🧵 Untitled Thread
Anonymous at Thu, 23 May 2024 17:48:48 UTC No. 16189806
If global warming is real then why did antarctic sea ice increase by 10% between the late 1970s & 2015?
Anonymous at Thu, 23 May 2024 18:05:23 UTC No. 16189819
You see, basically, you just have to know that greater people than you are thinking harder than you. They spend more time and money than you, and 100% of them have told you exactly what you're supposed to believe so don't even bother trying to think just go back to sweeping floors so that you can be famous, wealthy, and powerful one day when you've given everything you have and your freedom and your personality and your youth to the actual people who are famous, wealthy, and powerful.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 May 2024 18:34:09 UTC No. 16189859
>>16189806
Because measuring on just one day (sep 15) is retarded
Anonymous at Thu, 23 May 2024 18:36:41 UTC No. 16189861
>>16189819
Gummy wummy
Anonymous at Thu, 23 May 2024 19:04:07 UTC No. 16189899
>>16189806
That nonsense is 100% scam.
🗑️ Anonymous at Thu, 23 May 2024 19:07:49 UTC No. 16189914
>>16189806
What's the average temperature of the antarctic? What's the freezing point of water?
Anonymous at Fri, 24 May 2024 01:13:21 UTC No. 16190498
My guess would be the reduction in chlorofluorocarbons.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 May 2024 01:15:06 UTC No. 16190502
>>16189859
Oh shit, I didn't catch that. Also it looks like the graph was deliberately cut off at 2015, probably to hide the fact that the spike was transient.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 May 2024 22:19:34 UTC No. 16191725
>>16190758
sure there is. lmao. everyone knows you global warming faggots just change the data so it fits the narrative you're trying to sell
Anonymous at Sat, 25 May 2024 03:51:47 UTC No. 16192024
>>16191725
Retard take
Anonymous at Sat, 25 May 2024 07:40:29 UTC No. 16192277
>>16189859
>i know how to measure better than the professionals do
you don't
Anonymous at Sat, 25 May 2024 08:15:25 UTC No. 16192329
Anonymous at Sat, 25 May 2024 08:18:18 UTC No. 16192336
>>16190758
The abhorrent vomit you call data is not convincing anyone who has a working brain. There is no such a thing as global warming.
Anonymous at Sat, 25 May 2024 10:33:20 UTC No. 16192434
>>16191725
>>16192336
>OP posts a cherry-picked slice of data
>Someone posts a wider data span from the exact same source
>"n-no you can't do that data is le bad"
Somber.
Anonymous at Sun, 26 May 2024 07:47:52 UTC No. 16193724
>>16192336
Low IQ people will always tend to have stupid beliefs because they are low IQ
Anonymous at Sun, 26 May 2024 08:52:01 UTC No. 16193785
>>16189806
>the area meme again
Is this a psyop to make me believe in AGW or are you chuds unironically this retarded?
Anonymous at Sun, 26 May 2024 22:05:38 UTC No. 16194825
>>16189806
Global warming is fake
🗑️ Anonymous at Sun, 26 May 2024 22:23:59 UTC No. 16194865
>>16192277
>>16192336
>>16193313
>>16193724
Retard takes
Anonymous at Mon, 27 May 2024 09:39:27 UTC No. 16195522
>>16189806
Its amazing how upset people who claim to be concerned about the environment become when someone posts good news about the environment. You'd think they'd be happy to see good news about the environment, but instead they fly into a rage
Anonymous at Mon, 27 May 2024 09:56:11 UTC No. 16195542
>>16195522
>Its amazing how upset people who claim to be concerned about the environment become when someone posts lies and misinformation about the environment. You'd think they'd be happy to see lies and misinformation about the environment, but instead they fly into a rage
ftfy
Anonymous at Mon, 27 May 2024 14:24:12 UTC No. 16195849
>>16189806
>did antarctic sea ice increase by 10% between the late 1970s & 2015?
Yes, I remember following that well. The reasons for that increase are complex and involve a variety of factors.
