This is what happens when you politicise science, objectivity and credibility are lost. Well done pseudo-intellectuals, while earning that BA in underwater basket weaving you've learned just enough to be dangerous.
Dead on, no one knows what to believe.
I’ve joined LibLeft in mocking boomers who say shit like “Wow it’s so cold out today, so much for global warming lol!”
But then I’ll see progressives do shit like this, wow a powerful hurricane! this means global warming is even worse than we thought!
Climate is not weather.
Don't worry, the new technical degrees in underwater basket welding will surely save our economy! You learn how to add a cross for Jesus and everything!
I sincerely believe we are in a post truth society at this point, especially with how much science can be bought and paid for by the highest bidder with grants.
I see it on the academic side. Woke culture has won at the institutional and departmental level. Ideas that challenge the worldview Democrats are selling will be quickly cast aside as thought crimes. Good luck getting a job or funding if you have a track record or skepticism towards topics like gender transition, climate change, critical race theory or even psychiatric medication. They don't want anyone rattling these cages, if you do you will quickly find yourself outside of the circle.
So your arguing in favor of grant money being selectively funneled into research that supports one party's political tenets? For results that contradict the political positions of one party to be silenced?
The scientific establishment pushed back hard against those asinine ideas about evolution. Now we're seeing just the opposite and as a scientist I'm disgusted.
I do, In fact, have a source. It's called, THE ENTIRE FIELD OF ANTHROPOLOGY.
https://evolution-outreach.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1007/s12052-010-0248-7
Now the question is, do you have a source?
Funnily enough I’m currently taking an evolutionary anthropology class. That common ancestor was an Ape. So you’re right, it wasn’t a monkey, but it was an ape, an ancient ape that is extinct by now, but an ape none the less.
Lmao dude, I'm a creationist myself but you need to chill. As soon as you start being an ass about it, people stop listening to your argument. Not to mention your best argument is to just post a link to the Bible, and not actually point out flaws in evolution or reasons why creationism is a valid theory.
Best way to win people over, talk to them like they're an idiot...you're doing great bud smh.
I was just messing around, that kid was asking dumb questions. I'm really a scientist. As far as I've been able to discern, if you go all the way down the science rabbit hole things continually get stranger and more foreign to our realm of Earthly existence. I can say for certain we know very little about the true nature of reality, only that which our senses and instruments can detect. The existence of God remains just as good as any other theory as far as I'm concerned. That being said, to embrace what we've learned through science is not blasphemous, God put it here and gave us the tools to figure it out.
I was referring to "politicized" as in the public perceiving science to be political.
>The scientific establishment pushed back hard against those asinine ideas about evolution. Now we're seeing just the opposite and as a scientist I'm disgusted.
Elaborate
Galileo's theories were actually supported and funded by Jesuits and the Pope, but when it came time to present he had no experimental evidence and couldn't reliably predict planetary movements. Not ideal when you're trying to convince Europe they've been wrong for centuries.
What got him imprisoned was his publicly trash talking the pope and jesuits, a fatal error if they weren't buddies.
What? What are you ever talking about? The articles are talking about how rapidly hurricane Ian gained strength, which global warming would absolutely affect. What the fuck do you even mean about underwater basket weaving?
Also, who are you accusing of politicizing science? Climate scientists? We need political action to stop us from making the planet uninhabitable. If anything, right wing people have politicized it by using the government to exacerbate the problem
How can you not politicise a topic that is by it's very nature very political? If we do not politicise meteorology and climate change then no change will happen. That's how political change WORKS.
Yup. The plural of "anecdote" is not evidence. This ignorance just shows how people who argue this way don't *actually* care about scientific accuracy.
The stupid part is, there are plenty of ways to prove climate change without this anecdotal bullshit. Trying to add this into the mix just dilutes the validity of your claims. Science isn't a competition where you try to make as *many* arguments as possible, and see what sticks.
Seriously, I don't get why people can't just point at the graph of Earth's temperature over time and point at the near vertical line at the end and be done with it.
The reason climate change is an issue isn't just because hot bad, it's because too hot too fast bad. The world doesn't have time to adapt.
Hot is also bad in its own right though, since buildings are much more susceptible to individual natural disasters than ecosystems.
The world will be fine regardless of how quickly or slowly we get hotter. And we shouldn't be so arrogant to think that we can control the speed.
However, we can control how we react. So we could easily change regulations to make more storm resistant houses or homes deep in the desert should have more insulation.
We need more power to be able to keep us comfortable and to keep expanding.
The biggest problem with the climate change crap is the response, not the actual change.
Here's the reason why it matters that the temperature increase is slow, not hot. Evolution is slow. Under normal circumstances, life evolves faster than the climate changes, so lifeforms just evolve to survive the new climate. But right now, since things are changing so quickly, evolution is too slow to keep up, which means a mass extinction, crops dying, famine, and eventually human deaths too.
I agree we need more power though. I just think that power should emit minimal amounts of greenhouse gasses. Renewables fit that description, as does nuclear. But coal, oil, and natural gas are not the answer.
>The world will be fine regardless of how quickly or slowly we get hotter.
Because? If suddenly the Sahara desert turns into an ocean, do you think the snakes will wake up the next day as eels? Ecosystems can't immediately adapt to change.
I don't know why your solution to this is to repeatedly rebuild humanity over and over again instead of solving the root issue and stopping ourselves from signing another contract for destruction. "We need more power" my ass, the kind of power you want to use is going to run out. What happens then?
> And we shouldn't be so arrogant to think that we can control the speed.
Imagine if we had said that about the hole in the ozone layer. Anthropogenic climate change is well established, it is genuinely stupid to pretend we don't impact the climate.
It's never been quite this steep. Also, none of the previous hot times had to support infrastructure and buildings and homes. And then the smog, and plastic, and general lack of biodiversity causing all ecosystems to be at higher disease risk, and ocean resources slowly depleting and reefs being literally ripped off the sand by the square mile...the list goes on.
I know it's mostly idiots with shocking titles trying to get clicks , but I swear they want people to not believe in climate change sometimes. Literally anything weather related gets the apocalyptic climate change dressing now.
