...and anyone who mentions it is an "alarmist"?
>The last time carbon dioxide levels were this high
>was during the Pliocene era, about 4-4.5 million years ago.
...at which time, there were no living organisms like us, our livestock, or our crops.
Gradualists BTFO
How does this compare to the Roman warm period? Then the mini ice age after it? I don't really care if climate change is real or not, white civilization will continue regardless.
> white civilization will continue regardless
If things continue as they are, whites will go extinct before the end of this century.
It'll take 100's of years to complete breed whites out, by then lifespans will be increased to the 1000's of years and your children's genes will be designed.
>white civilization will continue regardless.
No.
More than 10% of Europe is now non white and this number is rapidly increasing in new births.
>How does this compare to the Roman warm period? Then the mini ice age after it?
They are both negligible compared to current warming.
That ghetto slope calculation is wrong, current warming is much faster. Try using
That was a localized warm anomaly and not representative of the global average temperature
Do you notice the part where it says anomaly? Do you know what it means? Do you know why they choose that measurement?
It means temperatures that depart from the global average. There's two reasons it was choosen. 1. Global temperatures were not going up, so they needed something else. 2. The more weather stations you build and measurements you get, the more anomalies.
That's how this scientific scam works
>deviations from an average are an anomaly
do climatologists really? anomalies will never end...
That's the whole point behind it. People seriously wonder why trust in science is going down...
>Global temperatures were not going up, so they needed something else.
Oh no... it's moronic. Temperature anomaly has the exact same trend as temperature, and the same units. Just a different baseline so that they can combine different data sets easily.
>The more weather stations you build and measurements you get, the more anomalies.
The more data points... yes. What does that have to do with the trend?
Don't let the morons get to you. They know it's a problem, they're just in denial. They can't acknowledge it because it's not something they can fix and that scares them.
https://www.zmescience.com/science/atmospheric-carbon-levels-are-now-50-higher-than-pre-industrial-times/
Your israelitepedia page where you got that image also has this one.
Explain homosexual
1850 is year 0 by convention.
is it now?
Yes. That graph clearly doesn't follow the same convention as the previous one.
>no error bars
into the trash it goes
0 looks like 2019 there fren
It clearly says "years before 1950 CE"
>CE
Which tells you what kind of people you're dealing with. Why would you trust those who are so confident in their deceptions that they lie to their god?
>graphs are hard
>they lie to their god
wut?
take a nap, boomer
>Imagine being this moronic
For me, it's 1889
>where you got that image
...from here, homosexual:
https://www.zmescience.com/science/atmospheric-carbon-levels-are-now-50-higher-than-pre-industrial-times/
let's add modern data, shall we?
le heckin off the charterooni omfg i'm terrified. what do i do anon
>demands explanation
>claims to not care when given
Textbook moron.
based vostok core still btfo alarmists
How? The ice core doesn't even show modern temperatures.
the article was published over 20 years and the results have been verified
That doesn't even respond to anything I said. It's this an AI generated post or are deniers braindead?
Fixed the plot by plotting y-axis down to zero. Wow, spoopy!
>Fixed the plot by altering the data
Is that what you mean by "spoopy"?
I didn't alter the data at all. All I did was show how tiny that growth actually is, in absolute terms.
>all I did was show how tiny a bullet in the brain is, in absolute terms
Hmm cool, can you do a practical demonstration now?
Why are you upset? All I did was present the data in a slightly different way. Unaltered, it just looks less scary. Scale is important.
Same effect, rapid global warming.
Not my problem
Don't whine to me about carbon taxes then, it's not my problem you can't afford them.
Its not my problem you are a Black person
your solution to carbon emission reduction is to make life harder for the poor? wow, you're such a visionary. i bet you support BLM too
The solution is to make life harder for the fossil fuel companies. They are gonna pass some of it along to the poor, sure, but if unchecked global warming will/is making life infinitely worse for the poor than carbon taxes ever could.
>no no no, poor joe, you don't understand! by making it fiscally impossible for you to afford gas to get to work, i'm helping you. why aren't you grateful?! i'm saving you!
We either jump headfirst into renewables within a decade or it never happens and we get wiped off the planet from drought. It's a utilitarian choice at this point, we can either sacrifice a few poor nobodies now to save a frick ton of poor nobodies in the future, or we can go business as usual headfirst into the collapse and wipe out poor nobodies altogether.
>We either jump headfirst into renewables within a decade or it never happens and we get wiped off the planet from drought.
Not my problem
https://www.euractiv.com/section/energy/news/germany-reactivates-coal-power-plants-amid-russian-gas-supply-threats/
https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/britain-makes-plans-keep-coal-fired-power-plants-open-this-winter-govt-2022-05-30/
That's not a fossil fuel "expansion" they're just replacing the lost energy from russia. The total fossil fuels used is gonna be the same if slightly higher total emissions from coal. This has nothing to do with the transition away from fossil fuels and doesnt mean anything.
>they're just replacing the lost energy from russia.
>They are just replacing a fossil fuel with a fossil fuel
Point is total consumption of fossil fuels is stagnating or going down.
Point is nobody cares about your religion
Now go ahead and market it to the poor blacks.
>We either jump headfirst into renewables within a decade or it never happens and we get wiped off the planet from drough
kek do ecologist really?
these are the same people who will act confused when you tell them climatologists are doomsday soothsayers predicting we're all going extinct within a few decades. they're the types to say "nobody is saying that"
"Doomsaying" isnt applicable when theres an actual threat.
>GOD says we're all gonna die TOMORROW
>The scientific consensus is that human carbon emissions will cause a rise in temps, resulting in a 29% increase in drought prevalence.
Not the same. Brazil has been having their worst drought in recorded history, kek and you sit and wonder why food prices skyrocked at the end of 2021
>brazil and africa will have mega droughts
>We either jump headfirst into renewables within a decade or it never happens and we get wiped off the planet from drought
Al gore said this 2 decades ago. Reminds me of 2 more weeks and the unvaxxed will be dead
Nobody cares. People talk cheap but as soon as theres a minor energy shortage every shitlib goes "coal is green" as they are doing now in Europe. You have first world problems and 95% of humans dont care about CO2. They will burn the coal and theres nothing you can do to stop it.
But /misc/ hates burning coal. I'm so confused.
Oh a BBC joke? Stay classy Black person
I don't think that joke would be allowed on the BBC.
>People talk cheap but as soon as theres a minor energy shortage every shitlib goes "coal is green" as they are doing now in Europe
There might be a few """"coal revivals"""" quote unquote, but renewables already have so much momentum that even short term gains in fossil fuels are pretty much transitory. Even fossil fuel investments, independent of the government, have taken the route of moving from expansion based models, where income is invested back into extracting more oil, to a profit based model where income goes to the holders. You cant stop it, even the US will be pressured and will fold even if there s Republican president. I should say the US will fold despite a Republican president at this point.
