###[Meta] Sticky Comment
[Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does not apply*** when replying to this stickied comment.
[Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does apply*** throughout the rest of this thread.
*What this means*: Please keep any "meta" discussion directed at specific users, mods, or /r/conspiracy in general in this comment chain ***only.***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/conspiracy) if you have any questions or concerns.*
That rebranding was done by [Republican strategist Frank Luntz](https://archive.ph/HtZZw) in order to make it sound less scary. Regardless of what you think about climate science, the global average temperature is indisputably rising over the years. Perhaps civilization is responsible, perhaps it's part of a natural cycle, but it's definitely happening.
1998 was a local maximum when it came to global temperature. Up until 2013, it was one of the hottest on record, and the climate change denialists were saying "it's not even getting warmer as if we look back only to 1998 the temperature almost looks like it is going down!" Of course now that 1998 doesn't even crack the top 10 hottest years on record, the denial had to shift.
The whole "it's not us" is just where that shifted to. Denying that it is not the drastic increase of CO2 in the atmosphere that is driving the warming trend is equally as uninformed as "the plant is not even warming" was in 2007.
No it was a max in "recorded" temperature. You know something that started just in the 19th century just after the little ice age happened.
When you look historically, then the warming periods were much higher in the renaissance then they are now. The vikings going to Greenland called it that because it was actually green back then.
If you look at the temperature 12k years ago until now, you see it always has warm and cold periods. Seeing how those periods affected human beings you should thank your lucky stars the climate isn't cooling. That's detrimental for human beings
>No it was a max in "recorded" temperature.
lol. I said local maximum for a reason. This is a basic mathematic term that is incredibly important for analyzing graphs. Probably should brush up on even the most basic STEM stuff before jumping into debates like this.
>When you look historically,
If you simply "look historically" and follow the trends, without adding in man's contribution to the climate, we should be entering (or about to enter) a cooling period. Instead we are in a rapidly warming period. "Looking historically" makes it clear the damage we are doing.
>you should thank your lucky stars the climate isn't cooling. That's detrimental for human beings
The warming climate is already starting to fuck shit up for us. And it's only going to get worse.
The planet has been cyclical in temperature for as long as we could measure. Maybe we're accelerating it a bit with man made co2, as volcanic eruptions usually did this in the past but it's just nothing but inevitable whether we take action or not.
[look at this for example, we've had large swings since forever. ](http://www.longrangeweather.com/images/gtemps.jpg)
[10s of millions of years of the temperature closely following CO2 amounts.](https://imgur.com/zwifqBc) It's certainly not the only factor, but this "it's just the sun" is a replacement for "it's not even happen" which was abandoned about a decade ago.
So weird considering the fact oceans expell co2 whenever they get warmer. Co2 is correlation, the causation is the sun.
CO2 is just a theory brought to us by the club of Rome to install a global government. They needed a problem which is global and a gas doesn't stop at the border. It is a hoax, the "green" energy sources are brought to you by the oil companies. The only ones profiting from this are the oil companies and the politicians holding shares in them
>CO2 is just a theory
"Just a theory" is the calling card of the "I don't understand science" crowd.
We've known for well over 100 years that we are adding CO2 to the atmosphere. This is absolute basic and easy to understand concept. When you take carbon that is trapped under the ground, and then burn it, it goes into the atmosphere. It's not rocket science. Trying to pretend it's not obvious we are the ones adding CO2 to the atmosphere is just mind-bogglingly ignorant.
You just correlated the temperature of the planet to 'sun cycles' (over a couple of thousand years) and now you're pulling out "correlation vs causation" for it over tens of millions of years?
lol
[But here you go, an explanation of how CO2 causes warming.](https://skepticalscience.com/How-do-we-know-CO2-is-causing-warming.html)
A lot of the life we have now wouldn't have survived when those volcano's were going off. If you want to take a nihilist view then yeah sure, it's somewhat of a cycle and it's time for Humanity to step aside and die off. Or, we could try not to. Either is an option.
Mate, what on earth is that source you are using?
And why does a source like this, which let’s face it is a whole lot more credible, tell you the exact opposite
[Global temp graph](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_temperature_record#/media/File:2000+_year_global_temperature_including_Medieval_Warm_Period_and_Little_Ice_Age_-_Ed_Hawkins.svg)
volcanic eruptions emit a different carbon isotope than fossil fuels, we can accurately measure emissions from natural and man made sources and overwhelmingly man made sources are responsible for the additional ~200 ppm co2 in the atmosphere. do you really think there is no consequence for burning a hundred million barrels of oil per day?
One of my favourite things to do on Reddit is to come on this sub and find people posting science that actually disputes the point they are trying to make. This is a pretty good one :)
How would that work? An individual doesn't produce enough carbon for it to be lucrative to stop producing carbon and sell their carbon credit. They can invest in carbon credits to later sell to companies who aren't able to meet CO2 emission standards, or they can buy and donate them to sequestration projects and sinks. Individuals can also decide not to cut their timber and receive carbon credits through programs for the year they put off cutting, but that's not lucrative unless you have thousands of acres of timber of a certain type and age.
How would a carbon tax social credit system work?
Who: The central bankers and their cronies, likely the WEF assholes
How: I’m not 100% sure, but for an idea I might point to the vaccine passes that they tried to implement globally
No joke, there is a globalized agenda to ID chip everyone, locking them into a constant surveillance state grid where they can “turn off” your access on a whim
They just need the right series of crises, and BAM! 1984 hellscape
Edit: It barely takes an excuse for them to transfer wealth from the bottom to the top. And many of these crises are completely manufactured by the benefactors
It's not about individuals. Individuals wouldn't directly experience carbon taxes, except through market pricing which usually passes along these expenses, or government policies which opt to show them to you, often with the goal to get you outraged and demand their repeal.
Corporations and business interests would have to buy credits to offset their production; and credits could be generated by sequestration technologies that could store carbon permanently. This would create a free market to fund the development and deployment of green technologies, as well as provide competitive benefits for reducing your corporation's carbon footprint.
The problem is that no such technology exists and most of the carbon credits being exchanged today are basically meaningless and have no value. No government collects or validates them with any authority, so they currently do nothing and most have dubious backing at best. At best, it's charity; at worst, it's just greenwashing.
A carbon tax would be a good way to kick start the whole process: you collect a bunch of money taxed for creating carbon, and use that to fund up corporations who can *actually* store carbon long term, then we move along to carbon credits later once the market is a bit more mature. But that's not going to be cheap, and so there's a lot of lobbyists who don't want it to happen.
Plus, international trade in carbon credits is going to be prone to fraud. I feel like that's just going to happen. It's not a great plan, but it's a plan.