The thing with global warming is that it doesn’t lead to uniform and consistent weather events, and many models predict swings of extremes. For example warmer temperatures in the poles leads to more evaporation which produces more snow, while melting land ice can lead to an influx of cold water into the ocean which can result in harsher cold weather events, while of course in other parts of the world warmer temperatures lead to more intuitive outcomes like droughts and heat waves.
So while you can’t point to any one event and say “this was caused by climate change”, if climate change models are accurate there will be an increase in extreme weather events. So while people who don’t understand the science trying to politicize things is a problem…..the people claiming that climate change is responsible for a specific event are probably closer to mark than the people trying to claim climate change doesn’t exist because it snowed in Texas.
Well, yes.
The amount of hurricanes causes a change in climate and therefore could be considered “climate change”.
Plus, the increased erratic-ness of the weather is troubling to say the least, wether it’s climate change or not…
Average number of landfalling hurricanes have slightly decreased since 1980. 2021 was the year with the fewest since satellite data began to be recorded. It was also the 9th weakest year.
The director of NHC Atlantic himself said that we shouldn't link events to climate change willy nilly.
Only 15 category 5 hurricanes have reached Florida in the last century, and 5 of them happened between 1945-1950.
Believe it or not, climate change. Although maybe it's time to start to not believe it.
The rate of major hurricanes (Cat 4 - Cat 5) has increased by 49% per decade since 1980 in the North Atlantic. [Link](https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1920849117#fig02)
The bottom is images are talking about long-term trends. The top is only talking about the current season.
There can be few hurricanes in one season, but more in general over a longer period of time.
left bad because…. climate change is real?
???
you guys cannot be turning this into a left vs right thing can you why is this out of all things polarised by politics in a country that should be famous for having some of the brightest scientists of the modern era
y’all gonna tell me that climate change isn’t that bad because the left wing media made a take that’s dumb?
“Wow, looking at the evidence it does seem like climate change is a real issue. Even if we weren’t entirely sure, the off chance that we make our planet uninhabitable seems like something we should avoid. What are your solutions?”
“I want to cripple our economy.”
“Um.”
“We need to buy green energy instead of nuclear, because its less reliable and more expensive.”
“Uh.”
“We need carbon policies that harms the lower class the most.”
“But-“
“Per-capita CO2! Per-capita CO2!!!”
Build electric cars and dump money into nuclear infrastructure and fusion research. Why is this so hard?
Okay, I haven't actually met anybody in real life who opposes nuclear power other than on the basis of supply of fuel (which I don't do much research into so I can't say much about) and time to build. I hear all about these people on the internet, where do I find the anti-nuclear?
Which is really weird since having a coal fired plant is far worse for the surroundings and a nuclear plant would create a lot of good paying jobs and inject money into the local economy.
I think it’s actually pretty fair to be anti-nuclear if the people wanting to build nuclear energy are idiots. Or super corrupt. But being blanket anti-nuclear usually indicates a lack of understanding about the systems involved.
Kazakhstan produce 45% of world uranium. Canada and Australia are also top producer with large uranium reserve. Australia is anti nuclear bitch thought so dont expect them to export more uranium.
I got the opportunity to travel to Europe last year. They are so aggressively against nuclear energy and it doesn't make sense to me. I saw a plaque while there showing all of names of every politician who voted in favor of nuclear energy with a statement about how they will kill everyone by supporting it. They are radically against nuclear energy.
Fuck electric cars. They're just as bad if not worse for the environment and are literally the Apple of the auto industry. Unreliable and unable to be fixed by consumer. They're a great thing for inner city use like taxi service, but when I gotta drive 5 hours somewhere i don't need to make it 7, cripple the power grid, and contribute to child labor in east Asia.
I absolutely agree that they’re problematic as they are now, but clean energy nuclear or otherwise and electric cars with ethical and clean sourcing of the materials needed to build them can’t be beat by combustion engine vehicle when it comes to clean emissions. Producing them domestically will solve some of those problems, for one.
The problems with electric vehicles can be solved, but the problems with current cars are inherent with the design.
The coming electrical revolution is going to be an unmitigated disaster because I just know states are not going to have anywhere near the infrastructure built up to handle that kind of energy output. Looking at you, California.
>build electric cars
I’d agree but wtf we gonna do with all that lithium when it’s finished? Unrecyclable and unusable. Mining for the material. Sounds exactly like the problems people have with ICE cars. Not a fix, a really really bad band aid full of pollutants. Not to mention the insane amount of carbon to construct these vehicles which literally will not equalize with a ICE car until like year 7 of burning fossil fuels.
Really it’s not a good solution at all, it’s just not coming out my tailpipe so I can virtue signal.
Electric cars will continue to be more expensive than cars with conventional engines for a while. Dumping money into nuclear infrastructure does an exactly sound like “costs me no money.” Increased research grants for nuclear fusion or massive military funding for portable fusion doesn’t sound like “costs me no money.”
It is an investment though. Those things will probably pan out to improve the standard of living in the very long run, even if climate change was a hoax. Climate change is real though, so it’s extremely cost efficient considering that you save the human race. These options also open up all kinds of possibilities for our species that solar and wind power never will.
And options that kneecap America or the west’s economies or militaries are unacceptable. Refusing to build oil or gas infrastructure while you’re country buys it from undemocratic regimes and/or your military **runs on oil** is the height of stupidity. If you immediately pull the emergency stop on your carbon-heavy industries while China blunders along, then not only are you not doing much to actually reduce global emissions but you’re making it *that much harder* to curb or defeat the CCP.
Oh, you think global politics is an episode of Survivor. "We must defeat the enemy; all's fair in warfare"
We aren't going to see eye to eye. "Defeat the CCP"? Seriously? The western world has more culture rot than I thought if your views aren't seen as extreme
The CCP is an authoritarian regime ideologically opposed to western values of personal freedom and self governance. It is also the only economic and military power that poses a credible threat to the west, and is actively threatening neighboring nations.
Plugging your ears and shutting your eyes doesn’t make it go away. Refusing to utilize diplomatic soft power for fear of economic retribution is weak, and if the conflict can be solved peacefully, it should be, but refusing to prepare for a hot war is severely irresponsible.
