/sci/ - Science & Math

This one goes back 2000 years. As you can see the Roman Warm Period was slightly warmer than today.

>>11306013
It was warmer in a few regions. the planet was still globally cooler than it is now.

>>11306037
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO WE GOT TOO COCKY RETARDBROS

>>11306013
>You can't argue with science.
You can argue whether something is accurate science. For example, the graph you posted is from a faulty model for northern hemisphere temperatures: http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/12/past-reconstructions/

So the graph is wrong, and irrelevant since it doesn't show global temperature, and the temperature gets cut off before most global warming occurred. Pic related for accurate Northern Henisphere reconstructions, which shows modern temperatures greatly exceed the MWP.

I also find your claim amusing since you are attempting (and failing) to argue against climate science.

2000 year chart. Roman Warm Period was warmer than today.

>>11306037
These are global temperature charts from:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_temperature_record
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geologic_temperature_record

10,000 year chart. It has been hotter than today TEN separate times.

>>11306046
Oh yeah so are all the graphics faulty then? Why are they all still listed on Wikipedia.

800,000 year chart. Temperature spikes comparable to now ten separate times like clockwork.

5,000,000 year chart. Gee it sure was a lot hotter back then!

65,000,000 year chart. It was hotter than now for an entire 60,000,000+ of those years. (((Science))) has btfo itself apparently.

>>11306013
A fun way to deal with shitposters is to ignore them completely and never bump their threads.

>>11306066
>A fun way to deal with shitposters is to ignore them completely and never bump their threads.
This isn't a shitpost. You science fags are sad because you literally just ignore anything that contradicts your (((RELIGION))).
These charts irrevocably BTFO global warming by your own "science".

>>11306046
I'm am currently reading your linked source to find any bullshit in it.

>>11306046
The charts come from the "GLOBAL temperature record", so your claim "its not the whole planet" is false. They are literally the global temperatures.

>>11306059
>>11306070
You're literally more obsessed with Jews than Jews are themselves.

>>11306048
>2000 year chart. Roman Warm Period was warmer than today.
Your own graph shows that to be false. The man who made it even says it's false:

“Since AD 1990, though, average temperatures in the extra-tropical Northern Hemisphere exceed those of any other warm decades the last two millennia, even the peak of the Medieval Warm Period”

That's because Ljungqvist reconstruction agrees with the other reconstructions showing today's temperatures exceed the MWP. Pic related. Thank you for providing yet another proof against your own argument.

oh my dear fucking god what the fuck does it even matter oh my god there are real solutions to healing the fucking earth why the fuck do you cunts use this as an opportunity to spew horseshit from your stupid fucking faces as if you have a fucking clue

>>11306051
>10,000 year chart. It has been hotter than today TEN separate times.
Quite funny how wrong you are.

1. Your chart shows temperature in one place in Greenland, not NH temperature let alone global temperature.

2. It doesn't show today's temperature since it ends in 1905.

3. It actually ends in 1855 since the person who made the graph is incompetent and mishandled the data.

So please explain how a chat which doesn't show global temperatures abc.d doesn't show modern temperatures can be used to say it was hotter in the past.

>>11306046
So your link, is just some random anonymous dood screaming why the official methods are flawed, from what I can tell. That website has no "officiality" in that I can find.
...When I click their home page, I get pic related, which is bullshit because it chooses to start the chart from the end of "The Little Ice Age", which was a massive temperature dip that ended in 1850. So of course the temperatures are going to rise for the next few hundred years, because they're going back to normal!

>>11306080
I could post evidence about Jews that would destroy your world if you actually looked at it objectively. But that's not for this thread.

>>11306085
Why do these images remain on Wikipedia then?

>>11306085
So in other words they retconned the data to fit their global warming agenda.

>>11306090
>oh my dear fucking god what the fuck does it even matter oh my god there are real solutions to healing the fucking earth why the fuck do you cunts use this as an opportunity to spew horseshit from your stupid fucking faces as if you have a fucking clue
I could say this same thing to the Science Cucks spewing Global Warming propaganda constantly. They're the ones that never shut up about it.

What normies consider "Science" (in actuality, propaganda they believe is science, but is not) laughably tries to hide any chart that shows more than the last 100, or even more laughably, 20-30 years of data. As if that's relevant at all in the grand scheme.

>>11306053
>Temperature spikes comparable to now ten separate times like clockwork.
They certainly are "comparable," in that if you compare 10 degrees of warming over 10000 years to 1 degree over 100 years you see that the latter is an order of magnitude faster. There is also the slight issue that the last peak was 10000 years ago, so according to the cycle we should be slowly cooling, but instead we are warming even faster on top of that peak. Once again, thank you for proving your own argument wrong.

>>11306110
Nah, every chart clearly shows spikes like near clockwork. I think you can see that really.

>>11306058
>it was hotter before humans existed
>temperature variations occurred over tens of thousands or millions of years
>therefore warming an order of magnitude faster is fine for humans

>>11306070
The charts you posted that are real are irrelevant. Please explain how "it was warmer millions of years ago" contradicts AGW.

Now that I am done with this thread, as I have in fact proven global warming false (whether delusional people can see that or not is irrelevant), I will tell that other guy about some Jew shit:

Follow these steps and be amazed:
>Google "buy foreskins"
>Click the first link which is this: https://www.atcc.org/products/all/CRL-2429
>See they are selling just the cells of foreskin for $400 a pop, only from caucasian males btw
>Click "About"
>Read "Largest provider of human cells to the medical industry" (from aborted fetuses that is)
>Click "Leadership" (https://www.atcc.org/About/About_ATCC/Leadership.aspx))
>Scroll down to see the 9 Jews who profit from slaughtering goyim infants (abortion) and circumcision.
and if you think this is an isolated incident i feel bad for you because its every single time.

BONUS: Google made me fill out 20 captchas to post this. When I only had to fill out 1 for all my other posts in this thread.

and I'm sure you've all heard of the "foreskin face cream" that rich people buy for $1000 a pop:
>google "foreskin face cream"
>first result is a brand called "SkinMedica"
>"who owns SkinMedica"
>(((Richard Fitzpatrick))) (source on him being Jewish: https://www.legacy.com/obituaries/ranchosantafereview/obituary.aspx?n=richard-fitzpatrick&pid=171760610)) and Mitchel (((Goldman)))
>parent of SkinMedica is Allergan Inc
>parent of Allergan is Actavis
>parent of Actavis is Teva Pharmaceutical Industries (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teva_Pharmaceutical_Industries))
>"Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. (Hebrew: טבע תעשיות פרמצבטיות בע"מ) is an Israeli American multinational pharmaceutical company"
>"Biggest producer of generic pharmaceuticals in the world"
>"Key people":
>(((Gunther Friedlander))) pic related
>(((Chaim Salomon)))
>(((Moshe Levin)))
>(((Yitschak Elstein)))
EVERY. FUCKING. TIME.

Jews are the world leaders of black market organ harvesting.

>>11306013
>Now that I am done with this thread, as I have in fact proven global warming false

>>11306078
>The charts come from the "GLOBAL temperature record"
What does that even mean? They come from an article about global temperature? They use multiple data sets from around the globe? Neither responds to anything I said.

>>11306013 comes from Loehle 2007 which explicitly states it's a NH reconstruction

>>11306048 says it's NH right in the chart

>>11306051 is from GISP2, a single Greenland ice core

Are you done pretending you have any clue what you're talking about?

>>11306132

>>11306095
>So your link, is just some random anonymous dood screaming why the official methods are flawed
LOL, nice projection. The author is Gavin Schmidt, one of the top climatologis in the world.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gavin_Schmidt

You on the other hand are just some anonymous random retard who doesn't even understand his own graphs. Numerous methodologies produce reconstructions that all reach the same conclusion: >>11306046 >>11306085. You lose.

>When I click their home page, I get pic related, which is bullshit because it chooses to start the chart from the end of "The Little Ice Age", which was a massive temperature dip that ended in 1850.
That date was not "chosen," it is the beginning of the instrumental temperature record.

>So of course the temperatures are going to rise for the next few hundred years, because they're going back to normal!
The end of the LIA means that the temperature had already returned to normal. Are you saying your own graphs are wrong? >>11306013 and >>11306048 both show, before 1880, recovery from the LIA and a flat period of "normal" at the temperature that preceded the MWP. So are you now rejecting your reconstructions or admitting the warming is not a recovery from the LIA?

>>11306075
You seem to be an expert in bullshit.

>>11306099
Why wouldn't they? The only thing wrong with them is your misinformed interpretation of them, not wikipedia's use of them.

>>11306101
How can it be a retcon when it's in the original paper the graph is from? You have no argument and you're way out of your depth. You lose.

>>11306013
Not the temperature, the rate is alarming.