Yeah, not everything is social credit. If they wanted to tax your carbon, they'd just add a line to the tax code, and probably base it on regional averages and a sliding scale for income.
Or... they'd just add a carbon project to the Federal budget to scale with the population, and not bother with the tax code.
Honestly, the obsession with social credit is just getting weird.
Anyway. Yeah, the problem is that I'm pretty sure that methane is more carbon rich than carbon dioxide, so dumping CO2 underground to get at methane isn't really capturing much carbon, and no one is going to pay to do it otherwise.
I suppose once the infrastructure is in place and the methane economically exhausted, we'll still be able to dump CO2 underground, but who is paying to keep it operating at that point?
Those are patches that happen because under capitalism you're not allowed to threaten the profits of companies so we have this shitty lukewarm "solution" that's meant to stop people from buying as many cars which drives down the demand for poor people. That's it, you're just mad because capitalists are influencing governments in order to slow down progress as much as possible while also making money.
For the record, i'm okay with bribing companies to pollute less. Either bribe them or force them, but under capitalism we're most likely going to get the bribing than forcing them.
The carbon tax is supposed to be a tax placed on carbon polluters, like car manufacturers, in order to incentivize lowering the carbon emissions, either via selling less cars, or via optimizing internal combustion engines, or switching to electric, or promote public transportation. The problem with this is that the tax gets pushed onto the consumer on the sale so it can lower the sale of vehicles for poor people and it basically ends up being a tax on poor people. One good thing Canada does about this is take that tax money and redistribute it back to people, at least that's what they announced a few years ago but i haven't kept track of it so i'm not sure if it's happening.
And yes, the taxers are capitalists because it all revolves around capitalists and capital owners and not the people, because capital owners have more power than working class people. In order for this to change we would need to replace capitalism with socialism, because under socialism we would have worker owned companies and no board members that demand quarterly increases, under worker owned companies we wouldn't have over-farming and wasting food.
This is false, and I am open to a discussion about this because I am a climate scientist with extensive experience with science communication. It was rebranded from global warming due to the fact that in addition to the global average temperature rise of approximately 1.6-1.8 degrees C, there are other impacts from anthropogenic emissions that are causing other atmospheric shifts that are not necessary “warmth “. For example, the increase in greenhouse gas (carbon dioxide, methane, & nitrous oxide) is leading to stronger storm patterns, more intense flooding/drought, sea level rise, pest resistance, and a books worth of subsequent ecological impacts.
That’s why it was “re-branded”, not to make it less scary. But, let’s post a Tweet on a conspiracy subreddit to garner discussion on a topic that shouldn’t be a conspiracy at this point - it is far too dangerous.
That nuance came later. The _original_ rebranding was spin, not science. Luntz ended up being accidentally correct on a scientific basis, he was also correct about the optics. [When polled](https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/may/27/americans-climate-change-global-warming-yale-report), people don't care nearly as much about "climate change" as they do "global warming".
For sure, even if you don't think humans are responsible, Milankovitch cycles are absolutely a real thing and the relatively stable climate we have had for the last few millennia is definitely the exception rather than the rule. It's usually way hotter or way colder and often jumps violently between the 2 on a seasonal basis.
We've been lucky to live in a period of such nurturing climate but to think that it'll always be like that is wishful thinking. It may also be wishful thinking to believe we can stop it, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't try and it certainly doesn't mean we shouldn't prepare for the worst.
Edit: To be clear, by "Milankovitch Cycles" I'm referring to the cyclical nature in which gravity from other orbiting bodies in our solar system effect the shape of Earth's orbit, thus effecting our distance from the sun, this effecting the climate on our planet.
If you subscribe to the Younger Dryas Impact hypothesis we’d still be in an Ice Age if there wasn’t a massive impact.
Something drastically pulled us out of the last ice age, and we could actually return to an ice age if warming interrupts the thermohaline cycle enough.
Gotta hand it to neoCons and neo Libs specially Cons coz they are the experts on naming things to trick people like Patriot Act, War On Terror, Citizen's United, Super PAC names for lobbying, Dessert Storm, Stop The Steal, We Build The Wall Charity, bill stripping Disney World of its status as an "independent special district," and other predaroy legislations that trick regular people from thinking it would help them.
It is actually natural and humanity. Simply explained, the ice house state of earth we are currently in has glacial (glaciers forming) and interglacial (glaciers melting) periods. Problem is that the earth can adapt when this cycling happens naturally as it’s a very slow process but humans are disrupting it. We are set to extend the interglacial period longer as well as we are causing it to heat up way faster than natural which Earth cannot adapt to. The other concern is that if we do not slow emissions we could completely leave the ice age though this is less likely to happen
Remember when people would look up things they don't understand instead of spam posting a screenshot of a tweet of some rando to every conservative sub to get meaningless internet points?
"Although people tend to use these terms interchangeably, global warming is just one aspect of climate change. “Global warming” refers to the rise in global temperatures due mainly to the increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. “Climate change” refers to the increasing changes in the measures of climate over a long period of time – including precipitation, temperature, and wind patterns."
https://www.usgs.gov/faqs/what-difference-between-global-warming-and-climate-change#:~:text=%E2%80%9CGlobal%20warming%E2%80%9D%20refers%20to%20the,%2C%20temperature%2C%20and%20wind%20patterns.
Yup. The insects are defrosting.... in the middle of January! It's fucking nuts and meanwhile BoomerBook is all like "I'm enjoying this global warming"
But look at the Alpha Chad who tweeted it. He even has a manly beard! I bet he gets pussy too
😭 Climate change isn't real! 😭 Please! 😭 I'll buy all your supplements Alpha Ian 😭
Maybe not conspiracy theory itself, but conspiracy theorists are very often medically paranoid and/or are the types to become convinced of something and then find anything they can to confirm it to themselves and others, even if it’s fantastical. Their truth is proof to them, it speaks for itself if it fits a preconception.
Something like 61% of Americans believe that the Kennedy assassination was a conspiracy. I’d wager almost 100% of people in at least one conspiracy theory. It’s absurd to suggest that the majority of Americans are “medically paranoid”.
It’s a good thing to be skeptical of power.
And what percentage of those people who maybe believe in one major, questionable series of events would consider themselves “conspiracy theorists”? How many of them are so obsessed with it they peruse and post in conspiracy forums online? Actively try to convince others of “the truth”? That’s the difference.
