5
36

[–] NoisyCricket 5 points 36 points (+41|-5) ago 

Make sure you reject the phrase, "global cooling" or "climate change." Always call it "global warming." Don't allow them to constantly change the name so that it matches the current climate. Force them to use their own terminology, regardless of the current climate.

That global warming sure is making it cold.

4
3

[–] DeadFox 4 points 3 points (+7|-4) ago 

Remember when they were worried about acid rain, Amazon rianforrsts, and the ozone layer?

3
13

[–] PollyFandango 3 points 13 points (+16|-3) ago 

To be fair the Ozone layer thing was actually kind of a big deal and international chemical regulations made an immediate an observable positive change. As a bonus we also got more bald eagles.

0
9

[–] Uncle_Tractor 0 points 9 points (+9|-0) ago 

The acid rain thing was caused by industrial pollution in the UK (and Germany?) and the effects were very real up here in Norway. The issue went away when the UK cleaned up its act. The loss of rainforest is still a problem, and the ozone layer thing was dealt with by using a different coolant gas.

0
6

[–] CrudOMatic 0 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago  (edited ago)

> acid rain

Nigger, that wasn't a prediction, it actually happened. Regulations worked. FFS, how many windshield wipers have to be melted and paintjobs be pitted & stripped before someone did something? Honestly, I think the very real property damage that was coming from it is what spurned kikes into doing anything to begin with.

1
-1

[–] Leak123 1 points -1 points (+0|-1) ago 

But what do I say when they bring up ice cream sandwiches?? It happens a lot

10
-4

8
-5

8
32

[–] YashinNashi 8 points 32 points (+40|-8) ago  (edited ago)

We just came off of 4 consecutive years of record-breaking high average global temperatures followed by 2 years of it coming back down a little. Nobody ever claimed every single year is going to be hotter than the previous. After the hottest year ever recorded, the following year has to either be the new hottest year ever, or cooler. But it's still warmer than a decade ago, a century ago, and on back.

It was an el nino cycle that contributed to the record highs, now we're in a la nina cycle. But when you adjust for both of those, it's still a warming trend. In other words, la nina should be cooler than el nino, but it's still warmer than it should be for both.

5
3

[–] Shekelstein6M 5 points 3 points (+8|-5) ago  (edited ago)

We just came off of 4 consecutive years of record-breaking high average global temperatures

All way within the margin of error. Meaning, you don't really know if they were record breaking.

Stop with the pilpul kikery.

Downvoats for factual statement. Hmmmmm

5
-4

1
2

[–] Plavonica 1 points 2 points (+3|-1) ago  (edited ago)

It was an el nino cycle that contributed to the record highs, now we're in a la nina cycle.

la nina should be cooler than el nino,

Can I get a translation?

Edit: I get it people! I was being facetious! Just making fun of the el-nino/la-nina thing.

0
6

[–] HorseIsDead 0 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago 

Ocean currents and shit.

Sometimes the places where people live will feel a lot colder but it's just one of two ways the climate patterns go, say you have pattern 1 and pattern 2, say the average temp for 1 is 30c and the average temp for 2 is 20c all year round in whatever specific spot. If it's 25 when we're having weather pattern 2, some dipshit is going to interpret it as the earth cooling off when really it's 5 degrees above average for climate/weather pattern 2.

1
0

[–] SChalice 1 points 0 points (+1|-1) ago 

Can I get a translation?

The polar weather streams have shifted, bringing cool air down towards the equator and warm air towards the Arctic. The Arctic is the warmest it has ever been.

Shills can easily skew data to the unintelligent and uneducated.

0
0

[–] YashinNashi 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago  (edited ago)

The short version is that during a la nina cycle, ocean currents pull warmer water down, during el nino cycles, warmer water is at the surface and a lot of the heat from la nina years is released. This is mostly associated with more hurricanes and there are some fish and crab migration and population changes and some other things. But, it's also a factor in the average global temperature for a given year.

