NASA Sides With Global Warming Skeptics, Carbon Dioxide is GREENING the Earth

all sages chucked out a 9 story window and bottles full of pepper thrown into your fucking face!

lol

videos.utahgunexchange.com/watch/box-of-rocks_x7kf6XICua6P8cc.html

The greenhouse gas effect also accelerates desertification and the polar ice caps melting when global temperatures rise so it's not exactly great, there are more plants maybe but climate change isn't good news generally.

Fuck NASA and all faggots that post anything that supports that bullshit collection of pure fucktards. According to NASA we were going to be in an ice age by now. See any polar bears in Iowa yet? All of this is bullshit concocted to get retard people who can't "Science" to go along with whatever shit spews forth from their ass today.
Climate changes naturally and there is nothing anyone on this earth can do to change that. All of this shit is as fucking moronic as one can make it. CO2 levels have been much higher many times in geologic history prior to the industrialization of man. It's a naturally occurring cycle. If people who believe this shit would only kill themselves the world would be a better place.

The real problem is not industry, the real problem is toxic pollution and geo-engineering thats causing all kinds of crazy weather patterns. In fact, America today is largely DE-industrialized from decades of outsourcing! So even IF industry was the problem, we wouldn't even be the ones contributing to it! It would be nations like Russia and China! But noooooooo, can't talk about that, can we!? They're exempt!

They have called it “the greenhouse effect” since the 70s. I don’t think anyone is arguing that it won’t be awesome for plants, and I’m not sure how putting it in quotes makes it a fresh new take on the science.

Contrarian en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contrarian

Oppositional defiant disorder en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oppositional_defiant_disorder

What Does Oppositional Defiant Disorder Look Like in Adults?

Oppositional Defiant Disorder in Adults

Adults with oppositional defiant disorder (ODD) display a pattern of negative, hostile, and defiant behavior that lasts at least six months and includes four (or more) of the following symptoms:

Often loses temper

Often argues with family and coworkers

Actively defies or refuses to comply with rules and laws

Deliberately annoys people

Blames others for his or her mistakes or misbehavior

Easily annoyed by others

Angry and resentful

Spiteful or vindictive

Adults with ODD are more than just aggressive and irritating from time to time. They feel mad at the world every day, and lose their temper regularly. This may manifest as verbal abuse or road rage. Adults with ODD defend themselves relentlessly when someone says they’ve done something wrong. They feel misunderstood and disliked, hemmed in, and pushed around. Constant opposition to authority figures makes it difficult for adults with ODD to keep jobs and to maintain relationships and marriages. They are particularly quick to anger, they are impatient, and they have a low tolerance for frustration.

[Self-Test] Oppositional Defiant Disorder in Adults

additude.com/screener-oppositional-defiant-disorder-symptoms-test-adults/?src=embed_link

/killcen/ threw an xtra lpg in the stove and got hot and said,''gol darn global warmin'
I'd better make a post today about it

You can be a democrat or a republican or independent or even a fascist, and still either know or not know a fucking thing about science.

Any time you find a “scientific fact” that’s better understood by one political party, you should be immediately skeptical of its authenticity.

Ask a scientist, not a republican, if you want to learn about global warming.

Defiant against WHAT exactly? I put up with a lot of bullshit, but you know what? I do have my limits to just how much bullshit I will put up with.

Well NASA has scientists too. I never said what Republicans or Democrats said… I directly said NASA didn't I? And honestly it all depends on which scientists you ask, because global warming is still a scientific theory meaning its not exactly proven, its still an issue that is being heavily debated in the scientific community! So some scientists will agree, and other scientists won't agree! Some groups will point to evidence, other groups will point to lack of evidence or contradictions!

How is this contrary to the narrative of global warming? Plants breathe carbon dioxide so of course more is good for them. The mass extinction is happening in animal life, the earth is still warming, and weather patterns are still getting more extreme. You can argue that this is an important fact left out of the narrative, but it does not contradict the other scientific data in any way. In fact one of the "green" things that has been thriving is algae. There have been plenty of reports on the unprecedented amounts of algae on the cost of Florida and California. I'm not sure why I bother. Everyone just listens to whatever reinforces their own bias.

lmao psychology is a bad meme

It's a documented fact. The temperature has been measured and it is increasing. The "theories" in science are what we use to explain facts. In this case it's the models trying to explain it. The only real debate is how much human activity directly and indirectly leads to global warming. No self respecting scientist has claimed human do not contribute to global warming, the debate is on how much. Next time you want to argue about global warming stick to saying the doomsayers are self promoting sensationalist who use fear mongering to propel their own careers, instead misusing words and coming off as a fetal alchohol syndrome baby.