Any day now
The solution to global warming is for all of the people who are unhappy with the current state of the atmosphere to kys, that is the only thing which will bring an end to the endless demanding complaints of the environmentalist "i am the protector of mother earth, i am the savior of humanity, woe is me the planet is suffering, i need you to give me all your money to compensate me for my feigned suffering and victimization" messiah complex narcissists and sadists
>The solution to global warming is for all of the people who are unhappy with the current state of the atmosphere to kys
Nah, the solution is for people to campaign and change the current world course. You'll stop hearing complaints and protests and so forth when you divest from fossil fuels and not a second sooner. It's that simple, you wanna stop hearing about autist Greta? Either stop listening or buy some solar panels or something.
you want sacrifices to be made to "save" the world... just not your own sacrifices. you're a parasite.
Pretty sure I lose from high fuel prices just as much as you...
did you just assume my financial status? you presumptuous piece of shit.
>he fails to realize poor people don't make as much as he does, and therefore are disproportionately hurt by such large taxes
tell me you're wealthy without telling me you're wealthy.
>atmospheric CO2 is rising...
So what?
I like my drinks bubbly!
>Nah, the solution is for people to campaign and change the current world course.
Frick you and your little greta prostitute. When is she going to do some porn? I want to see a brotha holding those pig tails and streching out her tight little holes while she screams and cries. Mmmmmmmmmmmm
Biden is driving up fuel prices... and that's a good thing.
>Biden is driving up fuel prices... and that's a good thing.
Yeah, it's a good thing for his rich 1% buddies and handlers who financed him and stole the election from the American people to install him.
Big oil is loving Biden and Democrats now almost as much as big-pharma.
>Big oil is loving Biden and Democrats now almost as much as big-pharma.
Really? They love it that he canceled all those leases? I think you're just trying to pull what's called a "no u" here.
>Really? They love it that he canceled all those leases?
Yes, because it drives up demand, with "artificial shortages", so big-oil gets to charge more for petroleum imported from SA and Russia.
That means government gets to charge more in taxes and pocket more money and get larger bribes from big oil.
All part of the scam/plan to make the 1% richer, with the help of the Uni-Party led by the leftists.
The environmental effects of fossil fuels arent normally priced in to their cost, this is just a rectification of that.
Also it's guaranteed to drive down demand for fossil fuels in the long run, which you can see why fossil fuel companies wouldn't want that.
>Also it's guaranteed to drive down demand for fossil fuels in the long run,
HAHAHAHHAAHHAHAHHAAA
NOPE.
There are too many things made with petrol that cannot be made in any other method.
Oil and gas and coal are here to stay. Good thing there is plenty of it, with more discovered each year.
The majority of demand for petroleum is energy. Alternative energies would absolutely decrease demand for fossil fuels, though many organic chemicals will still use petroleum as feedstock.
>The majority of demand for petroleum is energy
A frickton of it is in manufacturing or to power vehicles.
>Alternative energies would absolutely decrease demand for fossil fuels
If that was ever going to happen, it would have happened in the last century, especially in the late 1900s.
Pipe dream.
"Alternative energy" is just another grift and scam by the rich elite 1%
new oil field discovery rate is now a tiny fraction of consumption. do your homework before spouting off and looking like a moron next time
>new oil field discovery rate is now
boooooming.
Recently discovered oil reserve in the Indian Ocean yields more oil than all the known reserves combined.
Feels good to be an oilman.
>green good red bad
ok, i did what you said, i spent all my money on imported chinky "green" tech an now i am completely broke, is the environment heathy enough to satisfy you yet, oh savior of mother earth?
>NO, NOT GOOD ENOUGH, I DEMAND MORE REPARATIONS AND MORE GIBES
You're going to try but as soon as the pinch sets in watch how everyone wants the luxury oil provided back. Your only solution is green homosexual totalitarianism where the populace doesn't get a choice in the matter, and that's not exactly going well for you.
>your solution to carbon emission reduction is to make life harder for the poor
No, we can make the tax progressive by giving rebates to the poor. This will disincentivize fossil fuel use while benefiting them. However, /misc/tards well still complain and that's not just my problem.
Small tax games are nothing compared to the wealth gained by using fossil fuels
Not my problem, cry more.
Of course its your problem. You can't get rid of fossil fuels with timid money games because there's always more money to be made by using fossil fuels. Not using fossil fuels makes you poor much faster than any financial gimmick
>You can't get rid of fossil fuels with timid money games
They know that.
The idea is to virtue signal - without doing so while making life harder for everyone would be too transparent. If they were honest they'd be talking about economic/population growth, but they can't do that because corporations wouldn't be profitable without it (and their stock holders wouldn't get to continue living their bloated lifestyles)..
You cant get rid of fossil fuels with timid money games, sure, but you can make nuclear/renewables a better option, and that's enough.
Oh ok. So the same economic system that depends on perpetual growth and got us in this situation to begin with is has the solution. Cool. Good to know elite billionaires their economists have it all figured out.
>Of course its your problem
Nope, cry more. You're just going to have to get taxed. Sorry, I just don't care abut your whining.
As long as you agree to not whine when they fail to materialize
Tiny in what sense?
Not mt fault you are a Black person. Learn some math, Black person
Uh oh, he's chimping out. Take a few deep breaths and try again: tiny in what sense?
hurr
>no error bars
into the trash it goes
If you don't look up, you never see it rising. Also, if you apply a log transform it doesn't grow as much. :^)
Neither axis is logarithmic, pseud
if you apply a log transform
>alarmists be like let's carbon tax the shit out of everything and fix climate with more money
you see why alarmists are playing right into big players' scheme? There are sensible solutions and more tax for big daddy isn't one. Most alarmists I speak to won't even want to admit nuclear is a viable way forward. Carbon offsetting through tree planting, afforestation/reforestation, olivine seeding, coastal carbon capture and plenty others. But nah, MuH TaXes is ThE oNly waY foRwarD.
Btw I'm an environmentalist and not a nay Sayer. I agree anthropogenic climate "impact" is real but the world will not end for a mere 1.5 increase in temp. Mother nature knows beat how to deal with this anamoly. Just wait you'll see the earth turn green with all this surplus carbon in the Atmos (if we could curb deforestation).
Planting trees seems cool. It's relatively cheap and would help lower temperatures across cities as trees provide tons of shade. The city I live in has a idea to plant trees in the medium as to act as a barricade to ard and beautify the city and lower temperatures and lowers carbon in the city. Pretty awesome if you ask me.