3
0

[–] Gorillion 3 points 0 points (+3|-3) ago  (edited ago)

This is the narrative that the oceans getting too hot (el nino = little boy) due to stored energy from muh Global Warming forces, or getting too cold (la nina = little girl) creates storms and crazy weather via unusually high and low pressure cells. The idea is that things can't stabilize. Once all the all stored energy is released as a el nino event, the resultant la nina cooling process also creates weather disruption.

It's a nice cycle that allows them to talk about the sky falling on both the upswing and the downswing.

Note how the MSM when apefuck crazy over the tsunami in Thailand. Literally when before that did the MSM give a fuck about such a thing? It was part of selling the idea of weather instability due to human-created climate upsets. When in all reality, that area of Thailand is the equivalent of Hurricane Alley in the US. Just the worst place to have anything at sea level, because there's no geographical protection from any sort of larger than average swell.

The way things are unspooling, it's even entirely possible the tsunami was created by an undersea nuke for this exact purpose. As that was the one place in the world where a one meter swell could actually do some visible damage and take out a bunch of Westerners at the same time, to attract eyes and guilt-inducing sympathy.

Trust nothing about what the "Environment Movement" and their pet scientists say about anything. Current mainstream climate science is so pozzed and controlled that we're gonna have to go back and do it all again from scratch after we purge the Globalist influences from our institutions.

4
1

[–] Tallest_Skil 4 points 1 points (+5|-4) ago 

We just came off of 4 consecutive years of record-breaking high average global temperatures

Proven completely false. Fuck off.

After the hottest year ever recorded

That was 1934. Go fuck yourself.

But it's still warmer than a decade ago, a century ago, and on back.

Cooler, in fact. The world has been cooling since modern records began in 1880. You have NOTHING.

But when you adjust for both of those, it's still a warming trend.

Nope, cooling trend. 35 retards and paid shills agreed with you.

0
3

[–] Simonsaysgoat 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

Sources? As far as I know your completely wrong

0
0

[–] tinnitus_Cookedguy 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Dude more energy in the atmosphere means more severe weather. More severe storms, cold or warm.

You also have to consider whether we are in a solar minima or solar maxima.

There is some dynamism to global warming. If there wasn't, there would not be life on earth. It is a means of our planet holding onto energy. Forces of non-equilibrium permit systems that can etch out what look like negentropic processes. One does not simply refute global warming. One can refute man's impact. You can compare our contribution to volcanic activity. The thing you should be questioning is the water. WATER is a green house gas.What is interesting is that hot water rises and makes clouds, which reflect more energy into space. Water itself is interesting because it is slow to cool, and also slow to heat up. Clearly there is a sweet spot, in which we flourish. We might want to try to hold on to that sweet spot as long as we can.

They are not "shills" or retards. Even if they are wrong we discover truths by embracing our anticipatory ability.

We also have to consider where the data comes from. Are there more survey stations in colder climates or warmer ones?

The world is going to end. Its just a question of when. Hawking had predicted 1,000 years. In this instance, it would be nice if he were wrong by a couple of orders of magnitude, in the favor of reverence for life. Though it is still a fascinating prediction for anyone.

0
0

[–] Cat-hax 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Well shit I would call that a changeing weather/temperature pattern. Just like the seasons.

0
0

[–] YashinNashi 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Exactly, except it's the overarching thing that influences long-term weather patterns across seasons and years. I think it's called the climate.

8
11

[–] Saufsoldat 8 points 11 points (+19|-8) ago 

This is so painfully fake news it's not even funny.

He literally only looked at the data for February 2016 and February 2018. February 2016 was the hottest February in recorded history, 2018 was the 6th hottest February in recorded history.

Do none of you understand how ridiculously idiotic that is? That's like me saying "yesterday the weather was 13°C, today it's 25°C, so we've had record-breaking global warming over the past two days".