>>11306106
You're projecting. Most of the graphs you posted don't show modern temperatures while you make claims about modern temperatures. You still haven't even explained how warming in the past invalidates AGW.

>>11306113
Where did I disagree? You can't even parse a simple argument let alone present one of your own. There is a large scale cycle in the climate called Milankovich cycles. Current warning goes against that cycle both in magnitude and in timing.

>>11306198
This.

>>11306221
>(((Gavin Schmidt)))
lmao bruh, you are making this too easy for me. pic related.

>>11306239
>Not the temperature, the rate is alarming.
The graphic clearly shows the spike in 1200 AD was even more rapid. Debunked yourself.

>>11306013
Nice no source

>>11306013
I am still amazed how you trust global wide measurement of planet 900 years ago.

>>11306013
>>11306046
>>11306048
>>11306051
>>11306053
>>11306058
>>11306059
Sorry op

>>11306290
But it stopped at lesser numbers.

>>11306101
Lol, butthurt

>>11306013
If this temperature was stock exchange, I would buy it.

>>11306319
Put all your stocks in air conditioning

>>11306013
Funny fact, temperature increase is there when we fucked up forsts for farming on huge non forrest areas.

>>11306286
>no argument
Thanks for admitting you're full of shit.

>>11306290
More rapid than what?

I won't read the whole fist fight above, but I got curious: how the planet can be warmer locally and colder globally?

>>11306331
>no argument
not my fault you don't know the truth about jews. they're all charlatans.

>>11306337
Do you understand how averages work?

>>11306349
All /pol/tards are retards, therefore your argument is wrong.

>>11306371
Go read my Jewposts above. They're factually correct. Jews control the human body parts industry and will get them by any means necessary to make that money. Jews are behind global black market organ harvesting.
>>11306121
>>11306124
>>11306127

>>11306373
I have equally hard hitting evidence they are behind The Global Warming Agenda and The Vegan Agenda, but this thread is about done for that.

Maybe this supports ops argument maybe something else.. I was fascinated in the sun and generally made my own conclusions here (about global warming etc)

@Australia major fires
1974~, 2009, 2019 (among others I dont care to look up) fires all were within the peak of a solar minimum.

I don't have an argument, just info

>>11306379
I recall evidence showing the current temperature of the sun has always been a near direct correlation with the temperature here on Earth. Global Warming is possibly nothing more than Solar Cycles that humans have zero impact on.

>>11306388
here's a chart for that.

>>11306388
There's just one little problem with that hypothesis: solar irradiance has been decreasing for decades and is near a grand minimum, yet warming continues as fast as ever. You also have to explain how massive emissions of CO2 don't have the greenhouse effect they are directly observed to have. Good luck.

>>11306373
Go read all the posts in this thread debunking your lies and misrepresentations, they're factually correct. You have no response, which means you admit you're full of shit. The only dirty Jew here is you.

>>11306398
They're not though. You guys are seriously delusional. The charts speak for themselves and they're simple to read. There is no "Warming" going on in those charts. Only normal historical ups and downs.

>>11306051
For example this 10,000 year chart is my best example. A good 80% of those 10,000 years was hotter than it is now. This is a cool period.

>>11306410
And some of you have said "well thats just greenland" but any OTHER time ya'll are using the greenland results as evidence FOR global warming! you can't have it both ways.

>>11306406
>They're not though.
Then debunk them. Oh wait you can't because you literally know less about climatology than an elementary school student.

>The charts speak for themselves
Yes, they say you're full of shit. Toy can't even explain how past warming invalidates AGW.

>There is no "Warming" going on in those charts.
Because they are cut off before modern temperature, simpleton.

>>11306410
Your "best example" is the most flawed chart you presented. It only shows temperature in one place, the x-axis is mislabeled, and the data ends at 1855. It is indeed the best example of your complete ignorance of the climate and its scientific study.

>>11306412
>And some of you have said "well thats just greenland" but any OTHER time ya'll are using the greenland results as evidence FOR global warming!
How? The ice core data ends before global warming starts. No one has used it as evidence of global warming, you delusional hack.

Lmfao just turn on your AC

>>11306421
>Because they are cut off before modern temperature, simpleton.
Two of them go to the year 2000 and another goes past the year 2000. So nah. That's modern.

>>11306438
>Two of them go to the year 2000 and another goes past the year 2000.
Only one of them does >>11306048 and it shows current warming is much faster than during the MWP. Thank you for again disproving your own argument.

>>11306388
sorry to burst your bubble TSI and global temp have actually been moving in complete opposite directions that temp graph also looks doctored as fuck, it looks suspiciously like north America only

>>11306493
worth noting that graph is northern hemisphere only so comparing it to global average temp is far worse than any Jewish trick i've ever seen.

OP lies more than a Kike over a bed of hot coals, what's his real agenda?

>>11306315
Fuckin lol considering you faggots are going HOLY FUCK WE ARE ENDING THE WORLD based on opnly a century of data

>>11306517
>only a century of data
>literally cites 65 million year old temperature reconstructions
You're a spineless lying little kike

>>11306517
>Fuckin lol considering you faggots are going HOLY FUCK WE ARE ENDING THE WORLD based on opnly a century of data
This. Most of the shit they peddle is the last 20-30 years.

>>11306524
The 65 million year chart was mine and I posted it to DISPROVE global warming.

>>11306527
>>11306529
any long term temperature reconstruction is great evidence for AGW, so i'm glad you brought it up. Extremely high co2 levels millions of years ago are the only reason the earth wasn't an ice cube despite the fainter sun.

And a million years worth of ice cores and other reconstructions do a great job of demonstrating the fact we should be slowing entering a glacial period not warming at an exponential rate.

>>11306509
Already noted >>11306046

>>11306529
How does it disprove global warming? You've been asked several times and you failed to explain it each time. Yet you continue to lie.

Man i used to be on the fence about global warming (the whole the kinda seems like a scam) but after seeing how much OP has misrepresented data I'm pretty convinced he must have some kind of agenda. Clearly the scientists are doing something right if in order to argue against their position you have to lie constantly. Thanks for showing me the truth /sci/!

>>11306544
If I'm misrepresenting data then I don't see it. Because the charts clearly show temperatures are stable, and that it was hotter many thousands/millions of years ago. What the hell else is there to see?

>>11306558
There's more posts i can count pointing out exactly how you're mis representing the data on literally every one of your posts, it's all so obvious even a clueless normie like myself can understand it. Maybe read your own thread?

>>11306558
>If I'm misrepresenting data then I don't see it.
It was explained to you and you have no response. You're literally on denial odd what's right in front of your face.

>Because the charts clearly show temperatures are stable
The only chart you have showing modern temperatures showed rapid warming several orders of magnitude faster than MWP warming.

>it was hotter many thousands/millions of years ago
It was hotter millions of years ago, before humans existed. So what?

You're delusional.

>>11306059
This shows how much of a dolt you are. No one is saying the earth wasn't hotter. Climate science is about attempting to continue our current society in a prehistoric environment, which is impossible. Even this pic you posted, has the PEMT event highlighted, which killed 98% of all life on the planet.

Obvious troll though.

3 simple lemmas to prove anthropogenic climate change due to CO2 emissions:

1. CO2 has "greenhouse" properties. It let visible light pass, but absorb and re-emit light in the infrared spectrum. In fact, this behavior is exactly how we measure CO2 in the atmosphere, look up cavity ring down specstroscopy

2. CO2 in the atmosphere have been rising due to fossil fuel emissions. This is known from the ratio between C-12 and C-13 of CO2 (pic related). Fossil fuel has a light isotope signature.

3. Add 1+2 and you get warming effect from greenhouse gas forcing. The greenhouse gas forcing creates an energy imbalance, where there's more energy coming into earth than leaving. This is measurable via satelite
https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2009JD012105

You put your sensor to the sun (energy in) and you put another sensor to the earth (energy out). Integrate over the area as the satellite orbits the earth. 2nd law of thermodynamics states that energy must be conserved, if a system is raking in more energy, then temperature must increase.

1+2+3 = temperature increase driven by fossil fuel emission. All simple, 19th century physics confirmed by modern 21st century observations.

>>11306198
Why do you think India and China pollute so much? Who do you think makes all our shit? Someone's gotta provide for the shart in marts Lol. You can't even go back 2 steps.

>/pol/ack immediatly calls everyone that disagrees with him a Jew the very moment his shitty ''''''''theory'''''''' gets ripped to shreds by people with minimal scientific knowledge

Like pottery

>>11306645
Communism has failed everywhere tranny

>>11306686
>can't argue the point and instead attempts to change the subject
you idiots really never diverge from the script do you?

