Man-made climate change believers... you do realise CC is being used as propaganda?

[Kalmah6661]

Climate change "believers"? You say that as if this subject is debateable.

You either accept the facts, or you reject them out of ignorance.

It's like calling people " gravity believers."

[oshmalls]

Now they're claiming that climate change is making north africa and the mid east inhabitable...

inhabitable? or uninhabitable?

Can't believe all these posts and no one points out this enormous error...

[Jasonw1178]

The climate of Earth has been constantly changing for billions of years. The most drastic changes happened when man was nowhere to be found.

If you look at 99% of CC advocates, there are financial incentives for their cause. They use it as an excuse to tax (as though that will stop it) things you need, so they can funnel it to programs they are invested into, taking their cut of course. Carbon credits, don't even get me started, another program where the rich can make money off people's backs.

If the CC people were serious, why do they give China a free pass to pollute becaues they are not a poor country? India too, lots of wealth there.

[T150]

Thread sponsored by:

[LIFTplusHOCKEY]

lol the general problem in developed countries is that people will blindly buy anything and any agenda the media pushes imo.


Remember Kony 2012? How everyone went phukn crazy?

I love how 5-10 years ago man-made climate change was a very debatable issue and now? It's as if all you phucks got your phD's in environmental studies and make claims like "lol you're an autist if you don't believe in the buzz-term "global warming". lol you're delusional, it's like saying the Earth is flat."

Now I'm not saying man-made climate change is real or not, but I don't think there has been a drastic spike in the number of people studying the environment for a living. Have you ever thought what caused you to change your opinion from "hmm I don't care and am not really sure" to "LOL just LOL if you don't believe in man-made climate change!".

My point is you're [probably] no more of a scientist than I am and [probably] no more of a scientist than someone who thinks it's all exaggerated propoganda, and have done an equal amount of extensive field-based research on this topic (a.k.a none) so what drove you to have such a drastic change in opinion? Have you thought of that? The media pushed their agendas a little further, and all of a sudden everyone became an expert on climate change and had a much more firm opinion on it than they did 10 years ago even though they did no extensive research for them to reach that conclusion - I'm talking about the average joe. I wonder why..

[WhAtNoWbChSs]

we've managed to completely **** the earth in only about 200 years give or take from the start of the industrial revolution.

mind=blown

[liftasaurus]

inhabitable? or uninhabitable?

Can't believe all these posts and no one points out this enormous error...

lmao. everyone knew what i meant

[LIFTplusHOCKEY]

we've managed to completely **** the earth in only about 200 years give or take from the start of the industrial revolution.

mind=blown

but who was iceage? The last one happened about 10000 years ago way before the industrial revolution and way before cars and way before high amounts of pollution. Who do we blame that on? And then right after the Earth started warming again without modern day toxins and car emissions. The Earth has existed for over 4 billion years, and has gone through both insane periods of cold and insane periods of heat. You really think TWO HUNDRED years is enough to make a change that is anything more than negligible?

[WhAtNoWbChSs]

but who was iceage? The last one happened about 10000 years ago way before the industrial revolution and way before cars and way before high amounts of pollution. Who do we blame that on? And then right after the Earth started warming again without modern day toxins and car emissions. The Earth has existed for over 4 billion years, and has gone through both insane periods of cold and insane periods of heat. You really think TWO HUNDRED years is enough to make a change that is anything more than negligible?

Considering the number of cars I think the answer is Yes.

Most drive to work with only themselves in the car then sit in traffic jams for hours everyday while the engine idles. This **** is fuking retarded.

[Kiwi_Fella]

yeah totally agree OP, lol

multiple studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals show that 97 percent or more of actively publishing climate scientists agree: Climate-warming trends over the past century are extremely likely due to human activities. In addition, most of the leading scientific organizations worldwide have issued public statements endorsing this position.

http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

[JitnikoVi]

The climate of Earth has been constantly changing for billions of years. The most drastic changes happened when man was nowhere to be found.

If you look at 99% of CC advocates, there are financial incentives for their cause. They use it as an excuse to tax (as though that will stop it) things you need, so they can funnel it to programs they are invested into, taking their cut of course. Carbon credits, don't even get me started, another program where the rich can make money off people's backs.

