Image not available

685x960

CO2 is good for n....jpg

🧵 CO2 is good for nature

Anonymous No. 16203453

As Carbon Dioxide Grows More Abundant, Trees Are Growing Bigger, Study Finds
https://e360.yale.edu/digest/carbon-dioxide-climate-change-bigger-trees
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-022-33196-x
Trees are feasting on decades of carbon dioxide emissions and growing bigger as a result, according to a new study of U.S. forests.

Scientists tracked wood volume in 10 different tree groups from 1997 to 2017, finding that all except aspen-birch grew larger. Over that same period, carbon dioxide levels went from 363 parts per million to 405 parts per million, owing largely to the burning of fossil fuels. More abundant CO2 accelerates photosynthesis, causing plants to grow faster, a phenomenon known as “carbon fertilization.” The findings were published in the journal Nature Communications.

The study suggests that even as warming threatens forests by fueling drought, insect infestations, and wildfires, rising CO2 levels mean that tree-planting is an increasingly cost-effective method of fighting climate change, as the same number of trees can sequester more carbon, said Brent Sohngen, an environmental scientist at Ohio State University and coauthor of the study.

“While we’re putting billions of tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, we’re actually taking much of it out just by letting our forests grow,” Sohngen said in a statement. “We should be planting more trees and preserving older ones, because at the end of the day they’re probably our best bet for mitigating climate change.”

Image not available

800x464

wood volume per h....jpg

Anonymous No. 16203454

Image not available

720x532

20221013_181041.jpg

Anonymous No. 16203554

>everything is either imminent apocalypse or complete nothingburger
I hate this shit.

Anonymous No. 16203609

>>16203554
The fact that CO2 is good for nature is not a "nothingburger", its a massive bonus that goes along with using hydrocarbon fuels. No human and none out ancestors for tens of millions of years have witness nature in as heathy and vigorous a state as what we are witnessing currently. The more CO2 that goes into the atmosphere, the faster the plants will grow and the healthier nature becomes. All that just from using coal, oil and gas for fuels, its as if God exists and he likes us and wants us to be happy so he set up this fantastic synergy where burning fuel makes the world a better place.

Image not available

862x1121

tedk.jpg

Anonymous No. 16203636

>>16203453
>human extinction is good for the planet
yes. yes it is. you first please.

Image not available

1000x662

__opt__aboutcom__....png

Anonymous No. 16203644

>More CO2 in the atmosphere causes the earth to warm up, therefore causing more extreme weather events
Dare I say based?

Image not available

800x800

venus-remapped-an....jpg

Anonymous No. 16203650

Here's your run away greenhouse effect from CO2 anon! Enjoy your lush and green paradise.

Image not available

1234x846

ace-index.png

Anonymous No. 16203653

>>16203644
If only it were true, theres no real trend in annual cyclonic energy. And as far as individual massive storms go, the biggest ones on record mostly occurred in the 1970s when accumulated cyclonic energy was on the low side. If CO2 was affecting hurricanes, typhoons, etc. then a strong trend would be clearly visible

Anonymous No. 16203692

>>16203453
>plant fertilizer is good for plants
No shit Sherlock. Shall we all dump tons of ammonium and nitrates in the ground too, because plants love that?

Ever heard of "dose makes the poison"?

Image not available

1500x1000

Ideal-Gas-Law.png

Anonymous No. 16203727

>>16203650
Theres no evidence whatsoever that Venus was once an Earth like planet which eventually suffered a run away greenhouse effect due to industrialization or for any other reason. Venus has always been the way it is currently, it has no run away greenhouse effect, its hot because it has a very thick atmosphere. Jupiter has temperatures over 40,000º because it has an even thicker atmosphere.

Image not available

1058x1802

ExxonTigerTimelin....png

Anonymous No. 16203732

>>16203453
>CO2 is good for nature
That's not the issue, at all.

🗑️ Anonymous No. 16203761

Today, i, an inbred retarded christfag from the south, will simp for oil companies and decide that climate change is not real /thread

Anonymous No. 16203833

>>16203761
you're obsessed with politics and have no place on this board since you're not here to discuss science
>>>/pol/

Anonymous No. 16203836

>>16203833
>poltard tells non-poltards to gtfo out of /sci/

Image not available

720x846

1717114991808047.jpg

Anonymous No. 16203867

>>16203836
>everyone who doesn't subscribe to death cult anti-carbon climate alarmism is /pol/
The irony is staggering.
Our climate is changing - more and more infrastructure and absorbant black asphalt and waste heat from the billion devices and miles of pipes and vents and the millions of ICE vehicle activity. All of this stuff causes heavily built up areas, spanning many miles, to experience much warmer weather than surrounding rural locations.
99% of the "climate change" people cite as evidence is due to specific land use changes or environmental management failures.
Look at Picrel. Look how the heat so strongly correlates with urban sprawl. As soon as you get away and get vegetation, everything is cool: the plant life reflects more light and is pumping thousands of gallons of water daily into the air, not only reacting differently to hot weather but also making weather by contributing to cloud formation.
Identifying the CAUSE of the changes we observe is crucial. If you accept that the primary cause is carbon dioxide emissions, then "doing something about" climate change has only one solution - a nebulous commitment to "reduce carbon" without fixing any of the myriad specific problems in our lived environment and shortcomings in land management.
Consider picrel. Would you say "the cause of warmer weather in urban Japan is primarily due to atmospheric carbon" is a fair assessment? Or do you think a better explanation is "the cause of warmer weather in Japan is urbanisation and other associated land use changes"?
If you believe that the primary cause of observed changes is due to land use changes, then the set of solutions grows much larger, and more diverse, and potentially more radical. Eradication of city sprawl, an increase in rewinding and a managed decline in the global population. A complete redesign of our remaining city infrastructure, buildings and roads made as bright, white and reflective as possible with the inclusion of as much greenery as possible.

Anonymous No. 16203899

>>16203650
LMAO, Earth's atmosphere is far thinner than it should be for its mass. That is because it was formed by the collision of two smaller planets, and most of the atmosphere of those planets was lost in the collision. Venus was never like the Earth, it always had a very dense atmosphere, 90x times more dense than Earth's. On top of that receives twice the Sun's energy. The runaway greenhouse effect is a myth perpetuated by ignorant morons.

Anonymous No. 16203932

>>16203867
Cherrypicking

Image not available

540x718

landsat_color_tem....jpg

Anonymous No. 16203937

>>16203932
What's cherrypicking? Are you claiming that the urban heat island effect only happens Tokyo?
Picrel is Atlanta, Georgia. Much less urbanised, but the effect can still be seen.

Image not available

602x431

Cervest-Heat-Island.png

Anonymous No. 16203940

>>16203937
>>16203932
London

Image not available

926x569

manchester.png

Anonymous No. 16203942

>>16203932
>>16203940
Manchester

Image not available

1280x960

stifling-urban-he....jpg

Anonymous No. 16203945

>>16203942
>>16203932
Rome.
Is that enough cherries for you?

Image not available

397x448

c7ed873f4df73f280....gif

Anonymous No. 16204035

>>16203727
>unironically posting the ideal gas law to supplement this bullshit "answer"

Anonymous No. 16204042

Since when did /sci/ have jews shilling for CO2 and fossil fuel use?

Anonymous No. 16204046

>>16204035
Disprove it

Image not available

1300x418

CNX_Chem_09_02_Am....jpg

Anonymous No. 16204057

>>16204035
Yes, because it's relevant.
>For a constant volume and amount of air, the pressure and temperature are directly proportional, provided the temperature is in kelvin. (Measurements cannot be made at lower temperatures because of the condensation of the gas.) When this line is extrapolated to lower pressures, it reaches a pressure of 0 at –273 °C, which is 0 on the kelvin scale and the lowest possible temperature, called absolute zero.
Do you have ANY idea how dense Venus' atmosphere is?

Anonymous No. 16204060

>>16204035
Faggot
https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/251679/ideal-gas-equation-and-atmosphere-of-venus

Anonymous No. 16204073

>>16203453
nice bait

Anonymous No. 16204081

>>16204057
>>16203727
>Imagine being this retarded

Anonymous No. 16204082

>>16204081
>>16204060

Image not available

268x274

8575487.gif

Anonymous No. 16204089

>>16203609
>No human and none out ancestors for tens of millions of years have witness nature in as heathy and vigorous a state as what we are witnessing currently
Yeah let's just ignore deforesting most of the planet and killing off thousands of species

Anonymous No. 16204103

>>16204089
>Yeah let's just ignore deforesting most of the planet and killing off thousands of species
Yeah, I hate it when CO2 blows into a country and deforests it and kills all the animals.