They refused to give him (You)’s because he spoke the truth
I agree that alarmists are blowing things out of proportion, but I think you're underselling the very real negative impact this will have. Water loss and crop failures are gonna cause a shitload of climate refugees, while adverse weather conditions like deadly heat waves are going to become more and more common in major areas.
Trees alone are a crap solution, they dump virtually all their carbon back into the atmosphere when they die. Seeding oceans is risky IMO, the best CO2 mitigation at the moment is using existing CO2 pipeline infrastructure to pump that shit underground.
Nuclear is a great reliable power generator, but you really can't beat the price point of wind and solar. We should encourage innovation in the short-term storage sector and develop more ways to solve the internittency problem.
>you really can't beat the price point of wind and solar.
Lol, fricking moron. Try powering a place like Las Vegas on only wind and solar and tell me how much that would cost. Then tell me how much it costs right now, the standard way. Surely you can back up your claim with numbers.
Why the frick would I know the specific power costs for a single city? If you have a point you want to make, make it. Don't come finger-wagging at me to bring you incredibly specific data for no damn reason. Lazy ass.
You made a very general claim. This general claim ought to be applicable to Las Vegas. Go ahead and justify your claim.
>Why the frick would I know the specific power costs for a single city? If you have a point you want to make, make it. Don't come finger-wagging at me to bring you incredibly specific data for no damn reason. Lazy ass.
Cognitive dissonance at work.
>climate refugees
That is what borders, immigration laws, and bullets are for. This is a fake ass reason considering most refugees currently are a direct result, not of climate, but of conflict. One might say that leaders are starting conflicts in anticipation of this unseen climate doomsday, but that is no different than cult suicides to save themselves from revelations. Besides, have you looked at any refugee crisis in the last thirty years, none of these conflicts were about prime land until Ukraine, which just so happens to be good land and could be part of the pretext for securing an independent Russia.
>some shit about trees
Most trees do not catch on fire when they die. Long term forest life cycles probably do have some brushfire element, but that is lessened if we are in a high humidity sweatbox. Besides how much of the carbon is captured in the ground versus burned away..
Local environmental changes are a problem making certain environments not as worthwhile or maintainable, but that is solved by population level events over a few generations. Nobody in LA or some other developed shithole will form a climate militia. They will turn on a fan. The undeveloped third world is getting the shit end of the stick after being constantly fricked with and their nations plunged into free-for-all status.
Even the immigration crisis in Africa can be blamed on Western countries providing opportunity when they really should have shut off borders and assimilate only the most apt population groups.
Then there is South Africa, an alluring explanation for the lack of opportunity in the region. Swollen population centers deadset on returning to precolonial environments which can't sustain them. No fricks given.
>I agree that alarmists are blowing things out of proportion,
> agree with the obvious
> comes up with the next dystopian shit in the next sentence
Why are you believers so moronic?
Things will be worse because of climate change, which is why we need to fix it. That doesn't mean the world is ending, that humans are gonna go extinct, or that the current world order will be overthrown. Seems pretty reasonable to me.
Yeah yeah you wanna shoot da 'fugees, gimme a break. If you're too dumb to figure out why it's better if millions of people don't feel the need to flee their homes and countries then you should probably stick to the containment boards. Shooting them or walling them off won't stop the damage to the global economy that ships you your dirt-cheap chicken tendies. The world is interconnected now for better or worse and crap that affects one region affects everyone.
How does that follow? I made a general claim, you asked for something very specific and you can't seem to explain why. If you have a response to my claim then make it, I'm not going to respond for you.
Are you trying to say that Las Vegas, a specific territory, falls outside of your general claim? How the frick is that even possible?
It's very possible so long as you recognize that anon was talking out of his ass. He wrote a check his ass can't cash.
>Things will be worse
Been hearing this for 30 years, when does it actually get worse? I've heard we have a decade left to act like twice now
always today + 10 years
and we need to act NOW else we're extinct within 100 years. but, MAYBE we can act within ten years and MAYBE be safe. it's a literal cult.
it's not a cult, it's a giant ass grift
Forgot pic
Still not an argument. Should I be required to give you the LCOE for every single major city? Is that gonna change your mind, if I dig up Las Vegas' power generation stats? This is stupid.
Things have already started to get worse. Record heat waves in India these past few years killing hundreds, desertification in the Sahel, crop failures in the Middle East sparked the Arab Spring. The Mountain West is drying up and burning while the Southern Triangle countries of Central America were flattened by hurricanes leading to the recent migrant crisis.
>Is that gonna change your mind, if I dig up Las Vegas' power generation stats?
Yes, but only if you're right. Let me remind you of your claim.
>you really can't beat the price point of wind and solar
So, how much would it cost to power Las Vegas with only wind and solar? How does that compare to how much it costs now?
>recent migrant crisis.
Yeah that was totally because of hurricanes and not because of economic migration. India and the Middle East being hot, inhospitable shitholes is not new, and neither is the mountain west being dry. Not even trying to be contrarian but this is really weak evidence
The bottom fell out on the Triangle's economy when Iota and Eta pulverized the homes of half a million people, they weren't doing great before but the mass emigration happened because there was practically nothing left (like Haiti, construction is shit in these countries) for the poor fricks in their path. The Middle East has had problems with water and grain before, but a severe drought in 2010 caused a spike in bread that created a wave of popular dissent in 2011 that toppled half a dozen governments and created the bloodiest conflict of the 21st century. That's something I'd rather avoid.
And what if something like that hits America? I suppose you might be such a misanthtope you'd cheer on mass death if it happened to California, but even if you're that far gone you should recognize that disruptions to one part of the globe or country will affect your wallet. I'm not asking for charity but rational self-interest.
There's not a public breakdown of the costs of each energy source for Nevada, let alone Las Vegas. I did find the EIA's report on costs for the state, Nevada's on the cheaper side (.03 cents cheaper per kWh than Texas, tied for 5th cheapest with Washington) despite being >30% renewable in electricity generation, an impressive 10 percentage points above the national average.
>That's something I'd rather avoid.
Those migrations were caused more by overpopulation than any disaster.
Overpopulation is when a region's resources are no longer able to support the current population of an organism. It's not that the Triangle or ME's birth rates are unusually high (in other words, nowhere close to Sub-Saharan Africa), but that the region's available resources are dwindling. Whether that's water, sturdy housing, or stable dirt the situation is still ultimately a result of climate change.
Prove it.
"Climate change" wasn't a problem 20 years ago when the population was 1/2.
