Professor Brian Cox, everyone...

Aug 18, 2016 10:28 AM

astridsSAM

Views

341659

Likes

15283

Dislikes

522

"Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." - Martin Luther King, Jr

This is painful.

9 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 4

I can't tell who is talking to whom in these and who is denying what. The frame with bad syntax threw it out the window

9 years ago | Likes 29 Dislikes 0

This is my most upvoted post ever. Kangroosfromtazthetazmamiandevilsayingyay.gif

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

We're blaming human activity for this but isn't it really the dinosaurs' fault, if we're really being honest? I mean, "fossil fuels?"

9 years ago | Likes 48 Dislikes 1

No; it's ferns. Oil is not actually made from dinosaurs.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

People sent others to the moon ? What for ? It's cold up there, the cheese won't even melt.

9 years ago | Likes 16 Dislikes 1

But but.. the moon's made of cheese isn't it ? I bet when they landed on the rocket thrusters turned the surface into fondue !

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Don't be silly, the space mice would prevent them from landing.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

9 years ago | Likes 943 Dislikes 11

Glorious. You need more upvotes.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

When you take Dayquil and Nyquil at the same time

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

That blew my mind

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

It's really gonna fuck with nurses when he's older and goes into a nursing home. They're gonna be "holy shit he's having a stroke" everyday.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

I couldn't stop laughing for a full 5 mins the first time I saw this image. +1

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Star Wars and The Arrival, I'm glad Forest is back. Amazing actor. I digress.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Brian Cox is a good lad, calls people out on their bullshit, but politely.

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

I like the part where it mentions the head of the Senate Committee on Technology and the Environment doesn't believe in Global Warming

9 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 1

9 years ago | Likes 72 Dislikes 8

v

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

And he's in the Senate here... with 3 other people like him. It's gonna be a long three years (at least)

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

v

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Fukken saved.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

You can play chess with a pigeon... But it'll just knock all the pieces over, shit on the board, and strut around like it won anyway...

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Professor Brian was actually surprisingly patient in this discourse; can't really tell from thse gifs but he wasn't as direct as he could be

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

9 years ago | Likes 2121 Dislikes 26

I'll save this gif for later purposes

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

9 years ago | Likes 130 Dislikes 0

well, there is the Professor....

9 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 0

They're not stupid, they're bought.

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 1

Aye, I wish we just called it like it is more often.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

You guys should go on Google earth rn and look for the North Pole. These are 2016 satellite pictures and it's basically gone. Maybe I'm 1/2

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Looking at it wrong or sth. But it seems to be just gone almost Entirely...really frightening..

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

*shows empirical evidence* "There is no empirical evidence!"

9 years ago | Likes 26 Dislikes 0

Serious moment. Manipulating results is a very serious issue with publication. As is publishing positive results the majority of the time.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Knowing these people exist and that climate change is real.

9 years ago | Likes 89 Dislikes 2

They way we keep going, the planet won't be habitable anyways. But as long as our profits are up, who cares about our grandkid's grandkids.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

So why not go? He has a spaceship. Hubert represents people in modern times that wish they didn't live in their own country but still stay

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 6

+1 for calling him hubert. But he did actually leave earth in that episode.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Sweet :) I'm glad I forgot. Just a little longer and I can fully enjoy most of the series again without remembering the plotlines :D

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

(ofc even if I remember the plotline I'll still enjoy the episode ;p )

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

He wasn't refuting landing on the moon, in fact neither of them were. Brian was just testing his beliefs.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Whats gas lighting for 100 pls

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

As a resident of Missouri I'm ready for the ocean front view.

9 years ago | Likes 100 Dislikes 6

Yeah the drive right now is entirely too long

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Congrats on your new hurricanes.

9 years ago | Likes 23 Dislikes 0

Oh what a day! WHAT A LOVELY DAY!

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

As a fellow Missouri resident I too would love to have fresh fish in grocery stores.

9 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 0

I don't know if it'll get that far, but I'll definitely see you guys down in Arizona Bay.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Already training in diving to move to the Maldives.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

As a resident of Washington I'm glad I live near a tallish mountain. Might be able to snag it before someone else does.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

He's from Queensland. The Texas of Australia ...

9 years ago | Likes 46 Dislikes 13

Australia is already Texas of the world, so that's pretty crazy

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Being an oil state with no real fauna and flora to be affected most of us here just don't care as long as we get paid.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

That is pretty unfair on Texas

9 years ago | Likes 17 Dislikes 1

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

As an American this comparison helped me completely understand. Thank you!

9 years ago | Likes 13 Dislikes 3

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I'd say it's more of a Florida/Texas hybrid.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

That's a perfect storm of stupidity...

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Pretty cool moire interference pattern on your thumbnail.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

For all those claiming the Middle Ages were warm www.skepticalscience.com/medieval-warm-period.htm

9 years ago | Likes 30 Dislikes 7

Why do you think Greenland was called green of it was as cold then as it is now?

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

They called it Greenland to trick people into moving there ;)

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

In all seriousness though, it was named after a person. It's just coincidence.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Nobody really knows. It was always icy though and the most credible theory is that Erik named it something nice so people would move there.

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

Colonies, after all, need an influx of people. Although, it wasn't really a colony, as he was exiled.

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

He’s got a graph!

9 years ago | Likes 25 Dislikes 5

The irony that Prof. Brian Cox was in a band famous for a song "Things can only get better" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dIj-6fr2SlI

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

he's smarmy little assbag know-it-all

9 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 8

But he’s got - a - GRAPH. You can’t beat a graph. Time to pack up and go home.