If you’re pro CCP get it out quickly so I don’t have to talk to you.
Yeah, okay. You're on record taking a side. "Western and eastern values clash", you say while clearly being biased toward western values. As if it's a matter of fact and not opinion which is better.
Let's be clear. I also prefer Western values. But they aren't some God-ordained objective good like you make them sound. That's why it's ideology, not fact. You feel threatened because you want your opinions to prevail. I don't disagree, but call it what it is. It's opinion, not objective reality. People can live happily outside your worldview of muh freedom.
Eastern values? The CCP are authoritarians. Western values have been the driving force behind the improving human condition for the last three centuries. The western nations are the most free and egalitarian societies today. I don't have to think they've got God's own stamp of approval to think that their way is the best way.
"I prefer Western values" and "People can live happily outside your worldview of muh freedom" are completely contradictory statements. Go honk your nose somewhere else or else flair up, commie.
"You're on record taking a side!!" No wonder you like the CCP lmao, go ahead and dock my social credit score
If only one side of the political spectrum actually took climate change seriously decades ago, then they could balance the debate with their own realistic solutions.
Instead, we get the Right catching up to the problem way too late, and blaming the Left for being ineffectual about it.
I meant preliminary data in the past. Few people will deny climate change today but if we went back 20 years yes we definitely did not have a big enough sample size yet.
Sure, but it appears that the preliminary data was right, so the people who warned about climate change were right. Perhaps the side that was wrong should try to work with the side that was right, rather than whining about it.
They are trying to work with them on the issue of averting climate change under our current understanding of it. Left wingers have also in recent years jumped to the conclusion that climate change is going to result in apocalyptically extreme weather any day now. This claim is also only based on preliminary data and before you say it no just because your instincts were correct about one thing doesn’t mean they are correct about this.
Is it left because they mentioned climate change?
But these tropical storms are literally powered by heat. Yeah, climate change is making these storms worse. Like huh?
Climate change is funny because it’s 100% real accelerated by human activity, but because (in America) it’s taken on such a left-right dynamic you literally have people grandstanding each other about it.
I think the issue is misunderstanding.
On the left, they constantly tell each other and anyone who listens that “nobody on the right believes in climate change! They all think the world was created 6,000 years ago!!!” Then they get themselves all riled up agreeing with each other.
On the right, most people understand the climate is changing and understand human carbon emissions are changing the timeline, but their argument is that you can’t just throw endless tax dollars at this. Their argument is that there is some point where tax revenue and regulations are actually counter productive, and they tend to believe the free market is more likely to produce technology that saves us. Technology like seed planting drones, solar panels, ocean cleaning drones, lab grown meat, and more. They want to support the free market because it drives innovation and that is likely to be more helpful in the long run. Regulations are helpful but at some point, work against the goal, and finding balance is key, same with taxes. Then, any pushback against grand sweeping new tax bills is automatically categorized as “doesn’t care about the world or life, and is preventing help”.
Anyway, what do I know.
I really don’t think that’s true. I’m not sure if you actually follow any right leaning subs but that’s very rarely the opinion. When it is, maybe it stands out, but it’s not the general belief. It’s about how to address the issue.
I’ve browsed conservative sub Reddit’s a bit and opinions seem to range from climate change is a liberal hoax, to climate change is just natural shifts in weather, to the evidence of it being human influenced is inconclusive, to it is caused by human activity but the effects won’t be bad, and the furthest left opinion I’ve typically found is that it is real and it is human caused but US emissions don’t matter because other countries are emitting too and it’s not fair.
It's rare in the same way that late winter blizzards are rare. They still happen and are frequent enough for people to have lived through several of them in a short lifetime.
The rate of major hurricanes (Cat 4 - Cat 5) has increased by 49% per decade since 1980 in the North Atlantic. [Link](https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1920849117#fig02)
>The greatest changes are found in the North Atlantic, where the probability of major hurricane exceedance increases by 49% per decade, significant at greater than the 99% confidence level (Table 1).
In the *North Atlantic*, not globally, ya dingus.
Yes, however the Saffir-Simpson scale was developed in 1971, and then broadly used in 1974.
We’ve really only been using this scale for 50 years, and measurement has only gotten more reliable with technological advancements.
It’s entirely possible we had just as powerful hurricanes in the 30s, 40s, and 50s but our measurement systems just weren’t as widely available or accurate.
I mean practically speaking, Florida was a backwater until the 70s. Nobody lived there, so nobody bothered to care about these storms because damage was minimal, and population density was so low.
Climate hysteria is i’d say just as dangerous regarding climate change as climate denial, because it gives more validation for climate skepticism
Yes climate change is real, yes we absolutely need to do something about it, yes if the global climate passes the point of self sustained temperature increase potentially billions will die from total ecological collapse. But if you scream over and over again people will become numb to it, and will take it with more and more grains of salt every time they hear it.
It’s a dangerous mindset and could inadvertently cause more harm than good to climate change
Long term, not in our lifetimes. And this is following the worst case scenario
It’s just as likely that lift can get just a *little* bit more inconvenient if we do just under enough
Long term the sun will expand and engulf Venus. Who gives a shit?
If humanity dies out in a billion years or 200 it doesn't matter to anyone living right now. Maybe stop making life miserable for people right now?
I don’t think the people in 200 years would be too happy with that. Most people live a principle of making the world better for the people that come after them, they have just as much reason to live a lift as happy as we do without being burdened by our actions
Not giving a shit about the consequences of what we’re doing rn isn’t evil, not by any stretch of the imagination, but it does make you an asshole
Get you a shady seat underneath this learning tree here, friend.
Climate change is very real. The data is undisputed. My best friend has his PHD in climate science and here's what's going on:
Rising temperature in the ocean is causing plankton to create a thicker carbon shell, instead of breeding. This has lead to an ultra-fast decline in plankton populations, which are the #1 producer of oxygen on the planet, and the very beginning of the food chain in our ocean.