Anonymous No. 16204105

>>16204103
Stop playing dumb. Desertification is already going on in the Mediterranean region and Southern US.

Anonymous No. 16204106

>>16204082
Alright, let's play with your misunderstanding of basic physics. PV=nRT and therefore P1*V1/T1 =P2*V2/T2 and if volume remains constant then P1/T1=P2/T2. So we can make a nuclear-tier powered rod out of pressurized gas. P1 = 1atm, T1 = 20 C, T2 = 1000 C, so P2 must equal 50 atm or 730 PSI, which is easily achievable with the proper equipment.

Why then are we not powering the grid with tanks of compressed air that are 1000 C? Could it be because it's the change in pressure, and not the fact that pressure exists, that increases the temperature?

Dropouts should be autobanned.

Anonymous No. 16204110

>>16204106
You are responding to a bot.

Anonymous No. 16204114

>>16204110
No, I'm responding to a moron who's mad at science because he failed to learn it.

Anonymous No. 16204121

>>16204105
>Desertification is already going on in the Mediterranean region and Southern US
Failures of land management.
>>16204106
stop being cute.
Venus is hot because its atmosphere is insanely thick, dense, and massive compared to Earth.
Unless you think its plausible that Earth's atmosphere is going to become 100 times more massive, then it's either stupid or dishonest to hold up Venus as an reason for why "co2 = bad"

Anonymous No. 16204122

>>16204103
Holy ESL, you need to go retake your English exam, Paco

Anonymous No. 16204159

>>16204121
No. You need to justify why we don't power the world with the infinite energy of compressed gas or acknowledge that you failed high school physics and you have no clue what you're talking about.

Anonymous No. 16204203

>>16204159
I'm not denying that the greenhouse effect is why Venus is so hot. I'm saying that the greenhouse effect is so powerful on Venus because of how dense the atmosphere is. It's not the concentration of CO2 that's salient, it's the sheer mass of it.

Anonymous No. 16204240

>>16204203
What a moronic statement. I accept your concession.

Image not available

775x450

2023_4$largeimg_4....jpg

Anonymous No. 16204246

CO2 fags are actively pushing for a global warming and sending the Earth's climate out of its current status to kill off thousands upon thousands of species for the sake of plants. Never forget this.

Anonymous No. 16204331

>>16204240
Not a rebuttal.

Anonymous No. 16204358

>>16203609
>The fact that CO2 is good for nature
How is it good for nature?
>Because le trees grow bigger
And why is this an inherently good thing?

Anonymous No. 16204757

>>16204331
Learn the absolute basics of physics and maybe you'll deserve a rebuttal.

Anonymous No. 16204913

>>16204046
>>16204057
>>16204060
The ideal gas law is working perfectly as intended, you retards just don't know when to apply it. Showing me that Molar volume, temperature and pressure for a gas are related does not disprove Venus' greenhouse effect, because neither planet is an energetically isolated system. All you've done is proven you dont understand basic thermodynamics. It's just as retarded as you trying to claim an accelerating object isn't accelerating because it's velocity, mass and momentum are fixed at every instance in time.

So, I'll give you another chance, if you can show me using a proper energy balance using proper scientific data for physio-chemical properties that a Venus with a co2 free atmosphere, at the same density will equilibriate at the same temperature, I will concede. I'll even let you pretend the atmosphere is still an ideal gas.

If not, 8/10 bait, I kek'd, stay in school.

Anonymous No. 16204971

>>16204358
Because like, plants don't start wars, man.

Anonymous No. 16205508

>>16204203
>I'm not denying that the greenhouse effect is why Venus is so hot
Jupiter gets to over 40,000ºC, is that because of the greenhouse effect too?

Anonymous No. 16205535

>>16203836
you're obsessed with politics and have no place on this board since you're not here to discuss science
>>>/pol/

Anonymous No. 16205549

>>16203453
CO2 is based. My garden has never been greener and fruit harvest as bountiful.

Anonymous No. 16205567

>>16203453
so how much more should be added? Should we just never stop until the atmosphere is 100% co2?

Anonymous No. 16205628

>>16205567
>so how much more should be added?
At the rate we're going it will be over 1000 years until the perfect mix of atmospheric gasses is achieved, but by that time presumably selective breeding will have created plant varieties which are more voracious CO2 consumers than what exists currently. The current crop of selectively bred plants are geared for performance in the present near starvation atmosphere.
>Should we just never stop until the atmosphere is 100% co2?
There isn't enough carbon on the planet to get to that level, even 1% would be impossible, 8000ppm would be the absolute maximum attainable value.

Anonymous No. 16205633

It takes at least 10% atmospheric CO2 to start causing problems for mammals, at least. That's a fucking lot of CO2.

Anonymous No. 16205641

earth doesn't give a shit if it's 1000 degrees and covered in toxic gas because it's a fucking ball of rock
only humans care and clearly they don't since they love killing each other, enslaving each other, and poisoning each other's homes

Anonymous No. 16205669

>>16205628
but what's the point of that? Why can't we just curb out emissions and let the plants get things back to equilibrium? Why make the climate hotter and fuck with things?

Anonymous No. 16205718

>>16204105
Have you ever even BEEN to the southern US, you urban sóycuck? It's like the fucking Amazon down there. They have to work around the clock just to keep the branches out of the roadways.

Image not available

1024x576

Present+Flag+1956....jpg

Anonymous No. 16205752

>>16204105
Desertification? I've lived here in Georgia my entire life and if anything it's a subtropical humid vine and kudzu ridden green hell. Wouldn't have it any other way.

Anonymous No. 16205802

>>16203453
The problem is
#1 that humans aren't plants or sea birds. A greener planet (and by the way you're ignoring desertification) is good for some plants but bad if you live next to the ocean, which is rising. It's also bad for corals because it's warming too quickly and corals can't migrate fast enough to handle the increase temperatures. A lot of our food sources are dependent on coral reefs. So that's bad. It's also bad for communities under threat of water shortages which rely on glacial melt runoff or who live in semi-arid locations which will become unlivable soon. Or anyone who lives on an island like Tuvalu which will entirely be underwater by next century. Try telling them a greener planet is good, while they drown.

So go ahead, cherry pick your data ..... again. About how something you know obviously very little about is somehow "good" because you ignore all the terrible things which will happen as a result.

Anonymous No. 16205838

>>16205802
Don't reply to them, you are not educating them. They shill for oil companies for free

Image not available

480x360

easterbrook_fig5.png

Anonymous No. 16205862

>>16205669
CO2 doesn't cause global warming, if did then it would be hotter now than it was thousands of years ago. The 1930s are the warmest decade on record even though theres been substantially more CO2 in the atmosphere since then, that wouldn't be the case if CO2 played a significant factor in global temperatures.

Anonymous No. 16205917

>>16203454
Now do tropical forests.

Anonymous No. 16206989

>>16205917
Why does it upset you so badly that CO2 is good for plants? Why do you hate plants?

Anonymous No. 16207009

>>16203609
kek

Anonymous No. 16207045

>>16203454
The aspen birch decline is presumably because they're first growth trees and in a CO2 enhanced climate they get overtaken by the 2nd growth trees faster.

Anonymous No. 16207110

>>16203453
Plants like water too, in fact people also need water
Drown yourself in the bathtub

Anonymous No. 16207116

>>16207110
Why does it upset you so much that CO2 is good for plants? Do you hate plants? Why do you want to starve them? Where did the plants touch you?

Anonymous No. 16207127

>>16207116
Why does it upset you so much that CO2 is toxic for mammals? Do you hate mammals? Why do you want to poison them? Where did the mammals touch you?

Anonymous No. 16207140

>>16207116
>>16206989
Take your meds

Anonymous No. 16208088

>>16207127
>CO2 is toxic for mammals
it isn't, CO2 is necessary for life, respiration doesn't work without it. you would die without CO2.
NASA sets the maximum safe level for atmospheric CO2 in it's space station and on it's vessels at 5500ppm and astronauts have to live and do their complicated work in those environments. your house/apartment/dorm is over 1000ppm and you don't even notice the difference, you don't even own a CO2 monitor, thats how little you care about the issue.