Prove that the current migrations would still be necessary if the population was lower by even 10%, let alone half.
You can't.
The governments funding you have absolutely no incentive to talk about this because 1) they rely on economic/population growth, and 2) you can't sell a carbon tax that way.
>"Climate change" wasn't a problem 20 years ago
LOL, how can you be so stupid?
>ME's birth rates are unusually high (in other words, nowhere close to Sub-Saharan Africa), but that the region's available resources are dwindling
So basically you'd like me to calculate the area of a rectangle by considering only it's width while ignoring it's length.
Economic/population growth is great until natural fluctuations (like drought) cause famine. Maximizing population during times of plenty guarantees famine/migration, and that's exactly what our economic system does.
Of course politicians who rely on such growth are going to blame "climate change" - politicians love taxes.
>record heat in india
>killing hundreds
fricking Black person, more pajeets are killed by random busses in a MONTH than your stupid heat wave. yawn.
>Carbon offsetting through tree planting, afforestation/reforestation
Carbon capture through trees is useless since the residence time of that carbon is like 20 years
>Carbon capture through trees is useless since the residence time of that carbon is like 20 years
Nothim, but what? Carbon stays in wood until it's burned, moron.
The vast majority of trees die and decompose releasing the carbon again with an average residence time of 20 years.
Do you know about the carbon cycle?
>The vast majority of trees die and decompose
The trees we plant intentionally and harvest stay as wood though. You think we just plant managed forests for fun not thinking to prevent the wood decomposing by putting it to actual use?
When I was in elementary school (back in the 90s) we had a climate activist come in and scare us all shitless. He said coastal lands would be flooded, crops will be in shortage, etc. all within a couple decades (like 2020). He told us that we could help preserve water by not flushing the toilet after every use, but rather every other use. So I stopped flushing every time and got yelled at by my mom.
Nowadays I simply don't give a frick. I throw recyclables into the trash. I throw oily trash into the recycling bins (tainting other people's recyclables as well). I litter whenever I get the chance (I've seen some plastic trash I've thrown onto the grass walking home from the store sometimes a year later past the winter kek). I take obscenely long showers (sometimes two or three) every day. Sometimes I'll hop in the tub and run the bathtub on hot water for like 20 mins (while the water drains) just to keep my feet warm while I text my gf. I leave my lights on when I'm not home, and I leave the heat up to 73 even when I'm not home. I use the air conditioner down to 60 every day in the summer. The large electric bills don't bother me.
I pee on the floor in public bathrooms. I cough on doorknobs when I'm sick. So on, so forth. I eat almost exclusively meat and carbs, and never those homosexual vegetables. Whenever a vegan argues with me, I order extra meat and don't finish it. I throw it away.
I just want you all to know that I'm a climate accelerator. And I do it to spite you fricking morons. I want you to know people like me exist because of you. We're the joker to your Batman; you created us and now you need to deal with us. For every person you convert to your cult, I deconvert another. You won't win this fight.
"Passionate hatred can give meaning and purpose to an empty life.
Thus people haunted by the purposelessness of their lives try to find
a new content, not only by dedicating themselves to a holy cause,
but also by nursing a fanatical grievance. A mass movement
offers them unlimited opportunities for both."
– Eric Hoffer, "The True Believer" (1951)
>wasting water
h8 this meme. no water molecules are harmed in the process of showing or bathing. there is just as much water available at the end of the process as there was at the start of it. water treatment technology has existed for a long time, even if the formerly clean water is dirtied by it's use in a shower, it can easily be rehabilitated.
Honest question... Do you consider yourself an intelligent person?
Not really. But I also consider most other people even dumber than I am. I have a mountain of evidence to support me being intelligent, such as my PhD in math. You simply can't earn one of those without being at least somewhat intelligent.
>my PhD in math
i mean.. your actions in life are highly illogical. you spend your life literally burning money.. because some "climate alarmist" pissed you off in elementary school.
you seem driven by emotions like some petulant child so i have to conclude that you're actually a profoundly stupid individual... and that where ever you got your math phd must be handing those things out like mcdonalds coupons and the paper its printed on isnt not worth a shit smeared piece of toilet paper.
You mean I metaphorically burn money. Though I have burned literal money before. You haven't experienced freedom until you've set a $100 bill on fire around your friends with your cigar.
My reasoning boils down to "frick you". If you think an isolated incident made me stop giving a frick, then you're part of the reason I stopped giving a frick. It's the hypocrisy and unrealistic expectations climate activists put on the poor. I find myself in a unique position where I'm not poor, and also don't have a strong attachment to the material world. Seriously, burn some money and see how it feels. It's liberating. Once you've crossed that road, you see just how easy it is to burn metaphorical money. An extra $100 a month or so to stick it to the man with these kinds of posts, which utterly shatter your notions of reality and reason make it all worth it. But I don't need your exasperated confusion to motivate my apathy toward the environment; my self-interest is more than enough.
We're all climate accelerator. Just some of us are more honest about it than others. For example, if I told you I wasn't having kids, and that therefore my carbon footprint is less than that of a climate activist who starts a family, how would your opinion of me change, if at all? Of course, maybe I'm lying and my gf is pregnant. Or maybe I'm telling the truth. Or maybe I'm lying about my gf existing. Or perhaps I'm lying about how environmentally apathetic I am. I leave it as an exercise for the reader to determine the veracity of my posts for himself.
>if I told you I wasn't having kids
id think you were lying to me.
because people like you (people who burn money) don't plan ahead.
and before they know there are 8 screaming runts wanting to be fed and drive a porche like psycho daddy
>My reasoning boils down to "frick you".
That is not "reasoning", that is "reacting".
>you're not smart because you disagree with me and I'm smart >:(
>such as my PhD in math. You simply can't earn one of those without being at least somewhat intelligent.
lol
>http://www.theliberatedmathematician.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/PiperThesisPostPrint.pdf
Math PhD from Princeton.
As insulting as her thesis is to the world of academia, you're being willfully ignorant if you don't think she displays more intelligence than half the USA.
To other anons, it's coming up on 2 am here. I'm off to get some rest, but I promise I'll address your other comments in the morning. AMA.
I don't think you should conflate social empathy with intelligence. Assuming no empathy, what is the rationale for an intelligent person to care about the world after dying?
Presumably they have kids and would like to leave something for them. Burning money is cutting off your nose to spite your face. Nothing to do with social empathy.
>Presumably they have kids
Assuming no empathy, there wouldn't be any emotional investment. Probably, wouldn't have kids, either. What would be the rationale, then? I agree with the burning money bit, though. That part seems primarily driven by emotion, and not reason.
