I was gonna say "sounds like my Facebook friends talking about climate change" aaaaaaaand then I read the bottom. Good show sir.
The controversy is more over how much of it is man made vs natural celestial cycles.
@Reach4God, but there's like, 18 shjtloads of evidence suggesting that it's man made
@Reach4God, it's all man made. Made up by Jina!
@ieatu, While trying to stay neutral, do consider that at least 17 of those 18 have been proven to be tweaked or otherwise faked to look more like it is man made.
@Donald Trump, huge Jina! It's pronounced "Jina!"
@Reach4God, Maybe there should be a controversy if there weren't any facts, information, documents, or evidence relating to man's overall involvement to global warming. But there is, and out involvement is tenfold the size of natural celestial cycles. The ONLY controversy there should be is how will we resolve the situation.
@Reach4God, that's bull.
@Sloppy Dangle, being an environmental science major, you sir deserve the highest of fives
@Baby Cthulhu, please help us from ourselves mr.science guy, please
@Reach4God, that's not true. The ones that have been tweaked to appeal to a narrative are the ones that say humans aren't impacting the overall change in climate. Does the world naturally have influxes between glacial and inter-glacial periods? Yes. But the global climate has increased by 1 degree in just the last 100 years. Which may not seem like a lot when in a living room, but at the global scale; it has severe consequences. The coral reefs are shrinking, and dying do to the increase in ocean temperatures; and there have been far more hurricane events.
@ieatu, you mean the evidence that keeps being proven false or made up?
@Sloppy Dangle, http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2011/11/23/climategate-2-0-new-e-mails-rock-the-global-warming-debate/#f7122e9988d6
Whether you choose to believe it or not, this is an example of why there are skeptics of the issue.
@ieatu, evidence that was altered, taken from weather stations that don't exist, etc. And flat out lies. Statements released about temperatures and ice caps that satellite data immediately proves isn't true... It's a complicated issue, but scientists have ruined it in their over eagerness to prove it.
Decades ago climate scientists we're saying we needed to through carbon into the air or the world would freeze over... They have a history of making things up or at the very least not knowing what they are talking about.
@ThatGuyx79, do elaborate on what evidence is being made or proven to be false? Or did you simple hear this from another person who heard it from another person? Because that isn't credible.
@Reach4God, that's not the controversy. The controversy is over how drastic the outcome of it will be
@Reach4God, um...no....anyone that denies man made climate change is suffering from somethinf
Okay, I looked at your link, now look at mine. http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/solutions/fight-misinformation/debunking-misinformation-stolen-emails-climategate.html
You're link was about an opinion of a writer. Their were no actual facts. It says on the page "Opinions expressed by Forbes Contributors are their own.". So your link had no merit and your comments have no solid background. Opinions are not facts. Please do your research better. K, thanks.
@Sloppy Dangle, this was supposed to be to @Reach4God.
@Reach4God, Okay, I looked at your link, now look at mine. http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/solutions/fight-misinformation/debunking-misinformation-stolen-emails-climategate.html You're link was about an opinion of a writer. Their were no actual facts. It says on the page "Opinions expressed by Forbes Contributors are their own.". So your link had no merit and your comments have no solid background. Opinions are not facts. Please do your research better. K, thanks.
@ieatu, a lot of it is made from the gases coming from slaughterhouses and our cars
@ieatu, who cares if its made were f*cked if its natural were still f*cked no way out
@Sloppy Dangle, here's a question. If climate change is man made and the science settled, why has the name changed from global warming to climate change, and almost all the "scientific predictions" of the consequences all been proven wrong?
@Oujosh29, Do explain to me what predictions were wrong.
Climate change isn't just mankind's fault. Mankind is the larger part of the dilemma (much larger), but nature has its own part inside it. Those terms haven't replaced each other, they are simply different meanings involved with both terms. Look them up if you want to know what they exactly mean. People still use the terms global warming, its just not as common as climate change anymore.
@Sloppy Dangle, I think that you are being quite aggressive towards people that are being quite civil... In any case, I don't believe that any of us are scientists with credited degrees with written theories that have become scientific laws lol I do believe mankind should lessen its tremendous output of greenhouse gases, but who am I to say how much impact that will have on the world and nature
@Reach4God, okay, guys, here is a thought... Just throwing this out there (I was high when I thought this so don't ask)... Okay so we obviously know that our time schedule of a year is slightly off from the actual time it takes the Earth to go around the sun.. So what if over the many many many many years we have been counting our time has gotten so off that it just seems like winter is coming late and stuff like that because our calendars are now off by so many days? Eh? Eh? Any takers?