Anonymous No. 16208222

>>16203554
This is how you gain psychological control over people and populations. Leftists are some of the most programmed people you could ever imagine. This shit is like heaven to organizations like the CIA.

Anonymous No. 16208261

>>16208088
You're a disingenuous little faggot.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16499405/#:~:text=At%20low%20concentrations%2C%20gaseous%20carbon,cause%20convulsions%2C%20coma%20and%20death.

Anonymous No. 16208263

>>16208088
So why do our bodies undergo gas exchange and get rid of CO2? When there's too much dissolved CO2 in our blood and tissue it creates pathologies, you dipshit.

Anonymous No. 16208481

>>16208261
>Concentrations >10% may cause convulsions, coma and death
Hahaha
You are the one being disingenuous, carbon dioxide hasn't ever been even close to 100,000 ppm, yet alone over. The highest we know of is from the Triassic at 2,000 ppm; a 500 fold difference.
>At concentrations >5% it can have undesirable effects
That is, 50,000 ppm, still a 25 fold difference from the Triassic peak of 2,000 ppm. Indoors will often see 1,000 to 2,500 ppm, with little to no noticeable effects.

Why are you employing sophistry about the toxicity of co2? Sure at 10% it can kill you, so can oxygen. Drinking too much water or sleeping too little will kill a person, yet saying "drinking water and being awake will cause death" is fallacious. Did you even read the article, I recommend doing that. Too often the article isn't actually saying much of anything, even though the abstract and the title are eye catching.

Anonymous No. 16208487

>>16208263
>you shouldn't eat food because your body eventually gets rid of it via defecation

Anonymous No. 16208556

>>16208487
So you agree that waste must be removed or else it would poison the system?

Anonymous No. 16208696

>>16208556
you would die almost immediately of hypocapnia if there weren't CO2 in the atmosphere. CO2 isn't waste, its mandatory for all forms of life on earth, you can't live without it

🗑️ Anonymous No. 16208743

>>16208696
>>16208487
>>16208481
>>16208222
>>16208088
Retard takes

Anonymous No. 16208935

>>16208696
>hypocapnia
thats why people respirate better when theres more CO2 in the atmosphere

Anonymous No. 16209207

>>16208696
Lmao? You don't know shit about physiology. Hypocapnia is just an indicator of poor metabolism, not the need for CO2 in your blood. God damn dude...

Anonymous No. 16209327

Life on Earth evolved for nearly a billion years with much, much higher atmospheric CO2 levels that there are currently, the modern situation with practically no CO2 in the atmosphere is a recent phenomenon, so its pretty obvious that every living creature would be better off in the higher CO2 mix of atmospheric gases that they're evolved for.
Its not just plants that are better off with more CO2, its every form of life.

Anonymous No. 16209638

>>16209327
Retard take

Anonymous No. 16209686

>>16209638
Anon it's obvious bait.

Anonymous No. 16209724

>>16209686
Then he should try harder. It's not cute, funny, or accurate. If everyone called out these morons' retard takes instead of engaging with them then they would leave.

Anonymous No. 16209794

>>16209724
You call everyone who disagrees with the AGW net zero cult a retard. You have a very high opinion of yourself. Have some humility and at least pretend as if you believe there is a possibility that your beliefs are misled and your knowledge is imperfect.

Anonymous No. 16209797

>>16208743
This is an extremely low-quality post.

🗑️ Anonymous No. 16209803

>>16209797
>>16209794
Retard takes.

Anonymous No. 16209908

>>16209724
>anyone who doesn't think like me is a retard
You might have autism mate. It's common for autistic people to have trouble understanding different opinions, and that's fine! It will be difficult to learn and tolerate different opinions, but it's part of life to come across lots of different opinions (it makes life interesting methinks). Others can disagree with you without being retards. Here is an insightful book for you to read: https://teachingautism.co.uk/shop/different-opinions-social-story/

Anonymous No. 16209988

>>16203453
Sugar, oils and high-fructose corn syrup all make humans grow bigger. Ergo they are good for humans, and the more you eat the better.

🗑️ Anonymous No. 16210213

>>16209908
Retard take

Image not available

828x807

671flwevofv41.jpg

Anonymous No. 16210395

>>16209988
your perception of health was created by your exposure to media which tells you that people who are a week away from starvation are healthier, in every other species animals will eat to the point of obesity given the opportunity.

Anonymous No. 16210429

>>16208935
The bait is unreal.

Anonymous No. 16210437

It's good for viruses, including SARS-CoV-2, you know, the one that killed millions of people. If we had taken carbon reduction seriously, those people could still be alive today.
https://www.statnews.com/2024/06/04/co2-ventilation-research-virus-airborne-life-haddrell-celebs/

Image not available

1042x1757

24052813.27.png

Anonymous No. 16210442

>>16210437
covid didn't kill anyone, it was the vax that killed people

Anonymous No. 16210872

>>16210395
>Over eating is good because starvation exists
Okay, fatty.

Anonymous No. 16211104

>>16210429
try hyperventilating until your body runs out of available CO2 and see how much you enjoy it

Anonymous No. 16211439

>>16211104
That's not how that works.

Anonymous No. 16211597

>>16203942
That picture is London, too.

Anonymous No. 16211909

>>16209327
Based and Ray Peat pilled.
Lmao at all the midwits in this thread subscribing to modern academic dogma.

Anonymous No. 16212801

>>16205917
They grow faster with enhanced atmospheric CO2 also, that means they can be harvested more frequently.

Anonymous No. 16212921

>>16203650
> Equating a pond with an ocean
That slippery slope assertion is laughable.
Venus' atmosphere is so insanely denser than Earth's that humanity could torch every bit of accessible coal and wood on the planet and the atmosphere would still be magnitudes upon magnitudes upon magnitudes less extreme than that of Venus.

Anonymous No. 16213094

>>16212921
This is a thread where someone is saying breathing CO2 is good for you. That's where you are right now.

Anonymous No. 16213105

>>16209327
Yes, and the sun was cooler too. Did you forget that part? That the sun was cooler? Or you just cherry pick your data. Most likely in fact, you don't, you simply regurgitate what you read on a blog somewhere once. Worse yet, you're just regurgitating what you read on 4chan once.

It's called the young faint sun paradox. We know Earth always had liquid water on it but the sun was cooler in the past, that's how stars work. Which means greenhouse gases were more abundant in the atmosphere, mostly methane and carbon dioxide, because plants were less abundant in the early Earth, which meant that CO2 from volcanoes simply stayed in the atmosphere.

You should maybe, talk to an Earth scientist before you make accusations about a subject you clearly know nothing about. I recommend going to your local college or university and asking around the Earth Science department. I promise you, they will help you with your misunderstandings.

Anonymous No. 16213126

>climate change isn't real
>okay, climate change IS real but it's actually good!
Retarded fucking shills.

Anonymous No. 16217386

>>16211439
yes it is

Anonymous No. 16217467

>>16217386
Lol no.

Anonymous No. 16217894

>>16203609
This but unironically.
Warming up is also very nice to prevent the next glaciation cycle. Europe becoming frozen toundra and london and new york being under hundreds of meters of ice was not so fun for humanity, although it was what created the white race.

Anonymous No. 16217918

>>16213105
This is the climate alarmist in his final form. Boldly declaring what happened a billion years ago to justify why you must eat bugs right now, while tap dancing around not having any pictures of sea level rise.

🗑️ Anonymous No. 16217941

>>16203453
Why do you want a world that is, at best, 90% uninhabitable (for humans) jungle? Literally uninhabitable, we'd die after a few hours due to overheating.

🗑️ Anonymous No. 16217949

>>16208088
Kill yourself lying kike

🗑️ Anonymous No. 16217955

>>16209327
>so its pretty obvious that every living creature would be better off in the higher CO2 mix of atmospheric gases that they're evolved for.
How are you this fucking dumb? Sweating wouldn't fucking work in most areas if we went back to a hothouse earth. Why do you want to depopulate the earth and give it to lizards and bugs?

🗑️ Anonymous No. 16217958

>>16209794
Why do you want to turn the entire world into a globohomo concrete megacity hell?