>more limited resources fallacies
money comes out of a printer. electronic money is even easier to produce. you are just jealous of people who are able to spend more than you are able to, that is why you're screeching at others to not waste their money. you will see no financial benefit yourself if the other guy turns into a penny pincher, but you will be saved the torture of have to look at other people enjoying themselves more than you do and having more resources than you do.
actually i don't give a frick. tbf i dont really have much of an altruistic bone in my body. but humanity is entering a world of pain
the math/science is pretty clear on that much
you can think of it more like an "i told you so, haha", if it makes you feel better
you and your ilk have been spouting the same predictable lies for the same predictable greedy reasons since before the dawn of recorded human history. even Black folk are smart enough to figure your scam out.
>limited resources fallacies
those 3 words... lulz.... the idea that anyone serious could even write that.. does not bode well
seriously laughable
All those wasted resources (savings).
(inheritance/legacy) Certainly not gonna be any use to your children (there is a good chance that someone like you will reproduce... if there wasn't the world wouldn't be in such a state)
>you have sinned and the world is ending
It's a religion. He was a priest. You got preeched on.
>not flushing the toilet after every use, but rather every other use
It's a ritual. The more rituals you do the more sunk cost fallacy kicks in and more indoctrinated you become.
You narrowly escaped getting brainwashed into their cult but many dont.
Kinda awesome how this global warming thing literally solves itself when oil in the ground literally runs out hey? lulz
Greed, gluttony, and waste.. is the actual religion.
Isn't dominion over the earth, and go forth and feast / multiply literally in your book?
This is what moronic internet posturing leads to. Childish trolling and selfishness from brainwormed idiots who have negative value to society, because caring about the future is "gay". You are worse than worthless.
I think the people adding negative value to society are the ones endlessly kvetching for decades now about shit that never happens
Cry me a river homosexual.
Unequivocally and dangerously ultra based.
God I wish that were me. Godspeed anon, you glorious butthole.
Littering is shitty and wasting electricity is a moronic waste of money but everything else is based
I'm deconverted. I'm going to start disrupting recycling now, thx anon.
burn tires on parking lots
spray variety of insecticides at every inch of garden
apply fertilizer in copious amounts to garden
when changing refrigerator put a screwdriver in the old coolant to release the gases
summer months put AC to highest power, open windows
>4 million years ago
>no primates, no guinea fowl, no bovids, no edible green plants
fukking creationists, amirite or amirite?
>amirite or amirite
ammonite
What the frick is wrong with us? We're hurtling towards the abyss, and not only are we not hitting the brakes, we're not even willing to take our collective foot off the gas pedal. Human intelligence was a mistake.
Social form of the 2nd law of thermodynamics.
The scuzziest scum always rises to the top (because they fight dirty).
It's also why humans are essentially already extinct.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicholas_Georgescu-Roegen
True that we were always doomed from the start... but because of these clowns civilization gets to die young, like a kid with cancer.
>The scuzziest scum always rises to the top (because they fight dirty).
It's not just the people at the top. Try suggesting to the average voter that they need to reduce consumption (take a pay cut) for the environment. See how that goes down.
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicholas_Georgescu-Roegen
Never heard of him but his work looks super interesting. The Entropy Law and the Economic Process is going in my reading list.
>Never heard of him
5 decades ago mainstream economists chose to ignore his work in favor of happy fairy tales like "sustainable development". They kicked the can, lived the high life, and left future generations to deal with the fallout. Well the fallout is here now. How many centuries of worth of high EROEI oil did we have at 1970s consumption rates?
I almost kinda think baby boomers were all developmentally challenged due to leaded gasoline and the associated neurological damage. They really dropped the ball on that one.
Deforestation is only a problem due to the rate of deforestation. 1970s rates of deforestation were more sustainable. But unfortunately our "leaders" sold everyone on economic/population growth.. and here we are now.
>average voter that they need to reduce consumption
The science has been there all along. And it was flatly ignored by the elites of the time. I place absolutely no blame on the average person (sheep) for their consumption because they have been deliberately misled so that a small clique can continue raking in obscene profits because of that consumption.
The people that chose to ignore Nicholas Georgescu-Roegen's work in favour of feel good consumerist dogma 50 years ago literally killed humanity.
>atmospheric CO2 is rising
GOOD! That means more plants and more food to feed cows that make humans real meat to eat!
The frick, I love the progressive left now.
Republicans are so utterly moronic
Imagine thinking in terms of Republican/Democrat in 2022.
glowBlack folk push the two party psyop at every possible opportunity, so many midwits believe that the two party system is legitimate
>Republicans are so utterly moronic
CO2 is rising
>GOOD! That means more plants and more food to feed cows that make humans real meat to eat!
THIS is the way!
> source: government
ngmi. there's no climate change
>there's no
>noo
>noooo
there's no denying that there is deglaciation
>work with indoor climate
>work regulations recommend CO2 levels not reaching 1000 ppm indoors
>mfw we're almost halfway there outside
>mfw we're almost halfway there outside
you don't a CO2 meter.
if you did then you would have long since observed that CO2 levels at your location are far, far greater than the global average. areas of human habitation are where CO2 is emitted, thats where its concentrated. urban zones have the highest CO2 levels anywhere on the planet, thats why urbanites have the lowest IQs on the planet, their brains are oxygen starved because they are poisoning themselves.
if you had a CO2 meter then you'd also have recognized that CO2 levels are not steady, the vary throughout the day as a result of plant respiration.
CO2 levels around sunset will be about double what they are at sunup.
urban CO2 concentration is one of the factor which contributes to the urban heat bubble effect.
if urbanites were willing to accept that they are the ones causing CO2 pollution instead of trying to blame their environmental crimes on the tiny rural minority then they might be able to solve this issue or at least mitigate it, but until then it will only get worse and IQs in urban zones will continue to drop.
>CO2 levels around sunset will be about double what they are at sunup
source: your imagination
there's no climate change
This is an extreme magnified graph of earth atmosphere. Show the total not a trace gas in ppm concentration.
But i know that you are nothing more than parasite in the ass of the people who pay you. So it will never happen. Have a nice life there.
Further i am pretty schure that this is modeled. People who checked that had found way smaller increases. All Liers will get what the deserve. On rope day, including (You).
Are you and the flattearthers gonna get together one day and hang all of the evil scientists telling you stuff you dont like?
>i come to IQfy to regurgitate the msm conventional wisdom
The msm media wants you to believe the Earth is round and you'll die if you jump off a tall building, but you're too smart to fall for their tricks.