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 5

Holy crap! Brian Cox did a Q and A? I need to see it!

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

After hearing people deny scientific evidence of climate change.

9 years ago | Likes 66 Dislikes 21

11 Minutes 40 Seconds

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

17 minutes is where the NASA part happens

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Too much money to lose if we turned away from our current forms of energy, that's what's wrong.

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

The funny thing is that there's no shortage of renewable energy sources, by definition, really. It's an economically efficient industry.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Right? There isn't a discussion. You can't have an opinion on a fucking fact, unless it's "man I hate that fact."

9 years ago | Likes 27 Dislikes 7

GW is not really a fact, it is a logical conclusion. Not quite the same thing. The facts are the things supporting the conclusion.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I get really confused when people deny the conclusion but have nothing to say about the facts that got you there...

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Does he seriously think NASA are the only people "keeping an eye" on climate change ? Ha ha ha ha ha ha NASA are out to get us

9 years ago | Likes 66 Dislikes 16

did you misspell NSA?

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

NASCAR

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

More importantly does Brian cox seriously believe we didn't land on the moon?

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Thanks Onasa.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

NASA doesn't even do it, the organization is NOAA.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Thermometers have been all around the world for 3-4 centuries. It would be hard to cover up the results.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

If you watch the whole thing (fucking glorious) he thinks that NASA and the other agencies are colluding and conspiring to exaggerate etc

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Dude, shut up, or the NASAssasin squad will get you.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Next question, what would NASA get out of a fake climate change?

9 years ago | Likes 27 Dislikes 1

Institutional inertia, zeitgeist, etc

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

They will get their budget cut year after year after year.... oh no wait thats already happened

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

That is the curse of modern discourse. You can't just disagree with someone. You have to accuse them all of being part of a conspiracy . . .

9 years ago | Likes 18 Dislikes 1

. . . As opposed to, say, someone who works directly for the coal industry and is using doctored and picked data.

9 years ago | Likes 14 Dislikes 1

Doctored data is putting it mildly. They are worse than the assholes who tried to keep leaded petrol in the pumps

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

That just made people dumb. Human-caused climate change deniers have the potential to literally end the species.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Saying planet becomes uninhabitable, they get more funding to arrange colonising a new planet.

9 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 0

Man they suck at this conspiracy stuff huh, not exactly swimming in money lately...

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

So the "whole new world of unowned property and resources" that's not enough for us?

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

Something about the government being able to rule over us with an iron fist under the excuse of climate change.

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

Which is silly b/c what does the government gain by making all cars >20MPG? They'd benefit more from bad environmental policies, surely.

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 1

Humans like to observe things on very small time scales and then judge other things that happen on very large time scales for some reason.

9 years ago | Likes 69 Dislikes 18

People like to be progressive and indignant.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 5

Exactly. But Bill Nye says it's so so it's so.

9 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 8

Although you're right, we dont have to "judge" shit when 12,000 year old ice shelves are breaking up and arctic life is moving inland.

9 years ago | Likes 28 Dislikes 4

scientists didnt "make up" GW, they are simply trying to tell everyone we're fucking up and it's going to cost us BIG time in the future.

9 years ago | Likes 19 Dislikes 6

i really cant hear that bullshit anymore... its just sped up and human IS NOT the reason for global warming... global warming has happened 1

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 17

long before humans were existent. it allways has and allways will be. we are close to the edge of a new ice age and that will happen 2

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 16

no matter what humanity does. the ice age may end up being a few hundred years earlier or later due to the co2 emission... but if u wanne 3

9 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 15

argue about saving grandchildren then keep in mind that the grandgrandgrandchildredn still are fucked via ice age no matter what you do

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 15

Actually, if we look at it on a huge time scale, the current change in climate is an unnaturally rapid and severe one.

9 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 1

I don't disagree, climate change is very real and very likely caused by or highly related to human activity. Did my comment imply otherwise?

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

[deleted]

[deleted]

9 years ago (deleted Aug 27, 2016 2:03 PM) | Likes 0 Dislikes 0

I was criticizing their narrow view of "It was cold last Tuesday, Global Warming is BS!". They can't look beyond 10, 100 or even 1000 years.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Worse than sincere ignorance is willful ignorance

9 years ago | Likes 332 Dislikes 14

Which is ironic seeing as the climate change believer doesn't believe in the moon landing.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Umm, what?

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I could not upvote you enough

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

That's a profound thought.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

Thank you. I've been saying this for a long time now.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it!" Upton Sinclair

9 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 0

Those are not mutually exclusive.

9 years ago | Likes 17 Dislikes 4

you cannot be sincerely ignorant if you are willfully ignorant. Willfully ignorant means you KNOW you are ignoring some sources

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Um, yes they are? The poster is saying just plain not knowing something is much less bad that chosing not to.

9 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 0

Basically, though not exactly choosing not to believe it, rather chosing to only surround yourself with voices from one side only.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

You feel like you've made an intelligent choice, but you intentionally only give yourself the data you like to inform that choice.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

I believe that generally falls under willful ignorance. You are choosing to not know something, however you accomplish that

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Nothing necessarily wrong with sincere ignorance, as long as one is willing to learn.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I know there's global warming, but I've met people who know Brian Cox and told me he's just publicity, doesn't actually any do science

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

This is the people at CERN who actually did the research while he was really famous for working on it

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

He can't have gotten a Ph.D with out having done research. Because he is primarily an educator does not mean he hasn't or doesn't research

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

People told me he doesn't. People who work with him. That's all I said I have no opinion on the matter

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

You've been lied too. Go on google scholar and search for Brian Cox. He still published research

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

I'm working on my masters in disaster and emergency management. It's depressing what's happening to the planet and the measure we will need

9 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 4

Is it? But if everything went totally stable, your degree would be as useful as gender studies!