>>11306635
It's also been directly observed: http://asl.umbc.edu/pub/chepplew/journals/nature14240_v519_Feldman_CO2.pdf

>>11306051
This graph is intentionally misleading since that greenland ice record ends in 1895

>>11306053
These charts do not include modern temperatures since they come from slow accumulation proxies

>>11306696
Stratosphere cooling
https://www.yaleclimateconnections.org/2013/09/vertical-human-fingerprint-found-in-stratospheric-cooling-tropospheric-warming/

>>11306051
This is that record compared to modern temperatures

>>11306753

>>11306094
>1. Your chart shows temperature in one place in Greenland, not NH temperature let alone global temperature.

GLOBAL warming
T-this place doesn't count! Neither does the other place!

The point of global warming is that everywhere should be warming globally

>>11306753
higher res

>>11306066
Circumcised, vaccinated, clamped.

>>11306757
There is observed warming in that area. The shill who purposely misinterpreted that graph just used the end of that record and said it was 1995 when it was 1895

Can climate cultists please explain why I'm supposed to care about a one degree increase in global temperature? All the predictions are wrong. The glaciers aren't gone, coastal towns aren't flooding, polar bears aren't extinct. Someone blamed climate change for FIRE TORNADOES in a political debate this week. Why the fuck am I supposed to care about your dumb graphs

Look at a world map. Find New York City and Cairo. It should be pretty obvious which one is further south (Cairo is in the desert if you need a hint).
Would it surprise you to learn that a nonstop flight from New York City to Cairo starts by flying northeast over Canada? The same is true of most flights across the Atlantic.
The airline companies take a curved route instead of flying the shorter straight line on the map. They do this to burn more jet fuel and raise ticket prices, because they're in bed with both the fossil fuel companies and regulators.

>>11306766
Imagine being this fucking dumb. A straight line is not necessarily the fastest or the most fuel efficient way because of the westerlies and trade wind. Notice that if you fly from NA to Europe you're always riding the westerlies (in this specific case, the infamous gulf stream) and when flying back to NA you're always riding the trade winds close to the tropics.
Wind resistance and friction is a thing. There's a reason why Kipchoge had lines of wingmen shielding him from wind effect when he tried to break the 1 hour marathon record.

There is some conspiracies, but not everything is a conspiracy. If you know a better faster more fuel efficient path, why don't you open an airline business, become billionare and outcompete the existing airlines?

>>11306762
>All the predictions are wrong

>it was warmer in the past
>therefore human emissions cannot cause global warming today

Stupid logic.

>>11306757
>The point of global warming is that everywhere should be warming globally
>everywhere should be warming globally
This is a nonsense statement that amounts to saying "local values are global values".

To people who don't believe the climate is warming due to human actions: do you believe the greenhouse effect is real?

>>11306757
Do you understand what an average is?

>>11306963
Climate science is whatever, but the message is always gets co-opted by either politicians (Al Gore, who did not act like he preach as he flies everywhere and eats hamburger), radical socialists, SJW, activists, etc. trying to push their own agenda and oversell the negative impacts. "Legit" climate scientists, if there's any remaining should be ashamed of this and speak up for themselves not having Greta, Al Gore, Bill Nye speak on their behalfs.

>>11306994
Why did you even bother replying to me if you weren't going to answer my question. Are you only able to think of this topic through a political lens?
I agree, figures like greta are annoying as fuck but they don't have anything to do with the actual science.

>>11306762
>Can climate cultists please explain why I'm supposed to care about a one degree increase in global temperature?
Because it will harm the economy much more than a carbon tax will.

>All the predictions are wrong.
Which ones? Cite the scientists that made them.

>>11306994
>asked about science
>can only cry about Al Gore and Greta
Greta derangement syndrome

>>11306013

>>11306013 >>11306037 >>11306038 >>11306046 >>11306048 >>11306051 >>11306053 >>11306058 >>11306059 >>11306066 >>11306070 >>11306075 >>11306078 >>11306080 >>11306085
>>11306090 >>11306094 >>11306095 >>11306099 >>11306101 >>11306102 >>11306106 >>11306110 >>11306113 >>11306115 >>11306119 >>11306121 >>11306124 >>11306127 >>11306132 >>11306138 >>11306198 >>11306221 >>11306227 >>11306232 >>11306236 >>11306239 >>11306245 >>11306252 >>11306281 >>11306286 >>11306290 >>11306312 >>11306315 >>11306316 >>11306317 >>11306318 >>11306319 >>11306321 >>11306324 >>11306331 >>11306333 >>11306337 >>11306349 >>11306369 >>11306371 >>11306373 >>11306375 >>11306379 >>11306388 >>11306393 >>11306394 >>11306398 >>11306406 >>11306410 >>11306412 >>11306421 >>11306424 >>11306432 >>11306438 >>11306493 >>11306505 >>11306509 >>11306511 >>11306517 >>11306524 >>11306527 >>11306529 >>11306537 >>11306539 >>11306542 >>11306544 >>11306558 >>11306562 >>11306565 >>11306627 >>11306635 >>11306636 >>11306645 >>11306686 >>11306694 >>11306696 >>11306741 >>11306744 >>11306751 >>11306753 >>11306755 >>11306757 >>11306758 >>11306759 >>11306761 >>11306762 >>11306766 >>11306808 >>11306812 >>11306848 >>11306861 >>11306963 >>11306977 >>11306994 >>11307001 >>11307081 >>11307091 >>11307123

YES GOYIM, YES. AGENDA 21 WILL SAVE YOU, WE'VE DESTROYED THE CLIMATE. ID2020 IS GOOD, SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT, SOUNDS GOOD RIGHT? NOW GET IN THE HIGH DENSITY HOUSING, QUICKLY GOY, WE NEED TO REFOREST AND PROTECT THE PLANET. YOU WOULDN'T WANT TO HURT THE PLANET WOULD YOU? WE NEED TO CUT CO2 EMMISSIONS TO ZERO, FAST! YOU EMIT CO2. YES GOY, GET IN THE CHAMBER GOY, I MEAN YOUR SHIPPING CONTAINER SIZE HOUSE FULL OF 60 GHZ WIGIG, YES GOYIM IT IS THE ONLY WAY! WE TRIED TO STOP IT! LISTEN TO YOUR ZIONIST MASTER GOY, WORK THE SMART FIELDS GOY, YES GOYIM YES!!!!! BUILD US SMART AUTOMATED SYSTEMS GOYIM..

Ah,finally Goy. Tikkun olam... the Goyim are no longer needed. From dust you came, to dust you shall return.This is a Jewish planet.

>>11306013
what about the australia fires?

>>11307156
I love the inevitable meltdown deniers have in every thread when they run out of arguments

NUKE THE JETSTREAM! ITS THE ONLY WAY LUKE!

>>11307172
I didn't say pathological climate change wasn't happening, goy. Just that you are a golem goy, and do not realize the actual cause. Yes goy, do what you are told! We need to fight climate change GOY, YES GOY, YES. I WILL TELL YOU WHAT AND WHERE TO FIGHT, AND WHAT MUST BE DONE, GOYIM.

>>11306636
>Why do you think India and China pollute so much? Who do you think makes all our shit? Someone's gotta provide for the shart in marts Lol. You can't even go back 2 steps.
His point is that climate activists ignore China/India and blame white people for it when white countries are the only ones doing anything about it.

>>11306861
>This is a nonsense statement that amounts to saying "local values are global values".
...So the same argument climate activists use to prove their points then.

>>11306762
>Can climate cultists please explain why I'm supposed to care about a one degree increase in global temperature?
Especially when the temperature was higher millions of years ago and the entire planet was a luscious, green, beautiful tropical paradise full of life. EVEN ANTARCTICA! Sounds pretty good to me!

>>11306812
In 1995 they told us Florida would sink into the sea by now.

>>11306963
>To people who don't believe the climate is warming due to human actions: do you believe the greenhouse effect is real?
Yes, partly, but it is a self correcting system. More CO2 = trees grow faster, then absorb it faster, plus the trees start growing in places that were previously too cold.

>>11307622
who did? can you provide a source?

>>11307612
western consumption is the source of both emissions and growth in the east. The only way to address the east is to first address the problem in the west.

>>11307623
interesting claim, when will this self correcting mechanism start kicking in? why do CO2 levels just keep increasing with no signs of slowing down?

It's the diminishing magnetosphere letting in more solar and cosmic radiation. 5% loss in intensity per decade now. They lie about polar wanders and reversals not being linked to climate change and extinction events

>>11307652
Can you provide measurements of changes in solar radiance measured at ground level?

Can we speed up the warming? Antarctica looks fucking badass, I want to explore the land and lakes under the ice.

Fuck off Greta, let's burn some oil.

>>11307652
TSI is decreasing and an increase in galactic cosmic ray flux would cause cooling by seeding more low-level clouds. This also doesn't explain away the greenhouse effect. Try again.

>>11307619
Yes I can't wait for humans to not exist. Luckily I'm a fern, so it will be good for me.