@Sloppy Dangle, 1) it was predicted the himalayas would be snow free by now, they have normal snow levels 2) it was predicted new york would be under water (its not) 3) polar bears would be extinct (their populations are increasing). Honestly, at this point it might be easier to list the predictions that did come true.
@Oujosh29, For the Himalayas, I believe you are referring to the IPCC's 2035 prediction. You are wrong. They said the Himalayas will be snow free by 2035, not by today's date. Also, they said that IPPC 2035 prediction was not even accurate, they said they will expect it to be snow free later that 2035. Here is a link for evidence about climate change in the Himalayas http://www.icimod.org/?q=11326. For New York, yes it was predicted for the area to be underwater and it still is predicted. Just because it hasn't happened yet doesn't mean it is false. For the bears, simply type in "are polar bears endangered" into google - you will see instant results that you are completely wrong and that the polar bears are decreasing in pop. Honestly, at this point it might be easier for you to understand the difference between opinion vs fact.
@EVILdrPORKCHOP3, I apologize for being aggressive on funnypics. However, I consider climate change to real and factual, just as much as I consider monkeys to have hair. It is a fact, and some people treat the subject as if it's someone's opinion. And it doesn't matter if you're scientist or not, you can still understand the concept of climate change being a fact.
@RogueKnight, in the case of the satellite images you may be referencing, one area of Antarctica grew dramatically, but other areas also shrank dramatically, enough to offset the gain
@Reach4God, it's a business. Does man have some impact? Of course but to what real degree? Seriously, the numbers do get skewed to favor the research because who is going to fund something that is losing credibility? Same with all professions anymore. When there are announcements that normally lead with " The Data suggests" you know they are nearing the end of their funding. Then the media runs off with it suggesting that it's fact and the public gobbles it up.
@Reach4God, nope. The cause, while important, is not the controversy. The controversy is what action we should take (those who have read the facts and understand the reality) vs those who deny any problem, and seek to stop any intervention that hurts their profits
@Sloppy Dangle, in your anger you forgot that skepticism is a fundamental part of science.
@Baby Cthulhu, I think something that is a bit more of a pressing matter is ocean acidification. It's leading to most of what you say and is caused by most of the same things as climate change. Mostly just excess CO2 in the air. But the rise in ocean acidification is leading to higher temperatures at the poles, coral reefs shrinking, etc.
@shaman turtle, I know, I was implying it towards how climate change is affecting it through human impact. Since it's humans pumping large amounts of CO2, and other chemicals that produce acid rain when exposed to the chemicals in the atmosphere.
@ThatGuyx79, Skepticism is a fundamental apart of science, however, skepticism still uses the scientific method to back its belief or disbelief. Real skeptics don't use anecdotal evidence or personal opinions, they use hard facts - unlike the "skeptics" against climate change.
@Sloppy Dangle, u, my good sir, are a hero to myself and future generations. Thank you for the good research and ability to shut this down as a controversial topic of whether climate change is real.
@Sloppy Dangle, I didnt mean to 'trigger' you, sorry. I wasn't even taking a side on the issue, the article I showed was just supposed to be an example of/why people are skeptical. Call it playing devils advocate, if you will.
@Sloppy Dangle, I haven't followed climate change for a couple years now, but when I last checked, the most consistent story I could find was that the earth cooled from 0 CE to ~1400-1500 CE and has since been rising. This explains all facts I've seen of temperatures rising in modern history in the context of no human impact
@Sloppy Dangle, since this story hasn't been debunked, several stories in favor of climate change have been debunked, and there have been dozens of counts in my knowledge of researchers losing funding for questioning climate change, I remain a skeptic for lack of any trustworthy, original source on the topic
@Oujosh29, The most accurate name for it is the Climate Crisis, not Climate Change or Global Warming but you know potato potato
So how about that weather, eh? (Trying to use generic conversation changer, but realises it only furthers the conversation)
@Sheep Rider, "a lack of any trustworthy, original source on the topic"
Hey Bill Nye, you got this one, right? Yeah I'll get the forklift.