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 3

.. To take to survive

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 4

I actually wrote a paper on this in college. NASA did some shady stuff. Research before you bash a man's reputation over some pictures.

9 years ago | Likes 34 Dislikes 27

He has no reputation; he's a recently elected senator who is a cretin.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

i wrote a paper in college too: "the effects of LSD on my roommate." only got a B tho.

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 1

What shady stuff?

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Former NASA employee and earth scientist here. Please tell me exactly what we did.

9 years ago | Likes 17 Dislikes 9

badass.gif

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

For the record, I think the moon landing was a remarkable human achievement. Just an innocent opinion is that I think it's magical

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." Arthur Clarke

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Imgur likes to pretend that they're educated and knowledgeable, but they really just jump to knee-jerk reactions and mock people.

9 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 5

Well, this Imgurian is waiting for dude to respond to the former NASA employee up above about what he uncovered w/ his actually-wrote paper.

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

I'm just gonna be clear here. I'm not making any insinuations as to who is right or wrong. Imgur just loves to jump to conclusions.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

This comment clarifies nothing.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

How about some sauce with those fries? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jguarSWDcrM

9 years ago | Likes 133 Dislikes 4

Thank you!!

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

What's the problem with you guys that you always spell it "sauce" instead of "source"? Is that some kind of mental issue caused by imgur?

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Bless you, child, you're doing the Lord's work.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Now with direct link to discussion: https://youtu.be/jguarSWDcrM?t=673

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 1

Ugh, that guy is annoying to listen to. "No, you're wrong, it's all a giant hoax, because I once saw something that disproves it!"

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Dot for reference .

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Darn it. This was a totally awesome video. Anyone who has an hour to spare, please do watch it.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Anything similar to those? I could really use something.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Love you

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

You should have more upvotes

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

During introductions, I thought the second last guy was called "Greg Cunt"

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Straya!

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Thanks!

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

OH MY GOD That white haired shithead makes me want to DRINK

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Awe, thank you stranger.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

thank you sir. keep up the good work.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Ty

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

thanks

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Jesus that's a depressing video. The one scientist practically sidelined, and two politicians too entrenched in their own policy to listen.

9 years ago | Likes 28 Dislikes 1

That's alot of sauce for one meal

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

No one is going to suggest iview? Unless that's geo-blocked outside Australia, if so, that is delicious.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I would assume it is, given that all other ones like the BBC one are geoblocked :(

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Yeah iview is geoblocked

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

When does this part take place? Sorry I am on crunch time don't have time to watch it all but want to see it for later!

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

Roughly 14 minutes into the vid

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

The discussion starts at 11:00, the exact scene that @OP posted starts at 15:00.

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

11:30 in the video

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

FWD to 11:10 for relevant discussion

9 years ago | Likes 86 Dislikes 0

Thank you random internet stranger!

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

You're a good person.

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

Thx

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Thank you.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Doing the lords work ol chap

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

u da mvp

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Imgur is not the place for this discussion. I get the skepticism, but read the 2012 Berkley Earth report, it's what convinced me.

9 years ago | Likes 25 Dislikes 10

The "muh progressiveness" and "muh environment" SJW capital of the world Berkeley? Yeah there's no way this could be biased..

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 9

The irony here has layers. Your own bias has cut you off before you even know who did the study let alone what their own biases are.

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 1

The main author is physicist Richard Muller. If you'd rather to research on his bias before reading the paper, feel free.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

Yeah, it's just, y'know, one of the leading institutions in science. But by all means denounce facts and research because tumblr offends you

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

Why is imgur not the place for the discussion? That's a weird thing to say

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

140 characters per comment, up and down votes which bury unpopular thoughts and create groupthink, anonymous unaccountable participants.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

You haven't been around long. When you see comments that are factually wrong at +100 and the person linking to evidence at -50 you'll see.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

I'm on my phone.

9 years ago | Likes 30 Dislikes 0

Convinced you in which direction?

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

3 direction.

9 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 0

one direction

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

I like how I encourage people to get facts instead of taking someone else's conclusion, and the response is "So what's your conclusion?"

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 6

I'M TOO LAZY TO FORM MY OWN OPINION. LET ME TAKE YOURS!

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

That isn't a short paper and I have a lot of other stuff that I need to read. I was just trying to get an idea of which way the paper leaned

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

I will say that this study was run by people who thought there were flaws in prior studies and wanted to correct for them.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 3

The pdf I linked is only 7 pages and it's easy to pull out the highlights. I understand TL;DR but I don't want to prejudice.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 3

From your comment I meant you had been convinced to be skeptical; then I read the report... now I'm MORE TERRIFIED FOR THE EARTH THAN EVER!

9 years ago | Likes 15 Dislikes 1

Wait, you READ it? When I post a source I expect people to guess what it says and then take sides immediately, usually with namecalling.

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 1

Dooting to come back and read later.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

That has like at least 5655 words stretched over 7 pages!! Can you just sum it up for me in one word like, bad.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Doot

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

30s and 40s were hotter than it is now? He does know the line going UP means higher temperatures, right?

9 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 4

It went up because NASA manipulated the data that way. It's really not that hard to do.

