure out all the mysteries of the universe through SCIENCE! and make us immortal with physical metaphysics lol rofl bazinga zd

>yeah dude we're going to, like, transcend our mortal souls lmfao what does that even mean? who cares lol only gay l*beral arts cucks ask questions, our computers will inevitably figure out all the mysteries of the universe through SCIENCE! and make us immortal with physical metaphysics lol rofl bazinga zd

>>yeah dude we're going to, like, transcend our mortal souls lmfao what does that even mean? who cares lol only gay l*beral arts cucks ask questions, our computers will inevitably figure out all the mysteries of the universe through SCIENCE! and make us immortal with physical metaphysics lol rofl bazinga zd

>>15629310
I wanted to become a magic skeleton, but I'll gladly become an electronic skeleton instead if I get the chance.

I have generally not really enjoyed being alive, but I'm determined to live forever sarcastically, especially in a degraded state. I'd like to be a permanent "living" reductio against the premise that all life is sacred.

Great thread, great discussion. Truly the most intelligent and capable of minds are battling out here to see which argument is the best.
Truly what /lit/is all about. In no way should this thread be moved to /b/, because of the biting and profound discussion people are having here it should remain in this board.

>>15629547
The angrier you get, the more they will post

>Great thread, great discussion. Truly the most intelligent and capable of minds are battling out here to see which argument is the best.
>Truly what /lit/is all about. In no way should this thread be moved to /b/, because of the biting and profound discussion people are having here it should remain in this board.

>>15629314
first row: global warming is in fact happening
second row: farming does in fact contribute massively to climate change
third row: mining has in fact done massive damage to the climate
fourth row: pollution does in fact damage the earth's ecosystems

nietzsche retroactively refuted transhumanism

>>15629614
you're fucking brainwashed

>>15629620
in what sense

>>15629614
This is bait right? nobody can be this stupid right?
Nobody can be this dogmatic about their believes board that prides itself in reading and being intellectual right?
8/10 bait made me question why I even frequent /lit/

>>15629626
>global warming
>climate change
this is nothing short of propaganda

>>15629630
please explain what you disagree with

>>15629634
are we not deforesting the amazon & collapsing ecosystems? are sea levels not rising? was australia not on fire? what exactly do you not believe in

>This is bait right? nobody can be this stupid right?
>Nobody can be this dogmatic about their believes board that prides itself in reading and being intellectual right?
>8/10 bait made me question why I even frequent /lit/

>>15629643
The sea levels are not rising. The deforestation campaigns and destruction of ecosystems are inhumane, not to mention DEWs (direct energy weapons) and weather modification by places like HAARP, but none of that is "warming the globe" or "changing climate", they are short term effects.

>>15629310
Lol I don't believe hell is eternal but it's still going to be fucking hilarious on judgement day seeing these cunts get btfo. NOOOOOOOOOOOO I SHOULDN'T HAVE PUT THE FEDORA ON NOOOOOOOOOOO GOD BAD SLAVERY BAD GENOCIDE BAAAAD IN THE BAHHHHBLE

What the fuck is this terrible thread about?

>>15629657
>HAARP is a weapon

jesus christ how do you get out of the bed in the morning without accidentally killing yourself

>>15629657
how is deforestation not changing the climate? it is literally a large scale change being made to the climate. if you think that you can remove massive sections of the global ecosystem without affecting the rest of it then you fundamentally do not understand the concept of 'the climate' to begin with.

we have already observed progressive sea level rise (perfectly natural on its own) and progressive shrinking of sea ice (again natural on its own), however this is repeatedly happening faster than our predictions which indicates that there is a new factor (and there is a strong body of evidence to suggest that this factor is industrial emissions).

>>15629679
>weather modification
>the ultimate weapon

imagine being so fucking retarded to think chopping down the whole godforsaken Brazilian rain forest will not affect the climate