Anonymous No. 16217962

>>16217955
>>16217949
Don't argue with paid shills

Anonymous No. 16217965

>>16217941
Somehow you think it would be bad if deforestation wasn't a problem.
Why can't libshits ever hold a line.

🗑️ Anonymous No. 16218015

>>16217962
Who is paying them? I've been in and around far right politics my whole life and they just seem like the typical piece of shit contrarian that only believes in fringe things because he's a low/middling IQ narcissist with main character syndrome.
>>16217965
I think it would be bad if the only place people could live was Antarctica. Why do you want global depopulation?

Anonymous No. 16218077

>>16218015
>they just seem like the typical piece of shit contrarian that only believes in fringe things because he's a low/middling IQ narcissist with main character syndrome.
projection

Anonymous No. 16218315

So which fossil fuel company paid you, OP?

Anonymous No. 16218555

>>16218015
All the alarmists have are doomerism. The worst part is it is a sad and pathetic rapture where satan is defeated by eating bugs or whatever.

Anonymous No. 16218604

>>16218315
I'm sure all of them paid him through some kind of fund or intermediary

Anonymous No. 16220132

>>16218604
proof?

Anonymous No. 16220267

>>16220132
Answer the question. Which fossil fuel company is paying you?

Image not available

1x1

DunlapMcCrightOxf....pdf

Anonymous No. 16220338

>>16220132

Anonymous No. 16220454

>>16220338
Retard take.

Anonymous No. 16220470

>>16218555
>All the alarmists have are doomerism.
And increasing surface cean temperatures
And increasing extinction rates
And tons of anecdotal evidence for winters all but disappearing
And record breaking heatwaves almost every year (NOOOOO BUT MUH OCCASIONAL BLIZZARDS DATS FAKE AND GAY!!!!!)
And increasing rates of extreme weather
And the climate in europe routinely breaking historical norms

And literally everything else other than a delusional sense of self-importance and a steadfast boomer-tier worship of money and the status quo. You "people" have that shit all to yourselves.

Anonymous No. 16220639

>>16220470
None of that exists.
Doomer cope clinging to scriptures from the clergy, all the while the Earth keeps spinning.
Quick! Get the kool-aid while they will drink it!

Anonymous No. 16220654

>>16220470
I'm sure that the earth's magnetic field weakening and so it letting through more space weather has nothing at all to do with the weather on earth.

Anonymous No. 16220958

>>16203453
unclear how trees being bigger is significant at all

Anonymous No. 16221110

>>16220132
>>16220454
See
>>16218315
>>16218604

Anonymous No. 16221124

>>16220470
>And the climate in europe routinely breaking historical norms
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1540_European_drought
Was the 1540 European drought also caused by global warming?
Did Exxon invent a time machine and teleport all it's CO2 to the 1540s by using CERN's black hole generators?

Anonymous No. 16222282

>>16221124
lmao that scientists legit think that black hole comic book time travel stupidity is real.

Anonymous No. 16223080

>>16222282
They're dumb enough to think global warming is real, so the rest of their beliefs should be expected to be equally stupid
>dumb things are dumb

Anonymous No. 16223328

>>16203453
Are YOU a tree?

Anonymous No. 16223359

>>16203453
Greening in the short term is not a good thing. CO2 increases bulk mass of plants, sure, but that just increases the amount of cellulose in the plant. CO2 doesn't affect the amount of vitamins/minerals in the plants, which is causing deficiencies in animals. For instance it's well known that fish are dying from thiamin deficiency in some environments thanks to greening. Add onto that other Anthrogenic factors like pollution, and it's no wonder many species are going extinct.

Anonymous No. 16223399

>>16223359
NOOOO a gas company paid me to make this thread, stop debunking me.

Anonymous No. 16223641

>>16204358
>How is it good for nature?
You know how animals need oxygen to breathe? Plants need CO2 to breathe. They take in CO2 and spit oxygen back out again.

Bigger trees IN THEORY would provide a bigger oxygen output.

Anonymous No. 16223645

>>16223641
>Plants need CO2 to breathe
that's not true. you'd know that if you went to elementary school.

Anonymous No. 16223647

>>16220654
>I'm sure that the earth's magnetic field weakening
Ok that is a crisis. You wanna run that back?

Anonymous No. 16223756

>>16223641
So what you're saying is, more CO2 creates bigger trees, which produce more oxygen to compensate for deforestation.
So, at best, we've managed to Three Stooges Syndrome our way into a functioning ecosystem.

Anonymous No. 16225435

>>16223756
>we've managed to Three Stooges Syndrome our way into a functioning ecosystem.
God likes us, he wants us to enjoy both the use of hydrocarbon fuels while also enjoying the benefit of an environment improved by additional atmospheric CO2.

Anonymous No. 16225476

>>16225435
God loves Big Oil! In the name of the drill, the pumpjack, and the holy refinery, amen.

Anonymous No. 16226300

>>16220470
> a delusional sense of self-importance
projection

Anonymous No. 16226352

>>16226300
Correct, denialniggers project their mental retardation onto others

Anonymous No. 16226354

>>16221124
Do you know what "routinely" means, pajeet?

🗑️ Anonymous No. 16226356

>>16220639
Pure nonsense from a diseased mind. You're dumber than a nigger.
>>16220654
1) sounds like schizo shit you pulled from your morbidly obese ass 2) that would be even worse than global warming, wtf is your point?

Anonymous No. 16226366

>>16203609
What do you get out of lying?

Anonymous No. 16227836

>>16226366
Why does it upset you so badly that CO2 is good for nature? Life on Earth evolved in an atmosphere with far, far more CO2 than is current in the atmosphere, adding more CO2 back to the atmosphere is necessarily going to improve conditions for the natural world.

Anonymous No. 16227906

>>16227836
Retard take

Anonymous No. 16228019

>>16203554
>I hate this shit
stop watching good morning show.

Image not available

645x325

1-co2-S1319562X20....jpg

Anonymous No. 16229116

>>16203609
Reminder that when you plants blooming early, its not because the weather is warming, its because the plants grow faster and healthier due to having more CO2 in the atmosphere.
Plants on right in picrel are not only bigger, but they're also fruiting faster and earlier than the control

Anonymous No. 16229124

>>16229116
What fossil fuel company paid you to make this post?

Anonymous No. 16229556

>>16203650
Co2 Gas! Co2 Gas! Co2 Gas!
>>16228415

Anonymous No. 16229565

>>16203650
Look at all the veg! From the healthy CO2!

Anonymous No. 16229583

>>16204042
Part of the wider pajeet invasion of 4chan probably

Anonymous No. 16229600

>>16210395
Why did evolution do this

Anonymous No. 16229771

>>16229600
Evolution is always doing stuff like that, its retarded. If it wasn't then species wouldn't be constantly going extinct to make room for new species.
Did you ever hear about the elk species that grew antlers so large that it couldn't move through it's native forests effectively?

Anonymous No. 16229827

>>16229116
You've clearly never done gardening in your life and it shows.
Fucking city slickers shitting up my board with their shill posts.

Anonymous No. 16230252

>>16229124
>>16223399
>>16220267
>>16218604
>>16218315
>>16213126
>>16205838
>>16204042
>>16203732
Why do you think people need to be paid in secrecy for them to think differently from you?
Why must this ridiculous grand conspiracy exist, to explain away differing interpretations of the science?
The conspiratorial mindset has become a plaque onto science. The intolerance is palpable; it has become apparent that these people have almost religious devotion to their beliefs. Conspiracy theorists have started claiming, people who don't believe their particular conspiracy theory, are conspiracy theorists themselves for not believing it. "The big oil" pays people? What about the "big climate activism"? It goes both ways, to sum up, it's all mere assertions reliant on personal beliefs.

A consensus which is reached by outright dismissal, or even suppression of dissident and or differing opinions is not in fact a consensus, but an echo chamber.

Anonymous No. 16230256

>>16229827
>hasn't tried co2 fertilizing
hemp grows so so much faster with incresed co2 and heat

Anonymous No. 16230414

>>16230252
>Why must this ridiculous grand conspiracy exist, to explain away differing interpretations of the science?
Because it's hard to believe that anyone could be retarded enough to believe the horseshit that you do

>A consensus which is reached by outright dismissal, or even suppression of dissident and or differing opinions is not in fact a consensus, but an echo chamber
Describes denialnigger tactics to a T. Only difference is you're currently a minority so have to use more subtle kike strategies too, like crying about muh diversity of thought why are we so oppressed.