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 19

Yeah, "manipulated". Couldn't possibly be true, since you don't want it to be.

9 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 3

I'm writing a post now to hush all of your ignorance

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 9

Lemme know when it's up

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

brian cox is physicist, not a climatologist, so i'm feeling he might not be the best qualified person for this.

9 years ago | Likes 44 Dislikes 29

oh boy you've done it now, how dare you!

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 4

But he's highly qualified to interpret data. He didn't do the climate science, but he's accurately representing the facts of the results.

9 years ago | Likes 40 Dislikes 6

Certainly better than an engineer/MBA from the coal industry.

9 years ago | Likes 31 Dislikes 4

perhaps, but in this case, he just needs to be able to read a graph.

9 years ago | Likes 18 Dislikes 2

In fairness, that graph was probably altered as a conspiracy against the oil industry headed by NASA (known for faking the moon landing) ;)

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 3

Maybe, But he is quite good at cutting through bullshit too.

9 years ago | Likes 16 Dislikes 2

he is and he's very likable so that helps.

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Loved him on Wonders of the Universe. And Sunshine's commentary track.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Daft thing to say really - even if he's not the most qualified, he's very far from the least

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Because physics don't apply to climate?

9 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 1

More qualified than someone who doesn't remotely work in any scientific field. Plus, Physics = Thermodynamics + Fluid Dynamics & more

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

You don't need a science degree... you just need a brain... ;)

9 years ago | Likes 30 Dislikes 21

true, but brian cox ends up on everything which needs someone with half a brain.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 2

Fair enough.. :)

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 2

True, but just because I love Dr. Jack Horner doesn't mean I'm gonna use him as a source on molecular biology or astrophysics.

9 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 3

I'm a climate scientist. Could you explain to me why any physicist is not qualified on matters of thermodynamics and radiative transfer?

9 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 0

I didn't say they weren't. I said backing up your evidence with "he has a PhD" is a shit argument based on appeal to authority.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Seriously though. It's like these people have no understanding that many of the sciences are connected. :/

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

You right, me dumb caveman wif no understand of science cause me raise point about "appeal to authority" fallacies

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

So if you want to convince someone who isn't me, and doesn't buy into climate change, you have to do better than the Internet Atheist+

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

+version of Charismatic Evangelicals using the bible as the ends justifying the means.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

To be fair, I've heard that individuals on both sides of the argument have manipulated/ skewed data to benefit their respective arguments.

9 years ago | Likes 35 Dislikes 21

Sure, then consider them the margin of error. We then need to consider the following: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cjuGCJJUGsg

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

It beyond normal quality control and bias correction with out all of the other groups noticing 4/4

9 years ago | Likes 17 Dislikes 4

For example, a thermistor breaks on a station and reads 999.99. Obviously that's not a real temperature measurement & needs to be removed 2

9 years ago | Likes 18 Dislikes 3

Gonna need some sweet and sour sauce for that.

9 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 2

There are several hundred data collection agencies and systems, and many independent groups that process the data. You couldn't change 3/

9 years ago | Likes 17 Dislikes 3

The UEA in Britain did a lot of harm when it was revealed they were manipulating data, people remember the bad stuff more.

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 5

It's a quote mine, basically. The word "trick" was used in an e-mail and people assumed it meant a deception.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

They didn't though. Jones was talking about tree rings, not climate data. And the problem they were discussing was already well known

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 3

Climate scientist here. That's false. Scientists routinely correct data to remove bad measurements and to account for known biases in them 1

9 years ago | Likes 23 Dislikes 5

ill throw the flag on that comment. there are hedge funds that trade spreads on CDDs or HDDs in nearby areas to capture incorrect 1/

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

stations.. What might not be surprising is the areas they like to bet on are around major research institutions that get climate change 2/

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

funding. Their meter reads are higher than nearby stations and the traders can arb the market. Source: have seen this happen.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

What does that have to do with whether global temperature data, which is measured by thermometers and satellite radiometers, and is 1/

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

processed by multiple independent federal agencies in different countries across the globe, has been nefariously altered? 2/2

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

What, you can confidently claim that no climate scientists have manipulated data? In the era of publish or die?

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 3

I can confidently claim the independent data products available from over half a dozen seperate agencies and organizations and all agree 1/

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

to remove bad values from broken sensors and to correct for known biases and problems with measurement methods in the data sets. The 3/

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

within measurement precision are not influenced by nefarious manipulation. There are quality control procedures that must be conducted 2/

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

Also, you seem not to understand this, but "publish or perish" only pertains to university professors, not federal researchers 5/4

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

But there are university professors studying climate change are there not? And bias pertains to everyone including federal researchers too.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Studying, yes, producing the globally continuous temperature and climate records? Typically no. Those are produced by federal scientists 1/

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

at NASA, NOAA, USGS, DOE, EPA, etc... 2/2

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

other satellite records of global temperature 5/2

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Alabama. One of them is a young earth creationist, the other stopped helping a few years ago. Even still, their record matches well with 4/2

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Except for one notable satellite record (UAH) which is processed satellite data by two climate change denying scientists at Univ. Of 3/2

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

irony is that with out those procedures, the records actually appear much warmer..... 4/4

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

You can certainly claim that the overwhelming evidence outweighs bias or intentionally corrupted data. I'll buy that. But I don't think 1

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

side of the argument. So you can say "of course there might be intentionally corrupted data, but the amount of research is so vast that 3

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

it's astronomically unlikely that enough data is corrupt to overturn current thought"