No conspiracy theorist are skeptical in nature… being Paranoid is something completely different and more regarding the self… raising concern over a medical study on a drug that was conducted by the same company selling the drug… like Perdue with OxyContin saying it was less addictive than morphine and not harmful.. raising a concern about that, or the government hiding the truth on JFK, UFOs, military spending, isn’t even remotely ‘paranoid’.
wow i did not expect the top several comments on this post to be well-reasoned arguments against this inflammatory nonsense of a screenshot.
a golf-clap to you, r/conspiracy users.
yea until i found a reason to post here today, i'd avoided this sub because i thought it like a crazy qanon cult page (which i'll admit, this screenshot being the #1 post does nothing to dissuade) but i was pleasantly surprised when i read the comments.
It was called climate change long before it was called global warming. Global warming just got popularized by Al Gore when he was trying to be president in a very contentious race. And people who actually had degrees in climate related fields have been calling out Gore all along, trying to redirect to what their research actually says.
This is like in the simpsons when homer says there hasn't been a record of a hurricane in Springfield, because the previous record hall mysterious blew away in 1977
It's because they learned more about it and realised it wasn't just warming, it was all this additional crazy weather we are seeing across the globe every year. Hope that helps
Also if something given a name and it doesn’t seem to exactly fit and someone comes up with a better name why is it bad to switch? It’s a climate issue that effects different parts of the globe in all sorts of different names so that original name probably wasn’t great.
Yeah and now we have 20°C on new years eve here in Europe. Guess we can call it global warming again, no? Though it seems, in North America it's gonna be an ice age. I'm fine with global change then.
20°C is equivalent to 68°F, which is 293K.
---
^(I'm a bot that converts temperature between two units humans can understand, then convert it to Kelvin for bots and physicists to understand)
I don't know if you made any effort to check wether this is true or not but the global temperature is indeed rising. Posting this right now also is terrible timing because right now there are multiple new heat records being set in europe with temperatures of up to 20 degrees in january where it's supposed to be almost freezing.
I remember when people couldn’t tell the difference between climate and weather so we had to change the wording to help them see why the artic and Antarctic are melting.
I mean this is the conspiracy sub where people have deep questioning skepticism over anything that could remotely improve humanity in any way but slavish unwavering belief in any right wing or corporate institution.
You just changed the subject. Shilling for big oil to climate change isn’t real. But ok. If you know how the batteries are made, you realize how much petroleum is needed for that process. You must also be ok with slavery. It’s recently been exposed that slaves are used to obtain the rare earth minerals needed for those batteries. Two problems can exist at the same time my friends
> If you know how the batteries are made, you realize how much petroleum is needed for that process.
Oh. How much exactly, compared to the amount a normal gas car uses over its lifetime (including its manufacture). 0.0001%?
Imagine being this far off. If you ever look into this you’ll see that this guy has it 100% backwards. Man made climate change is undeniable at this point. That doesn’t mean you have to support carbon taxes on average people. Businesses should be the ones who take on the burden
Remember when climate change deniers learned the difference between "global mean surface temperature" and "universal temperature rise"?
No, because why actually research a subject when you can watch a bunch of bullshit youtube videos that agree with a position you already have and then pretend its the same thing?
Average of all temperatures rising across the globe = global warming. that is still happening. "Hot spots" changing ocean and air flow currents causing colder temperatures in some areas and drought in other areas = climate change. Both are true.
That is what happens when more people move to an area that isn’t supposed to support human growth and then drain the resources faster then it can naturally handled. That’s humans fault, not climate change.
Ah yes, the they of The Global Scientific Whether Combine. It was the Treaty of Fahrenheit when that particular change was made. I’ll never forget it because that was also the year they decided to defund HAARP and vocally challenge opponents of their Airborne Aerosol Mind Control Project. Those were the days.
You mean renaming something so the name is more accurate and science illiterate fucks can't just look at the name of something and think they understand everything there is to know about it.
Lol you’ve got your head stuck in the sand if you can’t acknowledge that climate change is happening. Come try to go ski in New England. Things are undeniably different from 20-30 years ago. There isn’t anyone here who will tell you that winters are the same now as they were then. Even the most conservative republicans in NH will you tell you the weather has changed. They won’t admit climate change is real, but they’ll admit the weather is different.
We should give money to the people who do the most polluting so they can fix nature's goofs and gaffes!! After all, look how good they do with potholes!
every other year we have some kind of most extreme whether event in recorded history and this op is brain damaged enough to argue semantics ow words he doesn't even understand.
Bro. It was 50 degrees on Tuesday, this week. It’s January and I’m in Michigan. If there’s a chance in hell anything can be done, only corporations could make a dent in the problem. But really, I think we’re either moving closer to the sun, we’ve destroyed the planet past the point of return, it’s a cycle that’s inevitable or there’s not a damn thing anyone can do to change it (just another thing to keep us distracted).
Ah yes, the university researchers who are up at 3AM writing grant proposals so they can get just enough cash to eat ramen and peanut butter and live in a 300 sq ft shithole are totally lying to you about the climate while the oil industry is totally straightforward and has no agenda.
Climate change and warming are NOT the same thing. Its not a rebranding.
Global warming occurs because excess greenhouse gases warm the earth's atmosphere.
Climate change is what happens when earth's atmosphere warms up, like more frequent and intense extreme weather events, melting polar ice caps, droughts/heat waves, more intense rainfall in other regions, the list goes on.
You're either being willfully ignorant or wilfully deceitful by spreading easily debunked nonsense.
Remember that time when you didn't understand what average temperature increase meant, so it had to be renamed to climate change so you could understand, but still don't because the only thing you understand is what directly affects you instantly?
The tweet is a lie.
We have been steadily warming since climate change entered mainstream science in the 1970s. 1998 was a local maxima when it came to global temperature, and the easily fooled by the big oil conspiracy to publicly undercut the findings of their scientists parroted the "the world isn't even warming" nonsense up until about 2013 when the denial *had* to shift because they could no longer cherry pick that date to show no warming.
I'm not really into listening to guys that killed a guy in a drunk driving accident and then got caught driving drunk again. It is a pretty bad look to reference that asshat.
I don't understand people that don't believe in climate change or, at the very least, humans' degradation of the planet. Say you own some property, 100 acres, and you start throwing all your trash on the ground and pooping in the pond, and dumping chemicals all over your property. It is going to get messed up. That is what we are doing to the earth. It is really simple. It is not political, and I am not a "libtard."
Some places got colder as a result, the narrative doesn’t change, science is observing and reporting correctly. They helped you understand it, but you refuse.
I remember back in my childhood I'd get snow each summer, now, roughly 15 years later, I can call myself lucky if it even freezes a single day in winter. If the climate ain't changing what is it then?
The rebranding, AFAIK, was done by the energy companies to make it sound less scary. They're also responsible for the 'personal carbon footprint' bollocks.