You have to understand that due to the chaotic complexity of many interacting fluid dynamics factors and solar irradiance, albedo, cloud cover, etc, no one knows EXACTLY why it happened, but it is attributed to several combined factors, such as wind patterns (stronger westerly winds spread ice outward), ocean currents (upwelling of colder deep water promotes ice formation), atmospheric temperature (stable temperatures and cooling from ozone depletion), freshwater input (melting glaciers add cold, fresh water that freezes more easily), natural variability (climate phenomena like the Southern Annular Mode and El Niño-Southern Oscillation influence ice patterns).
You combine all that mess into a salad bowl the size of an ocean around a frozen continent and, yeah, it's hard to determine the details.
Anonymous at Mon, 27 May 2024 14:28:00 UTC No. 16195859
>>16193313
Anon, from your own chart, you can see that the OP is correct, the increase did occur.
My modest attempt at clarifying the OP with a simple answer to a very complex question:
>>16195849
Anonymous at Mon, 27 May 2024 15:20:01 UTC No. 16195958
>>16195859
>>16195522
Retard takes
Anonymous at Mon, 27 May 2024 21:04:36 UTC No. 16196487
Anonymous at Tue, 28 May 2024 07:30:41 UTC No. 16197311
>>16196487
The rate at which the antarctic is gaining ice over the past 7 or 8 years is even greater than it was from 1978 to 2015
Anonymous at Tue, 28 May 2024 22:31:36 UTC No. 16198318
>>16189806
The current interglacial period is slowly coming to a close, the Antarctic will continue to gain ice for the next 10,000 years or so
Anonymous at Wed, 29 May 2024 06:43:39 UTC No. 16198779
>>16197311
the arctic is also gaining ice currently
Anonymous at Wed, 29 May 2024 20:22:43 UTC No. 16199574
>>16198779
>>16197311
both of these are good news if you're concerned about global warming, looks like all of the scientists' doomsday predictions turned out to be completely wrong.
Anonymous at Thu, 30 May 2024 05:57:02 UTC No. 16200304
>>16189819
science is such a stupid religion
Anonymous at Thu, 30 May 2024 21:06:08 UTC No. 16201393
>>16189819
>the next ice age is coming
<no, its global warming
>the next ice age is coming
<no, its global warming
>the next ice age is coming
<no, its global warming
>the next ice age is coming
<no, its global warming
Anonymous at Thu, 30 May 2024 21:07:41 UTC No. 16201398
>>16189806
Because it flows faster and more is inteoduced to the ocean, probably ? IDK, not a climate scientist.
Anonymous at Fri, 31 May 2024 01:20:05 UTC No. 16201785
>>16190498
But ozone decreases insolation, especially higher frequencies, so you would expect the opposite
Anonymous at Fri, 31 May 2024 01:27:32 UTC No. 16201800
>>16192434
>Seething
Nobody believes in your cow-farts doomsday cult anymore.
Anonymous at Fri, 31 May 2024 01:31:55 UTC No. 16201806
>>16189806
Global warming is a scam. Simple as.
Anonymous at Fri, 31 May 2024 01:34:40 UTC No. 16201810
>>16201398
yeah thats right, its the land ice of greenland and antarctica that are the ones to watch.
beware of data cherry picking people from either side. although i would say the deniers do it a whole lot more lol
Anonymous at Fri, 31 May 2024 17:57:22 UTC No. 16202781
>>16201398
>not a climate scientist.
thats why your retarded conjectures are so stupid
Anonymous at Fri, 31 May 2024 22:33:59 UTC No. 16203124
>>16201800
why are you deflecting?
Anonymous at Fri, 31 May 2024 22:35:39 UTC No. 16203128
>>16203124
>Why are you deflecting by proving that they fake their data?
