Climate change

What do y'all think about climate change?

kind of a massive problem.

why is this in Shitpost Central?

it's pretty bad

so's the amount of plastic in the ocean

humans are ruining the world

why is this in Shitpost Central?

Good question. Topic moved.

Quote from: Black T Cat on May 09, 2018, 07:33:38 pm

why is this in Shitpost Central?

Good question. Topic moved.

I'm finding this in Shitpost Central so take this how you will~


I don't see how climate change can be exclusively man made when it's well known that the Earth has natural warming and cooling periods. Otherwise, without industry, how did, in the early BC eras, climate change effect the growth of the black sea with an increase of over 50% of it's original size and how did the oceans rise enough to cover the Bering Land Bridge? Some portion of climate change has to be a natural occurrence due to these effects. People tend to see the "THEORY" of climate change and think of it to be similar to the theory of Gravity or thermodynamics while it's a more legitimate use of theory in that we're not entirely certain that humans ARE the main cause of temperature extremes. Pairing this with the belief that the planets orbit the Sun in a perfect circular alignment and that through use of selective wording to make sure we don't forget that we're to blame for climate change we can be reminded every few years to donate to the green causes.

The evidence for humans being responsible for climate change isn't as substantial as it's made to seem. With larger data sets (or better understandings of astro and geophysics today) from the past it would be easier to show, but unfortunately we are blighted with only when humans decided to start keeping track of the weather, coinciding with the rise of technology and industrialism, making it apparently all the evidence we need that humans are the only cause of global warming. By that logic just the act of keeping track of the weather could be the cause of global warming or any other factor that showed increase in this timeframe.

I don't see how climate change can be exclusively man made when it's well known that the Earth has natural warming and cooling periods. Otherwise, without industry, how did, in the early BC eras, climate change effect the growth of the black sea with an increase of over 50% of it's original size and how did the oceans rise enough to cover the Bering Land Bridge? Some portion of climate change has to be a natural occurrence due to these effects. People tend to see the "THEORY" of climate change and think of it to be similar to the theory of Gravity or thermodynamics while it's a more legitimate use of theory in that we're not entirely certain that humans ARE the main cause of temperature extremes. Pairing this with the belief that the planets orbit the Sun in a perfect circular alignment and that through use of selective wording to make sure we don't forget that we're to blame for climate change we can be reminded every few years to donate to the green causes.

The evidence for humans being responsible for climate change isn't as substantial as it's made to seem. With larger data sets (or better understandings of astro and geophysics today) from the past it would be easier to show, but unfortunately we are blighted with only when humans decided to start keeping track of the weather, coinciding with the rise of technology and industrialism, making it apparently all the evidence we need that humans are the only cause of global warming. By that logic just the act of keeping track of the weather could be the cause of global warming or any other factor that showed increase in this timeframe.

Except we have ice core samples that go back 20,000+ years?

Quote from: Kitlero on May 10, 2018, 04:20:21 pm

I don't see how climate change can be exclusively man made when it's well known that the Earth has natural warming and cooling periods. Otherwise, without industry, how did, in the early BC eras, climate change effect the growth of the black sea with an increase of over 50% of it's original size and how did the oceans rise enough to cover the Bering Land Bridge? Some portion of climate change has to be a natural occurrence due to these effects. People tend to see the "THEORY" of climate change and think of it to be similar to the theory of Gravity or thermodynamics while it's a more legitimate use of theory in that we're not entirely certain that humans ARE the main cause of temperature extremes. Pairing this with the belief that the planets orbit the Sun in a perfect circular alignment and that through use of selective wording to make sure we don't forget that we're to blame for climate change we can be reminded every few years to donate to the green causes.

The evidence for humans being responsible for climate change isn't as substantial as it's made to seem. With larger data sets (or better understandings of astro and geophysics today) from the past it would be easier to show, but unfortunately we are blighted with only when humans decided to start keeping track of the weather, coinciding with the rise of technology and industrialism, making it apparently all the evidence we need that humans are the only cause of global warming. By that logic just the act of keeping track of the weather could be the cause of global warming or any other factor that showed increase in this timeframe.

Except we have ice core samples that go back 20,000+ years?

Which are questionable at best when you decide to take a data sample that averages out to one every 15 years (or longer) and then interpolate across 100 years (or longer), until you get to the modern day.

-Shakun Et Al (2012)
http://www.atm.damtp.cam.ac.uk/mcintyre/shakun-co2-temp-lag-nat12.pdf

"The data set compiled in this study contains most published high-resolution (median resolution, 200 yr), well-dated (n = 636 radiocarbon dates)" - 80 Samples total
"The data were projected onto a 5x5 grid, linearly interpolated to 100-yr resolution and combined as area-weighted averages. We do not otherwise account for spatial biases in the dataset or lack of global coverage"


-Marcott Et Al (2013)
https://www2.bc.edu/jeremy-shakun/Marcott%20et%20al.,%202013,%20Science.pdf

"The 73 globally distributed temperature records used in our analysis are based on a variety of paleotemperature proxies and have sampling resolutions ranging from 20 to 500 years, with a median resolution of 120 years"
 "The results suggest that at longer periods, more variability is preserved, with essentially no variability preserved at periods shorter than 300 years, ~50% preserved at 1000-year periods, and nearly all of the variability preserved for periods longer than 2000 years"

i don't think climate change will kill us all

because a modern superplague will do worse

The Black Death is estimated to have killed 30?60% of Europe's total population.[6] In total, the plague may have reduced the world population from an estimated 450 million down to 350?375 million in the 14th century.[7] It took 200 years for the world population to recover to its previous level.[8][9] The plague recurred as outbreaks in Europe until the 19th century.

thanks wikipedia

anyway im holdin out for that superplague, fingers crossed!!