>>15629636
>>15629614
>global warming
That is clear and undeniable however it is not clear it's man made, there are several scientific theories propose we are simply living in a "Hot period" thank to the natural cicle earth has of warming and cooling as well as increased solar activity. AND THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE USE OF FIRE AS A MEAS OF KEEPING WARM FOR FUCKS SAKE!
>farming does in fact contribute massively to climate change
>climate change
this is one of the most outrageous one climate change and global warming are not interchangeable. You can say "farming" does have an affect in producing gazes like methane and co2 but they are minor contribute compared to the real issue if you do believe in man made climate change. That is coal energy plant.
> mining has in fact done massive damage to the climate
First off that is not mining you retard that is tool creation from rocks. How the early people in the Neolithic period made any sort of tools.
Second, no you moron the adverse affect of mining have to do with the usage of chemicals that contaminate the local ecosystem and/or erosion of the soil by several different means. Another issue might be the destruction don underground "river" or water beds but if you are going to mine you will avoid those these days for obvious self explanatory reasons.
> pollution does in fact damage the earth's ecosystems
SHITTING IN THE GROUND IS BETTER THAN SHITTING IN THE OPEN! that is all there is too it, even some animal bury their feces for fucks sake.
And proper sanitation and waste disposal reduce pollution not increase it, having proper waste and water treatment plants instead of simply dumpign all your shit in the river or in the streets IS BETTER FOR THE ENVIRONMENT AS WELL AS THE PEOPLE!
It's baffling I even have to explain this.

>>15629687
Deforestation is a short term effect. Cities are overcrowded, there are endless stretches of uninhabited land out there, nature is just more powerful than man is. The rest of the climate will go unaffected regardless how genocidal they get. They may make species go instinct but it will do nothing to affect the seasons.

>we have already observed progressive sea level rise and progressive shrinking of sea ice
"we" haven't. We've bombarded with propaganda about it. Its a lie. Like everything else they tell us.

>>15629679
https://ufdc.ufl.edu/AA00025909/00001

>>15629710
>there are several scientific theories propose we are simply living in a "Hot period" thank to the natural cicle earth has of warming and cooling
how well do you understand the scientific debate here? YES there are scientists who have proposed we are 'living in a hot period'. I could get a phd in some branch of science and claim we are 'living in a cold period' and then that would also be a theory. the broader consensus is still OVERWHELMINGLY in favour of an increasingly prominent human factor in global warming.
>THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE USE OF FIRE AS A MEAS OF KEEPING WARM FOR FUCKS SAKE
the burning of wood and other natural resources is a driver of climate change
>You can say "farming" does have an affect in producing gazes like methane and co2 but they are minor contribute compared to the real issue
the livestock industry is currently believed to account for 9% of co2 emissions and 40% of methane emissions.
>that is not mining you retard that is tool creation from rocks
mining stems from tool creation (e.g. the creation of picks). the image also clearly shows him cracking the earth open with his rock, which is essentially what the process of mining consists of.
>the adverse affect of mining have to do with the usage of chemicals that contaminate the local ecosystem and/or erosion of the soil by several different means
fossil fuels (which are mined) are one of the primary drivers of human climate change
>having proper waste and water treatment plants instead of simply dumpign all your shit in the river or in the streets IS BETTER FOR THE ENVIRONMENT AS WELL AS THE PEOPLE!
I
yes but we do not process all of our waste properly which has lead to massive pollution.

>>15629739
>The rest of the climate will go unaffected regardless how genocidal they get.
why do you think this unfounded conjecture is more legitimate than the group consensus among experts on climate

>>>yeah dude we're going to, like, transcend our mortal souls lmfao what does that even mean? who cares lol only gay l*beral arts cucks ask questions, our computers will inevitably figure out all the mysteries of the universe through SCIENCE! and make us immortal with physical metaphysics lol rofl bazinga zd

>>15629767
The unfounded conjecture here is that anything is changing the climate, especially in the long run just because industry, pollution, over hunting and over fishing is fucking the world up. I support putting an end to all of this nonsense, because its simply inhumane and unnatural, but it doesn't affect the climate one bit. There is no extra ice melting and absolutely no rise in sea level what so ever.

>>15629779
>>>>yeah dude we're going to, like, transcend our mortal souls lmfao what does that even mean? who cares lol only gay l*beral arts cucks ask questions, our computers will inevitably figure out all the mysteries of the universe through SCIENCE! and make us immortal with physical metaphysics lol rofl bazinga zd

>>15629687
>how is deforestation not changing the climate?
the amazon deforestation is fucking tiny compared to it's equivalent in other part of the world. For some reason everyone cares about when both Africa and china are CURRENTLY destroying more forests than whoever is cutting down trees in the amazon. In fact the deforestation has decreased for decades and still is decreasing. The "burning" happens every year and barely damages the forest, while some ecological experts say it help. The true problem is the deforestation for increased farming of onions. But that is not as new's worthy and it doesn't gt any clicks.
> if you think that you can remove massive sections of the global ecosystem without affecting the rest of it then you fundamentally do not understand the concept of 'the climate' to begin with.
Nobody is a saying you should do deforestation, in fact the opposite has been said. But you are a retard who has no idea what climate means.

noun
the composite or generally prevailing weather conditions of a region, as temperature, air pressure, humidity, precipitation, sunshine, cloudiness, and winds, throughout the year, averaged over a series of years.
a region or area characterized by a given climate:
to move to a warm climate.
the prevailing attitudes, standards, or environmental conditions of a group, period, or place:
a climate of political unrest.