Anonymous at Sat, 1 Jun 2024 20:11:03 UTC No. 16205091
>>16204958
This top image is ai generated, the Statue of Liberty is green
Anonymous at Sat, 1 Jun 2024 20:12:44 UTC No. 16205097
>>16192329
>I have no argument: the image
Anonymous at Sun, 2 Jun 2024 10:07:07 UTC No. 16205991
>>16205091
They didn't even have AI in the 1800s
Anonymous at Sun, 2 Jun 2024 22:28:17 UTC No. 16206877
>>16201393
meanwhile the weather hasn't changed since the 1800s
Anonymous at Mon, 3 Jun 2024 17:31:46 UTC No. 16208036
>>16189859
why
Anonymous at Mon, 3 Jun 2024 20:17:31 UTC No. 16208320
>>16208036
NGMI
Anonymous at Mon, 3 Jun 2024 21:20:41 UTC No. 16208400
>>16208320
so you're saying you have no explanation
Anonymous at Tue, 4 Jun 2024 04:50:07 UTC No. 16209188
>>16208036
one day is as good as any other, they'll all tell the same tale, theres more ice in the antarctic and in the arctic now than there was decades ago
Anonymous at Tue, 4 Jun 2024 07:40:56 UTC No. 16209368
>>16208036
Because there is no good reason to show 1/365 of the available data in this case. It makes sense if you, say, want to manipulate and hide the sea ice decline.
Anonymous at Tue, 4 Jun 2024 14:22:08 UTC No. 16209809
Anonymous at Tue, 4 Jun 2024 20:50:34 UTC No. 16210405
>>16209368
sourcing your information from government propaganda agencies will only get you falsified data. propaganda agencies exist explicitly for the purpose of circulating falsehoods.
Anonymous at Tue, 4 Jun 2024 21:17:42 UTC No. 16210465
Anonymous at Wed, 5 Jun 2024 04:59:20 UTC No. 16211081
Anonymous at Wed, 5 Jun 2024 08:01:42 UTC No. 16211192
>>16211081
>a single paper
>the article mentions a low probability in the very next paragraph
Anonymous at Wed, 5 Jun 2024 21:50:01 UTC No. 16212513
>>16211081
>Nature
everything in that rag is fake
Anonymous at Thu, 6 Jun 2024 18:04:08 UTC No. 16217303
Anonymous at Thu, 6 Jun 2024 18:31:48 UTC No. 16217449
>>16217303
The negative trend is clearly labelled in the bottom right corner. Thanks for agreeing that the sea ice is indeed declining.
🗑️ Anonymous at Thu, 6 Jun 2024 18:35:43 UTC No. 16217470
>>16190758
>polnigger is a lying retard
Color me shocked
Anonymous at Thu, 6 Jun 2024 19:05:47 UTC No. 16217619
>>16189806
This is SETTLED SCIENCE. That means it's not up for debate anymore.
EVER!
Anonymous at Thu, 6 Jun 2024 19:08:48 UTC No. 16217628
>>16217449
>The negative trend is clearly labelled in the bottom right corner.
This! The green line makes it undeniable. And it's not like the time interval started at a higher ice level than it ended with, which would skew the average. That would be an incredibly dishonest procedure, and nobody would ever do that,
🗑️ Anonymous at Thu, 6 Jun 2024 19:20:28 UTC No. 16217677
>>16217628
Why are you such a dishonest nigger?
Anonymous at Thu, 6 Jun 2024 19:44:20 UTC No. 16217761
>>16217628
Indeed, a 2007-2024 time range is a weird choice. Thankfully, we have more than 4 decades worth of data showing a long-term decline. See >>16209368
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 22:48:25 UTC No. 16220803
>>16209188
Why was there a 400% gain in arctic sea ice between 1984 & 2012?
How is that possible if global warming is real?
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 06:56:04 UTC No. 16221459
>>16199574
Again?
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 09:05:50 UTC No. 16221599
>>16199574
>looks like all of the scientists' doomsday predictions turned out to be completely wrong.
no, it doesn't: noise within a larger pattern is natural variability.