If the CC people were serious, why do they give China a free pass to pollute becaues they are not a poor country? India too, lots of wealth there.

anthropogenic climate change is real.

India had a whole 'green revolution' and is still working to improve their emissions with their technology.
China is similar, they used to use almost entirely coal around the 1960s and now thats down to about 50%.

[johsin28]

Considering the number of cars I think the answer is Yes.

Most drive to work with only themselves in the car then sit in traffic jams for hours everyday while the engine idles. This **** is fuking retarded.

If mother nature had given us car that ran on water, may be we wouldn't be polluting the atmosphere. lol

brb turning off car on every red light
brb paying more for gas
brb recycling
brb trying to save earth
brb asteroid hits
brb earth is gone

lol just lol.

Best you can do is live your life luxury without worrying too much about chit that doesn't even matter. One flood can wipe off every living creature on land in no time. Earth doesn't even need humans to destroy chit, it does it on its own.

We should celebrate the fact that we took over this planet and turned it into our lil bitch and survived for this long. No other species have done it but the fact is, earth goes through big changes after every millions year and around that time species get erased and new ones get created. We're at that tipping point. CC isn't happening because of humans, it's just earth going through its normal course.

[Jasonw1178]

anthropogenic climate change is real.

India had a whole 'green revolution' and is still working to improve their emissions with their technology.
China is similar, they used to use almost entirely coal around the 1960s and now thats down to about 50%.

I have NO DOUBT that the 7 billion people on this planet are contributing, but I also have no doubt that a lot of what is happening, would happen if we were never here. I am all for lower emissions. I just start drawing lines when I see money being laundered around and start seeing "poor" countries getting a pass because they are developing because it's not really about our environment, it's about an international socialism. If it's really about the envronment then it should be everyone.

[JitnikoVi]

I have NO DOUBT that the 7 billion people on this planet are contributing, but I also have no doubt that a lot of what is happening, would happen if we were never here. I am all for lower emissions. I just start drawing lines when I see money being laundered around and start seeing "poor" countries getting a pass because they are developing because it's not really about our environment, it's about an international socialism. If it's really about the envronment then it should be everyone.

Its hard/near impossible to force developing countries to put the environment as a priority when they are focusing on the economy/livelihood of their people.

The Kuznetz curve is made to describe just that.



As the people in the country get wealthier, they care more about the environment and viceversa.

[WhAtNoWbChSs]

If mother nature had given us car that ran on water, may be we wouldn't be polluting the atmosphere. lol

brb turning off car on every red light
brb paying more for gas
brb recycling
brb trying to save earth
brb asteroid hits
brb earth is gone

lol just lol.

Best you can do is live your life luxury without worrying too much about chit that doesn't even matter. One flood can wipe off every living creature on land in no time. Earth doesn't even need humans to destroy chit, it does it on its own.

We should celebrate the fact that we took over this planet and turned it into our lil bitch and survived for this long. No other species have done it but the fact is, earth goes through big changes after every millions year and around that time species get erased and new ones get created. We're at that tipping point. CC isn't happening because of humans, it's just earth going through its normal course.

but uh.... think of the children?

that's all I got.

[JitnikoVi]

CC isn't happening because of humans, it's just earth going through its normal course.

its a positive feedback loop and is definitely exacerbated by humans

[LIFTplusHOCKEY]

Considering the number of cars I think the answer is Yes.

Most drive to work with only themselves in the car then sit in traffic jams for hours everyday while the engine idles. This **** is fuking retarded.

lol the 200 years of cars in busy traffic is enough to make a significant impact on a planet that has been lasting for more than 4 billion years and has dealt with and lived through worse climates. Okay. No need to be angry none of this matters at the end of the day

[johsin28]

but uh.... think of the children?

that's all I got.

..but we share our DNA with most species on earth and some of them are quite impossible to get wiped off because they don't even live on top layer of earth. They'll live after extinction and turn into human v2.0. Those bacterias, fungus, viruses. They're your relatives.

[the[K]id]

actually climate change IS occurring in north africa, the sahara has been undergoing desertification for a while.... but well before we started burning natural fossil fuels

What's natural got to do with it? Uranium is pretty natural, don't eat it though...