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

I have personally ran those procedures on the raw data myself. Unless your telling me machines are now sentient, you're claim is false.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

you can claim that you know that no data has been intentionally manipulated. All problems must be faced, most importantly those on your 2

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

And the dude in denial of climate change is a new Queensland senator

9 years ago | Likes 2030 Dislikes 33

[deleted]

[deleted]

9 years ago (deleted Aug 18, 2016 11:34 PM) | Likes 0 Dislikes 0

It won't just be AUS getting nuked if trump gets in.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Queensland, if you live there for a bit, you can get why someone like him would come from there. Hot weather seems to make you act dumber :P

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 4

oh good I thought this was an American again

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I'm glad this got my a convo starter trophy and not for some lewd comment

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

...where the Great Barrier Reef is. And we'll just let that sink in for a bit.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

northern ireland govt had a climate change denier in change of environment for a while. can't say more so i'll just shake my head in despair

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

We feel from you in the republic. We have triple charges for water in other taxes, then "how about water charges" and tons of broken eu laws

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

well, that's one good thing...our water is still charge free

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Considering it's not true, can't be surprised some people don't believe it.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Yeah America gets a lot of shit for its politics but the only real difference in that area between us and other countries is that (1/2)

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

we're important enough for everyone to pay attention to our crazy shit.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

When people migrate from Victoria to Queensland, the average IQ goes up in both states.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Given it's hot af in Australia during summer, you'd think he'd at least take a pause for the cause

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

As a Queenslander, can confirm, this is the base level of retardation required to be a Queensland politician. Look up VLAD laws as well.

9 years ago | Likes 31 Dislikes 1

*Violent Lesbians Against Dachshunds

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

It would be Queensland

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Where's new queensland??

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Oh no, it's spreading

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Double dissolution, woo-hoo! Double your chances of getting a total whack job into the Senate

9 years ago | Likes 13 Dislikes 0

PAULINE HANSON.

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Who elected him

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

A total of 77 people. He got the senate position thanks to preferences from other parties.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

NASA

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

A bunch of twats.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Who got in thanks to his place on the party list, as opposed to the 70-something votes he recieved.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

You have to wonder what the fuck QLD was doing when they voted these idiots in?

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Just remember the same state voted in Clive Palmer in the last election.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Just remember the same state voted in Clive Palmer in the last election.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Just remember the same state voted in Clive Palmer in the last election.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Just remember the same state voted in Clive Palmer in the last election.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Just remember the same state voted in Clive Palmer in the last election.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

That's dissapoint, between him and Hanson. QLD is actually terrible with their choice of senators.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Let's not forget Clive fucking Palmer! He was kinda like the Trump of Australia, just less overtly racist, like an eccentric rich uncle.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Forgot he existed! My local member is Dutton, The idiot who said people who migrate here are going to both be illiterate & steal our jobs

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

But you are right. Clive is a flog and a half.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

we feel you. Watch a meeting of the USA Energy and Technology Committee. It's depressing watching representatives fumble basic science

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Don't feel bad in a minister in the Irish government said global warming isn't real God changes the weather he used Noah's ark as a example

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

That there isn't science.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Religio-tainment

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

That's a good one. I thumbs up you.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

It's Australia, what do you expect?

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 8

Australia is the best

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

In terms of government, the Australian one is about as efficient as the passing of energy to a higher trophic level

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Are you from Indonesia and pissed off with the thousands of irritating tourists, or north island New Zealand?

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Just a Brit who pays attention to international politics, for some reason. Australia has had a laughable government for ages.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I can agree with that. As a scottish australian I'm hoping something happens that causes us to call on The Queen to dissolve parliament.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

As an American, I'm really happy that Australia is around to make our politicians look a little less insane.

9 years ago | Likes 16 Dislikes 2

Haha keep kidding yourself champ

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

QLD is like the the same as America's South. There has to be a correlation between heat and white people's prejudices and ignorance.

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

I think American politicians enabled him to think he was right. It's so socially unacceptable to say what he just said in qld

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

First you steal our muscle cars, then you steal our BBQ, now you steal our insane politicians. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Hahaha exactly

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

1/2 If you really want to impress us, you're going to need to start a few wars with the redcoats.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

2/2 Get that old bitch off your money. Don't worry, we'll back you up.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Hahahaha, dude, yours is definitely worse

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Send that guy to a glacier or send him some pictures of the change in the last 100 years...well, maybe he'd say the NASA stole the ice

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 1

"This ice is gone, but it's more than made up for ice way over there where I can't see." You can't disprove emotion based belief.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

To morons, feels shall always be greater than reals.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

From Australia. Can confirm. This guy is just the entree, look up Pauline Hanson folks. ;-) That main meal will give you indigestion.

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

I already feel nauseated!

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

First world global warming believers, contributes 80% CO2, over consumption, cars, dirty electricity, homes, ya tell me you really believe.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 2

On a different note, Ewan McGregor 8D *drool* I have a thing for amazing actors.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

This is why we need scientists, engineers and people with common sense in the political field.

9 years ago | Likes 64 Dislikes 3

Lol no theres a reason they stay out of politics. They leave it to the politicians

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

The senator in question is an engineer haha. In my experience engineers are some of the worst climate change deniers I've met.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

They'll never be elected though. The truth is deeply unpopular.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

If scientists are so smart how come they ain't rich??

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Need people who use science and data to make decisions not belief's

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

You wouldn't like what they have to say.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Common sense is what they politicians use. Obvious "blank" is often wrong. Science is almost opposite to common sense!