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 20:14:20 UTC No. 16222695
>>16221599
>muh doomsday
Anonymous at Sun, 9 Jun 2024 04:29:05 UTC No. 16223729
>>16189806
That measured increase was really from the accumulation of jeet waste accumulating on Antarctic shores
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 06:10:08 UTC No. 16226281
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 08:06:37 UTC No. 16226400
>>16226281
>December 20
The remaining 364/365 of the data doesn't fit your narrative I presume? See >>16209368
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 16:26:45 UTC No. 16226967
>>16223729
>noaa.gov/tsunami/indo
interesting......
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 04:10:24 UTC No. 16227927
>>16226400
>t. science denialist
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 21:57:35 UTC No. 16229202
Anonymous at Wed, 12 Jun 2024 19:42:33 UTC No. 16230871
>>16189806
global warming isn't real
Anonymous at Wed, 12 Jun 2024 21:59:55 UTC No. 16231052
>>16227927
The irony of denying 99.7% of the data and calling someone else a science denier is staggering.
Anonymous at Thu, 13 Jun 2024 06:17:01 UTC No. 16231910
>>16231052
>denying 99.7% of the data
that data is only collected on the winter solstice
Anonymous at Thu, 13 Jun 2024 06:25:26 UTC No. 16231922
>>16189806
>>16189819
>>16189899
>>16191725
>>16192329
>>16192336
>>16193724
>>16194825
>>16201393
>>16201806
>>16217619
>>16230871
Hello, sirs. Please do the needful and do not redeem global warming scam. It is trick to make you give money to your bhenchod government. Thank you kindly.
Anonymous at Thu, 13 Jun 2024 08:12:59 UTC No. 16232056
>>16190758
>you're cherry picking!
>here's my own cherries!
Climatetards are so obnoxious.
Anonymous at Thu, 13 Jun 2024 08:50:52 UTC No. 16232109
>>16232056
Anger and insults are all you've got - no surprise there.
Anonymous at Thu, 13 Jun 2024 22:22:58 UTC No. 16233354
>>16232056
>Showing all the data is cherrypicking
You might be the stupidest person in this thread.
Anonymous at Fri, 14 Jun 2024 03:04:25 UTC No. 16233778
>>16233354
both the arctic and the antarctic are accumulating ice
Anonymous at Fri, 14 Jun 2024 07:58:10 UTC No. 16234157
>>16233778
Blatantly false.
Anonymous at Fri, 14 Jun 2024 19:31:13 UTC No. 16234980
>>16234157
>omg i put words lines and dots on a jpeg!!!
>that means its true!!
try getting some real evidence, kid.
everyone knows you can't
Anonymous at Sat, 15 Jun 2024 07:08:30 UTC No. 16235855
Anonymous at Sun, 16 Jun 2024 02:45:18 UTC No. 16237261
>>16189806
Global warming isn't real
Anonymous at Sun, 16 Jun 2024 05:26:21 UTC No. 16237386
>>16201785
What are talking about?
Anonymous at Sun, 16 Jun 2024 20:48:18 UTC No. 16238310
>>16189819
>trust the priests!!! oooops, I mean scientists
Anonymous at Mon, 17 Jun 2024 06:48:02 UTC No. 16239083
>>16218798
lol
Anonymous at Tue, 18 Jun 2024 02:36:25 UTC No. 16240425
>>16189806
>If global warming is real
false premise, its clearly fake
🗑️ Anonymous at Tue, 18 Jun 2024 02:50:24 UTC No. 16240444
>>16238310
>trust the priests!!! oooops, I mean brain damaged Twitter retards with noisy jpegs
Anonymous at Wed, 19 Jun 2024 05:32:44 UTC No. 16242229
>>16234157
>(((nature.com)))
thats a politcal propaganda outlet, not a scientific organization
Anonymous at Thu, 20 Jun 2024 03:25:47 UTC No. 16243550
>>16229871
lol
Anonymous at Fri, 21 Jun 2024 05:22:22 UTC No. 16245119
>>16220803
it isn't possible if global warming is real, thats how we know global warming is fake
Anonymous at Sat, 22 Jun 2024 04:43:03 UTC No. 16246837
>>16229871
can't be too cold out, he doesn't have a scarf or gloves on, no hat too. Maybe he just wears 4 layers of jackets in order to compensate for what must be substantial heat lost from his enormous nose and large, low set protruding ears. Looks like he is doing the merchant hand rub too, that probably not a coincidence
Anonymous at Sat, 22 Jun 2024 18:28:49 UTC No. 16247891
>>16246837
>Maybe he just wears 4 layers of jackets in order to compensate for what must be substantial heat lost from his enormous nose and large, low set protruding ears
Anonymous at Sun, 23 Jun 2024 08:14:44 UTC No. 16248948
>>16247891
Wooly mammoths evolved small ears as an adaptation to their cold environment. The jew's large protruding ears are clearly evolved for a warm climate like African or the middle east.