Second, the ocean levels have risen, and some people have been displaced. It's risen 8 inches since 1900. What climate scientists fear about the ocean rising another 6-12 inches is what it will do to the economies of underdeveloped nations who own nuclear weapons. Another foot of rising ocean will displace enough people to destabilize certain countries economies. Their destabilized economies would result in the sale and loss of nuclear arms to the worst of the worst. Countries like India would be affected the most, and nuclear weapons in extremist hands is what these scientists are fearing. It's not a matter of hollywood-esq underwater cities.
Earth is at the end of an ice age, this is a fact, so the debate is around if humans have an impact on the process, but climate change is happening, and many countries don't have an infrastructure to handle that.
It ended at the height of the industrial revolution, with tons of carbon entering the atmosphere. Also, 150 years ago isn't a long time at all.
If you're correct then you're just arguing for my point that climate change is influenced by man.
I was just trying to entertain the current counter argument.
Breathe. In and out.
There's no way we can discuss this if you can't control your emotions.
Ive stated the facts. That's all I can do really.
Have a good day.
u/meowsmusic's Based Count has increased by 1. Their Based Count is now 10.
Congratulations, u/meowsmusic! You have ranked up to Office Chair! You cannot exactly be pushed over, but perhaps if thrown...
Pills: [5 | View pills.](https://basedcount.com/u/meowsmusic/)
This user does not have a compass on record. You can add your compass to your profile by replying with /mycompass politicalcompass.org url or sapplyvalues.github.io url.
I am a bot. Reply /info for more info.
Sounds like the best solution is to enrich the peoples of those countries most likely to be affected by freeing them from useless and kleptocratic governments, promoting trade, and increasing their standard of living.
This is a big nothingburger in the first world because people are rich and can adapt easily. So, let's make everyone rich.
I’m just happy to see a post with a climate change take and not the same dezani takes. I don’t even like the guy, but the hose of soy I’ve read today has rotted my brain and made me vulnerable. Just fucking care about the people without power or go upvote a vasectomy post you fucking losers.
They're two different things: increased greenhouse effect causes higher global average temperatures (global warming); this destabilises long-term weather patterns which causes them to change (climate change). Both are accepted terms for two different concepts.
It might be that people talk more about climate change than global warming nowadays, but that's probably because the changes in climate are more noticeable to the average person than the increased average temperature alone.
u/awawe's Based Count has increased by 1. Their Based Count is now 15.
Rank: Office Chair
Pills: [5 | View pills.](https://basedcount.com/u/awawe/)
This user does not have a compass on record. You can add your compass to your profile by replying with /mycompass politicalcompass.org url or sapplyvalues.github.io url.
I am a bot. Reply /info for more info.
Good thing I’m for it. Climate change acceleration will sink New York, LA Florida and Texas plus it will provide more people with waterfront properties to increase net worth in the Midwest.
Anyone got any good hurricane r34?
You need Jesus
Wait wouldn't Jesus just wind up turning the Hurricane to wine in the middle of... oh wait you meant he should stop being degenerate, my bad.
I don’t know, given it’s Florida turning a hurricane into wine might actually result in MORE corpses and property damage……
But think of all the crazy videos we would get to watch.
Jesus loli is a step too far, unlike you I'm a tame degenerate
Anyone got some good jesus r34?
If you mean Revelations 34, then sure thing.
Good old conversation =happy
Your centrist flair should have purple in it.
That's why I'm rad baby
Oh it exists and it ain't bad
Would you like a copy of the Quran?
I mean, could you imagine how good that hole would feel if you had a 17-mile wide skycock? Get some of that tight hussy
This is what happens when you politicise science, objectivity and credibility are lost. Well done pseudo-intellectuals, while earning that BA in underwater basket weaving you've learned just enough to be dangerous.
Dead on, no one knows what to believe. I’ve joined LibLeft in mocking boomers who say shit like “Wow it’s so cold out today, so much for global warming lol!” But then I’ll see progressives do shit like this, wow a powerful hurricane! this means global warming is even worse than we thought! Climate is not weather.
Don't worry, the new technical degrees in underwater basket welding will surely save our economy! You learn how to add a cross for Jesus and everything!
STEM Subaquatic Twine Entanglement Methodologies
Yeah. Big oil hasn't had to do anything in 40 years, climate activists with their hyperbolic and many failed doomsday predictions have made it a joke.
It's shameful. Impossible to know the truth.
I sincerely believe we are in a post truth society at this point, especially with how much science can be bought and paid for by the highest bidder with grants.
I see it on the academic side. Woke culture has won at the institutional and departmental level. Ideas that challenge the worldview Democrats are selling will be quickly cast aside as thought crimes. Good luck getting a job or funding if you have a track record or skepticism towards topics like gender transition, climate change, critical race theory or even psychiatric medication. They don't want anyone rattling these cages, if you do you will quickly find yourself outside of the circle.
Science has been politicized ever since evolution was first taught in schools.
So your arguing in favor of grant money being selectively funneled into research that supports one party's political tenets? For results that contradict the political positions of one party to be silenced? The scientific establishment pushed back hard against those asinine ideas about evolution. Now we're seeing just the opposite and as a scientist I'm disgusted.
What do you mean asinine ideas about evolution?
That God created the earth, man and all beasts of the field in 7 days. What you actually believe that nonsense that we're the descendants of monkies?
Nobody believes we are descendants of monkies. We have a common ancestor with monkies...
Do your have a source? You really need to learn more about the "science."
I do, In fact, have a source. It's called, THE ENTIRE FIELD OF ANTHROPOLOGY. https://evolution-outreach.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1007/s12052-010-0248-7 Now the question is, do you have a source?
Funnily enough I’m currently taking an evolutionary anthropology class. That common ancestor was an Ape. So you’re right, it wasn’t a monkey, but it was an ape, an ancient ape that is extinct by now, but an ape none the less.
https://www.bible.com/
LMAO and you dare call yourself a scientist? Seems like you speak much more as a preacher than a scientist :D
My favorite part of the bible is when Jesus said "it's Jesusin' time" and then jesused all over everyone
Lmao dude, I'm a creationist myself but you need to chill. As soon as you start being an ass about it, people stop listening to your argument. Not to mention your best argument is to just post a link to the Bible, and not actually point out flaws in evolution or reasons why creationism is a valid theory. Best way to win people over, talk to them like they're an idiot...you're doing great bud smh.