Anonymous No. 16230429

>>16230252
Oh gee, I dunno, maybe the long history of oil companies doing exactly that? If you're not a skill then try being less of a retard.

Anonymous No. 16230433

>>16230256
Only in highly controlled conditions where the plant can take advantage of the increased CO2.

Anonymous No. 16231735

>>16230256
it would grow faster without the additional heat if you didn't overwater it. plants need less water when co2 is added to their atmosphere.

Anonymous No. 16232054

>>16230252
Because I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt and I'm assuming you're at least getting paid to be a retards instead of doing it for free.

Anonymous No. 16232066

>>16232054
>Theory of mind, the cognitive capacity to infer others’ mental states, is crucial for the development of social communication. The impairment of theory of mind may relate to autism spectrum disorder (ASD), which is characterised by profound difficulties in social interaction and communication.

>Imagine the following situation. You happened to come home earlier than usual. You were very hungry, and remembered that your partner keeps her (or his) precious chocolate in the cupboard, which she only eats after unusually hard day’s work as a special treat. You know how important the chocolate is to her, but you were so hungry that you took the whole box out of the cupboard and ate about half of it. When she suddenly arrived home, you just had time to put the box under the coffee table before she came in to the living room. She then said that “I’ve had a really hectic day - I’m exhausted! I think I deserve some chocolate tonight.” What would you do?

>Most of you would predict that she would get to the cupboard (so you have to do something quickly, before she opens it.). At the same time, you may not realize what a complex and sophisticated reasoning you’ve just made to generate this prediction, as it would have occurred to you naturally and effortlessly. The reasoning you have just made could be broken down into understanding that she will open the cupboard because (1) she wants the chocolate and (2) she believes that it is still in the cupboard because (3) she doesn’t know that you’ve moved it. Such reasoning is called the theory of mind. It involves inferring others’ behaviour based on their mental states, which are opaque and impossible to observe directly.

Anonymous No. 16232071

>>16232066
>The association between intolerance of uncertainty and anxiety has proved robust in neurotypical populations and has led to effective interventions targeting intolerance of uncertainty. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to investigate this association in autistic people, given the high prevalence of anxiety in this population
>Results showed that anxiety and intolerance of uncertainty were consistently elevated in autistic participants. Examining the correlation between these two constructs, the meta-analysis revealed a large sample-weighted effect size, r=0.62, 95% confidence interval=[0.52, 0.71], p<0.001. The strength of this association was comparable to meta-analyses conducted on neurotypical populations, and therefore, it was concluded intolerance of uncertainty may be an appropriate target for intervention for autistic individuals.
>People who find it especially hard to cope with the unexpected or unknown are said to have an intolerance of uncertainty. Autistic individuals often report a preference for certainty and experience levels of anxiety that can interfere with their daily life. Understanding more about the link between the intolerance of uncertainty and anxiety in autistic people might lead to better treatments for anxiety being developed.
> The autistic people who participated in the studies completed questionnaires that suggested a large number of them experienced very high levels of anxiety and intolerance of uncertainty. Of 10 studies that used relevant statistics, nine found a statistically significant link between anxiety and the intolerance of uncertainty.
Autistic retards gobble up the climate emergency narrative because even though it is peak doomerism, it offers certainty and a clear cut set of actions which can be supported. The future is inherently unknowable and uncertain. Accept it, and accept that others can disbelieve your fear porn without being paid shills.

Anonymous No. 16232072

>>16203453
Greenhouses are great for plant growth, I do not want to live in one

Anonymous No. 16232460

>>16229583
>Baltimore bridge and migrated into other country
Those leech bastard ruin everything

Anonymous No. 16232780

>>16204046
Why would he disprove the ideal gas law?

Image not available

3000x1621

Corals_all_spp.jpg

Anonymous No. 16232855

>>16205802
>It's also bad for corals because it's warming too quickly
The greatest diversity of corals are found in the warmest parts of the ocean. Corals LOVE heat. Warmer oceans are better for coral

Anonymous No. 16232892

>>16232780
See
>>16204913

Anonymous No. 16232903

QUICK, KEEP THIS THREAD UP! IT ALMOST DROPPED TO PAGE 10!

Anonymous No. 16232940

>>16232855
good map

Anonymous No. 16232961

>>16232855
>Imagine being this retarded

Anonymous No. 16232971

>>16232961
https://www.aims.gov.au/information-centre/news-and-stories/great-barrier-reef-reviving-or-dying-heres-whats-happening-beyond-headlines

Anonymous No. 16233191

The problem with more co2 is the increasing heat. Yes it's good for plants and the planet ecosystem. But when it gets really really hot for animals that aren't used to it that can cause problems. Especially if humans can't handle it.

Anonymous No. 16233482

>>16203692
>Ever heard of "dose makes the poison"?
For plants CO2 poisoning is 10%. Thats 100,000ppm.

Anonymous No. 16233487

>>16233191
Indoor concentrations of 1000ppm is considered safe for humans.

Anonymous No. 16233525

>>16203692
>Ever heard of "dose makes the poison"?
No, because OP takes hot doses of toxic pozzed oil, and that hasn’t killed him yet! XD

Anonymous No. 16233597

>>16233191
It's this. The economic and human costs of climate change are the real killer.

Friendly reminder climate change can stop tomorrow. Everybody on the planet just has to take a sledge hammer to their vehicles, their air conditioners, throw out all their phones, tablets, computers, etc. Shut down all those power guzzling large language models, transnational flights, supply lines, etc.

The price will be paid sooner or later, and I guess humanity chose the painful way (as in the way which will make half the planet inhospitable) .

Anonymous No. 16233661

>>16233597
Derive your own equations to simulate climate change, retard. I bet you can't.

Anonymous No. 16233669

>>16233661
You have outed yourself

Anonymous No. 16233689

>>16233661
I will after you build a Boeing 747 from scratch.

Anonymous No. 16234150

>>16233487
NASA has set the maximum safe CO2 concentration in their spacecraft and on their space station at 5500ppm and those are environments when astronauts are supposed to perform complicated jobs for extended periods of time.

Anonymous No. 16234158

>>16234150
Spaceships have a very small air volume. That's a safety buffer because if the atmosphere system degraded they'd go into dangerous CO2 concentrations very fast.

Anonymous No. 16234245

>>16234158
If NASA's data shows that astronauts can operate safely at 5500ppm then 1000ppm or 2000ppm for people on Earth isn't a big deal.

Anonymous No. 16235126

>>16234245
the people who all bitch and moan constantly about CO2 never even own their own CO2 meters, they don't even know how much CO2 is in the atmosphere in their own homes, which shows how disingenuous their concerns really are.

Anonymous No. 16235910

>>16217918
They never have any proof of anything other than made up lines on fake graphs.

Anonymous No. 16235916

>>16203453
This "CO2 = greening" bullshit is just as retarded as climate change itself ignoring all the true complexities of the environment.

For example: Greening ONLY happened in White majority countries with a strong culture of nature perservation.

The opposite happened in the Southern hemisphere which saw vast deforestation in the last few decades in favour of monocultures.

Anonymous No. 16235963

WHOAH

GET THIS

PEOPLE DRINK WATER

BUT ALSO PEOPLE DROWN IN IT

WTF

Anonymous No. 16235989

>>16235916
>For example: Greening ONLY happened in White majority countries with a strong culture of nature perservation.
That's wrong though. India and China have greened more in the last 20 years than any other region.

Image not available

700x467

smog.jpg

Anonymous No. 16235992

>>16235989
Ah, yes, the lush green Chinese cities

Anonymous No. 16235995

>>16203453
Classic jew propaganda

Anonymous No. 16236090

>>16204757
Why are you so mad at a simple law?What happens if the volume isn't held constant? How does the volume of the gas change if the system is open? Would it already be changing? What's the exit velocity of "heat" leaving the atmosphere. For some reason the ideal gas law seems to strike a nerve with smart geniuses like you, can you please help me understand oh wise sage

Anonymous No. 16236095

>>16204913
Without co2 it will have a different density. Give me my honorary degree gay nerd. Solutions Havard, Solutions to you

Image not available

1680x945

swedish climate m....png

Anonymous No. 16236097

>>16204246
>CO2 fags are actively pushing for a global warming and sending the Earth's climate out of its current status to kill off thousands upon thousands of species for the sake of plants. Never forget this.
And never forget Sweden's climate minister Romina Pourmokhtari with a bag from CATO Institute.