Cool bro. Completely ignore my point that climate change is delivered as propaganda. That's a fact. Whether or not it's purposely done as propaganda as the best way to reach the masses, or the best way to lie is up for debate. But it is 100% propaganda without a doubt. And they are completely drowning out any counter-propaganda from the oil companies.

You realise oil companies actually figured all this chit out 30+ years ago, then buried the research right? Think you are confusing scientific evidence with advertising brah. Warming/cooling cycles are natural, however the increased levels of CO2 in the atmosphere and ocean are not and correlate with increased human emissions. Air being 2 degrees warmer probably isn't a big deal, if all the chit in the oceans start dying we are going to be pretty fuked.

[JitnikoVi]

lol the 200 years of cars in busy traffic is enough to make a significant impact on a planet that has been lasting for more than 4 billion years and has dealt with and lived through worse climates.

Its not just cars but yes, 200 years of progressive industrialization is enough to make an impact on the planet. The earth has been through worse, no doubt, but we werent around for that, and if we were, we wouldnt have survived. Thats why this is important, we are seeing the trickle effects now and if we dont make relatively big changes the future generations will have this effect amplified.

[WhAtNoWbChSs]

Its not just cars but yes, 200 years of progressive industrialization is enough to make an impact on the planet. The earth has been through worse, no doubt, but we werent around for that, and if we were, we wouldnt have survived. Thats why this is important, we are seeing the trickle effects now and if we dont make relatively big changes the future generations will have this effect amplified.

I think given enough time, ultimately we will cook unless big changes are made.

We will turn this place into Venus eventually.

(not actually as bad as venus but too hot to sustain life)

To whoever made the universe, nice symbolism. The closest plant to earth is almost exactly the same size and has a runaway green house gas effect.

[MHannibal]

im against pollution but when people refer to climate change they are mainly talking about the rise in temperature ... that has been happening for millions of years at much more extreme rates. Moreover the key gas in the temperature increase argument is CO2, there have been MANY MANY ages where CO2 levels dwarfed what they are currently and the earth was cooler. It just isn't as simple as the media makes it out to be but hey, go recycle ... go buy your energy saving goods and pat yourself on the back as you're a better human being than those who don't right

did 4 years in chemistry

[BeerCalories]

lol the general problem in developed countries is that people will blindly buy anything and any agenda the media pushes imo.


Remember Kony 2012? How everyone went phukn crazy?

I love how 5-10 years ago man-made climate change was a very debatable issue and now? It's as if all you phucks got your phD's in environmental studies and make claims like "lol you're an autist if you don't believe in the buzz-term "global warming". lol you're delusional, it's like saying the Earth is flat."

Now I'm not saying man-made climate change is real or not, but I don't think there has been a drastic spike in the number of people studying the environment for a living. Have you ever thought what caused you to change your opinion from "hmm I don't care and am not really sure" to "LOL just LOL if you don't believe in man-made climate change!".

My point is you're [probably] no more of a scientist than I am and [probably] no more of a scientist than someone who thinks it's all exaggerated propoganda, and have done an equal amount of extensive field-based research on this topic (a.k.a none) so what drove you to have such a drastic change in opinion? Have you thought of that? The media pushed their agendas a little further, and all of a sudden everyone became an expert on climate change and had a much more firm opinion on it than they did 10 years ago even though they did no extensive research for them to reach that conclusion - I'm talking about the average joe. I wonder why..

Great post. The internet is a library of information, but it is also a great tool to peer pressure people into buying into whatever crap the gov wants. I notice women are powerless against social justice PC memes, and if you dont agree withtheir garbage you are a bigot. A global government is on the way boys. I cant 100% say it will be a bad thing, but they've been planning this for awhile.

No tin foil

[JitnikoVi]

im against pollution but when people refer to climate change they are mainly talking about the rise in temperature ... that has been happening for millions of years at much more extreme rates. Moreover the key gas in the temperature increase argument is CO2, there have been MANY MANY ages where CO2 levels dwarfed what they are currently and the earth was cooler. It just isn't as simple as the media makes it out to be but hey, go recycle ... go buy your energy saving goods and pat yourself on the back as you're a better human being than those who don't right

did 4 years in chemistry

You're likely referring to a very brief period of time (few million years) in the ordovician/silurian when there was a coincidence of effects (such as a dimmer solar irradiance) that caused both glaciers to still be present while co2 ppm levels were higher than present day.