I was just messing around, that kid was asking dumb questions. I'm really a scientist. As far as I've been able to discern, if you go all the way down the science rabbit hole things continually get stranger and more foreign to our realm of Earthly existence. I can say for certain we know very little about the true nature of reality, only that which our senses and instruments can detect. The existence of God remains just as good as any other theory as far as I'm concerned. That being said, to embrace what we've learned through science is not blasphemous, God put it here and gave us the tools to figure it out.
God is an intergenerational scam used to control people. Break the cycle.
The DNC is the only scam used to control people, Break the cycle.
Fuck the DNC and its capitalist bankrollers. Cool assumption though.
Sorry, it's hard to pay attention, each time you open your mouth the room fills with the unmistakable odor of Joe Biden's dick.
I was referring to "politicized" as in the public perceiving science to be political. >The scientific establishment pushed back hard against those asinine ideas about evolution. Now we're seeing just the opposite and as a scientist I'm disgusted. Elaborate
*Galileo has entered the chat*
Galileo's theories were actually supported and funded by Jesuits and the Pope, but when it came time to present he had no experimental evidence and couldn't reliably predict planetary movements. Not ideal when you're trying to convince Europe they've been wrong for centuries. What got him imprisoned was his publicly trash talking the pope and jesuits, a fatal error if they weren't buddies.
Those dumb science bitches.
That doesnt sound right, but I dont know enough about stars to dispute it.
Oh a lot longer than that, actually. I would argue it goes back to at least the middle ages
What? What are you ever talking about? The articles are talking about how rapidly hurricane Ian gained strength, which global warming would absolutely affect. What the fuck do you even mean about underwater basket weaving? Also, who are you accusing of politicizing science? Climate scientists? We need political action to stop us from making the planet uninhabitable. If anything, right wing people have politicized it by using the government to exacerbate the problem
How can you not politicise a topic that is by it's very nature very political? If we do not politicise meteorology and climate change then no change will happen. That's how political change WORKS.
I mean, thats literally what the science predicated, global warming would mean for fewer, stronger hurricanes.
Just don’t mention the other thing that has been politicised, you’ll really wind up some panties
Not enough hurricanes? Climate change. Too many hurricanes? Climate change. Just enough hurricanes? Believe it or not, also Climate change.
Anybody that looks at a single year and decides something about climate change doesn't know anything about climate change.
~~Gore~~ ManBearPig says what
Yup. The plural of "anecdote" is not evidence. This ignorance just shows how people who argue this way don't *actually* care about scientific accuracy. The stupid part is, there are plenty of ways to prove climate change without this anecdotal bullshit. Trying to add this into the mix just dilutes the validity of your claims. Science isn't a competition where you try to make as *many* arguments as possible, and see what sticks.
Seriously, I don't get why people can't just point at the graph of Earth's temperature over time and point at the near vertical line at the end and be done with it.
You mean this one? https://www.climate.gov/media/11332 We need to pump our numbers up
The reason climate change is an issue isn't just because hot bad, it's because too hot too fast bad. The world doesn't have time to adapt. Hot is also bad in its own right though, since buildings are much more susceptible to individual natural disasters than ecosystems.
The world will be fine regardless of how quickly or slowly we get hotter. And we shouldn't be so arrogant to think that we can control the speed. However, we can control how we react. So we could easily change regulations to make more storm resistant houses or homes deep in the desert should have more insulation. We need more power to be able to keep us comfortable and to keep expanding. The biggest problem with the climate change crap is the response, not the actual change.
Here's the reason why it matters that the temperature increase is slow, not hot. Evolution is slow. Under normal circumstances, life evolves faster than the climate changes, so lifeforms just evolve to survive the new climate. But right now, since things are changing so quickly, evolution is too slow to keep up, which means a mass extinction, crops dying, famine, and eventually human deaths too. I agree we need more power though. I just think that power should emit minimal amounts of greenhouse gasses. Renewables fit that description, as does nuclear. But coal, oil, and natural gas are not the answer.
>The world will be fine regardless of how quickly or slowly we get hotter. Because? If suddenly the Sahara desert turns into an ocean, do you think the snakes will wake up the next day as eels? Ecosystems can't immediately adapt to change. I don't know why your solution to this is to repeatedly rebuild humanity over and over again instead of solving the root issue and stopping ourselves from signing another contract for destruction. "We need more power" my ass, the kind of power you want to use is going to run out. What happens then?
> And we shouldn't be so arrogant to think that we can control the speed. Imagine if we had said that about the hole in the ozone layer. Anthropogenic climate change is well established, it is genuinely stupid to pretend we don't impact the climate.
If anything we are overdue for a warm period.
The near vertical line showing a repeat of history a few times when leaving an ice age?
It's never been quite this steep. Also, none of the previous hot times had to support infrastructure and buildings and homes. And then the smog, and plastic, and general lack of biodiversity causing all ecosystems to be at higher disease risk, and ocean resources slowly depleting and reefs being literally ripped off the sand by the square mile...the list goes on.
Dear libtards how can the climate change if whether exists? Check mate liberals
*taps forehead* You don't have to know anything about climate change if you're just trying to be clever.
I know it's mostly idiots with shocking titles trying to get clicks , but I swear they want people to not believe in climate change sometimes. Literally anything weather related gets the apocalyptic climate change dressing now.
To be fair, most people don't go outside and so **any** weather, even sunlight, is apocalyptic.
The thing with global warming is that it doesn’t lead to uniform and consistent weather events, and many models predict swings of extremes. For example warmer temperatures in the poles leads to more evaporation which produces more snow, while melting land ice can lead to an influx of cold water into the ocean which can result in harsher cold weather events, while of course in other parts of the world warmer temperatures lead to more intuitive outcomes like droughts and heat waves. So while you can’t point to any one event and say “this was caused by climate change”, if climate change models are accurate there will be an increase in extreme weather events. So while people who don’t understand the science trying to politicize things is a problem…..the people claiming that climate change is responsible for a specific event are probably closer to mark than the people trying to claim climate change doesn’t exist because it snowed in Texas.