Anonymous No. 16236105

>>16218315
You know big oil loves climate change. Don't sit here and act like the scientific establishment isn't a cute little puppet show. Step one outlaw or restrict commodity that you have a virtual monopoly over, step two set the new higher price adjusted for the black market. Do you think the drug cartels in South America want drugs to be legal? Then they'd be 2 bucks a gram and they might have to let the tiger back into the wild

Anonymous No. 16236106

Also can someone please explain the difference in the urban heat island effect and the greenhouse effect. P.s. sub 78 iq brianlet here and I hate every single one of you

Anonymous No. 16236119

>>16236106
>Also can someone please explain the difference in the urban heat island effect and the greenhouse effect. P.s. sub 78 iq brianlet here and I hate every single one of you
Ok, Mr Brianlet. Yes, cities are hotter than the surronding areas. Yes, there are ways to mitigate that. And yes, there was an investigation to see if the hotter cities caused mismeasurements of climate change. And it turned out that the cities didn't.

All things different, it was kinda like how Fred Hoyle (1915-2001) dismissed Big Bang. So astronomers etc looked deeper into it and it turned out that they strengthened the case for it.

Anonymous No. 16236277

>>16203650
That's sulfuric gas retard.

Anonymous No. 16236401

>>16203727
Dude Venus is hot DUE to the greenhouse effect. If Earth's atmosphere undergoes a runaway event then it would also be hot. Also if you know anything about planetary composition/formation both venus and earth are thought to be very similar in initial composition when it comes to carbon, oxygen, and nitrogen, the only big difference being how far from the sun they were formed. Earth's carbon is largely sequestered in rock and venus' is in the atmosphere.

Anonymous No. 16236415

>>16210442
Both testing rates and vaccination rates increased during the same time period as deaths from covid so it makes sense that they'd be correlated. But you know what they say about correlation and causation.

Anonymous No. 16236420

>>16227836
But modern life is mostly NOT used to high levels of atmospheric CO2. You know what fossil records show happens when you get rapid changes in atmospheric composition? Mass extinction.

Anonymous No. 16236429

>>16232071
Current climate discussions are only "doomeristic" atm because of decades of inaction. Historically these discussions have been slightly urgent but still optimistic.

Anonymous No. 16236431

>>16232855
Humans love heat too, relatively speaking, but would you want to live in an oven? Also I think ocean acidification is a large part of the problem not just heating

Anonymous No. 16236434

>>16203453
CO2 isn't the only issue, methane is 10x more potent and doesn't get absorbed by plants.

Anonymous No. 16236954

>>16226366
How much do you get out of lying?

Anonymous No. 16236963

>>16204246
>Global warming
What is this, the 2000s?

Image not available

420x572

1516300013319.jpg

Anonymous No. 16236970

>>16204042
>>16204246
>>16205838
>>16213126
>>16217962
>>16218315
>oil companies exist
Wtf I want to eat the bugs and live in a coffin now

Anonymous No. 16237130

>>16236434
If you're concerned about the environment why does it upset you that CO2 is good for nature?

Anonymous No. 16237136

>>16203650
Venus is earth in the past, not the future you dumb shit. If a "runaway greenhouse effect" were possible, then it would have already happened back when CO2 levels were 1200ppm. Earth used to have a venus-like atmosphere, and ALL THAT CO2 GOT TURNED INTO LIMESTONE, making the planet habitable.

Anonymous No. 16237141

>>16203867
>>everyone who doesn't subscribe to death cult anti-carbon climate alarmism is /pol/
Yes. National socialism is simply truth. If you care about truth, you are a nazi. Welcome to the club, your membership card is in the mail.

Anonymous No. 16237156

>>16204035
>physics is wrong and my feelings are right
kek

Anonymous No. 16237176

>>16205669
>Why make the climate hotter and fuck with things?
That isn't happening. The question is, why destroy the thing that makes our societies function for absolutely no reason.
>>16205802
>but bad if you live next to the ocean
I live next to the ocean. It has not moved. It is right where it has always been. The wharf has had fishing boats coming and going for 160 years and the water is still 5 feet below the walkway, just like it was 160 years ago. Why do you lie about something that is so easily verified with your own fucking eyes?
>>16213126
>if someone isn't retarded in the same way I am then they are a shill1!111
Climate change is fake and CO2 is beneficial to plants are not contradictory statements, faggot.
>>16220470
>And increasing extinction rates
That is the only thing in your list that is actually happening, and it has nothing to do with climate or CO2. Destroying ecosystems to feed and breed more niggers is not climate change.

Image not available

1280x720

co2level.jpg

Anonymous No. 16237674

>>16203650
you compare 96% co2 venus to 0,04% co2 earth

Anonymous No. 16237726

>>16203650
low iq post

Anonymous No. 16237728

>>16235916
>>16235992
samefag climate shill

Anonymous No. 16238003

>>16203453
Sabine already btfo'd this talking point, chud. You're lagging behind in the information war.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kGRjwT7mkx8

Anonymous No. 16238464

>>16237674
Earth is currently in a CO2 famine, plants and the rest of the environment would all be better off with CO2 in the 1000-2000 ppm range

Anonymous No. 16238485

>>16203609
>The more CO2 that goes into the atmosphere, the faster the plants will grow and the healthier nature becomes
Lmao it's obviously not that simple you retard

Anonymous No. 16238720

>>16203650
*BRAAAAAPPP*
sorry that was just me

Anonymous No. 16238721

>>16238485
Did you not read the OP cartoon by josh16?

Anonymous No. 16238748

>>16238485
>Lmao it's obviously not that simple you retard
Oh right, so CO2=BAD isn't simple?
Are you a retard anon?
Yes, I think so.

🗑️ Anonymous No. 16238756

>>16238748
75 IQ

Anonymous No. 16238793

>>16238756
Yes, that is your IQ anon.

Anonymous No. 16238867

>>16238003
It's also possible if you cut all the trees you plant down, bury them, and start all over again. Which is stupid.

Anonymous No. 16238874

>>16238793
That's a pretty impressive response given that you're legally retarded

Anonymous No. 16238940

>>16238874
Can you please tell me how CO2=BAD isn't a stupid over-simplified idea?
You know, what you believe in?

Anonymous No. 16239008

>>16238464
yeah i think same

Anonymous No. 16239238

>>16236970
>unironically defending oil kikes
/pol/troons have stopped all and any mental functions that they had, they now just automatically run on the opposite direction when confronted with a thought

Anonymous No. 16239438

>>16203453
Trees are extremely inefficient at processing carbon and unless the size of our forestscapes is going to grow dramatically how could they possibly keep up with an increasing human population dumping even greater quantities of CO2 in to the atmosphere? Not to mention, there surely must be an upper limit to the tree's adaptation?

“While we’re putting billions of tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, we’re actually taking much of it out just by letting our forests grow,” Sohngen said in a statement. “We should be planting more trees and preserving older ones, because at the end of the day they’re probably our best bet for mitigating climate change.” FALSE - our best bet was always and will likely always be to reduce the levels of carbon dioxide we generate. Even if you planted 1 billion new trees they wouldn't be able to process the carbon that humans generate in a single year.

Anonymous No. 16239946

>>16239438
>and preserving older ones.
The rate at which trees consume CO2 changes as they age because extremely trees in most species tend to rot at the core past a certain age and at that point they're releasing CO2 as well as sequestering it. 50-100 years of age is when most trees have their maximum sequestration rate, but for longer lived species the range for max sequestration leans older

Image not available

1035x706

climate soyence.jpg

Anonymous No. 16241774

Anonymous No. 16243104

>>16236401
>Dude Venus is hot DUE to the greenhouse effect.
>OMG I USED CAPSLOCK THAT MEANS I'M YELLING AND YOU HAVE TO AGREE WITH ME
no it isn't, you only think that because you're ignorant of basic physics, thats why you think TV propaganda is real.
furthermore raising your voice is something that only has an effect during in person confrontations, displaying your out of control emotional outrage online doesn't carry with it the threat of escalating to violence like yelling in person does.