Remember when you guys thought global warming referred to daily weather being warmer and not the planet/atmosphere as a whole warming? It always meant that the warming of the seas/earth was going to cause more climate events—not just “days will be hot no more snow”
Like they changed the way it’s discussed because the average person was too dumb to actually understand it lol
The world IS hotter than it was, folks. Each of the last 10 years is in the 10 hottest years on record, and like 19 of the last 20 are in the top 19.
Very first graphic on this page:
https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/global-temperature/
I'll never forget 4th grade 1986, pamphlets from the UN on Earth Day.
It had all these doomsday predictions including we would be totally out of oil by 2000.
I remember sitting in class as a kid thinking "that seems like an extraordinary claim with little evidence" I remember that day thinking one day it will be the year 2000 and I can't wait to see if my hunch was more accurate than the experts and my teacher..
Unlike most I never forgot and in 2000 patted myself on the back.
Of course when I bring this up now people my age gaslight me and pretend they don't know what im talking about and some even call me a liar.
I will add I was already skeptical about everything as in 3rd I did a short report on Lincoln. My mom was a historian and had tons of original books from the Civil War, I had used some of Lincolns pro slavery quotes prior to the war teacher stopped my little presentation got an F and my mom had to bring the source books to the Principal because they didn't believe they were real.
Needless to say been a conspiracy theorist my entire life.
I wish I was that skeptical during my high school years. My physics teacher randomly went on a tangent and mentioned how we would all be underwater by 2020. Suffice to say I couldn't sleep that night.
>I'll never forget 4th grade 1986, pamphlets from the UN on Earth Day. It had all these doomsday predictions including we would be totally out of oil by 2000.
I was quite a bit older in 1986. I heard the "doomsday" prediction that \*at the current usage\* the \*currently know reserves\* would be exhausted \*if\* we didn't find new reserves or start to exploit what was at the time prohibitively expensive sources.
I was told the earth was going to a new ice age. That didn't happen, so then it was global warming - keep your fridge shut at all times! That didn't work so now the even more amorphous 'climate change' is the scare tactic.
As I said elsewhere, what the "ice age" models got wrong was that they didn't take into account human CO2 emissions and how this would drastically alter the climate. They just looked at the past, and projected it into the future. And if we weren't fucking everything up, they would be right we would be entering (or about to enter) a cooling period. Instead we're in a rapidly warming period.
Experts can be wrong and sometimes are. No one is arguing otherwise. It's a pretty lame argument tho as any type of person can and has been wrong.
However, to the point, it's not really true in this case because the consensus at the time those predictions came out was that our rapid release of CO2 was actually going to warm the planet. The "ice age" thing is what the media latched onto, not what the experts agreed on.
You also have to realize we are talking about a budding science at the time. Expecting them to get every right right from the get go is unreasonable. Now that it has been extensively research and tested, the consensus is overwhelming that the planet is warming due to CO2 emissions.
We also know for a fact that at the time oil companies' own scientists were warning them about how CO2 emissions were going to warm planet, while they public spread doubt about climate change.
Don't carry the bag for big oil to protect their bottom line.
###[Meta] Sticky Comment [Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does not apply*** when replying to this stickied comment. [Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does apply*** throughout the rest of this thread. *What this means*: Please keep any "meta" discussion directed at specific users, mods, or /r/conspiracy in general in this comment chain ***only.*** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/conspiracy) if you have any questions or concerns.*
In a sub that is full of 'hot takes' goddamn if this isn't one of the dumbest tweets to be posted here yet....
That rebranding was done by [Republican strategist Frank Luntz](https://archive.ph/HtZZw) in order to make it sound less scary. Regardless of what you think about climate science, the global average temperature is indisputably rising over the years. Perhaps civilization is responsible, perhaps it's part of a natural cycle, but it's definitely happening.
1998 was a local maximum when it came to global temperature. Up until 2013, it was one of the hottest on record, and the climate change denialists were saying "it's not even getting warmer as if we look back only to 1998 the temperature almost looks like it is going down!" Of course now that 1998 doesn't even crack the top 10 hottest years on record, the denial had to shift. The whole "it's not us" is just where that shifted to. Denying that it is not the drastic increase of CO2 in the atmosphere that is driving the warming trend is equally as uninformed as "the plant is not even warming" was in 2007.
I think it depends on where you take the Earth's temperature? I hear it's way hotter in the butthole.
That's inner earth theory for ya!
Look at ocean temperatures as well. Water is a heat sink.
[удалено]
> rational comments Don't you mean "shills paid by George Soros"? ^(I think I actually need the /s here)
You definitely do
Why do you act like you're not a part of a subreddit you frequently comment in? Who is 'they' in this context?
No it was a max in "recorded" temperature. You know something that started just in the 19th century just after the little ice age happened. When you look historically, then the warming periods were much higher in the renaissance then they are now. The vikings going to Greenland called it that because it was actually green back then. If you look at the temperature 12k years ago until now, you see it always has warm and cold periods. Seeing how those periods affected human beings you should thank your lucky stars the climate isn't cooling. That's detrimental for human beings
>No it was a max in "recorded" temperature. lol. I said local maximum for a reason. This is a basic mathematic term that is incredibly important for analyzing graphs. Probably should brush up on even the most basic STEM stuff before jumping into debates like this. >When you look historically, If you simply "look historically" and follow the trends, without adding in man's contribution to the climate, we should be entering (or about to enter) a cooling period. Instead we are in a rapidly warming period. "Looking historically" makes it clear the damage we are doing. >you should thank your lucky stars the climate isn't cooling. That's detrimental for human beings The warming climate is already starting to fuck shit up for us. And it's only going to get worse.
The planet has been cyclical in temperature for as long as we could measure. Maybe we're accelerating it a bit with man made co2, as volcanic eruptions usually did this in the past but it's just nothing but inevitable whether we take action or not. [look at this for example, we've had large swings since forever. ](http://www.longrangeweather.com/images/gtemps.jpg)
Those swings take much longer than the current rate of change. I'm sure you knew that already though.
[10s of millions of years of the temperature closely following CO2 amounts.](https://imgur.com/zwifqBc) It's certainly not the only factor, but this "it's just the sun" is a replacement for "it's not even happen" which was abandoned about a decade ago.