IF you are taking the first definition everything might affect the climate INCLUDING reforestation which has been preached. AS some who studies geography the idea of "climate change bad " is Simply stupid and ridiculous.

>however this is repeatedly happening faster than our predictions which indicates that there is a new factor
Who is us who is predicting it? you are just sousing talking point, the sea levels has been rising both slower and faster than some prediction, BECAUSE THAT IS HOW IT WORKS! no prediction is perfect and depending on the variable and the method you use to make the predictions you get different results.
That is why the "incovinetn truth" is been completely debunked by time itself, they took the "worse" predictions and made it seem like they were sure to happen, that there was a "scientific consensus" behind them. THE VERY CONCEPT OF SCIENTIFIC CONSENSUS ON PREDICTIONS GOES AGAINST THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD FOR FUCKS SAKE!
These retard and you morons who keep sousing talking point's without knowing what you are taking about give a bad name to climatology by trying to make it an political issue when its a completely scientific area of study.

>>>>yeah dude we're going to, like, transcend our mortal souls lmfao what does that even mean? who cares lol only gay l*beral arts cucks ask questions, our computers will inevitably figure out all the mysteries of the universe through SCIENCE! and make us immortal with physical metaphysics lol rofl bazinga zd

>>15629614
>fourth row: pollution does in fact damage the earth's ecosystems
Poo in loo.

>le epic reddit soijack duel!!!!!!!!!!

>tfw they create a digitial hell and everytime you said nigger online is 100 years

>>15629798
the climate is not separate from fish, animals and trees. they are all part of the climate. because trees absorb carbon dioxide, removing trees increases the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. this means that the conditions within which life exists on earth have been altered; they are not balanced in the same way that allowed current types of life to evolve. if the changes to the climate outpace evolution then many forms of life will die.

>>15629815
>>le epic reddit soijack duel!!!!!!!!!!

>>15629699
Imagine being Lt Col Angus Watt and writing your shitty sci fi ideas on a piece of scrap paper.

>>15629352
I also think it's ultimately going to be disappointing, at least at first.

>>15629808
>>>>>yeah dude we're going to, like, transcend our mortal souls lmfao what does that even mean? who cares lol only gay l*beral arts cucks ask questions, our computers will inevitably figure out all the mysteries of the universe through SCIENCE! and make us immortal with physical metaphysics lol rofl bazinga zd
>>>15629815 (You)
>>>le epic reddit soijack duel!!!!!!!!!!

Good thread, pls soijak my post

>>15629839
samefag

>>15629806
>the amazon deforestation is fucking tiny compared to it's equivalent in other part of the world
okay, but i am talking about the cumulative deforestation that is happening everywhere
>In fact the deforestation has decreased for decades and still is decreasing
its still not down to sustainable levels. the amazon in particular is, according to many experts, nearing the point of ecological collapse.

>the prevailing attitudes, standards, or environmental conditions of a group, period, or place:

environmental conditions includes forest coverage, sea levels, e.t.c.

>the sea levels has been rising both slower and faster than some prediction
predictions that do not factor in the idea that humans are driving climate change consistently underpredict, which suggests that humans are an important factor.
>THE VERY CONCEPT OF SCIENTIFIC CONSENSUS ON PREDICTIONS GOES AGAINST THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD FOR FUCKS SAKE!
we don't have the liberty of 'waiting to see what happens' when massive damage to the world is the scientific consensus. we should treat the predictions of the most qualified people seriously and act accordingly

>>15629824
>climate is not separate
The ecosystems aren't separate. The overall big picture isn't changing. If they were to leave nature alone, all those species in question that aren't extinct yet will make a come back.

>>15629847
fuck yup it's all me
that was a cringe fail
sorry
that >>i fucking love science poster is a faggot for real though

>>15629867
'leaving nature alone' is not an option since we inhabit the same planet and our actions are tied to our environment.