I masturbate very hard

It is a theory and nothing more than that. And a theory A LOT of scientists still don't find conclusive. And YOU do not define which scientists are or who are reputable you shit for brains. I see what you are trying to do by claiming anyone who doesn't agree with you isn't worthy of contribution.

I'll have you know scientists have been studying this since the 1970s and since then there have been A LOT of predictions over the years that never happened.

The hoot has been going on before these millennial were ever born! We've heard everything from the world freezing over to the world burning up to the world being flooded, over and over, and the fact is climate change is natural. What you should be concerned about is weather modification technologies which do exist and have been openly admitted to by governments. Like that little fact or not.

Attached: TIME-magazine-cooling-to-warming-1973-2006.jpg (544x306, 174.42K)

now hold on, carbon DIOXIDE or carbon MONOXIDE? I thought cars were releasing carbon Monoxide, am I wrong? Is Monoxide also a fertilizer for plants, since it has carbon?

No only diesel cars produce a lot of carbon monoxide.
That will fuck up your kiddies lungs and stuff but its not a greenhouse gas.

Population is under 2/7ths that of the US. Stop believing propaganda.
US being nuked into oblivion is the only way forward.

What is the exact population figure a country needs to be above, to be blamed for muh global warming?

Good. Fuck animals. Especially humans

amalek lmao

...

Correct, the Earth is actually getting greener. HOWEVER, the reason is because plants are growing faster, this is bad because it makes them overall worse carbon sinks and vegetables in particular aren't absorbing as much nutrients in the soil before they're ripe. There's always a tradeoff

Attached: Dog_Mayor.jpg (640x914, 36.28K)

tldr of OP

More carbon dioxide means climate change will make more plants grow while more animals die. So basically, nothing has changed. This does not support "deniers" in any way.

Then you can start by necking yourself

God damn every single time man … You faggots need to get over that shit

In my study of communist societies, I came to the conclusion that the purpose of communist propaganda was not to persuade or convince, not to inform, but to humiliate;
and therefore, the less it corresponded to reality the better. When people are forced to remain silent when they are being told the most obvious lies,
or even worse when they are forced to repeat the lies themselves, they lose once and for all their sense of probity. To assent to obvious lies is…in some small way to become evil oneself.
One's standing to resist anything is thus eroded, and even destroyed. A society of emasculated liars is easy to control. I think if you examine political correctness,
it has the same effect and is intended to.

Reminder that communists are cancer.

LOL wow another fucking pathetic misinterpretation of the abstract by NATURAL NEWS!

Hey dumbass OP, you wouldn't mind posting the full article so I can point out and explain to you in depth why you and your shitty yellow journalism site are WRONG would you?

You know what I'll fucking do it for you because I'm not a dishonest hack who misunderstands THE FUCKING ABSTRACT and uses it to make sweeping generalizations.

sites.bu.edu/cliveg/files/2016/04/zhu-greening-earth-ncc-2016.pdf

Here you go kids, see if you can make it through all 6 pages and understand on your own why OP is a disingenuous pseudo-science shill.

Basically OP and naturalnews have confused how 'green' global vegetation is (literally the vegetation's color as a result of a longer growing season consistent with the effects of global warming), with forestation aka how much actual surface area the vegetation takes up. Pro tip: it is not expanding and has consistently been shrinking for years. OP's own study even cites this fact directly in its own references

publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/bitstream/JRC24255/EUR 20523 EN.pdf

It's a shame that shills can lie faster than they can be fact checked.