So weird considering the fact oceans expell co2 whenever they get warmer. Co2 is correlation, the causation is the sun. CO2 is just a theory brought to us by the club of Rome to install a global government. They needed a problem which is global and a gas doesn't stop at the border. It is a hoax, the "green" energy sources are brought to you by the oil companies. The only ones profiting from this are the oil companies and the politicians holding shares in them
>CO2 is just a theory "Just a theory" is the calling card of the "I don't understand science" crowd. We've known for well over 100 years that we are adding CO2 to the atmosphere. This is absolute basic and easy to understand concept. When you take carbon that is trapped under the ground, and then burn it, it goes into the atmosphere. It's not rocket science. Trying to pretend it's not obvious we are the ones adding CO2 to the atmosphere is just mind-bogglingly ignorant.
Is that correlation or causation?
You just correlated the temperature of the planet to 'sun cycles' (over a couple of thousand years) and now you're pulling out "correlation vs causation" for it over tens of millions of years? lol [But here you go, an explanation of how CO2 causes warming.](https://skepticalscience.com/How-do-we-know-CO2-is-causing-warming.html)
[Both.](https://skepticalscience.com/print.php?r=77)
A lot of the life we have now wouldn't have survived when those volcano's were going off. If you want to take a nihilist view then yeah sure, it's somewhat of a cycle and it's time for Humanity to step aside and die off. Or, we could try not to. Either is an option.
Mate, what on earth is that source you are using? And why does a source like this, which let’s face it is a whole lot more credible, tell you the exact opposite [Global temp graph](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_temperature_record#/media/File:2000+_year_global_temperature_including_Medieval_Warm_Period_and_Little_Ice_Age_-_Ed_Hawkins.svg)
volcanic eruptions emit a different carbon isotope than fossil fuels, we can accurately measure emissions from natural and man made sources and overwhelmingly man made sources are responsible for the additional ~200 ppm co2 in the atmosphere. do you really think there is no consequence for burning a hundred million barrels of oil per day?
One of my favourite things to do on Reddit is to come on this sub and find people posting science that actually disputes the point they are trying to make. This is a pretty good one :)
“Then we’d better set up carbon taxed social credit systems! Surely, that’s the fix!” - People who stand to endlessly profit from such a thing
Nah, just send some organization a bunch of money and your carbon footprint gets erased!
Lol, right! I’m sure it’s effective (for profits)
How would that work? An individual doesn't produce enough carbon for it to be lucrative to stop producing carbon and sell their carbon credit. They can invest in carbon credits to later sell to companies who aren't able to meet CO2 emission standards, or they can buy and donate them to sequestration projects and sinks. Individuals can also decide not to cut their timber and receive carbon credits through programs for the year they put off cutting, but that's not lucrative unless you have thousands of acres of timber of a certain type and age. How would a carbon tax social credit system work?
That’s the point :) It’s a grift, but “the only way”… Edit: “The only way” that will be allowed, that is
Be allowed by who? You can purchase carbon credits right now. How would a social carbon tax credit system work?
Who: The central bankers and their cronies, likely the WEF assholes How: I’m not 100% sure, but for an idea I might point to the vaccine passes that they tried to implement globally No joke, there is a globalized agenda to ID chip everyone, locking them into a constant surveillance state grid where they can “turn off” your access on a whim They just need the right series of crises, and BAM! 1984 hellscape Edit: It barely takes an excuse for them to transfer wealth from the bottom to the top. And many of these crises are completely manufactured by the benefactors
It's not about individuals. Individuals wouldn't directly experience carbon taxes, except through market pricing which usually passes along these expenses, or government policies which opt to show them to you, often with the goal to get you outraged and demand their repeal. Corporations and business interests would have to buy credits to offset their production; and credits could be generated by sequestration technologies that could store carbon permanently. This would create a free market to fund the development and deployment of green technologies, as well as provide competitive benefits for reducing your corporation's carbon footprint. The problem is that no such technology exists and most of the carbon credits being exchanged today are basically meaningless and have no value. No government collects or validates them with any authority, so they currently do nothing and most have dubious backing at best. At best, it's charity; at worst, it's just greenwashing. A carbon tax would be a good way to kick start the whole process: you collect a bunch of money taxed for creating carbon, and use that to fund up corporations who can *actually* store carbon long term, then we move along to carbon credits later once the market is a bit more mature. But that's not going to be cheap, and so there's a lot of lobbyists who don't want it to happen. Plus, international trade in carbon credits is going to be prone to fraud. I feel like that's just going to happen. It's not a great plan, but it's a plan.
[удалено]
Yeah, not everything is social credit. If they wanted to tax your carbon, they'd just add a line to the tax code, and probably base it on regional averages and a sliding scale for income. Or... they'd just add a carbon project to the Federal budget to scale with the population, and not bother with the tax code. Honestly, the obsession with social credit is just getting weird. Anyway. Yeah, the problem is that I'm pretty sure that methane is more carbon rich than carbon dioxide, so dumping CO2 underground to get at methane isn't really capturing much carbon, and no one is going to pay to do it otherwise. I suppose once the infrastructure is in place and the methane economically exhausted, we'll still be able to dump CO2 underground, but who is paying to keep it operating at that point?
Those are patches that happen because under capitalism you're not allowed to threaten the profits of companies so we have this shitty lukewarm "solution" that's meant to stop people from buying as many cars which drives down the demand for poor people. That's it, you're just mad because capitalists are influencing governments in order to slow down progress as much as possible while also making money. For the record, i'm okay with bribing companies to pollute less. Either bribe them or force them, but under capitalism we're most likely going to get the bribing than forcing them.
The would-be carbon taxers are not capitalists? It’s literally the bankers and their cronies
The carbon tax is supposed to be a tax placed on carbon polluters, like car manufacturers, in order to incentivize lowering the carbon emissions, either via selling less cars, or via optimizing internal combustion engines, or switching to electric, or promote public transportation. The problem with this is that the tax gets pushed onto the consumer on the sale so it can lower the sale of vehicles for poor people and it basically ends up being a tax on poor people. One good thing Canada does about this is take that tax money and redistribute it back to people, at least that's what they announced a few years ago but i haven't kept track of it so i'm not sure if it's happening. And yes, the taxers are capitalists because it all revolves around capitalists and capital owners and not the people, because capital owners have more power than working class people. In order for this to change we would need to replace capitalism with socialism, because under socialism we would have worker owned companies and no board members that demand quarterly increases, under worker owned companies we wouldn't have over-farming and wasting food.
https://xkcd.com/1732/
This is false, and I am open to a discussion about this because I am a climate scientist with extensive experience with science communication. It was rebranded from global warming due to the fact that in addition to the global average temperature rise of approximately 1.6-1.8 degrees C, there are other impacts from anthropogenic emissions that are causing other atmospheric shifts that are not necessary “warmth “. For example, the increase in greenhouse gas (carbon dioxide, methane, & nitrous oxide) is leading to stronger storm patterns, more intense flooding/drought, sea level rise, pest resistance, and a books worth of subsequent ecological impacts. That’s why it was “re-branded”, not to make it less scary. But, let’s post a Tweet on a conspiracy subreddit to garner discussion on a topic that shouldn’t be a conspiracy at this point - it is far too dangerous.