>>15629828
Imagine denying over a century of weather modification and geoengineering by sheer ignorance alone.

>>15629699
>paper is written to fulfill academic research requirements for an in-residence senior service professional military school.

not the best reader are you

>>15629758
consensus is not how a theory's validity is determined and not how science works

>>15629873
We are a part of nature. Mankind came from dust and to dust we return. By "leave it alone" I'm proposing an end to industry and pollution, or more like, being sensible about it. But nature will take over as soon as they stop. Just like a lawn will grow back and keep on growing if you don't maintain it.

Do you think trannies are just a thing of this generation?

>>15629893
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_consensus

>>15629889
https://ia801703.us.archive.org/27/items/weatificat00unit/weatificat00unit.pdf

>>15629893
the overwhelming majority of people trained to understand & interpret the empirical evidence agree that climate change is happening and is somewhat driven by humans.

does this mean its true? no, you are right.

but does this mean that your opinion as a layman based off youtube videos is somehow equivalent to the consensus of experts? no.

if you are able to significantly challenge the science then what is stopping you from participating in the scientific debate and proposing your theory to the scientific community? then they can compare your theory to the data they have and see if it is legitimate or falsifiable.

>>15629904
No. Androgyny has always been a thing. Once you understand polarity, duality, and the spiritual side of things, you'll know exactly why its being pushed so hard now days.

>>15629758
>the broader consensus is still OVERWHELMINGLY
Fuck off, no for real, fuck off and stop posting. the idea of a scientific consensus is fucking stupid. The cicle of warming and cooling of the planets is more than just a mere theory you fuck. It has been observe trough out history both trough written record, as well as in analyzing the growth rings of trees(which as you know show different growth depending on weather conditions), as well as several other methods I will not get into right now. you can't just "hur dur got PHD I will propose a bogus theory" it really shows how much you respect the scientific community and the scientific method that you would think this is feasible.
>the burning of wood and other natural resources is a driver of climate change.
Are you kidding me right now? is this the level of knowledge you have on the issue?
There is a lot more than this , the burning of trees Simply releases the co2 they accumulated during their live time and can be easily mitigate by planting more trees. The problem with co a is that coal is mined and while it's great for energy efficiency compared to trees it has a very intensive co2 release. (not than co2 is a bad things but it just goes to show how little you know).

>the livestock industry is currently believed to account for 9% of co2 emissions and 40% of methane emissions.

as I said minor, I would like to see the sources for those claiming because recently i saw a study claiming the overwhelming majority of methane was released by plastic degradation. That could be hyperbole tho.

Also stop demonizing green house gases for fucks sake. It's is still not clear they cause global warming, in fact naza scientists argue the opposite, that it's a cooling gas according to this and many other articles. https://coldclimatechange.com/carbon-dioxide-is-a-cooling-gas-according-to-nasa/
the livestock industry is currently believed to account for 9% of co2 emissions and 40% of methane emissions.
>mining stems from tool creation (e.g. the creation of picks).
For fucks sake, nest you re going to blame gun crimes on the development of metallurgy.
>fossil fuels (which are mined) are one of the primary drivers of human climate change
And again with this shit, now you are blaming the mining for how mining the material are used. You cannot blame the miner fro the use of fossil fuel any more than you can credit copper miner for the advent of the internet.
>yes but we do not process all of our waste properly which has lead to massive pollution.
You know the answer to that is not less sewer systems but more and better ones right?

>>15629943
I know they want to reconcile both sexes a la Kybalion (lol) thus altering the balance

>>15629536
magic>technology

>>15629860
>okay, but i am talking about the cumulative deforestation that is happening everywhere
fair enough
>its still not down to sustainable levels. the amazon in particular is, according to many experts, nearing the point of ecological collapse.
Nobody is saying we shouldn't decrease it even more, we should. But it's barely affecting the climate as it is. And no ecological collapse requires a lot lot more deforestation that what we have currently in the amazon forest. I agree with you but stop being and alarmist because you point becomes mot after exaggeration and being proven wrong.

>environmental conditions includes forest coverage, sea levels, e.t.c.
Read my point again climate change as used in it's proper meaning is not inherently bad.


>predictions that do not factor in the idea that humans are driving climate change consistently underpredict, which suggests that humans are an important factor.
predictions that do factor in the idea that humans are driving climate change consistently over-predict, which suggests that humans are not an important factor.

See I can do it too. In the end there's no certainty in this matter.