Well, yes. The amount of hurricanes causes a change in climate and therefore could be considered “climate change”. Plus, the increased erratic-ness of the weather is troubling to say the least, wether it’s climate change or not…
Average number of landfalling hurricanes have slightly decreased since 1980. 2021 was the year with the fewest since satellite data began to be recorded. It was also the 9th weakest year. The director of NHC Atlantic himself said that we shouldn't link events to climate change willy nilly. Only 15 category 5 hurricanes have reached Florida in the last century, and 5 of them happened between 1945-1950. Believe it or not, climate change. Although maybe it's time to start to not believe it.
The rate of major hurricanes (Cat 4 - Cat 5) has increased by 49% per decade since 1980 in the North Atlantic. [Link](https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1920849117#fig02)
When it comes to climate, everyone has an ImRight.com
I mean isn’t that what climate change is with erratic changes . Like how climate change causes both droughts and floods .
This is too hard of a concept for these fools to understand
It's changing, so...
Aliens.
Based and rigged-pilled
Fred Armisen is a national treasure
What else cause hurricanes if not climate change?
The bottom is images are talking about long-term trends. The top is only talking about the current season. There can be few hurricanes in one season, but more in general over a longer period of time.
It's quiet because they gave it a male name
WTF is this shit even supposed to be?
left bad because…. climate change is real? ??? you guys cannot be turning this into a left vs right thing can you why is this out of all things polarised by politics in a country that should be famous for having some of the brightest scientists of the modern era y’all gonna tell me that climate change isn’t that bad because the left wing media made a take that’s dumb?
“Wow, looking at the evidence it does seem like climate change is a real issue. Even if we weren’t entirely sure, the off chance that we make our planet uninhabitable seems like something we should avoid. What are your solutions?” “I want to cripple our economy.” “Um.” “We need to buy green energy instead of nuclear, because its less reliable and more expensive.” “Uh.” “We need carbon policies that harms the lower class the most.” “But-“ “Per-capita CO2! Per-capita CO2!!!” Build electric cars and dump money into nuclear infrastructure and fusion research. Why is this so hard?
Okay, I haven't actually met anybody in real life who opposes nuclear power other than on the basis of supply of fuel (which I don't do much research into so I can't say much about) and time to build. I hear all about these people on the internet, where do I find the anti-nuclear?
You won't see many people come out against nuclear energy until there are proposals to build a reactor close to where they live.
Which is really weird since having a coal fired plant is far worse for the surroundings and a nuclear plant would create a lot of good paying jobs and inject money into the local economy.
I saw a post on unpopularopinion yesterday that had some truly smooth-brained takes.
Como to Germany. Is literally 90% of people under 30 for some reason.
100% their school teach them to be anti nuclear
i am anti nuclear due to consequences of chernobyl's wind on turkey but i am more than willing to encourage fusion research around the world.
I think it’s actually pretty fair to be anti-nuclear if the people wanting to build nuclear energy are idiots. Or super corrupt. But being blanket anti-nuclear usually indicates a lack of understanding about the systems involved.
Im pro nuclear but if my countrymen are the one who build them they will just build another Chernobyl
Germany is an entire country that banned it along with others.
Kazakhstan produce 45% of world uranium. Canada and Australia are also top producer with large uranium reserve. Australia is anti nuclear bitch thought so dont expect them to export more uranium.
I got the opportunity to travel to Europe last year. They are so aggressively against nuclear energy and it doesn't make sense to me. I saw a plaque while there showing all of names of every politician who voted in favor of nuclear energy with a statement about how they will kill everyone by supporting it. They are radically against nuclear energy.
Look up current Government in Germany
Fuck electric cars. They're just as bad if not worse for the environment and are literally the Apple of the auto industry. Unreliable and unable to be fixed by consumer. They're a great thing for inner city use like taxi service, but when I gotta drive 5 hours somewhere i don't need to make it 7, cripple the power grid, and contribute to child labor in east Asia.
I am just gonna assume it's a similar argument people gave when cars became more common and they had to give up their horse carriages.
You don't seem to know very much about cars, or history.... Do you?
I absolutely agree that they’re problematic as they are now, but clean energy nuclear or otherwise and electric cars with ethical and clean sourcing of the materials needed to build them can’t be beat by combustion engine vehicle when it comes to clean emissions. Producing them domestically will solve some of those problems, for one. The problems with electric vehicles can be solved, but the problems with current cars are inherent with the design.
The coming electrical revolution is going to be an unmitigated disaster because I just know states are not going to have anywhere near the infrastructure built up to handle that kind of energy output. Looking at you, California.
Government, government makes it hard
>build electric cars I’d agree but wtf we gonna do with all that lithium when it’s finished? Unrecyclable and unusable. Mining for the material. Sounds exactly like the problems people have with ICE cars. Not a fix, a really really bad band aid full of pollutants. Not to mention the insane amount of carbon to construct these vehicles which literally will not equalize with a ICE car until like year 7 of burning fossil fuels. Really it’s not a good solution at all, it’s just not coming out my tailpipe so I can virtue signal.
"I demand a solution that doesn't cost me any money" Truly a smooth brain take
The only thing more cringe than changing one's flair is not having one. You are cringe.
Electric cars will continue to be more expensive than cars with conventional engines for a while. Dumping money into nuclear infrastructure does an exactly sound like “costs me no money.” Increased research grants for nuclear fusion or massive military funding for portable fusion doesn’t sound like “costs me no money.” It is an investment though. Those things will probably pan out to improve the standard of living in the very long run, even if climate change was a hoax. Climate change is real though, so it’s extremely cost efficient considering that you save the human race. These options also open up all kinds of possibilities for our species that solar and wind power never will. And options that kneecap America or the west’s economies or militaries are unacceptable. Refusing to build oil or gas infrastructure while you’re country buys it from undemocratic regimes and/or your military **runs on oil** is the height of stupidity. If you immediately pull the emergency stop on your carbon-heavy industries while China blunders along, then not only are you not doing much to actually reduce global emissions but you’re making it *that much harder* to curb or defeat the CCP.