>i come to IQfy to regurgitate the msm conventional wisdom
See
>i come to IQfy to regurgitate the msm conventional wisdom
See
No we're just going to embarass them, make their life's work inert, and have nobody see them as heroes or saviors anymore. It will hurt them more than any physical damage we could do. We're destroying ideas, aspirations, and legacies, not just a man.
Only hope is carbon capture
>wow look at these lakes dry up
>look at these glaciers melting!
>wow we are in a drought here but not over here
>wow it’s raining more here
This has been happening on earth for the last 4 billion years. It has nothing to do with climate or change
>that's not a speeding car, it's just the continent moving they've always been moving
hurrr durrrr
World population in 1960 was like 3B and currently it is around 8B, since 1960 a lot of deforestation has happened, pollution has caused environmental imbalance.
thanks for info
Instead of tackling real problems like overpopulation, India/China's environmental policies (or the lack thereof), consumerism or going nuclear because that would tank our popularity ratings and profits, lets take away their cars and make them eat bugs. Surely nobody will get upset.
Whataboutism
Cool non-answer. Got any more buzzwords?
>non-answer
To what? You didn't actually say anything relevant to this thread.
Both CO2 levels and global temperatures are at geological low points, we are literally living in an atypical ice age. The only temperature anomaly to ever threaten man has been glaciers, ice, and cold.
>geological low points
Are you a geological feature or a human?
>we are literally living in an atypical ice age.
We always have been. So you want us to stop living because we are an anomalous feature of Earth?
>The only temperature anomaly to ever threaten man has been glaciers, ice, and cold.
Until now.
It's amazing how dumb deniers are and how willing they are to parrot meaningless talking points without any thought.
>Millions of Years Ago
>...at which time, there were no living organisms like us, our livestock, or our crops.
Try to keep up, pls
co2 is good for the planet stop being a moron
>co2 is good for the planet
What does this even mean?
>food is good for you
>so stop complaining about obesity
>>food is good for you
>>so stop complaining about obesity
plants are getting fat from too much CO2? KEK
Another braindead /misc/tard that can't read. The claim was that "CO2 is good for the planet."
>The claim was that "CO2 is good for the planet."
It is.
More CO2 means more plant life.
More plants means more food and more CO2 scrubbers taking in CO2, so it fixes itself.
Are you really so dumb you cannot keep up with a thread and learn some basic scientific facts? lmao
>It is.
Just like food is good for you, it means more nutrients. There is no other effect of food to look at, food is always good for you. Spoken like a true fatty.
>More plants means more food and more CO2 scrubbers taking in CO2, so it fixes itself.
Then why is CO2 still rising? When did it fix itself? What calculation did you do to determine that? Oh... none. It's just another lie.
>Then why is CO2 still rising?
Deforestation due to urban sprawl and loss of the Amazon rainforest due to big corporations run by leftists bribing corrupt governments for profits.
You know that already though, unless you are really really stupid.
>Deforestation due to urban sprawl and loss of the Amazon rainforest due to big corporations run by leftists bribing corrupt governments for profits.
Oh, so now the problem didn't fix itself. Thanks for admitting that. So you're saying that already existing forests would have been enough to absorb all manmade emissions? Source?
As I predicted, you have no evidence for your claims. You just make shit up. Please do it again so you can lose more credibility.
climate mutation doesn't exist
>Canadian methane fields leak in your path
i wanna have a monster truck named "greta's regret"
Get a life
truly fossil fuels is the most addictive drug ever
another climate thread
if i say yes will you finally shut up?
If i say no will you finally be happy?
What`s the purpose of climate threads? the solution lies in Africa
And that's a good thing.
And yet not a single alarmist advocates for nuclear power or space exploration
the same le ebbin scientists who brought you covid and tell you that chopping off your dick will make you a woman, tell us that these magic numbers are 100% legit and they know exactly what's going on.
yes I will believe it
So who cares it is literally an engineering and money problem.
We can capture co2 and seqestor it but don't want to because it's too expensive.
I literally do not care. Not turning off my AC, not buying an electric cúckmobile, not switching to a bug based diet, not changing literally anything about my life. Cope
OH NOOOOOOOOOOO WE MIGHT HAVE SLIGHTLY MORE FOLIAGE ON THE PLANETS SURFACE. AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH
>WE MIGHT HAVE SLIGHTLY MORE FOLIAGE ON THE PLANETS SURFACE
This is what greencucks are concerned about?
None of you get it, global temperature rise is inevitable and it will change global atmospheric and oceanic dynamics. Different places across the world will experience warm/cooling and higher/lower rainfall. Places going to get hotter and dryer are areas already in the desert belt (+-30deg) like western Aus, india, west coast USA, Mideast.
Oceanic biochemistry is changing as a result of more carbon mixing from the atmosphere. The more absorption of c02 is making the ocean less mixed and is going to slowly be less efficient in taking c02 from the atmosphere. Besides fricking up the ph and ecosystems, its gonna make the terrestrial biosphere hotter.
The result of all this? Mass movements of people out of affected areas. Imagine what people in new dehli are gonna do with temperatures excess of 50 deg and 35 deg wet bulb. For starters they are going to need to run the AC (More energy/fossil fuels needed). Then those who can are going to try migrate to areas less affected by temperature change (Europe, russia, china, Aus, any western nation). Dont be stupid and dismiss man made biosphere perturbations. The only variable at this point is how much total c02 the world emits, the relationship between c02 release and temp rise is linear. Emitting as we are now up till 2050 will be a 8-10deg avg global temperature rise.
//Climate Science and engineering student at Oz university happy to debate or answer any questions
Only hope is geoengineering, and I bet India will try it sooner rather than later. Aerosol injections, iron seeding, etc.
Yes unless we stop emitting carbon by... well now. Seems realistic that a global approach will be to keep emitting fossil fuels and just hope that negative emissions technology will come around the corner and save us.
Certainly countries like india who will feel the effects of a warmer world first will try a geoengineering type solution. Small tweaks to the global carbon cycle could have potentially horrible effects, so im worried a desperate nation would try something retarted like aerosol injection and frick it up.
Any geoengineering would need global cooperation to be effective. Personally im a fan of afforestation, not as a solution but more as a safety net. Recently did some calcs and my estimates showed we need ~1.557% of the earths land mass reforrested (2.6million sqkm) to reduce atmospheric ppm to 395.96 (1.5deg temp incr). If we did even a fraction of this we would essentially create a safety net for if we frick everything else up. Also a decentralized solution, gov just needs to convince/incentivise people to allow revegetation of rural/urban areas. Worth noting cant do monoculture plantations and plantings in the tropics would be the most effective.
It needs to be two-pronged: cutting emissions and negative emissions/other effect reducing tech. Carbon emissions are dropping, just not fast enough.