Anonymous No. 16243173

>>16203453
>these anaerobic bacteria need to stop being such alarmists about increased oxygen, don’t they know it’s good for aerobic organisms?

Anonymous No. 16243176

>>16243104
>you're ignorant of basic physics, thats why you think TV propaganda is real
peak boomer moment

Anonymous No. 16243394

We're currently in an ice age, climate change is happening, and it's suspiciously correlated with the increase of CO2 and water vapor in the atmosphere as a result of the industrial revolution. That's about all we can say definitively. You should be skeptical of anybody saying anything conclusive in either direction. Climatology is beyond our capacity for reason by several orders of magnitude.

Anonymous No. 16243490

>>16235992
Yes
https://www.nasa.gov/centers-and-facilities/ames/human-activity-in-china-and-india-dominates-the-greening-of-earth-nasa-study-shows/

Anonymous No. 16243577

>>16237156
Low IQ people really are that irrational. People below 120 IQ or so will always tend to ignore reason in favor of emotionally pleasing delusions.

Image not available

893x458

Arctic-Surface-Te....jpg

Anonymous No. 16244818

>>16243394
>it's suspiciously correlated with the increase of CO2 and water vapor in the atmosphere
no it isn't

Anonymous No. 16244971

>>16244818
>Artic temperature

Anonymous No. 16245910

>>16244971
>when its cold anywhere: thats just a regional anomaly
>when its warm anywhere: omg this proves global warming!!!

Anonymous No. 16245914

>>16245910
>He doesn't know the difference between local and global
NGMI

Anonymous No. 16245932

>>16245914
He does. You kikes keep using local warm weather to "prove" global warming.

Anonymous No. 16245995

Giolbearill wDrmumi h is a hoax. IM SO ANGERY RHAT AY CAN BARELY TYPE

GLOBAL WARMING. IS A FUCKING HOX

Anonymous No. 16246014

>>16245995
Kino
>>16245932
How are you this retarded? The only people stupid enough to cherrypick individual measurements out of context are denialniggers.

Anonymous No. 16246017

>>16246014
Literally every single warm day gets reported as being proof of climate change you stupid lying kike.

Anonymous No. 16246022

Give me a tl;dr
Are plants gonna become gigantic soon?

Anonymous No. 16246030

>>16246022
Not dramatically so, they'll just grow faster and be healthier. Its like the difference between a 5'10" manlet nerd sissy and a 6'3" muscular chad

Image not available

580x430

1718988200878393.jpg

Anonymous No. 16246059

>>16204089
>deforesting most of the planet
Retard

Anonymous No. 16246568

How is this fossil fuel paid shill thread still up? /sci/ is dogshit and has been for some time.

Anonymous No. 16246600

>>16203453
Photosynthetic organisms are thriving. More CO2 in the atmosphere means higher partial pressure of CO2 and higher photosynthetic activity. Stomata can remain closed longer which means plant don't lose as much water either.

I have to cut the lawn more often than weekly now. You have to see it to believe just how fast plants are growing in this interglacial period. Fruit yields have never been better in the garden. Gardener bros, we're eating good right now

Anonymous No. 16246602

>>16246568
Post garden, environmentlet.

🗑️ Anonymous No. 16246676

>>16246568
Schizo retards can sit at home all day ruining shit with no consequences

Anonymous No. 16247116

>>16246600
>Photosynthetic organisms are thriving.
not good. asthma rates are skyrocketing due to the sheer amount of pollen in the air and now I hear plant roots are breaching into pipes, into the fucking water supply and releasing phytotoxins which can cause symptoms anywhere from nausea to premature balding. plants are not our friends.

Anonymous No. 16247153

>>16247116
>I CAN'T BREEVE!!!!
genetic trash being wiped out for us by the chad plants is good for humanity. your weak genes were never meant to survive. the little ice age and CO2 famine were all that was protecting you from your inevitable fate. got buy yourself a nice casket and funerary plot while you still have time, its over for you and your inferior respiratory tract.

Anonymous No. 16247171

>>16247153
humans evolved on dry savannahs without plants so yeah, your plant tolerance only means your ancestors fucked monkeys and that's where they got their plant-immune genes which is nothing to be proud of honestly.

Anonymous No. 16247220

>>16247116
>asthma rates are skyrocketing due to the sheer amount of pollen in the air
Why is the amish mysteriously unaffected by this pollen? Could it be that it is not caused by an increase in pollen, but rather due to an increase in raising kids inside of air-tight boxes full of toxic gasses?

Anonymous No. 16247461

>>16246059
>He thinks corn and rice are forests

Anonymous No. 16248842

>>16203453
Good pic
>the vigin Bill Nye
>the chad planet Earth
Its funny how IFLS faggots get so angry when reality refuses to line up with their idiotic scientism religious rhetoric

Anonymous No. 16249448

>>16203609
Bingo.
>almost as if
Bingo.

Anonymous No. 16250064

>>16203899
Imagine saying what you just said and believing it as fact. topkek

Anonymous No. 16250083

>>16250064
You're fucking retarded. Earths atmosphere is WAYYYY too thin, every other planet lines up and we are the weird outlier. The reason is not as he stated though.
>>16203899
You are correct that venus was never like earth. Quite the contrary, earth was like venus. But due to our distance from the sun and mass, we can support liquid water, and so life arose, and pulled almost all of the CO2 out of the atmosphere and sequestered it in the form of rocks like limestone. That is why we have an anomalously thin atmosphere.

Anonymous No. 16250118

>>16229565
It’s food for all my veg! I love CO2!

🗑️ Anonymous No. 16250138

>>16248842
Except it does you retarded nigger. The climate in my area has completely changed from how it was when I was a kid. Go outside.

🗑️ Anonymous No. 16250139

>>16247153
You are the definition of genetic trash though

Anonymous No. 16250142

>>16250138
>The climate in my area has completely changed from how it was when I was a kid.
Yeah, my grandma was born in 1930 and she said the same thing when she was in her 20s. Your local climate has changed lots of times, it has nothing to do with the carbon boogeyman.

🗑️ Anonymous No. 16250156

>>16250142
Cool, except my dad says the same thing for the same time period and it lines up 100% with climate change predictions. I'm going to believe my own eyes over retarded larpers like (you).

Anonymous No. 16250166

>>16250156
>but I did eat breakfast

Anonymous No. 16250213

>>16250166
>not understanding the breakfast meme
I understand your point about local climate variations not being inherently meaningful, but given that it is significant enough that my dad, who is 65, noticed it as well as me and almost everyone I grew up with AND it confirms predictions made in the 90s AND is historically abnormal (records broken every year) it clearly means something. You're going to respond to this with more cope regardless.

Image not available

987x291

Untitled.png

Anonymous No. 16250221

>>16203453
Climate alarmism is just a socialist/communist death cult.

Anonymous No. 16250236

>>16250221
Keep posting it, maybe someone other than you will be stupid enough to believe it one day

Image not available

1395x1079

record count.jpg

Anonymous No. 16250557

>>16250213
>records broken every year
since theres more days in the year then there are years of temperature record, you should be expecting records to be broken every year, if you didn't already figure that out for yourself then you have to ask yourself why you didn't

🗑️ Anonymous No. 16250561

>>16250557
*than, Kek

And no, I shouldn't expect that at all. Direct evidence of skyrocketing average temperatures in the last century that aren't normal according to the geological record should be alarming no matter what the cause. Why do you think the entire world should be uninhabitable jungle?

Anonymous No. 16250716

>>16250213
>it clearly means something
No, it doesn't. More than two people notice every change in weather, that's the point. That doesn't turn that weather into global warming. Everyone noticed how cold the 70s was, that didn't make it global cooling.
>>16250561
There is no such evidence. Look at the raw data, it shows no warming. Only the "corrected" data shows warming, and they keep changing the "corrections" to fit their needs.