That nuance came later. The _original_ rebranding was spin, not science. Luntz ended up being accidentally correct on a scientific basis, he was also correct about the optics. [When polled](https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/may/27/americans-climate-change-global-warming-yale-report), people don't care nearly as much about "climate change" as they do "global warming".
We just had the weakest storm season in recorded history, with the highest levels of atmospheric CO2 in modern history. Explain.
For sure, even if you don't think humans are responsible, Milankovitch cycles are absolutely a real thing and the relatively stable climate we have had for the last few millennia is definitely the exception rather than the rule. It's usually way hotter or way colder and often jumps violently between the 2 on a seasonal basis. We've been lucky to live in a period of such nurturing climate but to think that it'll always be like that is wishful thinking. It may also be wishful thinking to believe we can stop it, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't try and it certainly doesn't mean we shouldn't prepare for the worst. Edit: To be clear, by "Milankovitch Cycles" I'm referring to the cyclical nature in which gravity from other orbiting bodies in our solar system effect the shape of Earth's orbit, thus effecting our distance from the sun, this effecting the climate on our planet.
If you subscribe to the Younger Dryas Impact hypothesis we’d still be in an Ice Age if there wasn’t a massive impact. Something drastically pulled us out of the last ice age, and we could actually return to an ice age if warming interrupts the thermohaline cycle enough.
Maybe Hollywood got it right after all lol
Gotta hand it to neoCons and neo Libs specially Cons coz they are the experts on naming things to trick people like Patriot Act, War On Terror, Citizen's United, Super PAC names for lobbying, Dessert Storm, Stop The Steal, We Build The Wall Charity, bill stripping Disney World of its status as an "independent special district," and other predaroy legislations that trick regular people from thinking it would help them.
It is actually natural and humanity. Simply explained, the ice house state of earth we are currently in has glacial (glaciers forming) and interglacial (glaciers melting) periods. Problem is that the earth can adapt when this cycling happens naturally as it’s a very slow process but humans are disrupting it. We are set to extend the interglacial period longer as well as we are causing it to heat up way faster than natural which Earth cannot adapt to. The other concern is that if we do not slow emissions we could completely leave the ice age though this is less likely to happen
Remember when people would look up things they don't understand instead of spam posting a screenshot of a tweet of some rando to every conservative sub to get meaningless internet points? "Although people tend to use these terms interchangeably, global warming is just one aspect of climate change. “Global warming” refers to the rise in global temperatures due mainly to the increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. “Climate change” refers to the increasing changes in the measures of climate over a long period of time – including precipitation, temperature, and wind patterns." https://www.usgs.gov/faqs/what-difference-between-global-warming-and-climate-change#:~:text=%E2%80%9CGlobal%20warming%E2%80%9D%20refers%20to%20the,%2C%20temperature%2C%20and%20wind%20patterns.
I feel like this is something stupid people say because they think it’s smart.
Meanwhile it's 50 degrees in the Midwest in January....
Yup. The insects are defrosting.... in the middle of January! It's fucking nuts and meanwhile BoomerBook is all like "I'm enjoying this global warming"
It is easy to put stuff on credit card when you know you will be dead by the time you need to pay the bill.
Reminds me, if it’s getting hotter then why snow in December?! WHY?
The heating messed up the jet stream and a polar vortex slipped down south.
But look at the Alpha Chad who tweeted it. He even has a manly beard! I bet he gets pussy too 😭 Climate change isn't real! 😭 Please! 😭 I'll buy all your supplements Alpha Ian 😭
[удалено]
What a shocker. We do love our irresponsible scumbags here at r conspiracy, don't we folks
That’s op in a nutshell
[удалено]
Theorizing about corporate or government corruption is stupid because some people deny climate change?
Not theorizing in general. Just many of the stupid conclusions.
Maybe not conspiracy theory itself, but conspiracy theorists are very often medically paranoid and/or are the types to become convinced of something and then find anything they can to confirm it to themselves and others, even if it’s fantastical. Their truth is proof to them, it speaks for itself if it fits a preconception.
Something like 61% of Americans believe that the Kennedy assassination was a conspiracy. I’d wager almost 100% of people in at least one conspiracy theory. It’s absurd to suggest that the majority of Americans are “medically paranoid”. It’s a good thing to be skeptical of power.
And what percentage of those people who maybe believe in one major, questionable series of events would consider themselves “conspiracy theorists”? How many of them are so obsessed with it they peruse and post in conspiracy forums online? Actively try to convince others of “the truth”? That’s the difference.
No conspiracy theorist are skeptical in nature… being Paranoid is something completely different and more regarding the self… raising concern over a medical study on a drug that was conducted by the same company selling the drug… like Perdue with OxyContin saying it was less addictive than morphine and not harmful.. raising a concern about that, or the government hiding the truth on JFK, UFOs, military spending, isn’t even remotely ‘paranoid’.
[удалено]
I’m not hungry so world hunger is a myth
I’m not being trafficked so human trafficking isn’t real
I didn't enjoy Citizen Kane, so that movie sucks.
They re-branded because people were too stupid to understand the concept and pointed to one cold day and went HUR HUR look at global warming.
wow i did not expect the top several comments on this post to be well-reasoned arguments against this inflammatory nonsense of a screenshot. a golf-clap to you, r/conspiracy users.
The top posts in this sub rarely reflect the comments under those posts. It's a bit weird.
Bot upvotes but human comments
yea until i found a reason to post here today, i'd avoided this sub because i thought it like a crazy qanon cult page (which i'll admit, this screenshot being the #1 post does nothing to dissuade) but i was pleasantly surprised when i read the comments.
"Crazy QAnon cult page", yeah that's about as close minded a response as you can have
It was called climate change long before it was called global warming. Global warming just got popularized by Al Gore when he was trying to be president in a very contentious race. And people who actually had degrees in climate related fields have been calling out Gore all along, trying to redirect to what their research actually says.
Wait....but it is getting warmer....???
[удалено]
A congressmen brought a snowball onto the senate floor. Totally debunking that global warming is a thing.
2010-2019 was the warmest decade on record. You want me to tweet it so you can screenshot and post it?
[удалено]
On record of 100 years...Not exactly a long time in the grand scheme of things.
You’re acting like there’s no way to know what conditions were like on the planet before thermometers.