>Carbon emissions are dropping
Source? Because it seems the troposphere's CO2-ppm keeps going up 2-3 points each year.
Source? Because it seems the troposphere's CO2-ppm keeps going down 2-3 points each year.
>Source?
every place
https://www.co2.earth/daily-co2 for example, among a billion other sources
>Co2.earth
Do you have a reliable source? Thanks.
do you?
For what? I never made a claim. You did.
>I never made a claim
good
go back to sleep
>basic CO2 concentration readings are wrong
moron
https://gml.noaa.gov/ccgg/trends/monthly.html
> .gov
actually it's .lol. or .fake.
You are confusing 'weather' and 'climate'. To properly make assessments about global or regional temperature change you need to compare data on much larger time scales than '20 years'.
>noooooooo you cant recognise patterns
You didn't recognize a pattern.
>global warming be real cause there wuz an ice age at one point
you're just a little guy 😀 you have little penis, little IQ, little education and recognise little patterns
description of a typical shill
But we humans operate on short time scales.
Yes we'll frick up the planet in 300 years. But im pretty confident these hairless monkeys will find a way to build a new planet in 299 years if they need to.
The earth will be fine with or without us. No matter what we do. Even if we Nuke every inch of exposed soil. In a few million years it'd probably be back to teeming with microscopic life and a few million years after that probably sentient octopus.
What were worried about is whether we can survive on It. And I'm confident we can. Humans are adaptable. If the weather heats up we will build better fridges.
If it cools down we will build better heaters.
If the crops die we will genetically frick with then until they stop dying.
Trust humanity.
humanity will survive, but civilisation will end
Well not that much longer, I think the usual definition is the change in the averages over the last 30 years.
God climate shills are morons
>place is warm
>more proof for doomsday, it's *climate* change, the end is nigh!
>place is cold
>n-no that's just weather chud
Who are you quoting?
>Woodfortrees
Unreliable.
>Unreliable.
How so?
Honestly 1 degree of change doesn't seem to be that much.
Yes yes, on the grand scheme of things this might destroy the rare Amazonian pink finger birds habitat and drive them to extinction.
And yes yes if the trend continues for the next 200 years the ice caps might melt and inland real estate gets promoted to beachfront.
However, were humans. We operate on time scales of decades not geological time.
200 years ago we were using signal flares to communicate and lightning our homes with kerosine lamps.
In the next 200 years, global warming won't matter. We will be living off planet with biological reserves on elevated domes the size of small islands suspended above the sea.
https://www.sealevels.org
Click and drag in the plot area to zoom in
pure propaganda, no need to zoom to see it's bullshit
https://www.sealevels.org/#sources
https://www.pnas.org/content/suppl/2016/02/17/1517056113.DCSupplemental/pnas.1517056113.sd03.xls
>look at my le ebbin sources
>cant explain this simple image
>explain this simple image
tides, photoshop
it will never not be funny to see science acolytes rather believe unfalsifiable magic numbers than their own eyes
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proceedings_of_the_National_Academy_of_Sciences_of_the_United_States_of_America
> Wikipedia
Dude, this is a no go zone for at least 10 years, it's only for cattle to feed on fecal matter
>PNAS doesn't exist
hurr durr
something sponsored by government? rope already
Aww what's the matter stupid? Can't keep up?
shill, government is no longer an argument, same as "take meds"
yeah, instantly believe in "sources". dude, anything with ^https?: must be treated with exceptional care.
brought to you by the people who can't tell a penis from a vegana without government guidelines
So which part of earth science do you think is fake and fraudulent? The basics perhaps? Do you agree that atmospheric carbon absorbs high amounts of solar insolation? That it blocks outgoing shortwave radiation?
We've been on stage five for a couple decades now. Shame we couldn't have rallied around nuclear power when we had the chance.
science is judged on how good it can predict events, for example how an apple falls to the ground.
except climate "science" which wasnt correct a single time in the last 50 years.
>wasnt correct
bs
>except climate "science" which wasnt correct a single time in the last 50 years.
Why are you lying?
>fitting your magic numbers onto an obvious trend a few years into the future
ahahahahahaha
>magic numbers
you're on IQfy, educate yourself what a data set is
unreproducible magic numbers isnt science, friendo
low iq post
even low iq people see straight through your bullshit
It's reproduced. You have no clue what you're talking about.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berkeley_Earth
why dont you go ahead and reproduce their results?
No need, Berkeley Earth already reproduced it. Why did you lie?
>just trust us
good goy.
>just trust us
Nope, the data is publicly available.
http://berkeleyearth.org/data/
and you reviewed the data and reproduced all the experiments etc
of course not :^)
No need to, it's peer reviewed. If you claim they're wrong then prove it.
Peer reviewed by which peers? And reviewed how?
http://berkeleyearth.org/papers-climate-science/
so berkeley earth was peer reviewed by berkeley earth? holy shit.
That's a list of peer reviewed papers in a variety of different journals. What made you think Berkeley Earth peer reviewed its own papers?
It's impossible to tell whether you're a real moron or pretending to be one to make deniers look bad.
>Hausfather
>Hausfather
>Hausfather
>Hausfather
Anon, this is not what consensus looks like.
Not an argument. Try again.
Are you Hausfather? I'm going to tell your dean you post on a pedophile board. Expect an email from HR within a week.
See
Not an argument
No argument to respond to.
Peer reviewed by other climatologists whose funding also depends on this being a really totally super big deal
wow what a coincidence!
>Peer reviewed by other climatologists whose funding also depends on this being a really totally super big deal
kek
"trust the science!" says fact checkers who also get paid by the same corporations/governments.
This is as stupid as saying geologists' funding depends on the Earth being round.
No it would be like geologists claiming there's a massive tectonic shift about to occur every decade and we must give up our decision making to stop it
Are you absolutely sure you are not conflating peer-reviewed literature and tabloid news, dummy?
Yes I am. Are you absolutely sure you're not conflating climatology and ancient doomsday shamans?
Pretty sure you misunderstand climatology here. I'd be happy to see some of those peer-reviewed doomsday predictions, though!
No need, 96% of homeless preachers on the corner agree, consensus is never wrong
Ah okay, so it's just that you strongly believe that climate scientists are wrong.
Then it should be trivial for you to give me some examples of climatologists agreeing that catastrophe will occur and then not happening. So weird how you haven't done this yet.
>geologists' funding depends on the Earth being round.
Geologists, or "dirt people", study dirt and rocks, not the geometric shape of a planet. Wrong science dude.
Geography, whatever.
>if you dont agree with my grift you are wrong
lmao
>It's a grist because I said so!