Voat fucking loves fake news, don't let anyone claim otherwise.

3
2

[–] CrudOMatic 3 points 2 points (+5|-3) ago  (edited ago)

We caught you faking your data years ago, kike, when your emails got hacked.

The discussion is over - any further talk of it is you having a tantrum like a child refusing to admit you were lying the whole time.

You'll not have your de-industrialization agenda, you'll not have Agenda 21, you'll not have your U.N. Global Biodiversity plan, you'll not have your depopulation agenda, and you won't have your insane tax hikes as well as your Paris Accord where you funnel obscene amounts of money from the west into the pockets of African nigger dictators for "green projects".

You lose, kike. You might think this is a minor bump, but you NEED us to be on board - else if you just try to enact it all by fiat, the goyim-knowing index will fly off the charts and you'll find yourselves pogrom'd again.

0
2

[–] Saufsoldat 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

We caught you faking your data years ago, kike, when your emails got hacked.

I never faked any data, you fucking nigger. Go bother someone else with your paranoid delusions.

0
0

[–] B3bomber 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Why were the top 10 hottest years in history 2 years apart (spot #1 and spot #6)?

0
0

[–] Saufsoldat 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Not years, just the months. He literally only compared the months, which is retarded.

And they're so close together because the earth is getting hotter. 8 of the 10 hottest years in recorded history were past 2009.

1
0

[–] CrudOMatic 1 points 0 points (+1|-1) ago 

Because there are lots more systems in play than muh SUVs muh oil, and the kike @Saufsoldat damn well knows this - so he simply hopes the goyim are too dumb to see through his lies.

But maybe there is something to this de-industrialization agenda and depopulation - Israel should start first. Be the good steward of the Earth and show us all how it's done. I mean the world WOULD be a lot better off if there was a 90% "reduction" in Jewish populations. Why should we goyim be getting all the cuts?

2
-1

[–] Tallest_Skil 2 points -1 points (+1|-2) ago 

The world has cooled since the 1880s. You have no argument, yid.

0
0

[–] Simonsaysgoat 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Where is your source for this?

1
-1

[–] SChalice 1 points -1 points (+0|-1) ago 

yes, anyone with an IQ over 80 realizes

8
8

[–] bob3333 8 points 8 points (+16|-8) ago  (edited ago)

And in 2007 - 2008 we had two years of record-breaking stock market declines. Was that proof that the stock market doesn't rise over time?

It's also kind of funny for someone to use NASA's supposedly doctored data to prove that global warming isn't happening. You gotta pick one retards: either the data is falsified and it can't be used to prove anything, or it's not false and it shows cooling for the last two years and warming for the previous 100.

2
6

[–] JohnGoodman 2 points 6 points (+8|-2) ago  (edited ago)

The real issue is that you assume 100 years, or 2 years for that matter , of data means anything at all. Either one is a pretty meaningless sample size in the context of the earths history

0
6

[–] bob3333 0 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago 

The real issue is that you assume 100 years, or 2 years for that matter , of data means anything at all. Either one is a pretty meaningless sample size in the context of the earths history.

I guess it's a good thing we're not concerned with Earth's entire history, then. Otherwise we'd be talking about times when there wasn't even a biosphere at all. Or times that didn't even support mammals. Including irrelevant data is stupid.

3
-1

[–] slwsnowman40 3 points -1 points (+2|-3) ago 

So much this.

0
1

[–] NotALawyer 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Its just handpicked bad data. Here you go https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/news/global-climate-201804

1
1

[–] Laurentius_the_pyro 1 points 1 points (+2|-1) ago 

Don't you see, the data is all lies when it disagrees with me, and is perfect and unquestionable when it goes against me!

0
0

[–] CrudOMatic 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

> mfw this faggot thinks that a trend in the space of a single lifetime == we're destroying the planet! REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

0
6

[–] o0shad0o 0 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago 

0
0

[–] SChalice 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Solar minimum only accounts for 2-3 degree change, of course that is enough to fuck OPs assertion.