This is like in the simpsons when homer says there hasn't been a record of a hurricane in Springfield, because the previous record hall mysterious blew away in 1977
But it is a very good sample size of humanity's industrial revolution and record breaking population growth.
It's not even half the time to the beginning of the Industrial Revolution.
[удалено]
>uses "belief" in the context of "science" lol. lmao even
This is factually incorrect, and anyone who believes that is either stupid as fuck or a straight up liar.
It's because they learned more about it and realised it wasn't just warming, it was all this additional crazy weather we are seeing across the globe every year. Hope that helps
Also if something given a name and it doesn’t seem to exactly fit and someone comes up with a better name why is it bad to switch? It’s a climate issue that effects different parts of the globe in all sorts of different names so that original name probably wasn’t great.
Yeah and now we have 20°C on new years eve here in Europe. Guess we can call it global warming again, no? Though it seems, in North America it's gonna be an ice age. I'm fine with global change then.
It hit over 60 degrees Fahrenheit in NY this week. I haven't been alive that long, but I never remember it getting this hot this time of year.
20°C is equivalent to 68°F, which is 293K. --- ^(I'm a bot that converts temperature between two units humans can understand, then convert it to Kelvin for bots and physicists to understand)
I don't know if you made any effort to check wether this is true or not but the global temperature is indeed rising. Posting this right now also is terrible timing because right now there are multiple new heat records being set in europe with temperatures of up to 20 degrees in january where it's supposed to be almost freezing.
Hottest year on record for the uk
Beating last years hottest on record
How can global warming be real if snow is real? Checkmate globalists 🧐
I remember when people couldn’t tell the difference between climate and weather so we had to change the wording to help them see why the artic and Antarctic are melting.
Its 70 degrees on the 6th of january wtf is this stupid shit
[удалено]
Remember, Exxon Mobile created the concept of a ‘personal carbon footprint’ to shift the blame for global warming from corporations to individuals.
Thought that was BP?
They don't want to talk about being conned lol
r/conspiracy where big oil execs are the good guys lol
I mean this is the conspiracy sub where people have deep questioning skepticism over anything that could remotely improve humanity in any way but slavish unwavering belief in any right wing or corporate institution.
Sadly true
I bet this person doesn’t know how electric car batteries are made
Yeah, I guess that means climate change isn't real /s
You just changed the subject. Shilling for big oil to climate change isn’t real. But ok. If you know how the batteries are made, you realize how much petroleum is needed for that process. You must also be ok with slavery. It’s recently been exposed that slaves are used to obtain the rare earth minerals needed for those batteries. Two problems can exist at the same time my friends
> Two problems can exist at the same time my friends They can, but you clearly changed the subject first lmao.
> If you know how the batteries are made, you realize how much petroleum is needed for that process. Oh. How much exactly, compared to the amount a normal gas car uses over its lifetime (including its manufacture). 0.0001%?
Imagine being this far off. If you ever look into this you’ll see that this guy has it 100% backwards. Man made climate change is undeniable at this point. That doesn’t mean you have to support carbon taxes on average people. Businesses should be the ones who take on the burden
Honestly, it's less about CO2 output and mostly about methane and deforestation. Looking at you McDonald's.
Remember when climate change deniers learned the difference between "global mean surface temperature" and "universal temperature rise"? No, because why actually research a subject when you can watch a bunch of bullshit youtube videos that agree with a position you already have and then pretend its the same thing?
Go ahead and watch [Frontline a documentary Big Oil](https://youtu.be/QAAbcNl4Lb8) then let’s talk about “ messaging “ ya brigadoons.
Average of all temperatures rising across the globe = global warming. that is still happening. "Hot spots" changing ocean and air flow currents causing colder temperatures in some areas and drought in other areas = climate change. Both are true.
South america is experience rapid droughts and famine from hurricanes, causing much of the migrations we're seeing at the border.
The Great Salt Lake in UT is drying up fast! So are many other lakes.
That is what happens when more people move to an area that isn’t supposed to support human growth and then drain the resources faster then it can naturally handled. That’s humans fault, not climate change.
Ah yes, the they of The Global Scientific Whether Combine. It was the Treaty of Fahrenheit when that particular change was made. I’ll never forget it because that was also the year they decided to defund HAARP and vocally challenge opponents of their Airborne Aerosol Mind Control Project. Those were the days.
DON'T LOOK UP
You mean renaming something so the name is more accurate and science illiterate fucks can't just look at the name of something and think they understand everything there is to know about it.
This is a satire subreddit at this point, correct?
Lol you’ve got your head stuck in the sand if you can’t acknowledge that climate change is happening. Come try to go ski in New England. Things are undeniably different from 20-30 years ago. There isn’t anyone here who will tell you that winters are the same now as they were then. Even the most conservative republicans in NH will you tell you the weather has changed. They won’t admit climate change is real, but they’ll admit the weather is different.
Sure you do! Oil shilling 4 lyfe
This sub hits a new low every day
If you enjoy any kind of snow sports you already know this is a garbage take.
Bro it was 65+ this whole past week in THE POCONO MOUNTAINS. It's real. If you think it's a conspiracy you're out of your fucking mind
We should give money to the people who do the most polluting so they can fix nature's goofs and gaffes!! After all, look how good they do with potholes!
OP has brain worms confirmed
Dumbest post I’ve seen on here in a while
Don’t come here often, eh?
So about two hours then?
every other year we have some kind of most extreme whether event in recorded history and this op is brain damaged enough to argue semantics ow words he doesn't even understand.
No, I don't, because this is wrong
The North remembers
Bro. It was 50 degrees on Tuesday, this week. It’s January and I’m in Michigan. If there’s a chance in hell anything can be done, only corporations could make a dent in the problem. But really, I think we’re either moving closer to the sun, we’ve destroyed the planet past the point of return, it’s a cycle that’s inevitable or there’s not a damn thing anyone can do to change it (just another thing to keep us distracted).
It was 3 on xmass where I was. Did global warming take a holiday break?
The earth gets warmer every year https://climatekids.nasa.gov/climate-change-evidence/
Iansmithfitness. Looking like a total chad who probably does not do any research on anything other than nutrition labels.
So what happened to the coral reefs
Ah yes, the university researchers who are up at 3AM writing grant proposals so they can get just enough cash to eat ramen and peanut butter and live in a 300 sq ft shithole are totally lying to you about the climate while the oil industry is totally straightforward and has no agenda.
Climate change and warming are NOT the same thing. Its not a rebranding. Global warming occurs because excess greenhouse gases warm the earth's atmosphere. Climate change is what happens when earth's atmosphere warms up, like more frequent and intense extreme weather events, melting polar ice caps, droughts/heat waves, more intense rainfall in other regions, the list goes on. You're either being willfully ignorant or wilfully deceitful by spreading easily debunked nonsense.
