🧵 Climate change is now undeniable
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Jul 2024 17:48:48 UTC No. 16276232
Anyone with average or higher intelligence should be able to tell that climate change is massively affecting the world.
I don't need to explain, the last 11 years have been the warmest on record.
Civilization will likely massively regress back to 1950s or pre 1950s levels of consumption and carbon emissions by 2040 and many, many of the weakest members of society will perish. Poverty will increase massively, most people won't be able to own a car, and information technology is going to be very rare. Any computers, phones, TVs or radios made in the period 1980 - 2030 will be worth more than gold as the Semiconductor era comes to an end.
>But it's muh natural change
>But muh conspiracy
>Drill baby drill!
>Liberuls did it!
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Jul 2024 17:55:47 UTC No. 16276249
>>16276232
>compared to 1951-1980 average
How long did it take to range pick an arbitrary baseline to shape the graph like that and make the 1930s look chilly?
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Jul 2024 17:59:13 UTC No. 16276258
>>16276249
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2021
>please spoonfeed me because i'm conspiracybrained and deny my own senses in the name of Big Oil
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Jul 2024 18:09:14 UTC No. 16276266
>>16276232
Well see about that, our decentralized weather stations will provide cryptographic provenancs, and large citizen stake in our climate dataset, we'll see if your east anglia hadrcut gistemp p hacked un verified measurements truely holds water
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Jul 2024 18:10:16 UTC No. 16276268
>>16276266
Oh forgot noaa nda'd scientists as well
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Jul 2024 18:12:16 UTC No. 16276270
>>16276266
Need your meds?
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Jul 2024 18:17:46 UTC No. 16276279
I don't see why would would predict regression to 1980s levels of production in terms of semi-conductors. The areas which will be most affected by climate change do not product much in the way of semiconductors nor is siting for that industry particularly temperature sensitive. Plus, the countries which drive global consumption are also not those most likely to be severely affected by climate change.
>>16276249
What was special about the 1930s? They weren't globally warmer.
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Jul 2024 18:24:35 UTC No. 16276291
>>16276279
I said the semiconductor era will end, not that we'll be producing anything even on an Eighties level. Look up degrowth and societal simplification. The supply chain for semiconductor production and distribution is very complicated and unsustainable in a post capitalist, collapsing world. The whole world will look like 1990s post USSR Russia.
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Jul 2024 18:31:21 UTC No. 16276300
>>16276270
What if your methods and measurements are so prestine, surely there is nothing to fear. Your work will be checked, (if in fact you did a single temperature read and are not simply trusting another strangers works)
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Jul 2024 18:32:19 UTC No. 16276301
>>16276291
Well we disagree completely there then if you claiming that much. To some extent it is folly to try to predict the future. Certainly GaN and SiC supply chains rely much less on underdeveloped nations at least and those are honestly more common in my era due to the prevalence of high-power applications. So I have reasons conversely to be quite bullish on that area as well.
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Jul 2024 18:39:59 UTC No. 16276308
>>16276301
Yes, Fusion energy might take over and whatever comes after that, but if the current trend continues, our current way of life cannot exist for much longer. The countries which produce semiconductors also have below replacement birth rates and the people who currently work in the factories are eventually going to retire, so that's another probable factor. Labor shortages are already happening in many skilled labor industries.
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Jul 2024 19:10:57 UTC No. 16276329
>>16276279
>What was special about the 1930s? They weren't globally warmer
The new lie they cling to is that the 1930's were hotter than it is now so global warming can't be happening.
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Jul 2024 19:19:50 UTC No. 16276339
>>16276232
Global warming is fake.
All temperature collections are fake and corrupt. The ones done today are fake, the "historical" records from centuries and millenia ago are made up and completely unscientific.
All based on untested theories (that cannot be tested).
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Jul 2024 19:21:57 UTC No. 16276343
>>16276339
See this for corruption of even the readings taken today. Imagine how bad are "reconstructed" readings from 5000 BC based on some ice sample
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Jul 2024 19:22:50 UTC No. 16276344
>>16276339
I've never seen you in-person so you are fake and a bot
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Jul 2024 19:23:55 UTC No. 16276345
>>16276329
I believe it was only hot in the US or NA? I am not a climate scientist, so do not recall.
