You can login if you already have an account or register by clicking the button below.
Registering is free and all you need is a username and password. We never ask you for your e-mail.
[+]tame8 points16 points24 points
ago
(edited ago)
[–]tame8 points
16 points
24 points
(+24|-8)
ago
(edited ago)
It's all just scare tactics to push the lefties' political agenda. Big Climate Change is paying off the researchers. The climate isn't really warming. It's just the normal El Nino cycle. The sunspot cycle is exiting a Maunder Minimum. We're actually in an ice age right now. Mars is warming at the same rate as Earth, explain that! It was really cold last winter. La la la not listening! sticks fingers in ears
I was actually really close to putting a /s on the end but I gambled on the last couple of lines making it clear enough. Looks like I pitched it just about right. :D
global warming is UN plot to keep power in europe / america. They are causing it. It is real. Part of the agenda to depopulate the earth, cause unrest and famine. they are anticipating this and will offer 1 world govt as solution.
[+]Broc_Lia2 points0 points2 points
ago
(edited ago)
[–]Broc_Lia2 points
0 points
2 points
(+2|-2)
ago
(edited ago)
Meanwhile, athletes preparing for the Olympics have been setting a frenzy of athletic records in the lead up to the games. Dissatisfied with their performance, coaches hired consultants from the climate-change-science community and hit upon the incredible new technique of simple adjusting their data using models.
"It's incredible" gasps Sven Utgardsson, a swimming coach, "All this time Helga, my swimmer, had been underperforming, but the theory stated that she should be faster, so clearly the actual times were wrong. We added 30 seconds to her results when we turned them in and suddenly she was winning medals."
[–]Animaillian6 points
0 points
6 points
(+6|-6)
ago
(edited ago)
But global warming is a good thing. Why do people think otherwise?
warmer weather => nicer climate, greater agricultural productivity, Antarctica and Greenland would be green again like they were in the past.
Some flooding but Holland has dealt with that no worries.
The earth is very cold compared to it's normal state
This idea that warm weather is bad is the most amazingly successful scam the left has ever...well, one of the best anyway
Look at this, from the time mammals took over the planet 65 million years ago until about 3 million years ago earth was hot, sometimes much hotter than now. Life thrived on earth during that period.
I have argued with climate activists before, none of them have any idea that the earth is normally much hotter than at present.
But the science is sound, not controversial at all.
There's no point in mentioning this here. (a) This is Voat, which is full of anthropogenic client change deniers. (b) You've posted this in /v/science, which is untrustworthy as a source of scientific articles following the elimination of moderators in this subverse a few months ago. Articles cited here now have to be voted on by non-scientists and loons of assorted stripes before they pass muster. I long ago stopped reading /v/science, and I imagine there are many others like me. I only saw this because it made the front page. Popularity is not an appropriate criterion for judging scientific results.
To be honest, I don't know. If you mean "where should non-scientific people with an interest in science go for their news?" I'd suggest a dedicated science news website, but I'm not sure which is the best one to recommend. I'm not a scientist myself, though I have a fair degree of training in mathematical physics from earlier study, so although I can spot drivel I'm not best placed to name the best science news website.
If you mean "where should us non-science folk go to express an opinion on the accuracy of scientific results?" I'd suggest that you simply refrain from doing so. If you're not a scientist you're probably not really qualified to express an opinion on peer-reviewed papers. I certainly don't, as a general rule, express an opinion of matters of scientific fact and experimental results, and I suggest you don't either. We're not well-informed enough and it's ludicrous to suggest otherwise.
If, however, you mean "where should us non-science folk go to discuss the social implications of some scientific result we've read about?" I suppose Voat is as good a place as any. The truth is that most of us are incompetent to discuss such things seriously, so keeping our comments to Voat, where they are nicely isolated from the serious world, is probably wise. I wouldn't look to Voat for a serious discussion of the morality of cloning, or GMOs, or global warming, or any of a thousand other scientific issues, because Voaters are not serious thinkers, at least insofar as they post on Voat. (I include myself in this, of course.) Tragically, people come to Voat to howl. (Again, I include myself in this!) When I first joined Voat I had some hopes that it would be an interesting place to share serious and entertaining opinion and comment, but these days I recognise that it's just another puddle of pond life.
[–]Gorillion4 points
-1 points
3 points
(+3|-4)
ago
Well, you white coated fucks had better invent a technological fix quick sharp then, cuz I ain't got enough invested in this shitshow anymore to bother reducing my carbon footprint. You pissholes can suck my smog.
Sort: Top
[–] tame 8 points 16 points 24 points (+24|-8) ago (edited ago)
It's all just scare tactics to push the lefties' political agenda. Big Climate Change is paying off the researchers. The climate isn't really warming. It's just the normal El Nino cycle. The sunspot cycle is exiting a Maunder Minimum. We're actually in an ice age right now. Mars is warming at the same rate as Earth, explain that! It was really cold last winter. La la la not listening! sticks fingers in ears
...did I miss any?
[–] HeartAttack99 [S] 3 points 14 points 17 points (+17|-3) ago
You almost Poed me.