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

No, we need politicians to trust scientists and engineers. Scientists and engineers would be as bad at anything outside their specialty.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 2

Looking at the modern politicians...can we try having scientists there, they can't make it much worse.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

But since we go for popularity and not for qualification, thats not very likely to happen.

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

That's called a "Technocracy" look into it

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

No one with common sense would go into politics

9 years ago | Likes 66 Dislikes 0

Right. Except Bernie, and look at him now...

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Bernie's last message to his audience before he knew he'd lose it was actually "Go into politics! Become the change you want to see."

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

thats right, I have work to do. no time to muck about in politics.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

They wouldn't want to but it would be like sometime with OCD going into a dirty house. It's going to get cleaned

9 years ago | Likes 13 Dislikes 0

Or they get blackmailed, bribed, or discredited by the same people they are trying to oust.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

There have been attempts by good-intentioned politicians. They either don't last more than one term, or get corrupted by the system.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

I work around plenty of scientists who are heartless, power hungry, and a few that don't believe in global warming. It'd be just the same.

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 1

Scientists aren't a different species. They're just as prone to idiotic emotion based belief as everyone else.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Exactly why I commented. Just because someone is a scientist doesn't mean they are somehow better

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I had a geologist professor in college that insisted it wasn't real. I still don't know what to believe, he had a very compelling argument..

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

...Interestingly it's not any of the arguments that side presents on a regular basis. He also believed there's nothing wrong with what...

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

climatologists recommend we do because it's just good sense for human welfare, so he refused to fight as a climate change denier.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

I'm a geologist who works with another geologist who doesn't believe the link between CO2 and temperature.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

It's absolutely baffling.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

That's what's great about science. It's true regardless. But why would geologists know anything about climatology, for example?

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

There are still some geologists who don't accept Plate Tectonics....

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

He's not even the worst one from Qld

9 years ago | Likes 143 Dislikes 3

Yet he somehow managed to get in with just 70 votes

9 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 1

Please explain

9 years ago | Likes 23 Dislikes 0

Queensland the florida of Australia, double the gator size and half the intellect, you got your self queensland

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

Pauline Hanson. Look up her One Nation Party (they're actually from the same party, but I consider her even more of a moron)

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 1

She is a literal relic from the past, yet sadly she is more popular these then she was back then ... :(

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Anon, Mermaid knows. PLEASE EXPLAIN is basically Pauline's catchphrase

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Hahaha yup! :)

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Haha I completely missed that

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Their generation seems to me the majority who's in denial of it. My guess because they don't can't comprehend/admit they fucked shot up bad

9 years ago | Likes 80 Dislikes 1

Trust me - your kids/grandkids WILL say the same about you, just on a diffeent subject

9 years ago | Likes 25 Dislikes 1

It'll be the same subject, it will just be after this generation has become the rich. They'll be in power and wanting to protect their $$$

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

The thing is, our generation is facing a huge amount of dept and poverty. This generation will only get rich through family money or a start

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Up that changes the world.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Provided we haven't rendered the planet uninhabitable by then.

9 years ago | Likes 24 Dislikes 0

When my kid calls me up on shit ill do what my mother did and yell real loud until they cry and go to their room. Perfect planning.

9 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 0

Don't forget to follow them to their room and piss on their stuff to assert dominance.

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

That stuff costs money. Ill just take it back to my room until they learn to behave themselves.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Yeah pretty sure it's hard to top "fucked up the planet for literally everyone ever"

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

Yeah. We were not born or were/are still kids while the planet's being messed up. What can we do that's worse, and still have kids?

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Since the world is overpopulated in certain places already, maybe we should start thinking about toning down the amount of children we have.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

"Elected Donald Trump"? Though that's pretty much the same thing...

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

(1)I wouldn't be surprised if the spike in the 40s is connected to the huge ramp up in industrial activity for the war effort

9 years ago | Likes 1627 Dislikes 42

[deleted]

[deleted]

9 years ago (deleted Oct 21, 2024 11:41 PM) | Likes 0 Dislikes 0

[deleted]

[deleted]

9 years ago (deleted Aug 19, 2016 12:56 AM) | Likes 0 Dislikes 0

Ignore this im blind

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Half right. Increasing sulfur emissions (volcanos + humans) in the 40s caused a temporary cooling. El Nino in 1939 contributed to spike.

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

Yes! Thank you smarter person with knowledge

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Not to mention a lot of that activity went into products designed to go boom and burn shit.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

i dont really care about GW i dont know much about it but it would be cool to have an electric car and a self powered house

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Either that or from WWI, got to account for lag time.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

An argument I've heard is that data is manipulated by China to force US companies to go green, becoming non competitive. I don't buy it, but

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

It's plausible.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Many conspiracy theories are plausible but don't have any evidence to support them - that's the real criterion

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Eh, given the rate of change and normalization I'd guess solar activity or regional bias,have to check the data. Why the mean is important.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

You don't say. Nobody would have ever thought of that globally influencing incident if you didnt mention it. Thank god.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I prefer the spike in the nineties. He rocked the long black leather coat.

9 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 0

There's a major time lag on CO2 emissions and global temperature, but methane for example can have a faster impact.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Correct! But not a very lasting effect. Over 100 years, CH4's impact as a greenhouse gas is less than CO2's, much less If I remember right.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Yeah they included the temperature in Hiroshima at 8:15am in the average =/

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Correct

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Also AFAIK dead bodies effect this too. Can you imagine just how much more of them was during that period?