>we don't have the liberty of 'waiting to see what happens' when massive damage to the world is the scientific consensus
"see I love science but we should ignore how it works because science tell me we should stop the damage to the globe because of scientific consequences which goes against the scientific method. We just don't have time.
If you want to have your ideology it's fine, but don'y taint science with your activism. that is the only thing that manages to pisses me off you lunatic.

>we should treat the predictions of the most qualified people seriously and act accordingly
WHO ARE THEY YOU MORON ? clearly those who agree with you right? And those who disagree are fringe non important scientists.
If you don't see the problem I'm done. Just stop Just stop tainting with your activism.

i hope climate change is real u both gonna fucking die and shut up for real

>>15629975
>the idea of a scientific consensus is fucking stupid.
we base all knowledge on the consensus of experts. mathematical proofs are also considered to be valid or invalid based on whether or not experts agree. its not possible for every human to verify everything themselves.

>The cicle of warming and cooling of the planets is more than just a mere theory you fuck
the argument for global warming is not 'temperatures used to be lower and are now rising', the fact that you think it is shows how little you know about the issue. the argument is that temperatures are currently rising at a pace that is not consistent with these previous cycles of warming and cooling. it is a faster pace which suggests that there is another factor at play this time. a wealth of evidence suggests that the new factor is human industry.
>you can't just "hur dur got PHD I will propose a bogus theory"
you can propose whatever theory you like, but bogus ones are debunked using available evidence by the broader scientific community. (this is essentially what has happened to your view on climate change)
>the burning of trees Simply releases the co2 they accumulated during their live time and can be easily mitigate by planting more trees
yes but we are losing trees
>I would like to see the sources
https://edgar.jrc.ec.europa.eu/overview.php?v=temp_profile
>>15629975
>https://coldclimatechange.com/carbon-dioxide-is-a-cooling-gas-according-to-nasa/
this is an unsourced blog post.
>stop demonizing green house gases for fucks sake
i think the gases' feelings will be fine
>You cannot blame the miner fro the use of fossil fuel
it is literally only mined for one reason
>You know the answer to that is not less sewer systems but more and better ones right?
the answer is to not leave our shit in the earth (as the caveman was doing) and instead to develop renewable techniques

>>15630024
>See I can do it too. In the end there's no certainty in this matter.
>see I love science but we should ignore how it works because science tell me we should stop the damage to the globe because of scientific consequences which goes against the scientific method
the scientific method has been used to make predictions based off the data we have. the predictions are looking like something we want to avoid, so it makes sense to try and avoid them. if all scientists who understood meteor trajectories agreed that a meteor was heading for the earth then should we wait for it to hit to test their hypothesis?
>those who disagree are fringe non important scientists.
those who disagree are in the minority based on a number of studies: https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1029/2009EO030002

>>15630024
>predictions that do factor in the idea that humans are driving climate change consistently over-predict, which suggests that humans are not an important factor.
this isn’t true at all though is the difference

Attachment to "humanity" is irrational. The only way other than extinction to avoid suffering is the radical alteration of our biology.

>>15629310
Friendly reminder: transhumanism is really just subhumanism with some word magic added on.

>>15630024
have you verified for yourself that ricin is poisonous? i know the experts agree that it is, but we can't accept the expert consensus so i guess you will need to try it yourself to make sure.

>>15630087
Nonhuman doesn't imply subhuman.

>>15630102
Yeah no shit chief we’re talking about transhumanism. It is subhumanism. Try to wrap your head around it again.

>>15630110
why is it subhumanism

>>15630039
>we base all knowledge on the consensus of experts.
yes
>mathematical proofs are also considered to be valid or invalid based on whether or not experts agree. its not possible for every human to verify everything themselves.
No problem there, the issue is there are experts who disagree with this thesis.
>the argument is that temperatures are currently rising at a pace that is not consistent with these previous cycles of warming and cooling.
No you are confusing man made global warming with global warming in general. Global warming is not falsifiable it's simply data showing the growing temperatures.
>you can propose whatever theory you like, but bogus ones are debunked using available evidence by the broader scientific community
yes
>this is essentially what has happened to your view on climate change
Not my view you piece of shit and it has yet to be "debunked". The global warming issue is an a ongoing debate Just because you chose a side and identify with it ideologically does not make it right.