Imagine being so stupid that you think a few degrees will cause the extinction of the human race. My nigga move away from the coast and you good.

>>11307695
>Yes I can't wait for humans to not exist. Luckily I'm a fern, so it will be good for me.
baseless alarmism. these are (((their))) words not yours, you heard it from them first, then started repeating it, you can't deny that.

>>11307646
>interesting claim, when will this self correcting mechanism start kicking in? why do CO2 levels just keep increasing with no signs of slowing down?
Why did CO2 levels on Earth increase dozens of times in the last 5 million years then inevitably go back down again? And why did every rise and fall take thousands of years, not a pitiful hundred or so years?

>>11307658
>Can we speed up the warming? Antarctica looks fucking badass, I want to explore the land and lakes under the ice.
This. I hope global warming is real for this reason.

>>11307156
pill won't work if you don't take them, schizo

>>11307623
>>11307747
The terrestrial biosphere does not control the carbon budget. Stop talking shit

Nobody ever talks about ocean salinity in the climate discussions, it's probably the biggest impact

>>11307619
Do you have any idea what life looked like back then?
Do you seriously think that life will just flourish as temperatures rise at more rapid speeds than previously seen? This is such naive thinking.
The earths current biodiversity is extremely threatened by what's going to happen since its adapted for current temperatures, not to mention all the other impacts like >>11307780 mentions. We're talking huge amounts of ocean life at risk which will obviously have a severe impact on other life as well.

>>11307622
Well there may come something good out of it all in the end then

>>11306013
I checked that Wikipedia page. It didn't include that graph. It did include this one.

Tineye showed seven pages of matches for your graph. Most were from denials blogs; none were from Wikipedia.

>>11307873
>earths biodiversity
More species have gone extinct than currently exist. And yet we are still here. There's no problem.

>>11307921
>yea bro don't worry if we're creating one of the greatest extinction crises the earth has seen we're still alive lol

b-but what about India

>>11307929
>yea bro don't worry if we're creating one of the greatest extinction crises the earth has seen we're still alive lol
life has always flourished during warm periods.

>>11307757
Yes goy, legitimize the medical-industrial complex, you need us, there are no better solutions than the drug. YES GOY, TAKE THE DRUGS, THEY WILL HELP.
Remember goy! Better living through science! You're not a luddite, are you? You don't think you can stop the future? Yes goyim... your futures... imagine if we never intervened and left you on your course, what future you goyim could have had...

>>11308052
jews only control everything because they're really smart people.

>>11308052
>>11307156
Are you actually having a breakdown right now, or is it simply an act?

>>11308084
It's more about the manner of intelligence and certain psychological characteristics which the circumcision rituals plays on. Everywhere a Jew goes, he is his own master. This remains whether his foreskin does or not, however if the foreskin is taken and he enters a double bind with the Rabbi and broader culture, it induces certain neuroses.

There's also a vast and fairly complex history that Jews, the core thread of Rabbis, have preserved. Look into Jubilee for example. Judaism is an incredibly durable, well engineered system The loans between each other and financial concealment go without saying.

>>11308087
It is both.

>>11308047
How is this an argument that climate change won't cause an extinction crisis?

>>11308128
>How is this an argument that climate change won't cause an extinction crisis?
There's no evidence that it will, that's the biggest issue. The entire climate change movement is based on fake shit.

How do you know the sun won't explode at any given moment?

Here's another thread I made where I deny the moon landings with hard hitting evidence:
>>11308131

>>11308136
>There's no evidence that it will
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ocean_acidification
This is only the impact it has on ocean wildlife
>How do you know the sun won't explode
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun
>The Sun does not have enough mass to explode as asupernova. Instead it will exit themain sequencein approximately 5 billion years and start to turn into ared giant
The answer your questions are easy to google

>>11308140
I can literally see legs near the front of the body, it's clearly moving on it's own and not a piece of ice. What a crock of shit to call that "ice". Last time I checked the ice FALLS OFF THE SIDES and DOESNT HAVE MOVING LEGS.

>>11306635
1st law, my dude.

>>11307745
>the climate will be like it was millions of years ago before humans existed
>but this will not effect humans
Baseless retardation.

>>11307921
We've only been here for a short time, and the climate has never changed so rapidly while we've been here. Ignoring this doesn't make it go away.

>>11308136
Why are you lying?

https://skepticalscience.com/Can-animals-and-plants-adapt-to-global-warming.htm

>>11308407
That website is CGI, sorry.

>>11308936

>>11307001
I think the strongest argument against climate science *is* political, namely that political considerations corrupted the science to a point where it isn’t trustworthy. I’m not saying this has happened, but it is probably the strongest “anti” argument. And it’s not wholly unreasonable. The entire field of sociology has a massive replication crisis driven in part by the ideological conformity of the practitioners, and the bad science concentrated around political hot button issues like nature vs nurture or conservative vs liberal views. So a small field (paleoclimatology) that was a scientific backwater suddenly gets very popular for political reasons, and it’s easy to image the output is bad science. This is to say nothing of some of the shady and shoddy things that came out of for example the climate gate emails. None of this of course disproves the theory, but I think it explains a lot of people’s reticence to embrace it as truth.

>Source
>Wikipedia
>Science
Sage

>>11310271
Simple answer, dont just make baseless accusations, actually provide evidence demonstrating otherwise. It shouldn't be hard. After all it's not like literally every country and every university is collaborating to spread misinformation so it should be incredibly easy to find inconsistencies

>>11310288
Again, the same could be said of existing replication crises in certain scientific fields. It’s not like sociologists all conspired to pump out ideologically conformist bad science. The scary part is they did it because of a shared ideology, or perspective on the world, that colored most of their output. Probably, as with climate science, the field itself selects for people who already strongly lean in a certain way. The only heterodox sociologists clustered around IQ research and we’re torched for it over time. I’m not even sure where a heterodox climate scientist would even get clean data - start up their own tree ring hunting expedition? Launch satellites? Which is the issue with the “just go disprove it yourself” idea, that’s obviously impractical for the vast majority of people to do. They either trust what comes out of the academy or don’t, and frankly the academy has given doubters plenty of ammo lately.

>>11310317
replication crisis doesn't mean what you think it means

>>11310317
So basically it's too hard to actually support your argument so you just believe whatever you want? great, have fun with that.

>>11308052
Quick, shitpost more, you’ve almost redpilled the entire population and foiled the globalist plot!

>>11310321
It means a lot of work was put out saying something that later didn’t prove to be accurate.

>>11310323
And no, as above I’m saying if people think the science isn’t accurate then it has reduced or no predictive value. The onus is on people who want forcefully to rearrange trillions of dollars of global economic activity to have an airtight argument, which they probably can’t in the current academic/political environment. That’s not “believe whatever you want,” rather it’s “skeptical of what these people are saying.”

>>11308385
what do you think you’re saying

>>11310271
>climate science
wtf even is "climate science"? its not even a real field of science.
meteorology is a real field of science, people have been trying to predict the weather since forever, "climate science" is some gay bullshit that was invented on college campuses a couple decades ago.

>>11310339
Fair point. I guess broadly I consider it paleoclimatology, which attempts to model past weather or temperature patterns and predict future ones under a given set of parameters, as well as economic/sociological modeling of the effects of these potential future changes.

>>11310335
climatology has and continues to provide incredibly accurate and useful predictions. Regardless of what people think.

>https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2019GL085378

>>11310329
I think the most amusing thing is most of the "schizos" on pol, x, sci, and wherever else, I imagine people probably conjure an image of some weirdo in a dark room, no doubt spending their time doing weird conspiracy theorist shit... barely functioning in the outside world, can't engage in conversation with other people without telling them that invisible reptillians are in their brain and trying to get us in the smart city social credit system so they can sterilize us and make us into golem cattle chattle AND ONE EYE ALWAYS OVER YOUR SHOULDER...
...
...when in reality most of them are probably relatively normal, and as helpless, concerned, and frustrated with the state of things as anyone else.

Yes goy... gather them up, they're shitposting schizos goy, YES INTO THE CHAMBERS GET RID OF THEM GOY. NO NEED FOR BOOKS ANYMORE, BUY A KINDLE, GET RID OF YOUR BOOKS GOYIM IT'S THE 21ST CENTURY WE DON'T NEED ANY HARD RECORD OF THE OLD WORLD, BY THE WAY EMINENT DOMAIN GOY WE'RE DEMOLISHING ALL THESE SHITTY OLD BUILDINGS TO PUT UP HIGH DENSITY HOUSING IT'S GOOD FOR THE ENVIRONMENT, GOY. YOU NEED TO BE LIVING IN AN UGLY SHITHOLE, GREY AND SQUARE AS FAR AS THE EYE CAN SEE, THE SOVIETS KNEW THE USE OF MODERN ARCHITECTURE, GOY!