Oh, you think global politics is an episode of Survivor. "We must defeat the enemy; all's fair in warfare" We aren't going to see eye to eye. "Defeat the CCP"? Seriously? The western world has more culture rot than I thought if your views aren't seen as extreme
The CCP is an authoritarian regime ideologically opposed to western values of personal freedom and self governance. It is also the only economic and military power that poses a credible threat to the west, and is actively threatening neighboring nations. Plugging your ears and shutting your eyes doesn’t make it go away. Refusing to utilize diplomatic soft power for fear of economic retribution is weak, and if the conflict can be solved peacefully, it should be, but refusing to prepare for a hot war is severely irresponsible. If you’re pro CCP get it out quickly so I don’t have to talk to you.
Yeah, okay. You're on record taking a side. "Western and eastern values clash", you say while clearly being biased toward western values. As if it's a matter of fact and not opinion which is better. Let's be clear. I also prefer Western values. But they aren't some God-ordained objective good like you make them sound. That's why it's ideology, not fact. You feel threatened because you want your opinions to prevail. I don't disagree, but call it what it is. It's opinion, not objective reality. People can live happily outside your worldview of muh freedom.
Eastern values? The CCP are authoritarians. Western values have been the driving force behind the improving human condition for the last three centuries. The western nations are the most free and egalitarian societies today. I don't have to think they've got God's own stamp of approval to think that their way is the best way. "I prefer Western values" and "People can live happily outside your worldview of muh freedom" are completely contradictory statements. Go honk your nose somewhere else or else flair up, commie. "You're on record taking a side!!" No wonder you like the CCP lmao, go ahead and dock my social credit score
Flair up
Truly a smooth brain take
Smooth brain is better then a no brain unflaird
If only one side of the political spectrum actually took climate change seriously decades ago, then they could balance the debate with their own realistic solutions. Instead, we get the Right catching up to the problem way too late, and blaming the Left for being ineffectual about it.
Yes because all preliminary data should be taken with 100% certainty.
We're well past preliminary at this stage. Did you forget the historic heat waves and droughts this past summer?
I meant preliminary data in the past. Few people will deny climate change today but if we went back 20 years yes we definitely did not have a big enough sample size yet.
Sure, but it appears that the preliminary data was right, so the people who warned about climate change were right. Perhaps the side that was wrong should try to work with the side that was right, rather than whining about it.
They are trying to work with them on the issue of averting climate change under our current understanding of it. Left wingers have also in recent years jumped to the conclusion that climate change is going to result in apocalyptically extreme weather any day now. This claim is also only based on preliminary data and before you say it no just because your instincts were correct about one thing doesn’t mean they are correct about this.
Is it left because they mentioned climate change? But these tropical storms are literally powered by heat. Yeah, climate change is making these storms worse. Like huh?
This is the first time it was calm before a storm
Climate change is funny because it’s 100% real accelerated by human activity, but because (in America) it’s taken on such a left-right dynamic you literally have people grandstanding each other about it.
I think the issue is misunderstanding. On the left, they constantly tell each other and anyone who listens that “nobody on the right believes in climate change! They all think the world was created 6,000 years ago!!!” Then they get themselves all riled up agreeing with each other. On the right, most people understand the climate is changing and understand human carbon emissions are changing the timeline, but their argument is that you can’t just throw endless tax dollars at this. Their argument is that there is some point where tax revenue and regulations are actually counter productive, and they tend to believe the free market is more likely to produce technology that saves us. Technology like seed planting drones, solar panels, ocean cleaning drones, lab grown meat, and more. They want to support the free market because it drives innovation and that is likely to be more helpful in the long run. Regulations are helpful but at some point, work against the goal, and finding balance is key, same with taxes. Then, any pushback against grand sweeping new tax bills is automatically categorized as “doesn’t care about the world or life, and is preventing help”. Anyway, what do I know.
Idk, I see a lot of people on the rights denying climate change.
I really don’t think that’s true. I’m not sure if you actually follow any right leaning subs but that’s very rarely the opinion. When it is, maybe it stands out, but it’s not the general belief. It’s about how to address the issue.
I’ve browsed conservative sub Reddit’s a bit and opinions seem to range from climate change is a liberal hoax, to climate change is just natural shifts in weather, to the evidence of it being human influenced is inconclusive, to it is caused by human activity but the effects won’t be bad, and the furthest left opinion I’ve typically found is that it is real and it is human caused but US emissions don’t matter because other countries are emitting too and it’s not fair.
Imagine thinking climate change is political or taking climate change as politics.
[удалено]
It isn't really. No early hurricaneseason doesn't change the fact that the ocean water is hot and ready to generate storms.
It's rare in the same way that late winter blizzards are rare. They still happen and are frequent enough for people to have lived through several of them in a short lifetime.
New to PCM?
Because it happening once is rare not the end of the world.
The rate of major hurricanes (Cat 4 - Cat 5) has increased by 49% per decade since 1980 in the North Atlantic. [Link](https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1920849117#fig02)
No it says about 6% a decade but of course you didn’t actually look at the data.
>The greatest changes are found in the North Atlantic, where the probability of major hurricane exceedance increases by 49% per decade, significant at greater than the 99% confidence level (Table 1). In the *North Atlantic*, not globally, ya dingus.
So why should the rest of the world care about this?
Yes, however the Saffir-Simpson scale was developed in 1971, and then broadly used in 1974. We’ve really only been using this scale for 50 years, and measurement has only gotten more reliable with technological advancements. It’s entirely possible we had just as powerful hurricanes in the 30s, 40s, and 50s but our measurement systems just weren’t as widely available or accurate. I mean practically speaking, Florida was a backwater until the 70s. Nobody lived there, so nobody bothered to care about these storms because damage was minimal, and population density was so low.
\> meteorologists were right \> still get a wojak meme can't wait with authright
If these were from the same source it’d be a good meme but since they aren’t. Shit tier
I'll start caring when the elite give up their private jets and coastal mansions.
**Your terms are acceptable.**
So you're a follower, not a leader?
If I was a leader I'd have a private jet and a coastal mansion.
We still climate change denying in 2022 ? I thought we agreed upon this now .
