/mlpol/ - My Little Politics

>Climate change is reaching the point of no return
Please qualify that statement
>cursor drifts toward horsepussy

>>201546
The climate always changes, so what?

>>201546
Reminder the world was in its death throws during the little ice age and was only saved by europeans burning fossil fuels releasing the trapped carbon back into the air where it can be used to grow plants, and that we still have not reached optimum carbon levels for plant growth.
Bring on the horse pussy boys.

>>201558
This time it is our fault and it is causing damage to the environment such as desertificiation and acidification of the oceans. Something needs to be done.

>>201562
We should press jews into biodeisel for a cheap abundant alternative fuel source.

>>201563
I think they would be more useful as soap and lampshaded.

>>201562
Welcome to Mlpol. Have you tried the horsepussy?

>>201565
I've been here since April fools faggot. Just because the left believes in climate change doesn't mean it isn't real. Also the solution I am proposing doesn't involve crippling our economy.

>>201570
So, you wouldn't mind validating these statements then
>Climate change is reaching the point of no return
>This time it is our fault

>>201562
You are in for a surprise!

>Solar activity predicted to fall 60% in 2030s, to 'mini ice age' levels: Sun driven by double dynamo
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/07/150709092955.htm

Pic: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Ice_Age

I'm just going to leave this here...

>>201573
This may not be such a joke. Economic activity will fall, civilizations could teeter.

>>201575
Who said I was joking?

>>201576
Actually I was thinking about the looming Little Ice Age could do those things. Ignore me.

>>201574
>Sources:
>IPCC Fifth Assessment Report, Summary for Policymakers

>B.D. Santer et.al., “A search for human influences on the thermal structure of the atmosphere,” Nature vol 382, 4 July 1996, 39-46

>Gabriele C. Hegerl, “Detecting Greenhouse-Gas-Induced Climate Change with an Optimal Fingerprint Method,” Journal of Climate, v. 9, October 1996, 2281-2306

>V. Ramaswamy et.al., “Anthropogenic and Natural Influences in the Evolution of Lower Stratospheric Cooling,” Science 311 (24 February 2006), 1138-1141

>B.D. Santer et.al., “Contributions of Anthropogenic and Natural Forcing to Recent Tropopause Height Changes,” Science vol. 301 (25 July 2003), 479-483.

>In the 1860s, physicist John Tyndall recognized the Earth's natural greenhouse effect and suggested that slight changes in the atmospheric composition could bring about climatic variations. In 1896, a seminal paper by Swedish scientist Svante Arrhenius first predicted that changes in the levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere could substantially alter the surface temperature through the greenhouse effect.

>National Research Council (NRC), 2006. Surface Temperature Reconstructions For the Last 2,000 Years. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.

>http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/GlobalWarming/page3.php

>https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/indicators/

>http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/temperature

>http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp

>https://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/news/20170118/

>Levitus, S.; Antonov, J.; Boyer, T.; Baranova, O.; Garcia, H.; Locarnini, R.; Mishonov, A.; Reagan, J.; Seidov, D.; Yarosh, E.; Zweng, M. (2017). NCEI ocean heat content, temperature anomalies, salinity anomalies, thermosteric sea level anomalies, halosteric sea level anomalies, and total steric sea level anomalies from 1955 to present calculated from in situ oceanographic subsurface profile data (NCEI Accession 0164586). Version 4.4. NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information. Dataset. doi:10.7289/V53F4MVP

>https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.php?feature=7159

>National Snow and Ice Data Center

>World Glacier Monitoring Service

>National Snow and Ice Data Center

>Robinson, D. A., D. K. Hall, and T. L. Mote. 2014. MEaSUREs Northern Hemisphere Terrestrial Snow Cover Extent Daily 25km EASE-Grid 2.0, Version 1. [Indicate subset used]. Boulder, Colorado USA. NASA National Snow and Ice Data Center Distributed Active Archive Center. doi: https://doi.org/10.5067/MEASURES/CRYOSPHERE/nsidc-0530.001. [Accessed 9/21/18].

>http://nsidc.org/cryosphere/sotc/snow_extent.html

>Rutgers University Global Snow Lab, Data History Accessed September 21, 2018.
R. S. Nerem, B. D. Beckley, J. T. Fasullo, B. D. Hamlington, D. Masters and G. T. Mitchum. Climate-change–driven accelerated sea-level rise detected in the altimeter era. PNAS, 2018 DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1717312115
https://nsidc.org/cryosphere/sotc/sea_ice.html

>USGCRP, 2017: Climate Science Special Report: Fourth National Climate Assessment, Volume I [Wuebbles, D.J., D.W. Fahey, K.A. Hibbard, D.J. Dokken, B.C. Stewart, and T.K. Maycock (eds.)]. U.S. Global Change Research Program, Washington, DC, USA, 470 pp, doi: 10.7930/J0J964J6

>http://www.pmel.noaa.gov/co2/story/What+is+Ocean+Acidification%3F

>http://www.pmel.noaa.gov/co2/story/Ocean+Acidification

>C. L. Sabine et.al., “The Oceanic Sink for Anthropogenic CO2,” Science vol. 305 (16 July 2004), 367-371

>Copenhagen Diagnosis, p. 36.