>this is an unsourced blog post.
you really are trying to be as pedantic and dishonest as possible aren't you? you aren't even going to try and argue honestly? her is the first. fucking. link. on the article you asshole
https://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2012/22mar_saber/
>i think the gases' feelings will be fine
fuck off
>it is literally only mined for one reason
Are you actually retarded? do you really know know about the uses of fossil fuel?
>the answer is to not leave our shit in the earth (as the caveman was doing) and instead to develop renewable techniques.
ok so you are retarded and do not know how current sewer systems work and water treatment plant work. Also how is just shitting on the ground not "leaving out shit on earth"?
Fuck off.
You are just an ideology ignoring science when it fist you while claiming you have it's full weight behind you.

You are doing more harm than the Christians retard on the 90 ever did.

>>15630069
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3052926/Our-climate-models-WRONG-Global-warming-slowed-recent-changes-natural-variability-says-study.html

fuck off
>>15630054
That is form 09 you retard. DO you not realize the models have changed? And even more dramatically so to account for the reduction in the speed of global warming.

>>15630162
>dailymail
lmao. 4/10 I replied

>>15630167
https://www.hoover.org/research/flawed-climate-models

FOR FUCKS SAKE YOU LITTLE PIECE OF SHIT DO YOU KNOW KNOW HOW TO LOOK AT LINK HOW TO READ NEWS?
You are all completely brainwashed.

>>15630134
>there are experts who disagree with this thesis
there doesn't need to be a unanimous consensus. if the experts who disagree are correct, then why haven't they been able to convince anyone else who is similarly qualified and looks at the same data? there are also experts believe that marlowe was shakespeare, but they're very much in the minority because most experts on either dramatist don't think that there is strong evidence for them being the same person.

>No you are confusing man made global warming with global warming in general. Global warming is not falsifiable it's simply data showing the growing temperatures.
yes, but when these temperatures are rising at a faster rate than ever before then there must be a reason for that
>The global warming issue is an a ongoing debate
what peer reviewed papers have been published in the last 5 years that are viewed as a serious challenge to the idea of anthropogenic climate change?
>you really are trying to be as pedantic and dishonest as possible aren't you? you aren't even going to try and argue honestly? her is the first. fucking. link. on the article you asshole
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/03/28/a-misinterpreted-claim-about-a-nasa-press-release-co2-solar-flares-and-the-thermosphere-is-making-the-rounds/
>Are you actually retarded? do you really know know about the uses of fossil fuel?
we mine fossil fuel to use it as fuel. it is suggested by the name 'fossil fuel'
>Also how is just shitting on the ground not "leaving out shit on earth"?
im sure it provided a tasty treat for your ancestors

>>15630162
>That is form 09 you retard
https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/11/4/048002/pdf

>>15630179
David R. Henderson is a research fellow with the Hoover Institution. He is also a professor of economics at the Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, California.

Charles L. Hooper is president of Objective Insights, a company that consults for pharmaceutical and biotech companies. He was a visiting fellow at the Hoover Institution.


hmm...

>>15630082
>we're going to foist this dehumanizing system on you then eradicate your culture and biology and everything that it means to be human to save us from ecological catastrophe
I mean this sincerely: fuck off.

Reminder the Transhumanism is true, so is Mormonism, and that together they explain G*D's plan for mankind.

>>15630267
no it's just secularized christian eschatology

>>15630270
Incorrect. You should read The Book of Mormon. It is free, you really have no excuse.

>>15630162
https://www.nature.com/articles/srep09957.pdf
this is the study that your article is citing (it is one study among hundreds done that year)

according to the authors their results support a model of climate change called 'rcp 6.0'

here is some information about that model: https://sos.noaa.gov/datasets/climate-model-temperature-change-rcp-60-2006-2100/

"Projections for temperature according to RCP 6.0 include continuous global warming through 2100 where CO2 levels rise to 670ppm by 2100 making the global temperature rise by about 3-4°C by 2100"

RCP 6.0 is based on the assumption that we do make significant changes to our way of life, however. https://tntcat.iiasa.ac.at/RcpDb/dsd?Action=htmlpage&page=welcome#rcpinfo
the fact that emission are currently consistent with RCP 6.0 according to one study does not imply that they will continue to be, since RCP 6.0 is a model based on us decreasing our emissions over the next few decades.

the scientists behind this study certainly do not believe that they have evidence that anthropogenic climate change does not exist, they just think that we are potentially not in the RCP 8.5 scenario for climate change (which is a worse one) and are instead in RCP 6.0 (which still requires us to make significant changes to reach the desired outcome)