>no I don't have any evidence, I just want it to be true!
You honestly are indistinguishable from flat earthers.
you mistake your refusal to see with not existing.
Refusal to see what? You've shown nothing, just made up a bunch of easily disproven claims. Why are you here?
DEBOOONKED
No need to debunk what has no evidence in the first place. moronic monkey.
Again with the "anomaly". A failsafe scam that allows climatologists their place at the pots
What is wrong with using temperature anomaly?
>models are constantly overshooting and then getting corrected down to only undershoot
impressiv science you have there
here we can see climate "science" in action:
>create as much noise as possible
>cherry pick the few models that were right by chance
>look we were right all along
as much noise as possible
pick the few models that were right by chance
Neither describe anything in that graph. Are you a literal shill? Because you just seem so desperate to write any lie that pops into your head to make climate science look bad.
>it's literally a graph of a few cherrypicked models
>nooooooooooooo you are a shill
>>it's literally a graph of a few cherrypicked models
No, it literally isn't and you're literally making shit up. Why?
Stop responding to obvious shills who just deny without posting any data
yes it is. why are you in denial
No, it's not.
https://www.wcrp-climate.org/wgcm/references/CMIP3_BAMS_2007.pdf
You immediately destroy your credibility when you just make shit up.
BlackRock, Inc. is an American multinational investment management corporation based in New York City. Founded in 1988, initially as a risk management and fixed income institutional asset manager, BlackRock is the world's largest asset manager, with US$10 trillion in assets under management as of January 2022.[3] BlackRock operates globally with 70 offices in 30 countries and clients in 100 countries.[4]
BlackRock has sought to position itself as an industry leader in environmental, social and corporate governance (ESG). The company has faced criticism for worsening climate change, its close ties with the Federal Reserve System during the COVID-19 pandemic, anticompetitive behavior, and its unprecedented investments in China.
In 2017, BlackRock expanded its presence in sustainable investing and environmental, social and corporate governance (ESG) with new staff[84] and products both in the USA[85] and Europe[86][87] with the aim to lead the evolution of the financial sector in this regard.[88]
BlackRock started using its weight to draw attention to environmental and diversity issues by means of official letters to CEOs and shareholder votes together with activist investors or investor networks[89] like the Carbon Disclosure Project, which in 2017 backed a successful shareholder resolution for ExxonMobil to act on climate change.[90][91] In 2018, it asked Russell 1000 companies to improve gender diversity on their board of directors if they had less than two women on them.[92]
> go to pol
shills paid by government have two arguments, meds and pol
.org
That's not even the name of the website, illiterate /misc/tard
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Climate_Research_Programme
>posts blatant lies and propaganda
Still waiting for you to show one thing is a lie/propaganda.
>atmospheric CO2 is rising
>...at which time, there were no living organisms like us, our livestock, or our crops
Australopiths are similar enough to us that this seems an exaggeration.
>Southern Ape with one-third our brain size are similar enough
>
>this seems an exaggeration
No shit, Sherlock.
>dad just got air conditioning in his summer house
>gf just bought a new SUV
>I just had a barbecue and used propane for the grill
No matter where I look I see an increase in CO2 being released.
CLimate CHange is just another scam like a ponzi scheme.
The Earth fixes itself. Humans are just a tiny speck on it.
Microscopic plankton have more of an effect on the climate than humans ever will have, even if we become 100 billion people.
no, it's a hoax to prevent mad useless use of fossil fuels
>The Earth fixes itself.
Proof? Why is CO2 and temperature still rising if Earth fixes itself? What magical rule dictates that humans can do no wrong?
>Microscopic plankton have more of an effect on the climate than humans ever will have, even if we become 100 billion people.
How are plankton causing current warming? Certainly their evolution had large effects over geological timescales millions of years ago, but what does that have to do with today?
>What magical rule dictates that humans can do no wrong?
Humans can do wrong but are still not powerful enough to cause a drastic change to life on earth or anything which matters at all.
Humans can not extinguish all life on earth even if they tried really really hard and did their best at it.
You and greta lovers like to think that Humans are gods on earth, but you are not, you are literally having the same effect as a plankton or cyanobacteria.
>Why is CO2 and temperature still rising
natural changes, earth is not a static system and never was
>Humans can do wrong but are still not powerful enough to cause a drastic change to life on earth or anything which matters at all.
Why not? Is this a religious belief?
>Humans can not extinguish all life on earth even if they tried really really hard and did their best at it.
I don't see what this has to do with what we're discussing, but why not? If desired, humans could create a strong enough nuclear winter to block out the Sun for years. This could create a chain reaction that could certainly kill all life on Earth.
>You and greta lovers like to think that Humans are gods on earth
No. You certainly don't have to be gods to have a large effect.
>you are literally having the same effect as a plankton or cyanobacteria.
First you said the Earth fixes itself, even though the Earth still hasn't recovered from the CO2 drawdown caused by phytoplankton millions of years ago and isn't stopping current warming. Then you said we have a smaller effect than phytoplankton, even though we're releasing CO2 at a much faster rate than it was sequestered by phytoplankton. Now you're saying we have the same effect. You're very confused.
We are observably having a large effect on life on Earth by rapidly changing the atmosphere, climate, and habitats.
>Why not? Is this a religious belief?
Not religious belief, scientific.
>If desired, humans could create a strong enough nuclear winter to block out the Sun for years.
lol really lol this is an example of the religious belief in human superiority and being uber all else, just like that funny book from a desert told you.
delusion
>to have a large effect.
good now you are back to reality, humans are having an effect on their environment just like cats, cyanobacteria and mushrooms have
>the Earth still hasn't recovered
there is no static state for it to recover to, your mind is literally polluted by religious ramblings by a desert dweller thousands of years ago
>We are observably having a large effect on life on Earth
and that is a good thing
>natural changes
What are the natural causes?
>earth is not a static system and never was
I never claimed it was. You're the one who claimed Earth fixes itself. I'm asking you how. So far you've just made claims without any evidence or even just a mechanistic explanation.
>What are the natural causes?
well first you have to get rid of the abrahamic religious notion that humans are placed on this earth by god with the task to care for all the animals and life on it and also perceive humans to be some kind of different animal and more of gods own creation in his image separate from the natural earth
when you do that then we can talk about how biological organisms affect their environment
>Earth fixes itself. I'm asking you how
we dont know, but that topic of research is far more interesting than climate alarming climate change muh global warming erections you guys have
lets pump as much co2 and in fact as much greenhouse gases as we can to see what happens
embrace that earth changes
if you really believe that humans can cause so huge change to destroy life on earth, then we certainly can change it back or just terrform mars
stop being a pussy