0
5

[–] fistof_feilong 0 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago 

But, but, but... muh science!

0
5

[–] tanukihat 0 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago 

Front page of Leddit right now. 21.6k upvoted, triple-gilded.

One of yall is lying.

0
1

[–] MessyEnema 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Came here to post that.

The only difference I can see initially is the OP here said "global cooling" and red doesn't specify. The loophole is that if you can find one place in the world that's warmer than average every month, then boom - you have 400 straight warmer than average months.

0
0

[–] The_Cat 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

It's a global average, not one place.

0
0

[–] Simonsaysgoat 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Posted this voat link to reddit,yesterday haha

1
-1

[–] Tallest_Skil 1 points -1 points (+0|-1) ago 

The kike website is lying. The world has cooled since 1880.

1
-1

[–] Saufsoldat 1 points -1 points (+0|-1) ago 

OP is lying. February 2016 was hotter than February 2018. Both are still way above average and Feb 18 was actually the 6th hottest February in recorded history.

2
-2

[–] Tallest_Skil 2 points -2 points (+0|-2) ago 

Nah, you were proven wrong. Go suck kike cock somewhere else.

1
5

[–] ardvarcus 1 points 5 points (+6|-1) ago 

The original scenario of the climate alarmists was that we were in the beginning of a runaway greenhouse effect. This is a hypothetical situation where the climate of the Earth feeds back on itself and just keeps getting hotter and hotter and hotter until the seas all boil and lead melts. Yes, that is what they were predicting -- that the Earth would turn into Venus. Well, as I said, it is a hypothetical effect that has never been observed in Earth's history. Why? Because planet Earth has mechanisms built into her climate that prevent it.

Later on, carbon dioxide was demonized so that the whole "carbon credit" scam could be enacted. That was nothing more than a money and power grab.

It's interesting that a complete fraud and farce such as anthropogenic global warming could sustain itself for decades. But then, a lot of people were making money and careers from it. They had an incentive to keep the hysteria going ... and they did. But reality is proving that AGW is a complete fraud and a farce.

1
0

[–] B3bomber 1 points 0 points (+1|-1) ago 

In the really long term (unknown when), Earth will be hotter than Venus when that runaway effect does happen (it's not an IF, it is a WHEN). Earth's magnetic field will keep the solar wind from blowing away water vapor when it becomes the atmosphere instead of the ocean.

The thing is, do you really want to experiment with this planet (the only one we have proven we can and have lived on) to find out when/where that tipping point is?

There was a time when scientists were against detonating nukes in certain parts of the atmosphere because it could cause a catastrophic reaction that effectively wiped us out in a matter of months. You know what our governments (yes, more than 1) did with this information? They detonated nukes in those places to see what would happen anyway (literally actually tested to see if it would fuck humanity and everything else it would take out, that was the ENTIRE point of trying it).

1
-1

[–] SChalice 1 points -1 points (+0|-1) ago 

Rex? Tillerson? Is that you?

1
-1

[–] Tallest_Skil 1 points -1 points (+0|-1) ago 

Kike. Paid shill. That IS you.

2
-1

[–] NotALawyer 2 points -1 points (+1|-2) ago 

Its funny how you try using scientific terms, please continue, its incredibly amusing.

You -probably- mean Clathrate gun scenario, which is basically Methane (stong greenhouse gas) being released from melting ice, and permafrosts (mainly Siberia) and seabeds. This methane is trapped there since -most likely- cryogenian era.

1
-1

[–] Tallest_Skil 1 points -1 points (+0|-1) ago  (edited ago)

Nope, he means exactly what he said because that’s what the narrative has always been. Go fuck yourself and your yiddish condescension. The world isn’t warming.

load more comments ▼ (39 remaining)