Submit to your Zionist master. Goyim are cattle. Goyim are beasts of burden. Even the best of the Goyim should be killed.

>>11310383
And by the way, "Jews" are just padding, fodder to hide amidst and use accordingly, which is how the existence of Israel was finally fully justified to begin with, displacing and pouring tons of enraged and paranoid youths in Tel Aviv then brainwashing the hell out of them. Even Zionism is a front to a great extent. Nonetheless, on our layer, the concept of the "goyim" is useful and actually quite descriptive.

My assumption is there isn't any single group that you could find and eliminate where this force wouldn't reconstitute itself under a new identity, in time. It needs to be destroyed at the root.

>>11310367
What people think about climate change predictions is what they were told most loudly, which because of the media and politics tended to be the most dire and therefore inaccurate predictions of catastrophe due to climate change. Since for example Florida isn’t under water, they think the predictions are inaccurate. Although when it gets to the economic modeling I don’t think there’s much chance of them being very accurate anyway.

>>11310391
>It needs to be destroyed at the root
They're genetically Jewish. They are of the Jewish RACE. They can not reconstitute themselves if all Jewish DNA is wiped off the face of this planet. You say they're just hiding among the Jews to use them...But they are genetically Jewish themselves.

>>11306013
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geologic_temperature_record
No that fraudulent graph is not in that article.

You are a lying shill.

https://discord.gg/FFwRXKq

>>11306046
Based and correctpilled

>>11306013
Cringe and moronpilled

Has anyone ever explained exactly how paying more taxes to corrupt government bureaucrats will change the climate? I can't remember anymore.

>>11306075
you are more than welcome to. This is what science is about.

>>11313731
do you understand basic economics?

The climate hoax is perpetrated by the Jews to accelerate the great replacement of the White race.

>>11314790
sounds like he does, despite the oilkike propaganda image

>>11314917
>propaganda image
Propaganda doesn't mean it's false.

>>11313731
>paying more taxes
Technically that should work fine, but the most popular approach right now isn't a "tax", since the idea is everyone takes back an equal share of it.

>>11314917
>asking "how can making emitting greenhouse gases more expensive help reduce their emissions?"
>this implies some understanding of economics

>>11314826
ok boomer

>>11306115
That's his point.

>>11313731
Government solves everything and is a backstop to all problems everywhere and thus will solve this one too because magic I ain't gotta explain shit. Just don't ask questions and pay up bitch.

>>11306013
>just proving global warming
Wikipedia.

>b-but it's sourced
One study.

>b-b-but 99% of climate scientists!!!
Bandwagon fallacy.

>b-b-b-but the ice sheets!
Good. Let the coastal faggots drown.

> NOOOOOOOOO
> YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED TO DISAGREE WITH ME
> LOOK AT MY TITLES AND MY AFFILIATIONS
> EVERYBODY IN THE SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY RESPECTS MY AUTHORITY
> NOOOO, MY DATA IS 100% CORRECT AND NOT FALSIFIED YOU ARE JUST DUMB!!!!!

You see, in a good board, people would let the thread slide. But this is not a good board and apparently people aren't tired of replying to the most basic bait.

>>11315404
Actually it's falsified and tampered with all to fuck and back to the point where it has zero credibility whatsoever, which is actually a real shame because the fundamental science of co2 and the greenhouse effect is sound and the effect of pumping out the levels of co2 we are into the atmosphere is at the very least a potentially dangerous experiment. And yet the argument is so politicized, and the data so undeniably tampered with and munged, and the models so flatly inaccurate, and the presentation methods such complete bullshit, that any actual dangers there are that would show up clearly in the absence of all the above are effectively obfuscated from view and thus become harder to respond to.
Thanks useless liberal fucktards for fucking absolutely everything. What would we do without you?

>>11306762
>All the predictions are wrong
"No!"
https://youtu.be/ugwqXKHLrGk

>>11315517
Uhhuh.

>>11314923
Not false doesn't mean it's relevant.

>>11315083
So his point is a patently retarded non sequitur?

>>11315767
It's very much relevant because the entire hoax was designed to drain government money to their pocket

>>11306013
HOW DARE YOU

>>11315786
How does the image show a hoax?

>>11315421
Where is the evidence that the data is falsified or tampered with? You're just highlighting sentences without any attempt to understand what they mean.

The ocean blip refers to the well know problem caused by a change in how SSTs were measured in the 1940s: http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2008/06/of-buckets-and-blogs/

>>11315836
mmhmmm

>>11315836
mmmkay.

>>11315742
That satellite data is wrong, a very large source of error was found due to the decaying orbit of the satellites and RSS has corrected it:https://www.carbonbrief.org/major-correction-to-satellite-data-shows-140-faster-warming-since-1998

>>11315836
yup.

>>11315865
"corrected" k.
isn't it a funny coincidence how all these corrections neatly add up to validating the original hypothesis no matter what the supposed cause or explanation?

>>11315851
>corrections to US data increases the warming trend
>therefore the data is false
>corrections to global data decrease the warming trend
>...

>>11315873
But they don't. You just cherrypicked data from the US. Globally, the adjustments have reduced the warming trend. And since you have no actual argument against the justification for these corrections, your posts are irrelevant anyway.

>>11315851
>>11315858
>>11315864
>>11315873
These corrections have been verified by comparison to raw high quality data: https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/2015GL067640

Simply comparing adjusted data to raw data known to be flawed tells us nothing.

>>11306080
Underrated savage burn
based

>>11315884
> all the adjustments are in one direction, no matter what their root cause, and all serve purely to validate the original hypothesis.
> no argument against justification for these corrections.
Ok.
> cherrypicked data from the us
http://joannenova.com.au/2015/06/if-it-cant-be-replicated-it-isnt-science-bom-admits-temperature-adjustments-are-secret/
http://hidethedecline.eu/

>>11315892
>flawed = doesn't validate my shitty hypothesis
ok.

>>11307645
>Expecting 99 percent of /pol/ to understand

I'm bored with this shit, have a nice day, on sober analysis you'll have trouble coming to any valid conclusion other than >>11315421

>>11315797
It shows it's not possible that man-made CO2 emission can have any large climate impact

>>11315921
How does it show that?

>>11316010
Literally shows in the pic that human activity accounts for a very small part of greenhouse gasses you retard

>>11316054
>human activity accounts for a very small part of greenhouse gasses
How does this show that it's not possible that man's CO2 emissions can have a large climate impact?

>>11316076
Because CO2 isn't even good greenhouse gas. Its heat capturing ability is lower than that of water vapour, which are also much more abundant

>>11316076
You're literally glowing at this point.

>>11316085
>CO2 isn't even good greenhouse gas
How does this show that man's CO2 emissions can't have a large climate impact? I hope you realise that the earth has a natural carbon cycle and that human carbon emissions are fucking up the balance of that cycle.
https://skepticalscience.com/human-co2-smaller-than-natural-emissions-intermediate.htm
https://skepticalscience.com/water-vapor-greenhouse-gas-intermediate.htm
>>11316086
Not an argument.

My buddy who works as a climate science says people are paid to “tune parameters” on the models to get the result they want. He showed me one model that drew a smily face. Basically global warming is strictly a vessel for politcal agendas at this point.

>>11315898
>> all the adjustments are in one direction
They're not, why are you lying?

>all serve purely to validate the original hypothesis.
They don't even affect the original hypothesis, the raw data still shows warming.

>http://joannenova.com.au/2015/06/if-it-cant-be-replicated-it-isnt-science-bom-admits-temperature-adjustments-are-secret/
This is just a bunch of bullshit editorializing.

>http://hidethedecline.eu/
What about this is relevant?

>>11315903
Nice strawman, all corrections are explained: https://judithcurry.com/2014/07/07/understanding-adjustments-to-temperature-data/

>>11316100
Does he also work for Nintendo?

>>11316054
>>11315921
You don't seem to understand that warming is caused by a *change* in greenhouse gases, not the total amount of greenhouse gases. So the proportion of GHGs is irrelevant. Man's proportion of the change in GHGs is what's relevant. Let me give you a hint: without mandmade CO2 emmissions, the change in GHGs would be negative instead of positive.

>>11316105
> "corrections"

*yawn*
https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2019/09/18/global-warming-and-the-leftist-war-on-western-industrial-society-parts-iii-v/
"What if a small group of these world leaders were to conclude the principal risk to the earth comes from the actions of the rich countries? … In order to save the planet, the group decides: Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring this about?"
Oh yeah nothing to see here please move along.

>>11316105
Interesting to see how Judith Curry's position has changed in the last ten years. https://judithcurry.com/2019/11/12/legacy-of-climategate-10-years-later/ even she realises it's bullshit now.