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Jul 2024 19:26:36 UTC No. 16276348
>climate change
Ha. I admit that some climate change is probably possible but I have also seen too many failed predictions to take them too seriously anymore.
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Jul 2024 19:43:14 UTC No. 16276381
>>16276232
>Climate change is now undeniable
Yeah, it changes every few months. They're called "seasons", you stupid communist.
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Jul 2024 19:58:53 UTC No. 16276403
>>16276232
A reduction in emissions doesn't have to correspond to a reduction in quality of life. We just need to switch to renewables before we run out of oil. Most oil companies think that will happen around 2060, but even if the supply gets tight in 2040 that gives us 15 years to make the switch. Solar has had a doubling period of about 3 years so its reasonable to expect our solar capacity to increase 32 fold by 2040. That means electricity production should easily be met by 2040, but electricity is only 16% of the global energy use. If the doubling trend continues then by 2060 we'd have 64 times the 2040 solar capacity which should easily cover our global use in all forms.
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Jul 2024 20:00:31 UTC No. 16276406
>>16276232
You forgot to admit that this chart is "after adjustment are made."
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Jul 2024 20:02:55 UTC No. 16276415
>>16276345
It was a little warmer than the 1940's, but it's much hotter now and even if it weren't there's a reason we call it global warming and not American warming.
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Jul 2024 20:05:09 UTC No. 16276419
Isn't it weird how the raw temperature data shows it's is getting colder, but then the "experts" make some adjustments to the raw data and then it looks like it's getting hotter? Isn't that strange?
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Jul 2024 20:07:41 UTC No. 16276426
>>16276419
Why are coastal areas getting eroded so rapidly and sea levels keep rising?
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Jul 2024 20:08:43 UTC No. 16276428
>>16276424
Global mean sea level has risen about 8–9 inches (21–24 centimeters) since 1880. The rising water level is mostly due to a combination of melt water from glaciers and ice sheets and thermal expansion of seawater as it warms.
>They fudged the data. Here's my chart created by Big Oil
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Jul 2024 20:09:32 UTC No. 16276430
>>16276426
That's been happening far longer than we've been producing significant CO2.
You should try reading a book some time.
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Jul 2024 20:10:33 UTC No. 16276432
>>16276428
>since 1880
Which you should find suspect since we have only been producing significant CO2 since about 1940.
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Jul 2024 20:14:15 UTC No. 16276441
>>16276232
>THIS TIME IT'S NOT FAKE! NO REALLY!
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Jul 2024 20:15:00 UTC No. 16276447
>>16276432
Since the onset of industrial times in the 18th century, human activities have raised atmospheric CO2 by 50% – meaning the amount of CO2 is now 150% of its value in 1750. This human-induced rise is greater than the natural increase observed at the end of the last ice age 20,000 years ago.
You're the one in a cult. Why are hurricanes increasing in intensity?
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Jul 2024 20:16:21 UTC No. 16276450
>>16276447
>Why are hurricanes increasing in intensity?
They aren't. You are trying to prove an increase from ONE FUCKING DATA POINT.
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Jul 2024 20:21:35 UTC No. 16276459
>>16276450
>doesn't believe in the Greenhouse Effect
So we are pumping the atmosphere full of C02 and the result is nothing?
I bet you would advocate for ending regulations and similar stuff. Hmm, I wonder, is the data about tobacco being bad also fudged? Pollution too? Yeah let's bring back the good old days and eliminate catalytic converters because here's some charts which PROVE that breathing pollution is healthier than not
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Jul 2024 20:22:58 UTC No. 16276462
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Jul 2024 20:26:27 UTC No. 16276469
>>16276465
So all the scientists who believe in climate change are................. Le Retards?
Let me guess, you believed the vaccine would kill everyone and we'd be in Red Deer Apocalypse
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Jul 2024 20:28:06 UTC No. 16276473
>>16276469
>So all the scientists who believe in climate change are................. Le Retards?
No, no, I would say most of them are crooks.
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Jul 2024 20:30:51 UTC No. 16276477
>>16276473
You just said it's an indicator of mental retardation though.