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

2/2 this goes a bit more in depth to record Temps just in the states. Data is from NOAA/NCDC. Nothing from nasa :/

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

The graph is for ocean water surface temps during WWII the temp were taking by the engine room instead of the deck

9 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 2

No, that graph is surface air temperatures. The sea surface temperature records were corrected for different collection methods back in 2004

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

There's a delay between emissions and climate response. Warming now is the result of activity from decades ago. tl;dr: s'gonna get worse

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Bombings might cause the drop afterwards where dust blocks out the sun

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 7

Impact end 3/3

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Didn't that regulation only start within the past 30 years though?

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

The first regulations were set in the 60's. Remember this is GLOBAL, not just the US

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

It's totally black from the soot and other aerosol pollution (which muted some of the warming). After clean air legislation you see the 2/

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Not bombings, but industrial aerosol pollution. Early industry was extremely aerosol intensive. Look at historical pictures of Big Ben 1:

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Very curious why this is getting downvoted.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

I dunno. The 40s were alarmingly cold. Partially why there were so many casualties on the Eastern Front. Bombs can't have been only factor

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

No, it's not. That would have not been a spike, but a ramp up. More likely change in measurement accuracy, volcanos/forest fires/sun/el nino

9 years ago | Likes 35 Dislikes 6

The industrial machine scaled back down to pre-war levels following the war.

9 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 0

I saw this graph during a lecture at Uni last week and that was the consensus that we reached amongst students and our lecturer too :)

9 years ago | Likes 27 Dislikes 6

What consensus, that man didn't land on the moon?

9 years ago | Likes 26 Dislikes 0

Obviously we didn't land on the moon. The moon would have to be real for that to happen.

9 years ago | Likes 30 Dislikes 0

Well, by saying uni I'm assuming not a US citizen, so no, THE didn't land on the moon. Haha

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 6

They*

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 2

Come on people, it was a joke. The haha was supposed to denote thay

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

That*

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

And burning millions of bodies probably wasnt too good for the environment either

9 years ago | Likes 53 Dislikes 4

I didn't want to be the one who did this

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Killing millions was probably good for the environment.

9 years ago | Likes 28 Dislikes 1

Yea but burning the bodies was still a bad idea. Kind of the only option at that point though

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Wait are you saying the Jews did this???

9 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 1

What haven't they done?

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

ohhhh. Dark. I like it

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Even if you don't believe in gw, why not still try to improve the environment? None of this makes sense to me..

9 years ago | Likes 430 Dislikes 11

The air is cleaner now than it has been since before the industrial revolution. CO2 is a great boogeyman for some reason that defies logic

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

*in first world nations

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Cuts into corporate profits.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

If they don't believe it's true, what would they believe that they have to improve? Sure they'd say the environment is just fine right now

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Because muh monies and liberties!

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Ehh, the environment doesn't need saving, it's just gonna kill us off and then come back. I just need it to be good for another 60 years.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Clean air is fine. It's when climate change is used a silly reason to over regulate businesses. That's when I get pissed about it.

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 5

Because there are substantial costs to emissions control, climate change prevention, etc. So they believe bearing these costs is pointless

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

worst case scenario you have a more efficient, cleaner planet

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

A) Industrialism is the greatest poverty fighter, ever. B) The party that wants it limited(in US) happens to benefit from people in poverty.

9 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 3

You're right, Republicans represent people that profit from poverty. But, also, the Democrats rely in large part on votes from the poor 1/2

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

who rely on welfare, which the Democrats support and the Republicans fight.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Poor countries are often not the most clean places. Prosperity allows people to worry about the environment & not how to feed your family.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Ever heard the phrase "Don't shit where you live". We are literally doing that.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Because they don't believe changing energy systems will improve the environment. Also, there's a lot of $ involved. Political donors, etc.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Denial is easier. Accepting that we're to blame for mass extinctions & fucking up the earth for our grandkids is a heavy weight of guilt.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 2

Its the way they want to improve it. Elites get richer & have no impact, others suffer. Plus we get Enron style mgmt of energy = corruption.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Oh they believe it. They are just pretending not to so they can scramble into short term profits and they'll be all "fuck yall I got mine."

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

because money.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

The people who don't believe... don't give a shit. They don't believe because they don't care enough to think:

9 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 5

"Even if it's not real, the possibility of it being real is worth us all making a huge effort." They just want to keep the wallet bursting.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

People in third world countries CANNOT AFFORD anything other than fossil fuels.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

But it won't be that way forever, and there are still things we can do to help.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Oil.

9 years ago | Likes 33 Dislikes 2

That's the icing on the cake, we are burning a non-renewable resource that has lots of other potential uses.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Potential uses? Petroleum is absolutely critical to every part of our economy! Our agriculture requires it. And we're fucking burning it up

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

It's the attitude at this point. Anyone who even questions the data is called a moron, despite valid concerns that may exist.

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 3

100% Agree. He might have a valid data oriented conclusion but no one is willing to entertain a dissenting opinion against the current dogma

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Your argument is that knowledge is as good point as ignorance?? Because that's what it seems when you question the data

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

But anyone who even raises questions is being told that they are wrong and a fool because SCIENCE. It's blind faith, which is not scientific

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Not ignorance, questions. Part of the scientific method is questioning the results, and questioning the methods.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Yes , to question the mainstream is part of progress in science but only if it's not skewed and has the correct data to proof it

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I mean, if you keep questioning that 2+2=4 and you want to proof it wrong then you invent a method to 2+2=5 it doesn't mean you're correct

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Some of the solutions to 'improve the environment' are very expensive, erode freedom, and empower unaccountable governments.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

Because to make improvements costs money and who wants to waste their money on making other people happy?