Let's play spot the jew!

Here is a more important question: how much energy and sacrifice should humanity put into a dynamically changing environment to keep it stable and unchanging? How much tax should we pay? How much convenience should we give up?

>>201574
https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/climate-change-global-warming-earth-cooling-media-bias/
A quick Google search seems to debunk global warming stories from NASA, as their own research is providing counter evidence.

>>201581
>NASA
You win!

>>201581
Mate I trust NASA more than investors.com when it comes to Earth's climate. I see no reason why the right can't adopt this issue.

>>201580
We should invest in solutions that require us to give up as little as possible. We should also try to do as little damage to the environment as possible.

>>201584
NASA is the one finding the counter evidence to global warming. Take it up with them.

>>201584
I would say psychologically greenies are close to lefties. So you will need data which doesn't have opponents. Lots of global cooling data ( >>201581 ) and predictions ( >>201572 ) around. And so we all get to pick with our personal bias deciding.

So since it isn't clear the right will lean right.

>>201558
>The climate always changes, so what?
There is going to be billions of "climate refugees" this time.

>>201561
>little ice age
As far as I know this was caused by a massive volcanic eruption which threw up dust, and ended when that settled out of the atmosphere.

>>201580
And who should make the sacrifice, and to what extent? Europe, China, the developing world? Good question.

>>201584
>I see no reason why the right can't adopt this issue.
As with so many other things, it comes down to having different facts and a different worldview. It's funny (not really) that this is something that has such a sharp left/right divide in the US, but not in Europe to the same extent. People just have access to different sources of information.

>>201575
Reminder that the dark ages were caused by the sudden cooling that shifted the people in the roman empire to collapse

>>201574
>people paid to find that climate change is man made find that climate change is man made
In other news, cigarettes have no harmful effects on humans

>>201607
Look into Richard A Muller and Berkeley Earth if you want to see what an independent team lead by a skeptic come up with.

>>201546
As for the actual OP question, it's going to happen.
We somehow seem to have returned to an age of "titans of industry" that go off and do whatever they feel like, and something like your example of iron fertilization isn't even that costly as I understand it. Eventually someone will just go ahead and do it on a large scale. We might even see some things (marginally effective or mostly useless things) paid for by corporate PR budgets.

NASA and the NOAA fuckers lied to us about the "97% consensus" meme. But that doesnt mean theres a body of research that supports GW theory. However, even if the left are a bunch of lunatics for beliving it, it makes them more ambitious for clean energy than us. The future of clean energy will be in the hands of the jews while republicans sit back and laugh about "haha muh climate hoax".

>>201603
309 year solar cycle. It exists.

Climate change and environmentalism in general is a religion propagated to enrich national and global governments with taxation, delaying bankruptcy due to entitlements. By stifling Western industry it serves as an indirect wealth transfer to the developing world which does not need to abide by such terms strictly.

>>201546
>Climate change is reaching the point of no return
I heard this before. But the propaganda pushed by the (((UN))) is deceptive.
And the answer is right before us: mass human culling.
Does RAHOWA ring a bell?

>>201603
I, for one, welcome the long dark and the cold.

>>201572
>>201622
pic.

---

>NASA Sees Climate Cooling Trend Thanks to Low Sun Activity
...
>“We see a cooling trend,” said Martin Mlynczak of NASA’s Langley Research Center. “High above Earth’s surface, near the edge of space, our atmosphere is losing heat energy. If current trends continue, it could soon set a Space Age record for cold.”
...
>“Right now, (TCI) is very low indeed,” said Mlynczak. “SABER is currently measuring 33 billion Watts of infrared power from NO. That’s ten times smaller than we see during more active phases of the solar cycle."
...
>The new NASA findings are in line with studies released by UC-San Diego and Northumbria University in Great Britain last year, both of which predict a Grand Solar Minimum in coming decades due to low sunspot activity. Both studies predicted sun activity similar to the Maunder Minimum of the mid-17th to early 18th centuries, which coincided to a time known as the Little Ice Age, during which temperatures were much lower than those of today.

>If all of this seems as if NASA is contradicting itself, you’re right — sort of. After all, NASA also reported last week that Arctic sea ice was at its sixth lowest level since measuring began. Isn’t that a sure sign of global warming?