>>11316108
No I actually made friends in college lol

>>11316198
she got tired of being a mediocre academic no one cared about, and now she's treated like a rockstar and showered in donations from oil companies, she just found her price, can hardly blame her.

>>11316224
> it's the money goyim we (((climate scientists))) are all poor ignored noble academics.
just fucking lol.

>>11316254
nice

>>11316198
>Interesting to see how Judith Curry's position has changed in the last ten years.
It hasn't. The article I posted was not written by Curry, she just has it on her blog.

>>11306373
That has to be shooped. Dude looks fucking demonic.

>>11316254
couldn't even deny it nice.

>>11306013
>disproving Global Warming
>by proving the planet cycles in cold and warm phases
wut.

>>11306037
From memory the oriental and occidental historical records of the warm periods tend to correlate with the analysis of various methods of recording climate data all over the world.
It was global.

Climate change, particularly in the 3rd and 5th-6th centuries, brought down Rome around the same time empires globally fell. The leading cause of the collapse was agricultural issues, population explosions and mass migration.

>>11316100
Mate, there are mass migrations happening right now because third world countries are beginning to have crop failures and the follow on from that - system failure. Those failures are 100% tied to climate change.
To deny this at this stage is utter delusion.

>>11306095
regarding the pic though:
>post-war boom
American industry boom is associated with a period of COOLING. This is why Climate scientists used to be fear-mongering about "global cooling" and completely inverted their position a few decades ago.

>>11316096
>human carbon emissions are fucking up the balance of that cycle.
What's interesting is how the organic fossil fuels got there.
You know how a lot of it got there? Climate change allowing the sea level to drop and vast forests/swamps to grow. We use it's decay as organic fossil fuels.
Climate change also brought the carboniferous forests to it's knees and killed off that same forest.

The sun is the biggest threat to humanity and it's biggest life giver.

>>11315906
Most of /pol/ actually agrees, but then also tells you that this gremlin is right for the wrong reasons and is just a Soros puppet.
Some are calling for the increase of warming to increase the amount of agriculture production in colder areas and potentially make dry areas wetter.

>>11306636
>Why do you think India and China pollute so much?
Because they have no political system of oversight to constrain industrial pollution.
Same reason western factories moved there actually.

>>11316383
Which crop failures are these? co2 is plant food and there is no actual observed significant statistical variation so this sounds like the same bullshit that tried to attribute the recent australian bushfires to (((climate change))) also.

>>11316410
Try the ones in Ethiopia first.

>>11316410
>same bullshit that tried to attribute the recent australian bushfires to (((climate change)))
You mean a bushfire caused by a dramatic change in the Indian ocean dipole that shifted the entire climate of Australia towards less rain and more heat in SE?
Totally unrelated to a CHANGE in CLIMATE (albeit more short term as an oscillation, though correlating with various other longer term oscillations).

>>11316393
>Climate scientists used to be fear-mongering about "global cooling"
Naah, they discovered the pattern of recurring Ice Ages and the sensationalist media went nuts.

>>11316425
>discovered Godzilla
Well that would make me go nuts.
People severely underestimate this issue, it is essentially, Godzilla in proportion.

>>11316414
Yeah that's the one jackass. Definitely had nothing to do with pic related, definitely had nothing to do with regulations changing the burden of controlled burns to fall on the state instead of private land owners, definitely had nothing at all to do with the state fire management agencies having their budgets cut at the same time, and absolutely positively definitely had nothing to do with it being a simple fact that ~85% of bush fires are caused by humans directly.
Instead it's all muh (((climate change)))
Christ you kikes need to tune up your bullshit, nobody believes it anymore, even the normies on facebook were laughing at your shit.

>>11316414
https://thenewdaily.com.au/news/national/2020/01/18/torrential-rain-causes-havoc-along-australian-east-coast/

>>11316452
>regulations
>burden
>the state
>private land owners
>state fire management agencies
>budgets cut
>you kikes
found the froth-flecked raving /pol/itard

>>11316472
I didn't actually say the regulations were necessarily wrong, I simply pointed out the inevitable and obvious fucking consequences of doing that at the same time as you slash budgets for the agencies in question that become responsible for that activity. It's not a question of ideology at that point, it's a question of not having your head embedded firmly up your ass.

>>11316412
https://www.tamsat.org.uk/data/rfe/index.cgi
Not very convincing.

>>11316452
Oh don't worry, us WA people were screaming "wow that's fucking retarded" when we heard you were cutting back on burn offs.
But climate oscillation is a fact of life here, we monitor it with BOM anon. You can find climate change records on it as we speak because Indian Ocean Dipole and El Nino events can cripple our agricultural industry without proper preparation.

>>11316463
Yeah, something tells me the dipole's switched again. That happens.

But hey, it's still climate change.
We need more education on these dipole events in schools, they are basically long term seasons that fluctuate over years or even half a year.

>ctrl+f orbit
>2 matches
>referring to a satellite
just wondering why Earth's orbit is never taken into consideration since the sun is the greatest source of heat in this solar system

>>11316516
>Earth's orbit is never taken into consideration

>>11306252
>Milankovich cycles

>>11316516
What aspect of the orbit?
There are so many to begin with that it's hard to dig through.
You have the solar oscillations of sun's radiation and the oscillation of the distance of the Earth from the sun.
Then you have the oscillations of Jupiter, etc impacting the behaviour of the sun, therefore increasing or decreasing it's radiation of heat and EM waves.

People ignore ALL of these things still. I think meteorologists are finally getting the memo with this shit. The solar system is a form of closed environment which directly impacts our Earth's climate.

>>11316526
I could have said Gleissberg cycles too but the point is the layman has no clue about either of the researcher's work.
Point is that in the world of school and MSM orbital mechanics is never taken into consideration

>>11306393

>>11316513
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B_tn8f0uaB4

>>11316452
Prescribed burns have decreased because the prescribed burn season has been getting shorter and shorter due to global warming:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t0x46-enxsA

Regulations on controlled burns haven't changed recently, budgets haven't been cut recently, bushfires caused by humans tend to be minor and are put out more quickly, the larger fires that occurred recently were caused by lightning, and you're a fag.

>>11316530
>What aspect of the orbit?
its elliptical shape
a declination range
what side of the planet gets to roast when it's at its closest to the sun

>>11316536
See >>11316539

>>11316531
I think meteorologists are taking it into account now. BoM provides a lot of info on oscillations, I'm sure they're aware of orbital oscillations too.

Why is it that only Australia and the US care about this shit? The rest of the world have next to no info on it.

>>11316539
>prescribed burn season has been getting shorter and shorter due to global warming:
I doubt that it was global warming causing it. I bet that was a regulation issue, as most of that bushfire is. Over regulation in some areas, under regulation in others.

>>11316540
>what side of the planet gets to roast when it's at its closest to the sun
Is that consistent?
I bet all sides get it over time.

>>11316543
Sure, weather knowledge is handy, but there is an active campaign to keep any discussion outside of meteorology
>Why is it that only Australia and the US care about this shit?
propaganda

>>11316516
Solar irradiance is measured directly and is near a grand minimum, so I'm not sure how orbits are going to help you. Climate cycles determined by Earth's orbit operate on the scale of tens of thousands of years

>>11316549
Considering the ocean coverage most of that energy would be heating up sea water

>>11316546
Sure don't listen to the firefighters, just assume it's all political.

To any sane person reading this: m since extreme weather is made more common by global warming, firefighters have noticed that the season in which controlled burns can be carried out is more limited. Either the bush is too wet from heavy rain to burn or too dry from drought to burn in a controlled manner.

>>11316552
Yes, there are many cycles that deal with the shape of the orbit, the angle at which it deviates from the solar meridian and when the sun decides to press the reset button.
The point is that where the Earth is relative to the sun will always play the largest roll as to what we're going to get for weather.
There aren't enough farts or mouth breathers that could change the density of the atmosphere to start transforming for Venus 2

>>11316550
No it's more likely that our agricultural industry here is so burdened by this phenomena that we focus on it now.
Other places have more regular climate patterns. Australia's is odd, it's climate changes every few years.

Simply put, we're decades ahead of the game.

>>11316539
> Regulations on controlled burns haven't changed recently
Get fucked. https://www.abc.net.au/radio/programs/worldtoday/are-we-backburning-less-than-in-the-past/11696192 "BRONWYN PETRIE: Over the last 15 or so years there's been a change in the rules. The hazard reduction burns or agricultural burns you can do: you have to have a hard edge, or else you can't have a permit.

So that means you need to have a road. You need to have a fence line or something where you contain the fire in.