@Oujosh29, The name changed because too many stupid people like politicians and backwoods retards saw climate changes in some areas that were colder on average and said they had therefore debunked global warming. So they started calling it climate change as a more concise term that anyone can understand. Even though global warming is hitting the nail on the head, it is an overall thing and not necessarily visible in every microclimate.
@Baby Cthulhu, yo, u single?
@Baby Cthulhu, cuz ain't nothin gets me goin better than The Glacial Fluctuations And Their Impact On Environmental Shifts On The Planetary Scale type talk. Lemme take u out, my treat. Wanna make u feel special ;)
@Nahdudeurgood, sounds great. I've never been so flattered ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
@Sloppy Dangle, no it isn't, according to the natural cycle of earth we should have been back at our normal temperature over 500,000 years ago. Our standard temperature on earth is 132 degrees at any given place which means we are severely under where we should be. The only reason people try to blame global warming on anyone is for money's sake, we as a species should be extinct or evolved by now, but since we're not the liberal media try's to blame it on corporations, that way when the inevitable happens they can pretend they were right.
@SparkySparky BoomMan, Well, you are incredibly wrong. I'm honestly not sure if you're trolling me or not. I'm just going to say that, 14 degrees Celsius is earth's standard temperature, and that is an average temperature - not "at any given place". I have no idea where you got 132 degrees, even in Fahrenheit that's hot.
@Sheep Rider, For your first comment, obviously you did not read what I had said prior about nature being involved in climate change. Please review that. For the second one, please provide proof of how "several stories in favor of climate change have been debunked.".
For anyone else questioning the concept of climate change please check out this link http://climate.nasa.gov. Educate yourself. If you're "skeptical" of the source of information from this link (which is from NASA and the GOV of USA), then well, you have greater subjects to concern yourself about. And remember, opinions aren't facts.
@Sloppy Dangle, hockey stick graph is most famous debunked one, and I'll check out your article. I don't believe it's wise to take everything the government says on this as truth without question because there is now so much partisan (democrat) motivation for evidence in favor of climate change. That being said, facts are still facts
@Sloppy Dangle, I checked out your link and went to evidence of climate change. The only evidence it provided was a measurable increase in carbon dioxide. This, I agree, is a man made increase which changes the climate in some ways like ocean acidification. The rest, about warming, relies on the assumption that carbon dioxide results in global warming, which is career suicide to dispute, so no one applying for government grant (every researcher ever) would dare claim otherwise
@Reach4God, Regardless if you are neutral or 'the devil's advocate', saying what you said in your first comment on this picture is encouraging people to treat the subject as an opinionated debate, which it is not. Your lack of understanding and your audacity to state such comments to the community of funnypics is what set me off. I ask you to refrain from commenting on something that you do not fully understand as it fogs up the subject to others.
@Sloppy Dangle, historically you moron, the average temperature for our location from the sun you twit. 50 million years ago there were no ice caps do you know why you idiot, because ice caps are not natural, they are caused by planetary cooling. The only reason we have ice caps and such a low temperature today is because of an ice age, we are still cooling down from. If you're going to call me an idiot try to get some facts instead of ignoring what I said and substituting your own logic.
@SparkySparky BoomMan, Yeah, you're trolling me.
@Sheep Rider, Saying that supporting carbon dioxide results in global warming
@Sloppy Dangle, I'm not I just don't stand for stupid people speaking their mind with no opposition, bad things happen that way. Just because you aren't smart enough to understand what I'm saying doesn't mean I'm a troll it means you are flat out retarded.
@Sheep Rider, Opps, I hit 'send' by mistake. Saying "about warming, relies on the assumption that carbon dioxide results in global warming, which is career suicide to dispute," is an opinion. You cannot use opinions to justify your statements. Also, the link had more than just carbon dioxide as evidence, obviously you glanced at it. It also discussed the credibility of global warming, even referencing it. You say "no one applying for government grant (every researcher ever) would dare claim otherwise" but again you are incorrect. The link I had displayed, clearly claims that global warming is real and that carbon dioxide is the main cause of it, - and guess who put that on the link? NASA did, and the GOV of USA. So no, supporting global warming isn't career suicide.