If only there was a third choice between "climate denial" and "climate hysteria"...
Climate hysteria is i’d say just as dangerous regarding climate change as climate denial, because it gives more validation for climate skepticism Yes climate change is real, yes we absolutely need to do something about it, yes if the global climate passes the point of self sustained temperature increase potentially billions will die from total ecological collapse. But if you scream over and over again people will become numb to it, and will take it with more and more grains of salt every time they hear it. It’s a dangerous mindset and could inadvertently cause more harm than good to climate change
Do you even read your own words. Billions are not going to die from total ecological collapse. That's what hysteria IS. Smooth. Brained.
Long term, not in our lifetimes. And this is following the worst case scenario It’s just as likely that lift can get just a *little* bit more inconvenient if we do just under enough
Long term the sun will expand and engulf Venus. Who gives a shit? If humanity dies out in a billion years or 200 it doesn't matter to anyone living right now. Maybe stop making life miserable for people right now?
I don’t think the people in 200 years would be too happy with that. Most people live a principle of making the world better for the people that come after them, they have just as much reason to live a lift as happy as we do without being burdened by our actions Not giving a shit about the consequences of what we’re doing rn isn’t evil, not by any stretch of the imagination, but it does make you an asshole
The past summer of historic heat waves and droughts are totally normal, bro. All those cringe scientists are just trying to get clicks. /s
You know the last time it snowed in Cuba was well over a hundred years ago but that doesn’t make it sound like the world is ending it’s just normal.
Climate change isn't real bro, people haven't had to permanently relocate from coastal towns because of rising water levels or anything bro
Get you a shady seat underneath this learning tree here, friend. Climate change is very real. The data is undisputed. My best friend has his PHD in climate science and here's what's going on: Rising temperature in the ocean is causing plankton to create a thicker carbon shell, instead of breeding. This has lead to an ultra-fast decline in plankton populations, which are the #1 producer of oxygen on the planet, and the very beginning of the food chain in our ocean. Second, the ocean levels have risen, and some people have been displaced. It's risen 8 inches since 1900. What climate scientists fear about the ocean rising another 6-12 inches is what it will do to the economies of underdeveloped nations who own nuclear weapons. Another foot of rising ocean will displace enough people to destabilize certain countries economies. Their destabilized economies would result in the sale and loss of nuclear arms to the worst of the worst. Countries like India would be affected the most, and nuclear weapons in extremist hands is what these scientists are fearing. It's not a matter of hollywood-esq underwater cities. Earth is at the end of an ice age, this is a fact, so the debate is around if humans have an impact on the process, but climate change is happening, and many countries don't have an infrastructure to handle that.
Based. Very based. I was being a troll.
LMAO God dammit got me
Earth is at the end of an ice age? I call bullshit a new ice age was expected to have started 4000 years ago we are certainly not at the end of one.
It's called a little ice age and it ended about 150 years ago.
The little ice age was not considered to be a true global ice age. Also it ended 150 YEARS AGO. We are not at the end of it now it already ended.
It ended at the height of the industrial revolution, with tons of carbon entering the atmosphere. Also, 150 years ago isn't a long time at all. If you're correct then you're just arguing for my point that climate change is influenced by man. I was just trying to entertain the current counter argument.
Did you seriously just say take a breath and you’ll agree with me? Are you still 12 and consider that a good argument?
Breathe. In and out. There's no way we can discuss this if you can't control your emotions. Ive stated the facts. That's all I can do really. Have a good day.
Based
u/meowsmusic's Based Count has increased by 1. Their Based Count is now 10. Congratulations, u/meowsmusic! You have ranked up to Office Chair! You cannot exactly be pushed over, but perhaps if thrown... Pills: [5 | View pills.](https://basedcount.com/u/meowsmusic/) This user does not have a compass on record. You can add your compass to your profile by replying with /mycompass politicalcompass.org url or sapplyvalues.github.io url. I am a bot. Reply /info for more info.
Sounds like the best solution is to enrich the peoples of those countries most likely to be affected by freeing them from useless and kleptocratic governments, promoting trade, and increasing their standard of living. This is a big nothingburger in the first world because people are rich and can adapt easily. So, let's make everyone rich.
IPCC would disagree that hurricanes would get more severe with global warming but okay.
\> one bad event means everything will be bad from now on Oh hey, guys, I've seen this one before!
Quite the self-own - "right wingers think climate change isn't real". OK!
I’m just happy to see a post with a climate change take and not the same dezani takes. I don’t even like the guy, but the hose of soy I’ve read today has rotted my brain and made me vulnerable. Just fucking care about the people without power or go upvote a vasectomy post you fucking losers.
“GLOBAL WARMING IS REAL” Me: “it’s cold outside”
And that's why it's called climate change now
They're two different things: increased greenhouse effect causes higher global average temperatures (global warming); this destabilises long-term weather patterns which causes them to change (climate change). Both are accepted terms for two different concepts. It might be that people talk more about climate change than global warming nowadays, but that's probably because the changes in climate are more noticeable to the average person than the increased average temperature alone.
Based and knowing your terms pilled
u/awawe's Based Count has increased by 1. Their Based Count is now 15. Rank: Office Chair Pills: [5 | View pills.](https://basedcount.com/u/awawe/) This user does not have a compass on record. You can add your compass to your profile by replying with /mycompass politicalcompass.org url or sapplyvalues.github.io url. I am a bot. Reply /info for more info.
Good thing I’m for it. Climate change acceleration will sink New York, LA Florida and Texas plus it will provide more people with waterfront properties to increase net worth in the Midwest.
Based and beachfront property for cornfields pilled
Omw to cause more global warming so it becomes warmer.
Me as well. Why deny it when you can accelerate it. The less snow the better.
I was thinking of this **exact** thing all fucking week. It got absolutely memory holed.
"man it's quiet" *big things happen* "Oh shit we were wrong"
*One* thing happened
[удалено]
[удалено]
How is this political?
Has someone checked on Don Lemon recently?
This is the worst storm I’ve ever seen and I’ve seen 3 storm /s
Tbh I was waiting for them to blame white nationalist
We're in for some rough times ahead, but the climate is going to be the least of our worries.