>All any of this “proves” is that we have, at best, a cursory understanding of Earth’s incredibly complex climate system. So when mainstream media and carbon-credit salesman Al Gore breathlessly warn you that we must do something about climate change, it’s all right to step back, take a deep breath, and realize that we don’t have the knowledge, skill or resources to have much effect on the Earth’s climate. God — and that big yellow ball of light in the sky — have much more impact on our climate than we ever could.
https://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/environment/item/30214-nasa-sees-climate-cooling-trend-thanks-to-low-sun-activity

---

>Study: Ice sheets may melt rapidly in response to soot from distant volcanoes
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/10/25/study-ice-sheets-may-melt-rapidly-in-response-to-soot-from-distant-volcanoes/

>Surprise: Greenland ice gets a melt assist from Earth's hot mantle below
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/08/12/surprise-greenland-ice-gets-a-melt-assist-from-earths-hot-mantle-below/

---

You'll need to factor in the Earth's heat, solar output, natural green gases, and then human effects. Good luck with that. Another factor is that global cooling could shrink the crust, causing gaps for magma to rise, leading to land heating, volcanoes etc. The system is significantly more complicated than the sales pitch to get more taxes from people.

>>201546
Even if climate change was an actual thing that wasn't being bullshitted to the public at large to excuse more taxes, it's the developing world that's doing the most damage.

Nuclear. Fucking. Power. Dump research grants into figuring out Thorium reactors and recycling waste as more reactor fuel. Don't build reactors on tectonically unstable landmasses like the ring of fucking fire. Don't build reactors close to the coast and then skimp on the sea walls like the nips did. Don't build reactors and skimp on safety features to wring out a few more dollars like three mile island. Don't build reactors and then refuse to maintain them for forty fucking years because communism thinks soviet engineering lasts forever. It's that fucking simple.

>>201779
I agree with what you're saying, but it's important to differentiate climate change and anthropogenic climate change, or climate change that's the result of human influence. The one thing that we can say about our climate is that it is always changing. Our planet has gone through warm periods and ice ages, and will do so again. The very presence of icecaps was uncommon for most of our planet's existence. Current trends seem to indicate that reduced solar activity will be sending us into another cold period.

On small scales, we can observe scenarios where human activity has affected the local climate. Most notably situations where deforestation has dramatically changed the local ecosystem, in turn affecting the average humidity levels in the local air and leading to the shrinkage of nearby glaciers not due to excessive melting but instead due to an reduction in precipitation that would normally replenish the ice.

But when it comes to large scale global influence of the climate, I am thoroughly unconvinced that humanity is a driving force. I'm confident that the sun is the most prominent driving source since it is the origin of almost all of the energy that enters our climate system.

I'm all for protecting the environment, but 99% of "climate saving" plans are ludicrously expensive and by their own admission would do fuck-all to counteract their expected catastrophes. They're just excuses to virtue signal, lower the quality of life in the civilized world, and redistribute wealth via carbon shekels.

Fuck yes for nuclear power. In its current state is is by far our cleanest and safest power source on the planet. Daily reminder that wind and solar are far deadlier than nuclear per gigawatt hour even with the most ludicrously high estimates of Chernobyl. We can make it cleaner and safer if idiots would stop standing in its way.

>>201836
Small scale, certainly, but local changes will always correct themselves over an extremely long period of time. Desertification for example will partially reverse in a cold snap due to less ionising radiation boiling everything so there's never any humidity, allowing vegetation to start reclaiming the land. I'm personally more worried about the Krill populations, we either need to stop the developing nations from dumping shit in the oceans (because yes, the likes of India and China are responsible for most of it, not western nations as eco activists would have you believe) or start hunting whales again to help get their population numbers back up. The loss of Krill populations can and will have a catastrophic long term effect on the ecosystem, similar to bees and bats.

Last time the sun went through a period of low activity, the french decided to decapitate a bunch of people. There were lower crop yields, at least closer to the poles, and there will be again. As far as I know, this cold period is looking to be worse than the one back then.

Solar panels require highly toxic metals to make and degrade fast and wind requires large scale deforestation for a meager return on power produced, yes, it's astounding how few are actually aware of this and buy into green energy anyway. Solar has its uses, but as a general power supply for hundreds of millions? Fuck right off. Nuclear is far from ideal, but it's the best we currently have, and focusing on it will force innovation in that area to make them even better and safer than they are currently. Clouds of vapour are much better to put in the atmosphere than clouds of exhaust. Of course, that then screws over a significant portion of the oil industry doesn't it, and we can't have that.

>>201838
Right. I just think that it's important to not fall into their weasel word traps that they try to use to make us look stupid and uninformed. Climate change demonstrably happens and you'd be hard pressed to find any scientist that would claim that it doesn't. Humanity also has some level of impact on the climate since we are a part of the system. The magnitude of our impact is what we question.