@Sheep Rider, As for the hockey stick graph, I do not know much about it, and I am currently not going to discuss until I put some research time into it. But I am confident that, once again, if I research it, I can proof you wrong. Remember that opinions are not facts.
The Earth gets hotter and colder in cycles naturally. We've had ice ages and hot periods many times for thousands of years. To deny global warming is just ignorant of this fact. Yes humans contribute to it if even a little. We still add to it as all things do. Just as volcanos do. The things is and this is where I make my stand on this issue. Even if humans go completely carbon neutral. Global warming is a snowball effect. The earth gets warmer. More methane and other gasses from the ground and oceans continues to release more and more as the temperature rises. Thus continuing to make it worse and worse.
So the fight over who caused global warming and us going carbon neutral is pointless and a waste of time. It's happening, get over it. Focus on how to reverse it. Because stopping humans carbon emissions alone won't reverse what will happen naturally now that its already started.
@Sloppy Dangle, Whether you like it or not there are a significant amount of people that don't believe any of this. You acting like a child and going off on anyone different than you certainly won't change their mind. I suggest you grow up and learn how to have a civil discussion before wading into serious conversations.
@Reach4God, How am I acting like a child? By representing facts with my statements? It's not my fault where people have the wrong understanding of this concept. You still think of it as an opinion and not a fact, and that's just sad. It's obvious I got you frustrated, I'm sorry about that. I only solely want to educate everyone.
@Sloppy Dangle, I'm not frustrated, and perhaps you aren't understanding what I'm saying, but there ARE people that do not see it as a fact. Then I gave you an example in the form of that article on Forbes. There are also people other than me in this comment sectiom that think you're not being very respectful to others.
@Reach4God, Seems that you are frustrated, still. I understand fully what you have said. I simply elaborated on your statements by highlighting what exactly about your primary comment is wrong and that people should not be viewing it as they are.
@Sloppy Dangle, you're my hero
@tylersmileyface, dude I thought the same thing when I was high lol
@Seohn, while I somewhat agree with you.. I disagree that discussing what is climate change is a waste of time. If people don't understand that us humans have a huge impact, they won't believe that there's a reason to change. You can't just act on things that you don't understand
@SparkySparky BoomMan, Shut the fuсk up kid, if you're gonna try to sound smart, don't resort to name-calling in every fuсking sentence. It completely destroys whatever point you're trying to make. And the planet doesn't cool down from an ice age, genius, it warms up from one.
@Trump Repellant, really so when the earth is covered in ice it gets hotter? Wow you really changed my perspective numbnuts.
What's this? A pic that's NOT jumping on the liberal circle-jerk?
"If there's no evidence for it but a theory, it must be right!" - climate change believers.
*looks up to the ceiling with red shady eyes* Dude.
Before commenting on this (or any climate change pics), I would highly recommend reading "state of fear" by Michael Crichton. Good read with a lot of cited sources
I'd rather ignore that all those "facts" & "studies" & "consensus" have been tweaked & massaged & outcomes predetermined by biased scientists. When I ignore those things then it's easy to just broadstroke natural celestial cycles as being caused by man.
@brent1a, I would do some more research if I were you...
@Can yew knot, and I, you.
Hopefully Trump will be able to shut down this system of cronyism that funnels government money to "scientists" and green energy shell corporations in exchange for propping up this bogus climate change nonsense that the government uses to exert more and more control over the populace.
@Bobaganusche88, uh-huh, nice self up vote.
@Bobaganusche88, I think you forgot your tinfoil hat when you went to see the psychiatrist.
@Bobaganusche88, Uneducated moron spotted
Liberals don't realize.... it's a movie.
@smartstu, oh man, I don't know how you got away with this without getting torn apart. You know it was a real event, yeah?
@Quoth the Revan, Yes. Then James Cameron turned it into a movie. Liberals can't tell that difference.
@Quoth the Revan, You realize that "climate change," didn't sink the Titanic right?
It was an ice berg that sank the Titanic. Not CC. Liberals, they're nucking futs!
The human impact on climate change is greatly exaggerated. Scientists removed temperature sites from rural areas and doubled down on ones in cities, thus creating the "spike" in climate change. Look it up.
Don't worry just stat their
Yeah it's more of a "This ship is sinking and there's nothing I can do about it, so shut the fvck up about it" argument.