Tell me, are scientists all in on a conspiracy?
>they are all paid by......... the ANTI big oil leftist conspiracy
I could be just like you. It's very easy. Hopefully you are actually just a troll
DRILL BABY DRILL at Wed, 10 Jul 2024 20:34:36 UTC No. 16276480
Pollution is good for you, especially C02!
We need DEREGULATION like Ronald Raygun did! Moar pollution, moar gas and oil, moar moar moar! Praise the Orange King!
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Jul 2024 20:43:34 UTC No. 16276498
>>16276419
That's not raw temperature data. How do you justify using that metric?
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Jul 2024 20:53:14 UTC No. 16276509
>>16276498
imagine the smell
>Libs : Owned
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Jul 2024 20:54:18 UTC No. 16276511
>>16276498
>Because I say it's not.
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Jul 2024 20:55:36 UTC No. 16276513
>Hopefully all the hard data you've been posting showing AGW is bullshit means you're just a troll.
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Jul 2024 21:01:46 UTC No. 16276523
>>16276513
You are right...........
Bring back the good old days and eliminate all the regulations against pollution because pumping the atmosphere full to the brim with C02 has no effect,
That'll show em
>inb4 that's n-not what I said you are-
>here's this chart whic-
Ponder the aroma.
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Jul 2024 21:34:46 UTC No. 16276572
>>16276232
>anomaly
good try nosenstein
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Jul 2024 22:04:51 UTC No. 16276622
>>16276232
omg these anomalies make it stop
https://www.bitchute.com/video/8AHk
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Jul 2024 22:46:31 UTC No. 16276657
>>16276232
its was evident to exxon mobil in 1977.
if this isnt convincing enough, the only thing that helps is a shotgun.
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Jul 2024 22:51:09 UTC No. 16276659
>>16276232
I'm going to fix it but I will need more time
Anonymous at Thu, 11 Jul 2024 03:22:12 UTC No. 16276858
>>16276511
Do you expect anyone to believe that these weather stations only reported the days above 95 F? Your graph doesn't contain any raw data. How do you justify the metric? You never answered me.
Anonymous at Thu, 11 Jul 2024 08:07:38 UTC No. 16277013
>>16276232
Nice image anon, sauce?
I'd be interested in seeing an update version.
Anonymous at Thu, 11 Jul 2024 09:13:57 UTC No. 16277056
>>16276657
the people who buried that research and promoted denialism should all rot in jail.
Anonymous at Fri, 12 Jul 2024 06:37:14 UTC No. 16278355
bump
Anonymous at Fri, 12 Jul 2024 06:59:18 UTC No. 16278381
>world is freezing
>world is cooking
>world is freezing
>world is cooking
>why aren't people taking us seriously?
in the end, you will just be another iteration in the cycle of hysteric pseuds.
Anonymous at Fri, 12 Jul 2024 07:11:51 UTC No. 16278391
>>16276232
>the last 11 years have been the warmest on record.
How far back do the records go?
Are the same types of measuring equipment used in the same places?
We didn't, say, change from mercury thermometers to electronic ones, which require regular calibration to keep within acceptable error margins, did we?
We didn't, for example, keep measuring stations in the same place whilst surrounding them with ever more asphalt, AC units and power lines?
There's absolutely no way that error margins of +/- 0.5c could creep into our data, is there? Our devices are infallibly well-calibrated and sited in perfect and fair areas?
Anonymous at Fri, 12 Jul 2024 07:22:44 UTC No. 16278400
>>16276426
>sea levels keep rising?
In some places they are rising and in some places they are falling. Its due to geology and plate tectonic, not climate change.
Anonymous at Fri, 12 Jul 2024 07:25:49 UTC No. 16278403
Anonymous at Fri, 12 Jul 2024 16:26:25 UTC No. 16278935
>>16278400
>>16278403
>He doesn't understand the difference between the coastline and sea level
Anonymous at Fri, 12 Jul 2024 19:31:58 UTC No. 16279195
>>16278935
Read the key on the X axis >>16278400
Anonymous at Fri, 12 Jul 2024 22:16:03 UTC No. 16279456
>>16278391
>How far back do the records go?