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Please see my response to TheStorkasauraus.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

It's not economically efficient - the world is better off using the efficient forms of energy & reinvesting wealth to create future wealth.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Yeah, most recommendations to fight climate change just make common sense. Why take pride in being wasteful?

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Thats incredibly naive. The world literally runs on oil and coal. What do you think would happen if we just force everyone to not use it?

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Please tell me where anyone says we should immediately switch from fossil fuels

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

It's because it's politically, financially, or economically inconvenient for these people. They demonize science to try and get their way.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 2

Money

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Because it's a SCAM, by the godamn liburls

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

It's a scapegoat.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Yeah, even if the consensus is worse thing to happen would be we clean up the planet and the air, win-win

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Why think about the future when there's money to be made now?

9 years ago | Likes 50 Dislikes 2

Ding ding ding we have a winner

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

It's not 'money'- it's optimizing wealth generated by using efficiency; that wealth is reinvested allowing us to reach new technology /1

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

sooner and everyone is better off. E.g. Solar. An environmental concept; maximizing growth curves w/ respect current/future cost.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

It's not exclusively about money. Solar and wind is far too expensive for third world countries to adopt effectively.

9 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 1

Because they haven't been worked on even MARGINALLY as much as fossil fuel.

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 1

According to the article, there are 3 plants being established: Noor 1 through 3. Each one will produce 160 MW, adding up to a total of >>

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

+1. Thats why Mars. Gonna be our terraforming experiment, the science will be fantastic and in turn save earth. So say I.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

We've already run the experiment and will apply it to Mars.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Nuke the poles? :)

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Yes! Though the more technical description was fission satellites over the poles.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Cuz then you don't get to maximize your profit.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I've always wondered that. Just look at Beijing. That's what happens when you don't curb pollution.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Exactly! What if it's all a hoax and we make the world a better place unnecessarily?

9 years ago | Likes 183 Dislikes 4

The environmental economics argument is that by deferring renewables, you create wealth now that is reinvested to create even more wealth /1

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

in the future. We reach new levels of technological innovation sooner, and everyone will be better off - maximizing development curves. /2

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

The debate is not whether or not gw exists, but rather what is the optimal proportion of wealth we should allocate to fighting it now.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

BLASPHEMY!

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 1

Because the people who think that way will make less money. They care about their money more than their grand-children's future.

9 years ago | Likes 63 Dislikes 3

I don't plan on having grandchildren, so fuck it... and I mean that sincerely. Fuck it and fuck you all.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

I have argued that even if GW is fake, creating a stable power economy with high growth and profit margins is only good for us.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

That's the bit I can't understand. It makes economic -and geopolitical- sense to switch to renewables. No more conflict oil and clean air.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Yeah, maybe some, but for most it's not that they think it's less important, it's that they think it's NOT important. 1/2

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

2/2 for example, why haven't you spent any money defending against the oncoming aliens? What if we end up making world safer unnecessarily?

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Oh no, its retarded.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

It's not 'money'- it's optimizing wealth generated by using efficiency; that wealth is reinvested allowing us to reach new technology /1

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

sooner and everyone is better off. E.g. Solar. An environmental concept; maximizing growth curves w/ respect current/future cost.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

(2)not to mention nukes that were used. There is also a spike correlated to the first world war

9 years ago | Likes 619 Dislikes 28

All two of them. I'd betting the jews created more of a spike than the nukes.

9 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 20

nukes generally cause nuclear winters. Not nuclear summers.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Nukes actually lower the temperature. It sends dust into the atmosphere and reflects sunlight. Volcanoes too

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Wow. That's rather interesting. I'm not sure how the temperature dropped that fast 1 minute later. It should have still been really high.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

He brings solid data to the table.

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

From all the Dukes we used.

9 years ago | Likes 215 Dislikes 3

That was WW1

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Yep! That's m' joke :)

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Great, now I'm that guy/

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

You literally made me snort. Thanks for making my day a bit brighter!

9 years ago | Likes 22 Dislikes 1

Your username. If I were high right now, if be losing my shit.

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

Of Hazard

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 4

Lots and lots and lots of explosions. Releases a ton of carbon and stored heat energy.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Nukes didn't do very much, but the massive-scale firebombing of Germany and Japan definitly did something.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Far more nukes were detonated in the decades following WW2 than the tiny few tested and used during it.

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

Thanks. Was about to say that. I posted the youtube video timelapse for anyone interested. It's above.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Correlation is not automatically causation. Sometimes two things, unrelated, happen to occur at the same time.

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

Like if murder rate and ice cream sales both increase during the summer. Lol I always remember that example from school

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Your example is interesting because there is a third correlation that could be the causation i.e. hot weather

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 2

Oil prices in Texas and the length of mini-skirts in Paris is the one I remember.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Yeah setting an atomic bomb off can cause a bit of a spike

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 5

In global temperature? Its about as significant as a fart in a stadium.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Nope. Our annual greenhouse gas emissions cause the equivalent heat build up of 92 million nukes every year

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

A single nuke does next to nothing to global heat

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

A volcano eruption will do more to climate than all the nukes so far.

9 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 0

Both might rather lower the global temperature by putting dust into the upper atmosphere and creating a "sun screen".

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 1

So we just need to set off a volcano or two eh?... SCIENCE, MAKE IT HAPPEN. Just... over there, away from my house.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

NIMBY

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0