The thing is: they say, "Oh, we will not have running fire." But the fact is: as a result of this, there's a lot of country – simply, it's impossible to have a hard edge because of the nature of the terrain.
And it also comes down to money
ISOBEL ROE: He says there's more pre-burning happening in New South Wales than ever, but state agencies don't have the money to do the amount of burning needed to prevent fires like those in the state this week."
> budgets haven't been cut recently
Get fucked. https://independentaustralia.net/politics/politics-display/9-top-story-of-2019-gladys-berejiklian-slashes-fire-service-budgets-while-nsw-burns,13441
> bushfires caused by humans tend to be minor and are put out more quickly, the larger fires that occurred recently were caused by lightning
Because they're closer to population centers, they also do more monetary damage and cause more fatalities, no shit fires out in the middle of nowhere lit by dry lightning with nothing around for hundreds of miles tend to last longer and consume more area. Big fucking deal.
> and you're a fag.
and you're a triple nigger who needs to quit your government job and go work in mcdonalds where you belong.

>>11316563
>The point is that where the Earth is relative to the sun will always play the largest roll as to what we're going to get for weather.
Over very large timescales the Sun determines the climate. Not weather. Weather is local and fast and primarily determined by atmospheric circulation. The climate affects essentially the range of weather, and on human timescales the largest factors in the climate are large scale cycles in atmospheric circulation like ENSO (annual timescale) and Earth's energy balance determined by greenhouse gases (decadal timescale). The Sun is really not a big factor on those timescales. It varies very little compared to other factors and its effects tend to involve much slower feedback loops.

>There aren't enough farts or mouth breathers that could change the density of the atmosphere to start transforming for Venus 2
This is like saying you couldn't eat enough to weigh 1000 pounds, therefore diet isn't a main factor in controlling your weight. Total nonsense.

>>11316607
>ISOBEL ROE: He says there's more pre-burning happening in New South Wales than ever, but state agencies don't have the money to do the amount of burning needed to prevent fires like those in the state this week."
Uh... thanks for disproving your own argument? Fact is, there is no change in pre-burning policy that caused this. There are practical and natural limits to how much you can pre-burn and how much pre-burning will help. It's not a panacea. I suggest you watch the video in >>11316539 before making any other arguments that have already been addressed.

>Get fucked. https://independentaustralia.net/politics/politics-display/9-top-story-of-2019-gladys-berejiklian-slashes-fire-service-budgets-while-nsw-burns,13441
Bullshit propaganda
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-12-05/fact-check-are-nsw-firefighters-facing--budget-cuts/11747396

If you buy three planes in one year then not buying three planes the next year is not a "budget cut," it simply means you already have the equipment you need. The planes did not disappear.

>Because they're closer to population centers, they also do more monetary damage and cause more fatalities, no shit fires out in the middle of nowhere lit by dry lightning with nothing around for hundreds of miles tend to last longer and consume more area. Big fucking deal.
Right, because the ecent massive fires caused by lightning strikes had no effect on population centers. Moron.

>>11316633
The agencies assigned to do the burning may be doing more pre burning than ever, that's not the same thing as more pre burning getting done than ever in light of the fact that responsibility was transferred to them for what was previously performed by private property owners who are now not able to get permits to perform it you halfwit fuck.
> not cut. Cites abc as evidence against "propaganda".
Go directly to McDonald's. Do not pass go, do not collect 200 dollarydoos https://www.crikey.com.au/2019/11/11/nsw-bushfires-budget-cut/>>11316633
> Right, because the ecent massive fires caused by lightning strikes had no effect on population centers. Moron.
Not what I said at all shit for brains. Read it again until you actually get it.

>>11316652
>The agencies assigned to do the burning may be doing more pre burning than ever, that's not the same thing as more pre burning getting done than ever
This was already addressed, the season for pre- burning is getting shorter and shorter because of global warming. All you have to do is listen to the people actually fighting these fires if you want to know the truth. Or you could just keep on assuming that whatever answer is most politically convenient for you is the truth.

>Cites abc as evidence against "propaganda".
LOL you cited abc first you fucking hypocrite.

>Not what I said at all shit for brains.
Yeah it's not what you said, it's what your logic implies.

>>11316660
>This was already addressed, the season for pre- burning is getting shorter and shorter
If it's getting shorter then australia obviously needs to put more funding towards controlled burning to make use of the little time they have and put more funding towards fire fighters to take reactionary measures against the fires. The australian government really did neither even though this seasons fires were predictable.

>>11316660
> This was already addressed, the season for pre- burning is getting shorter and shorter because of global warming.
You just tried to prove that there's more pre-burning going on than ever, now you're ceding that's bullshit. You clearly have no idea what the fuck you're talking about. I can't tell you what a huge surprise that is as you come across as so wise. There's less pre-burning happening because responsibility was transferred to an agency that isn't pre-burning as much as the previous holders of that responsibility did, and (((global warming))) has fuck all to do with it for all the reasons listed above that prove it's complete bullshit to begin with.
> LOL you cited abc first you fucking hypocrite.
Because I know it plays well with you sycophantic self important liberal fuckheads, not because I tried to use a slanted opinion piece that flows in the exact direction that they always want it to go does. It's the difference between citing a nazi newspaper about something the jews do well and should be respected for and a nazi newspaper about something the jews are evil for doing, which claim is more credible? The one that isn't just pushing the party line.
> Yeah it's not what you said, it's what your logic implies.
No, it's what you took out of what I said and twisted it to mean. Saying that fires out in the middle of nowhere as a counterpoint to fires close to population centers lit by arsonists tend to cause less damage is simply not the same thing as saying when fires lit by natural causes impact population centers they magically have lesser effects than if they were started by artificial means. That's all just batshit crazy projection on your part.

>>11316539
You're not going to win anyone over by citing potholer as a source and say go watch him. He and his audience are colossal queers.

>>11316683
>Ad hominem
>No argument
>No science

Pathetic..

>>11316692
I'd also like to say that parroting someone's views and tell them to watch their 34 minute video without a proper explination is not scientific and is a pretty shit argument at proving your point, but that that's also exactly what you're doing so I don't see the problem in me telling you the truth.

>>11316715
how are they views? literally everything is properly cited and empirically true, you're clearly just incredibly lazy, and or stupid to realize you've fallen for the most obvious propaganda ever.

>>11316715
>>11316683
>>11316677
>>11316671
>>11316652
>>11316607
>>11316550
>>11316536
Take your politics and fuck off back to where you belong, retards.

>>11307646
>when will this self correcting mechanism start kicking in?
Never, just look what's going on in Alaska, Siberia, California, Brazil and Australia. Forests burn down faster then they grow back.

>>11316671
>If it's getting shorter then australia obviously needs to put more funding towards controlled burning to make use of the little time they have
It's so obvious yes. That means no more thought needs to be put in. Problem solved. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-01-07/fuel-reduction-burn-debate-rubbish-says-vic-fire-chief/11849522

>>11316677
>You just tried to prove that there's more pre-burning going on than ever
No, I proved that regulations are not the cause of reduction in pre-burns, simpleton.

>There's less pre-burning happening because responsibility was transferred to an agency that isn't pre-burning as much as the previous holders of that responsibility did
Wrong, according the people who actually know what they're talking about.

>(((global warming))) has fuck all to do with it for all the reasons listed above that prove it's complete bullshit to begin with.
Which reasons were those?

>Because I know it plays well with you sycophantic self important liberal fuckheads, not because I tried to use a slanted opinion piece that flows in the exact direction that they always want it to go does.
Ah I see so it's OK to use when you wrongly think it supports your argument but when it doesn't, when it actually fact checked your argument, it's biased and can't be used. Yeah that would not be hypocritical and fallacious ad hominem if you had only explained what was right about your article and wrong about mine, but you didn't. Retard.

>Saying that fires out in the middle of nowhere as a counterpoint to fires close to population centers lit by arsonists tend to cause less damage is simply not the same thing as saying when fires lit by natural causes impact population centers they magically have lesser effects than if they were started by artificial means.
If they tend to cause less damage, why are the firefighters saying the most damaging fires were caused by lightning and not arsonists? Because the arsonist meme is more retarded propaganda.

>>11316683
>>11316715
The pot calling the kettle black.

>>11317256
> is so
well, that's super convincing.

>>11317291
Who are you quoting?

>>11316822
Based retard.

>>11317342
>non sequitur
>calls others retarded

>>11306046
>>11306085
>>11306095
>>11306316
>>11306421
>>11306505
>>11306635
>>11307081
>>11307883
All of these graphs and studies reference the "hockey stick" study of Mann, the Lysenko of climatology.

We have hard archeological evidence of agriculture on Greenland during the Viking period. Something he vehemently denies being possible.

>>11317345
>can't read graph about growing leaf area
>calls it non-sequitur anyways
Retard.

>>11317256
lmao

>>11317372
>unironically posting the d*ily m*il

>>11317389
> it's not the abc ignore it
this is the problem with ignoring politics, which is otherwise sensible advice. People are so fucking obsessed with it they will do retarded shit like disregard objective information by source because it contradicts their political narrative.