>Are the same types of measuring equipment used in the same places?
>We didn't, say, change from mercury thermometers to electronic ones, which require regular calibration to keep within acceptable error margins, did we?
>We didn't, for example, keep measuring stations in the same place whilst surrounding them with ever more asphalt, AC units and power lines?
>There's absolutely no way that error margins of +/- 0.5c could creep into our data, is there? Our devices are infallibly well-calibrated and sited in perfect and fair areas?
all that is studied, researched about, controlled, regulated, mitigated, etc.
You have to be very paranoid to think everyone else out there is an idiot but yourself. Get real.
Anonymous at Fri, 12 Jul 2024 22:45:59 UTC No. 16279489
>>16276476
huh
Anonymous at Fri, 12 Jul 2024 23:20:21 UTC No. 16279536
>>16276657
>This random sheet of paper is from exxon. Trust me, goyim.
Anonymous at Fri, 12 Jul 2024 23:27:53 UTC No. 16279543
warmer is generally better. more things grow further north and during a larger part of the year. the medieval warm period had higher temperatures than today. they grew wine grapes in england and grain on the coast of greenland. there was so much agricultural surplus that they could fuel the huge cathedral building projects all over europe.
what isn't good is devastating our ecosystems with logging all the old growth forest, large scale industrial agriculture, depleting the fisheries, asphalting and cementing everything and putting all kinds of toxic stuff into air, water and soil.
the whole discussion about literal hot air is used as a smokescreen to distract from all of the environmental destruction that large cooperations are pursuing for short term profits and trading carbon credits is easy greenwashing (we're carbon neutral!) and a huge scam to profiteer from.
most of our environmental problems could be solved if we analysed them objectively and put resources into changing our industries to work for long term sustainability, instead of short term profits.
Anonymous at Sat, 13 Jul 2024 03:30:23 UTC No. 16279803
>>16276232
when you cherry pick your data and create a model on a subset of a larger heavily correlated dataset it is called pseudo science.
Anonymous at Sat, 13 Jul 2024 07:10:24 UTC No. 16279987
>>16279456
>all that is studied, researched about, controlled, regulated, mitigated, etc.
Lmao you have such faith. You would have made quite the zealous clergyman in another lifem
Anonymous at Sat, 13 Jul 2024 09:42:45 UTC No. 16280087
>>16276232
oooo colorful chart
must be true
Anonymous at Sat, 13 Jul 2024 23:12:25 UTC No. 16280778
>>16279456
>I don't understand the scriptures, but the priests do!
Anonymous at Sun, 14 Jul 2024 14:56:13 UTC No. 16281392
>>16276232
Still waiting on that picture of sea level change.
Anonymous at Sun, 14 Jul 2024 17:22:18 UTC No. 16281490
>>16281392
You realize sea level changes constantly due to tides?
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Jul 2024 01:22:16 UTC No. 16281852
>>16276406
You forgot to admit that we don't need temperature stations to prove it
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Jul 2024 03:20:59 UTC No. 16281921
Don't need graphs to prove it. Go to a city around people and cars, then go to a nice forest or a beach and see the differences in temperature. Now look at expansion of human development. It's a no brainer.
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Jul 2024 03:38:29 UTC No. 16281946
>>16276657
>>16277056
"Welp, climate's changing everybody, time to just pack up the oil rigs and go home and give up."
-said nobody ever.
If Exxon hadn't extracted all the oil then some other company would have taken their place. Climate change is the result of 150 years of human momentum since the beginning of the industrial revolution.
What if somebody came up to you and said you had to give up your phone, your computer, your AC, your fridge, oven, washer, etc. and go live like Amish? It's FUCKING STUPID. This is what climate tards don't understand, you just don't get it do you? It's not natural human behavior to give up technology. Oh yeah, and all those solar panels, electric cars, windmills, it's all fucking SNAKEOIL because society was not built to exist without fossil fuels. It's like trying to use fossil fuels to replace fossil fuels with a shittier version of fossil fuels. People in the 1850s didn't have electric cars, so what makes you think they can exist in a world without oil? They can't. No, the only solution is to let society collapse. Sure, it'll be fucking awful, but you can't change fundamental human nature, so stop whining.