[–] tame 1 point 8 points 9 points (+9|-1) ago
I was actually really close to putting a /s on the end but I gambled on the last couple of lines making it clear enough. Looks like I pitched it just about right. :D
[–] RedditCEOEllenPao 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
Same.
[–] [deleted] 3 points 3 points 6 points (+6|-3) ago
[–] GIF-lLL-S0NG 2 points -2 points 0 points (+0|-2) ago
global warming is UN plot to keep power in europe / america. They are causing it. It is real. Part of the agenda to depopulate the earth, cause unrest and famine. they are anticipating this and will offer 1 world govt as solution.
[–] throughtheblack 0 points 6 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago
In other news, the Emperor was seen wearing his most fantastic new clothes yet.
[–] aboutime 8 points 1 point 9 points (+9|-8) ago
If these stats are anything like the economics stats we are given then I call BULLSHIT from this BULLSHIT administration and their BULLSHIT "experts".
[–] [deleted] 2 points 6 points 8 points (+8|-2) ago
[–] DickHertz 1 point -1 points 0 points (+0|-1) ago
Ignorance about statistics is something we need less of in the world.
[–] Broc_Lia 2 points 0 points 2 points (+2|-2) ago (edited ago)
Meanwhile, athletes preparing for the Olympics have been setting a frenzy of athletic records in the lead up to the games. Dissatisfied with their performance, coaches hired consultants from the climate-change-science community and hit upon the incredible new technique of simple adjusting their data using models.
[–] Animaillian 6 points 0 points 6 points (+6|-6) ago (edited ago)
But global warming is a good thing. Why do people think otherwise? warmer weather => nicer climate, greater agricultural productivity, Antarctica and Greenland would be green again like they were in the past. Some flooding but Holland has dealt with that no worries. The earth is very cold compared to it's normal state
This idea that warm weather is bad is the most amazingly successful scam the left has ever...well, one of the best anyway
[–] kmojo 2 points 1 point 3 points (+3|-2) ago
Doesn't research show that the times of highest co2 on the planet are also the times with the most abundant life?
[–] Broc_Lia 3 points -2 points 1 point (+1|-3) ago
And that colder climates mean bigger deserts.
[–] Animaillian 3 points -2 points 1 point (+1|-3) ago (edited ago)
Plants need CO2 to get carbon for growth. The more CO2 there is the faster they grow.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleoclimatology#/media/File:All_palaeotemps.png
Look at this, from the time mammals took over the planet 65 million years ago until about 3 million years ago earth was hot, sometimes much hotter than now. Life thrived on earth during that period.
I have argued with climate activists before, none of them have any idea that the earth is normally much hotter than at present. But the science is sound, not controversial at all.
[–] carbanara 4 points 0 points 4 points (+4|-4) ago
Have any models been made that predict the weather change accurately? I have never seen one.
[–] TelescopiumHerscheli 1 point -1 points 0 points (+0|-1) ago
There's no point in mentioning this here. (a) This is Voat, which is full of anthropogenic client change deniers. (b) You've posted this in /v/science, which is untrustworthy as a source of scientific articles following the elimination of moderators in this subverse a few months ago. Articles cited here now have to be voted on by non-scientists and loons of assorted stripes before they pass muster. I long ago stopped reading /v/science, and I imagine there are many others like me. I only saw this because it made the front page. Popularity is not an appropriate criterion for judging scientific results.
[–] Boris ago
Well where do you suggest us non-science folk go?
[–] TelescopiumHerscheli 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
To be honest, I don't know. If you mean "where should non-scientific people with an interest in science go for their news?" I'd suggest a dedicated science news website, but I'm not sure which is the best one to recommend. I'm not a scientist myself, though I have a fair degree of training in mathematical physics from earlier study, so although I can spot drivel I'm not best placed to name the best science news website.
If you mean "where should us non-science folk go to express an opinion on the accuracy of scientific results?" I'd suggest that you simply refrain from doing so. If you're not a scientist you're probably not really qualified to express an opinion on peer-reviewed papers. I certainly don't, as a general rule, express an opinion of matters of scientific fact and experimental results, and I suggest you don't either. We're not well-informed enough and it's ludicrous to suggest otherwise.
If, however, you mean "where should us non-science folk go to discuss the social implications of some scientific result we've read about?" I suppose Voat is as good a place as any. The truth is that most of us are incompetent to discuss such things seriously, so keeping our comments to Voat, where they are nicely isolated from the serious world, is probably wise. I wouldn't look to Voat for a serious discussion of the morality of cloning, or GMOs, or global warming, or any of a thousand other scientific issues, because Voaters are not serious thinkers, at least insofar as they post on Voat. (I include myself in this, of course.) Tragically, people come to Voat to howl. (Again, I include myself in this!) When I first joined Voat I had some hopes that it would be an interesting place to share serious and entertaining opinion and comment, but these days I recognise that it's just another puddle of pond life.
[–] Gorillion 4 points -1 points 3 points (+3|-4) ago
Well, you white coated fucks had better invent a technological fix quick sharp then, cuz I ain't got enough invested in this shitshow anymore to bother reducing my carbon footprint. You pissholes can suck my smog.