Anonymous at Sun, 23 Jun 2024 20:21:59 UTC No. 16249828
>>16191725
Ah, I see they used Mike's Trick™.
Anonymous at Sun, 23 Jun 2024 20:24:37 UTC No. 16249830
>>16192434
>wider
This wide enough for you? You faggots are always trying to "correct" your doubters by claiming they aren't looking at a big enough picture, then when someone reminds you you're actually retarded by showing you a picture that includes anything before 1850 you all shriek like the women who haven't been appropriately financially compensated for a sexual transaction you are.
Anonymous at Sun, 23 Jun 2024 20:43:15 UTC No. 16249853
>>16231922
Fuck of bastard, we do not bloody talk like that.
Anonymous at Sun, 23 Jun 2024 20:49:46 UTC No. 16249860
Look at this absolute fucking nonsense. Now "climate change" apparently exclusively means "anthropogenic climate change". They're not even hiding their lies anymore. Also, water vapor almost certainly accounts for more like 75% or more of the greenhouse effect, not less than half.
Anonymous at Sun, 23 Jun 2024 20:52:34 UTC No. 16249867
>>16249830
>OP posts a cherry-picked slice of sea ice measurements
>someone posts a full available range of the same sea ice measurements
>"n-no you can't do that" posts a proxy temperature reconstruction
First steps in cognitive processing, eh? How about you try reading the very sources you post?
Royer et al (2004): https://rock.geosociety.org/net/gsa
Anonymous at Sun, 23 Jun 2024 21:13:31 UTC No. 16249888
>>16249867
Do you care this much about this little oopsie? Or is it just ones that you're "allowed" to care about?
Anonymous at Sun, 23 Jun 2024 21:22:25 UTC No. 16249898
>>16249860
>water vapor almost certainly accounts for more like 75% or more of the greenhouse effect, not less than half.
Based on what?
Anonymous at Sun, 23 Jun 2024 21:34:15 UTC No. 16249920
>>16249898
Based on the fact that it traps heat in a noticeable fashion.
Anonymous at Sun, 23 Jun 2024 21:43:23 UTC No. 16249933
>>16189806
Whatever happened to HAARP? Did that conspiracy theory become obsolete?
Anonymous at Sun, 23 Jun 2024 21:50:26 UTC No. 16249940
>>16249920
So your feelings? What data do you have to support the claim that water accounts for 75% or more of the greenhouse effect?
Anonymous at Sun, 23 Jun 2024 21:55:41 UTC No. 16249947
>>16249940
Yes, my feelings are more important than your lies.
Anonymous at Sun, 23 Jun 2024 22:25:02 UTC No. 16249972
>>16249888
Good post
Anonymous at Sun, 23 Jun 2024 22:43:00 UTC No. 16250000
>>16249947
So you don't have any data to back up your claim? What use is it then?
Anonymous at Mon, 24 Jun 2024 01:16:27 UTC No. 16250146
>>16189806
Because of global warming.
Anonymous at Mon, 24 Jun 2024 17:59:56 UTC No. 16251163
>>16250146
lol
Anonymous at Tue, 25 Jun 2024 07:33:37 UTC No. 16252320
>>16251216
the climate history of the holocene really seems to upset you, why is that?