>>11317363
The hockey stick has been vindicated numerous times by many different temperature reconstructions using different data sets by different researchers
https://skepticalscience.com/broken-hockey-stick.htm
>hard archeological evidence of agriculture on Greenland during the Viking period
Not a global event.
https://skepticalscience.com/greenland-used-to-be-green-intermediate.htm

>>11317403
>disregard objective information
Nothing about the d*ily m*il is objective. It is an extremely sensationalised tabloid which is pretty much globally regarded by anyone with a lick of sense to be a
shit source for anything.
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/daily-mail/

>>11317413
> Nothing about this is objective
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=liam+sheahan+black+saturday&t=braveed&ia=web
uhhuh, never happened, not objective fact at all, because muh daily mail.
This is exactly what I mean, go neck yourself twat.

>>11317421
it's ok anon, it's in the BAKA, so it happened after all. https://www.baka.com.au/national/fined-for-illegal-clearing-family-now-feel-vindicated-20090212-85bd.html
I mean, it stopped being objective fact when the daily fail posted that story in 2019, but it was sure objective fact back in 2009 when the BAKA posted it, because half assed politically biased leftist fuckhead logic.

>>11317421
>never happened
I never claimed that. Regardless of what happened, using the d*ily m*il as a source does nothing for your credibility.

>>11317431
you're the kind of idiot who would question 2+2=4 because a political opponent said it. I pity you.

>>11317440
>who would question 2+2=4 because a political opponent said it
How so? You posted a screenshot of an article (still not sure what you were trying to prove with it) from a dubious source. Post better sources next time.

>>11306013
it's not a matter of velocity, it's a matter of acceleration.

>>11317443
Wasn't me, stop making an idiot of yourself trying to excuse you calling an objective fact otherwise because you wanted to virtue signal and attack the source, when a ten second search yourself would've unveiled the fact even to your soviet political standards that it was an objective fact after all.

>>11317372
>>11317421
>>11317460
>Liam Sheahan

You mean the same person that was experienced in fighting fires with a bunch of mates that stayed to defend the property when the other houses didn't have professional fire fighters actively trying to save the house?

The same one that then racked up a bunch of legal costs because they didn't want to pay a small settlement fee for illegal clearing?

While the Sheahans made it out of Black Saturday alive and with their house still standing, even with their preparations it was a close call.

Throughout the night of February 9 their home caught fire eight times. They also lost several sheds, a Range Rover and two Subarus, as well as a truck and trailer to ember attacks.

'I was in the Country Fire Authority, and so were my son and daughter, so we'd fought fires before and we thought we knew the risks, we thought we were well prepared if a fire came through,' Mr Sheahan said.

https://www.baka.com.au/national/fined-for-illegal-clearing-family-now-feel-vindicated-20090212-85bd.html

'But we found out that day that we were barely adequately prepared.'

Oh... But funny how the right news media forgot these little facts...

https://eastgippsland.net.au/news/media-love-a-good-fire-story/


It turned out that although stories in the media had claimed that the trees had been “cleared”, in fact the felled trees were still on the ground on the Sheahan’s property. The logging had been very poorly timed – this was done at the start of the 2002/3 bushfire season and all the trees were not removed until later in 2003. The local CFA raised the fire hazard posed by the dead trees and a Fire Prevention expert engaged by the Council found that because of the number of dead trees left on the ground, the fire hazard faced by the Sheahans had probably increased. It was just luck that the fires that affected the State in 2002/3 did not include Reedy Creek.

Ooops... Nice fire safety there

>>11306066
A fun way to not have a discussion is to dismiss any contradicting info and just believe what hegemonic media wants you to believe.

>>11317372
>>11317421
>>11317428
>>11317460
The Council was reluctant to take this case to Court and spent several months negotiating a settlement with the Sheahans. In April 2003, the Sheahans signed an agreement with the Council to do some rehabilitation planting and pay Council costs of $2,500. They were given 6 months to complete their work. Unfortunately, the Sheahans failed to honour this agreement – they dumped their local legal team and engaged Clem Newton-Brown, a Melbourne barrister, to defend their case.

The Sheahans lost their case, and ended up with a large legal bill and costs from the Council. The magistrate did not accept their claim that they were doing the clearing for fire prevention and found that they had only sought to consider exemptions under the Mitchell Planning Scheme after the event.


Here's the minutes btw:
https://web.archive.org/web/20060822095725/https://www.mitchellshire.vic.gov.au/Files/12_Sept_05_minutes.pdf

Not so objective now is it? Fucking gullible retard.

>>11306090
Enjoy living in a pod and eating insects anon

>>11317470
> but the bad man fought back
lol just fuck off cunt.

>>11317483
Nice non argument, I'll take that as a concession. I recommend you try and save some face and stop replying before I expose you as an uninformed idiot again.

>>11317492
EUPHORIC

>>11306379
>solar cycles decreasing
>what its solar effect on cloud cover
read more anon

>>11317497
Keep replying.

>>11317406
>skepticalscience.com
At least post something objective not bullshit spouted to match the narrative.

>>11317506
Do you actually genuinely think that was a rebuttal? The council mounted an extensive campaign to attack the guy for something he did that ended up saving his property, and now you can actually look back on it and verify objectively that this is the case despite all the bullshit excuses that were raised at the time, and you instead think "ahhh but he was combative and dared to fight!" is actually an effective rebuttal?
all of my wat, the reason he's looking back and gloating on it now even though he's 500k down is because he clearly *was* right and everything that they did to try and get their own way back then clearly *was* wrong.
Christ, what on earth is wrong with people these days.

>>11306013
I dislike jews and globalism as much as the next guy, but misinterpreting these charts so badly and so smugly is absolutely disgusting.

>>11317515
>ended up saving his property
No, that would be due to the fact that him and his family were experienced fire fighters and stayed behind to fight the fires. (nothing in the articles state that this was the case for any of the other homes that burned down)
>verify objectively that this is the case despite all the bullshit excuses that were raised at the time
>he clearly *was* right and everything that they did to try and get their own way back then clearly *was* wrong
No, he wasn't right. He cleared a bunch of trees without the proper planning permission, and then claimed he cleared the trees for fire safety reasons after the fact. He had a chance of getting away with a mere $2,500 fine, but instead he decided to go full retard, wasted a bunch of money on an expensive legal consultant and then blamed the courts when he inevitably lost the case and had to pay his own legal fees. I provided you with the council minutes, I suggest you read them.

>>11317509
Not an argument

>>11317542
> No, that would be due to the fact that him and his family were experienced fire fighters and stayed behind to fight the fires
Which would've been suicidal in the event that the clearing that they did wasn't fucking done you clueless nob, it was almost suicidal *even with that clearing*.
> No, he wasn't right. He cleared a bunch of trees without the proper planning permission and then claimed he cleared the trees for fire safety reasons after the fact
Which he provably did in retrospect, having survived fires that wiped out every other property around for miles. Even captain hindsight can't save your dumb ass from itself.
> He had a chance of getting away with a mere $2,500 fine
Which would have been paying a fine for something he was provably right to do in retrospect
> but instead he decided to go full retard, wasted a bunch of money on an expensive legal consultant and then blamed the courts when he inevitably lost the case
And they are indeed to blame because *he was provably right in retrospect* you fucking moron.
> I provided you with the council minutes, I suggest you read them.
I suggest you read whatever self serving justification from any other extant kangaroo court trying to justify it's own bullshit that in hindsight is perfectly well known to be that and understand how you're pushing the exact same shit here and you're apparently confused as to why people aren't swallowing it, but you're clearly so constantly on your knees for authority the idea that they can actually be wrong might simply be impossible for your servile mind to comprehend.
You're a depressing specimen son.

>>11317551
>would've been suicidal in the event that the clearing that they did wasn't fucking done
Proof?
>Which he provably did in retrospect
No, he didn't submit the proper paperwork before clearing the trees meaning we can only assume he didn't have fire safety in mind when he cleared the trees.
>wiped out every other property around for miles
Again, the other properties didn't have experienced fire fighters attending to them.
>something he was provably right to do
No. If he was interested in fire safety and wanted to avoid fines, he would've gone through the proper procedure before clearing the trees. Just because there was a fire seven years later doesn't mean he should be exempt from the law.
>they are indeed to blame
Why? There were proper procedures in place for those wanting to clear their trees in the interest of fire safety. He didn't follow these procedures or submit an application.
>kangaroo court trying to justify it's own bullshit that in hindsight
The minutes are from 2005. The fire that claimed his neighbours' homes was in 2009. I don't think you understand the sequence of events at all.

>>11317372
>>can't read graph about growing leaf area
Please explain how leaf area is relevant. It's not.

>>11317509
Can you point out one (1) thing that's bullshit in the article?