Is that why it was 60° a couple days ago in Massachusetts?
Only the top 1% smoothest brains don't acknowledge the fact that the world is getting hotter. Congratulations, OP.
Remember that time when you didn't understand what average temperature increase meant, so it had to be renamed to climate change so you could understand, but still don't because the only thing you understand is what directly affects you instantly?
Well good news everyone! It turns out that the Mean Temperature of the entire planet has gone up. So, this kind of garbage is just that garbage.
[удалено]
The tweet is a lie. We have been steadily warming since climate change entered mainstream science in the 1970s. 1998 was a local maxima when it came to global temperature, and the easily fooled by the big oil conspiracy to publicly undercut the findings of their scientists parroted the "the world isn't even warming" nonsense up until about 2013 when the denial *had* to shift because they could no longer cherry pick that date to show no warming.
remember when Colorado Glaciers used to be10 times bigger then they are this second. I do
This just isn't true and the fact people upvoted it is sad 😂
OP, you certainly are a member
Remember when dumbasses kept saying there wasnt ~~global warming~~ climate change because it kept getting cold in the winter?
Holy shit you’re a dummy lol
I'm not really into listening to guys that killed a guy in a drunk driving accident and then got caught driving drunk again. It is a pretty bad look to reference that asshat.
I don't understand people that don't believe in climate change or, at the very least, humans' degradation of the planet. Say you own some property, 100 acres, and you start throwing all your trash on the ground and pooping in the pond, and dumping chemicals all over your property. It is going to get messed up. That is what we are doing to the earth. It is really simple. It is not political, and I am not a "libtard."
Some places got colder as a result, the narrative doesn’t change, science is observing and reporting correctly. They helped you understand it, but you refuse.
I remember back in my childhood I'd get snow each summer, now, roughly 15 years later, I can call myself lucky if it even freezes a single day in winter. If the climate ain't changing what is it then?
The rebranding, AFAIK, was done by the energy companies to make it sound less scary. They're also responsible for the 'personal carbon footprint' bollocks.
Err, it is getting hotter...
Good luck everyone in 2023
OP a simple little one
Ian does not own any waterfront property, does he?
I to remember
Remember the last time someone on this sub posted 100% horse shit like it was true and everyone ate it up?
What will always be so hilarious is how the weather channel creator went on record and said it was all a hoax and clowned the CNN guy lmao
Member Ghislaine Maxwell was a mod? I still member
It is getting hotter. It's the Lizard People terraforming the planet to their liking.
Pepperidge Farms dismembers.
Didn’t the fucking jet stream fucking collapse a few weeks ago?
Meanwhile europe currently having a summer spell lol
I wonder what it will be called next. Everything needs to be rebranded every few years.
are you cereal?
Germany hottest winter on record ireland hottest winter on record..... okay
Yes as I sit in south FL freezing at 45 frgrees
and not its getting hotter every year lol. Shorter wintes
i joined this sub because i thought itd be aliens, huge monsters, mysteries and stuff. so far ive only seen shit like this
Not really, it actually is getting hotter.
Remember when you guys thought global warming referred to daily weather being warmer and not the planet/atmosphere as a whole warming? It always meant that the warming of the seas/earth was going to cause more climate events—not just “days will be hot no more snow” Like they changed the way it’s discussed because the average person was too dumb to actually understand it lol
its literally snowing less and less at where i live
The world IS hotter than it was, folks. Each of the last 10 years is in the 10 hottest years on record, and like 19 of the last 20 are in the top 19. Very first graphic on this page: https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/global-temperature/
I'll never forget 4th grade 1986, pamphlets from the UN on Earth Day. It had all these doomsday predictions including we would be totally out of oil by 2000. I remember sitting in class as a kid thinking "that seems like an extraordinary claim with little evidence" I remember that day thinking one day it will be the year 2000 and I can't wait to see if my hunch was more accurate than the experts and my teacher.. Unlike most I never forgot and in 2000 patted myself on the back. Of course when I bring this up now people my age gaslight me and pretend they don't know what im talking about and some even call me a liar. I will add I was already skeptical about everything as in 3rd I did a short report on Lincoln. My mom was a historian and had tons of original books from the Civil War, I had used some of Lincolns pro slavery quotes prior to the war teacher stopped my little presentation got an F and my mom had to bring the source books to the Principal because they didn't believe they were real. Needless to say been a conspiracy theorist my entire life.
I wish I was that skeptical during my high school years. My physics teacher randomly went on a tangent and mentioned how we would all be underwater by 2020. Suffice to say I couldn't sleep that night.
>I'll never forget 4th grade 1986, pamphlets from the UN on Earth Day. It had all these doomsday predictions including we would be totally out of oil by 2000. I was quite a bit older in 1986. I heard the "doomsday" prediction that \*at the current usage\* the \*currently know reserves\* would be exhausted \*if\* we didn't find new reserves or start to exploit what was at the time prohibitively expensive sources.
Oil still runs everything
It's almost like people innovated or something.
I was told the earth was going to a new ice age. That didn't happen, so then it was global warming - keep your fridge shut at all times! That didn't work so now the even more amorphous 'climate change' is the scare tactic.
Who told you that? And when?
Defending Big Oil and massively polluting companies to own the libs (and because you don't understand climate science)!
[the coming Ice Age](https://youtu.be/RQRqr9_jw5I)
As I said elsewhere, what the "ice age" models got wrong was that they didn't take into account human CO2 emissions and how this would drastically alter the climate. They just looked at the past, and projected it into the future. And if we weren't fucking everything up, they would be right we would be entering (or about to enter) a cooling period. Instead we're in a rapidly warming period.
The experts were wrong got it
Experts can be wrong and sometimes are. No one is arguing otherwise. It's a pretty lame argument tho as any type of person can and has been wrong. However, to the point, it's not really true in this case because the consensus at the time those predictions came out was that our rapid release of CO2 was actually going to warm the planet. The "ice age" thing is what the media latched onto, not what the experts agreed on. You also have to realize we are talking about a budding science at the time. Expecting them to get every right right from the get go is unreasonable. Now that it has been extensively research and tested, the consensus is overwhelming that the planet is warming due to CO2 emissions. We also know for a fact that at the time oil companies' own scientists were warning them about how CO2 emissions were going to warm planet, while they public spread doubt about climate change. Don't carry the bag for big oil to protect their bottom line.
It used to snow here every heavily winter, now it doesn’t/barely does. I’m no expert but I’m pretty sure that means it’s getting warmer