Anonymous No. 16250794

>>16250716
>He doesn't understand the difference between weather and climate

Anonymous No. 16250797

>>16250794
>point out that weather is not climate
>some retarded faggot tells you that weather is not climate

Anonymous No. 16250839

>>16250797
>Everyone noticed how cold the 70s was, that didn't make it global cooling.
>He doesn't understand the difference between weather and climate

Anonymous No. 16250841

>>16250839
>oh fuck I am retarded and everyone sees it what do I do?!111
>I know, just repeat myself like a fucking retard, that will make everyone forget I am retarded!1111

Anonymous No. 16252159

>>16250142
The 1930s were the hottest decade in recorded history for which accurate temperature measurements exist. Every decade since then has been substantially cooler

Anonymous No. 16252223

>>16250839
yeah, we get it. it's like the catholic notion of substance and accidents. climate is the substance and only gawd and his anointed can see it. all we ordinary folk can see is the weather, and it is perfectly ok if it does not seem to support all the wannabe world-dictator fantasies your ilk has.

Anonymous No. 16252235

>>16250841
>>16252223
>He doesn't understand the difference between weather and climate

Anonymous No. 16252236

>>16252235
>I know, just repeat myself like a fucking retard, that will make everyone forget I am retarded!1111

Anonymous No. 16252566

>>16252159
Yes, that is the point.

Anonymous No. 16252675

>>16252236
Instead of doing that you could learn the difference between weather and climate.

Anonymous No. 16252683

>>16252675
>why is everyone calling me retarded?!111
>it couldn't possibly be that I am retarded could it?
>no, it must be everyone else that is retarded!

Anonymous No. 16252718

>>16252683
Here, I'll help get you started.

>weather
noun
the state of the atmosphere at a place and time as regards heat, dryness, sunshine, wind, rain, etc.
"if the weather's good we can go for a walk"
Similar:
meteorological conditions
atmospheric conditions
meteorology

>climate
noun
the weather conditions prevailing in an area in general or over a long period.
"our cold, wet climate"
Similar:
weather pattern
weather conditions

As you can see weather and climate are clearly not the same thing. Now learn about the global climate so you can catch up and properly participate in the discussion.
https://www.encyclopedia.com/science/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/global-climate

Anonymous No. 16252743

>>16252718
>hot during the 30s
>this is just weather not climate
>hot during 2010s
>this is climate not weather
HURRRR

Image not available

864x580

fig11b_1.2.1 (1).png

Anonymous No. 16252761

>>16252743
Hot where during the 30's? Globally the 40's were much hotter and both periods are colder than they are now. At best you are confusing local climate with global climate, but to me it's clear that you still don't understand the difference between climate and weather.

Anonymous No. 16252769

>>16252761
>look mommy I said it again!
Try posting the actual temperature, not the post-adjustment temperature.

Anonymous No. 16252785

>>16252769
Post your data and I'll see if I can explain to you how your metric is useless for establishing the state of the global climate, but can almost guarantee that you won't understand what I tell you since you're having so much trouble figuring out the difference between 'weather' and 'climate' or apparently even 'local' and 'global'

Anonymous No. 16252798

>>16252785
It is your data, retard. Just pre-adjustment. Learn to read.

Anonymous No. 16252809

>>16252785
>establishing the state of the global climate
NTA but the notion of a "global climate" is meaningless. No-one experiences the global climate. The "global climate" could theoretically cool solely due to localised effects in Antarctica whilst the inhabited world got slightly warmer or stayed the same. In such a scenario it would be nonsense to say that the global climate had cooled just because one large, uninhabited region got a lot colder.

Anonymous No. 16252815

>>16252798
Post it.

>>16252809
Retard.

Anonymous No. 16252871

>>16252815
https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/products/land-based-station/noaa-global-temp

Anonymous No. 16252929

>>16252815
>Retard
Not an argument

Anonymous No. 16254366

>>16252761
There weren't enough widespread accurate temperature records being created 100 years ago for any accurate measure of global temperature average to be made, anyone who is claim that is the case (like you are with that graph) is obviously blatantly lying.

Anonymous No. 16255554

>>16252871
That site lists multiple datasets. Which one are you using? Where are you getting your data? Be specific.

Anonymous No. 16255556

>>16252929
>>16254366
Retard.

Anonymous No. 16255602

>>16255554
>That site lists multiple datasets.
No it doesn't you braindead waste of sperm.

Anonymous No. 16255621

>>16255602
The NOAA Merged Land Ocean Global Surface Temperature Analysis (NOAAGlobalTemp, formerly known as MLOST)

Input Datasets
ERSST v5
GHCNm v4
ICOADS
IABP

You said it was the same data without the adjustments. I asked you for that data and you gave me this page which lists multiple datasets used as input for the final dataset. Which of these datasets are you using as support for your claims?

Anonymous No. 16255629

>>16255621
Those are the INPUTS USED TO MAKE THE DATASET you absolute fucking retard.

Anonymous No. 16255632

stand back guys, he used capslock, he is really angry now, he could go past the critical point any second, we might be about to witness a total spergout

Anonymous No. 16255639

>>16255629
And which of these are you using as evidence for your claims? Which dataset is "pre-adjustment"?

Anonymous No. 16255655

>>16255639
How many abortion attempts did you survive? The dataset I linked to, shit for brains. Not the inputs used to make it, IT.

Anonymous No. 16255767

>>16255655
Are you sure? That dataset doesn't back a single claim you've made. It shows the exact opposite in fact.

Anonymous No. 16256916

>>16255632
clearly global warming is a very emotional issue for him and not one he is able to consider on a rational scientific basis

Anonymous No. 16256937

>>16255767
>no it doesn't say what it says trust me
k

Image not available

1080x2220

Screenshot_202406....png

Anonymous No. 16257004

>>16256937
That dataset shows the 30's being colder than the 40's and both being colder than now. The data runs exactly contrary to your claims. This is why I asked if you were sure that this was the dataset you're talking about.

Anonymous No. 16257025

>>16257004
>he didn't even look at the data
lol

Anonymous No. 16257029

>>16257025
That is the data. That's the same dataset you linked me to as evidence for your claims. Strangely it shows the exact opposite of your claims.

Image not available

1280x720

global warming is....jpg

Anonymous No. 16257033

>>16257029

Anonymous No. 16257042

>>16257033
Could I have a bit more compression in that jpg, I don't see enough artefacts

Anonymous No. 16257043

>>16257033
None of the input datasets used tree ring data.

Anonymous No. 16257523

This reminds me of a thread years ago in which a guy started claiming that tigers don't exist and that every proof is actually a fabrication. The OP in the end said it was basically some sort of social experiment on how easily it is to argue for something that obviously is wrong if you're enough of a snake. I just want you guys to keep that in mind.

Anonymous No. 16257533

>>16223645
>you'd know that if you went to elementary school.
What elementary school teaches you that photosynthesis doesn't rely on CO2 being brought in through the stomata to mix with sugars to create energy with oxygen as a byproduct?

Image not available

576x937

(((michael mann))).jpg

Anonymous No. 16257573

>>16257033
The "Mike" in that pic is Michael Mann, who is a political operative, not even a real scientist.

🗑️ Anonymous No. 16257575

>>16257573
>the GOP is evil
Honestly, I can agree.
Trump isn't really a GOP guy though, he's a Tea Party incarnate, just like Taft was midway through his term.
The GOP is just the remanent of the whig party. They're old world, European-styled statists.

Anonymous No. 16257619

>>16257573
Retard.

Anonymous No. 16257628

>>16257619
Micheal Mann is not a retard, he is fully aware of the fraud he is engaged in.

Anonymous No. 16257678

>>16257628
No fraud was found.

Anonymous No. 16257981

>>16257678
>we investigated ourselves and declared ourselves free of any wrong doing! Just ignore the evidence!

Anonymous No. 16258037

>>16257981
Welp that clears it. No fraud! Any more questions and you and your russian shills/bots get send to the anti-science gulags you bigot!!!

Anonymous No. 16258048

>>16257981
>>16258037
>we investigated ourselves
If you're this ignorant then why even try to participate in the conversation?

Anonymous No. 16258054

The key is time. Natural causes usually do it in the span of millions or even billions of years. Plenty of time for evolution to catch up. Humans cause changes in the span of decades.

Anonymous No. 16259100

>>16258054
wrong

Anonymous No. 16259111

>>16259100
Retard

Anonymous No. 16259115

>>16259111
That's where the body of your post is supposed to go, not your signature.

Anonymous No. 16260053

>>16257042
why does that pic trigger you so badly?

Anonymous No. 16260062

>>16260053
>recipient blurred
>title blurred
>message field overwritten with caps text
and you don't seem to know what "trigger" means

Anonymous No. 16260065

>>16257033
>fox news
Top kek