That brief period in history is based on a GEOCARB model by Robert Berner who specifically advised against using it for these time periods due to high uncertainty. Only about 1-3 million years later (as co2 levels consistently increasing, amplifying a positive feedback loop) the glaciers thawed entirely and co2 levels skyrocketed.

Its important to note that a much smaller increase in c02 today will produce a climate that would have required much higher c02 to achieve in the Paleozoic.

[winjones]

Time Magazine 1974 (Global Cooling Article)

Strong understanding of positive feedback...

Cooling does not refute global warming; its simply a result of variation from region to region, and an example of how positive feedback works and the complexity of our planet's climate system.

Agreed, Climate change is BS, sure it might contribute in small non significant way but to completely blame humanity for changes on earth is silly beyond belief. It is fact that the earth have transformed naturally over its life time, it's a matter of time before another ice age.

Nobody debates that temperature changes trend over time... the issue is that as a species we rape our planet's dynamic equilibrium.

Small non significant way? Not sure if srs? Bro humans are the worst ****ing thing to happen to the biosphere (fact). Even if you want to debate global warming thousands of chemicals have been casually dumped into the environment in the USA alone and we only know how a fraction (around 10%) of these chemicals react with organic matter.

Virtually every major scientific institution that that deals with the climate, ocean, or atmospheric science agrees that our planet is rapidly warming and the primary cause is CO2 emissions.

[bobbjj]

Agreed, Climate change is BS, sure it might contribute in small non significant way but to completely blame humanity for changes on earth is silly beyond belief. It is fact that the earth have transformed naturally over its life time, it's a matter of time before another ice age.

Lol.

If you paid for any schooling at any level you should ask from a refund.

[Reliance012]

Time Magazine 1974 (Global Cooling Article)

You idiots never stop.

Human induced global cooling was never published in any peer-reviewed literature, and never had the consensus of the scientific community (to put it mildly).
It was published in popular magazines (Times, RD,) after an interview.

Take the foil off your head. Go to college. Vote intelligently.

[RedSoxfan1978]

Have you thought about who stands to benefit from climate change denial?

I'll give you a clue, the industry that would be hit hardest by reductions in emissions or alternative fuels is worth 10s of trillions of dollars.

There also many people and companies making billions off of "Green Energy" as well. Look up who they are and who they know. It would probably be shocking to you.

That's all I'm saying. Keep an open mind here and just look into the supposed clean energy racket.

Also there are ice core samples that disprove climate change/global warming. Look that up too.

Just saying.

[Kalmah6661]

There also many people and companies making billions off of "Green Energy" as well. Look up who they are and who they know. It would probably be shocking to you.

That's all I'm saying. Keep an open mind here and just look into the supposed clean energy racket.

Also there are ice core samples that disprove climate change/global warming. Look that up too.

Just saying.

No, there aren't.

90% of climate scientists agree that humans are affecting the rate at which climate changes.

You're not a scientist, so shut your mouth.

[BenBlue]

There is no question that climate change happens with or without humans.

There's also no question that humans are contributing to global warming. There is plenty of evidence, and anyone who wants to question that can, please, just do some research. There is an almost completely united front with scientists indicating that yes, it is real. The reds here denying it, are not scientists, and are not providing any evidence beyond "this is what I think". Saying that it's all propaganda, is pretty silly. Think about all the massive businesses that will be affected if the world started taking it more seriously and trying to reverse the effects? Why would the media propagate that? You can try to counter by saying that green energy is big business too, which it is, but it's not comparable. The industries pocketing from fossil fuels are among the most powerful in the world. There is no doubt in my mind that green energy will, eventually, take over. But we've had many green energy solutions for decades now. There is a reason why it hasn't taken off yet. Change takes time, especially where big business is concerned. The media has been covering up climate change for years. What we're getting now, is a dose of truth. The only propaganda being bought here, is by those who think it's fake.