1973 cover - energy crisis
1977 cover - record cold temp for that year in usa, specifically discusses the weather for that year with no mention of climate trends
2001 & 2006 covers - both discuss global warming and correctly predict what would happen a decade later

content.time.com/time/subscriber/article/0,33009,918620-1,00.html

scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2013/06/04/the-1970s-ice-age-myth-and-time-magazine-covers-by-david-kirtley

thinkprogress.org/time-magazine-got-global-warming-right-in-2006-be-worried-be-very-worried-de306a6c8dc5/

Also LOL pants on head retard thinks fucking weather control machines exist rofl put down the comic books kid.

Attached: 52813664_134192420966974_557376587067871831_n.jpg (480x480, 37.09K)

I really should just stop reading right theren but I'll bite.

I didn't say reputable I said self respecting, as in not taking money to state facts aren't facts. I know scientists who are doubtful about the contribution of human activity to global warming, despite there being a cult like devotion to the idea it is caused by humans and only humans. Depending on the person they usually don't talk about their doubts publicly. But I have never had a single colleague say that the earth is not warming, because the average temperature (over a full year) of the earth is going up. Literally the only people I have ever seen dispute that in the present day are lobbyists who are payed to deny it or scientists payed by oil and gas companies. Plenty on non reputable scientists argue both ways as to the causes.

No fucking shit. Their models were wrong and so their predictions were wrong. Those predictions are examples of theories. You should be skeptical of predictions of sensationalist disasters. What is not a theory is that the average global temperature has increased since 20 years ago. That has already occured and has been measured i.e. a fact. Why is that so hard to wrap your head around?

You are either a shill trying to shift the Overton Window, or more likely just retarded. I hope for your sake you are a shill.

nasa. saving the planet from invisible demons with fake science.

Im not the guy you are replying to but:
Currently the earth is below the average temperature over the last ten thousand years. The trend of warming is less now than it was in the 1960s. Which is why they were so worried when that period of warming ended in the 70's.

This may just be things returning to normal.

HAARP exists faggot. The US government admits geo-engineering exists. They admit they "cloud seed" and have hundreds of patents. Its proven, its admitted and its ALL documented.

Extensive List Of Weather Modification Patents: archive.fo/WLAv4
geoengineeringwatch.org/links-to-geoengineering-patents/
Weather as a Force Multiplier: Owning the Weather in 2025: archive.org/details/WeatherAsAForceMultiplier
apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a333462.pdf
Harvard Scientific Paper Details Entire Geo-Engineering Program Using Jet Aircraft: archive.fo/jKSGu
iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aae98d
Mainstream Media Admits Governments CAN Modify Weather: archive.fo/e8SPm
archive.fo/4QKv3 | archive.fo/dVYxW | archive.fo/5EjHL
CIA Admits Weather Modification Can Be Used As A Military Weapon: archive.fo/ujPEG
archive.fo/RIAjF | seed07.bitchute.com/DgELBJjfE0C2/uXHl8OPVWVIn.mp4
More Shocking Evidence Chemtrails Do Exist And Future Health Issues Unknown:
seed25.bitchute.com/JGrBdmFbMzJh/rLAaB2Lzavs.mp4
LEAKED FOOTAGE OF INSIDE MILITARY CHEMTRAIL JETS:
bitchute.com/video/VDsTr0zJMQWZ/

globalresearch.ca/haarp-secret-weapon-used-for-weather-modification-electromagnetic-warfare/20407

Ask any green freak where most of the mass of a tree comes from and they will say the ground. Ask them what is the largest contributor to carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and they will say humans. Ask them what nation is responsible for the largest amount of carbon emissions and they will say the USA. Ask them what is the cause of large scale forest fires and they will say climate change.
They ignore basic science to further their agenda and so they can feel smug driving the ecological nightmare that is their hybrid/electric car. You can do more good for the environment by cutting dead and over crowded trees than any hybrid/electric car driver. You can do more by burning wood for heat and not using electric or gas heating. You can do more for the environment by hunting and fishing than those claiming it's wrong or immoral.

It's not in contradiction to anything. It is no secret CO2 is good for plants and toxic for humans. The CO2 levels were WAY higher in the distant past and plant life flourished in those times. That doesn't mean it would necessarily be a better place for humans to live.

Now go luck more since you don't understand the science you are talking about even a little bit.

I’m not saying anything about you. I just want to point out that if a scientific theory or observation is split across political parties, it’s probably because one or more of those parties has a non-scientific take on it.

Some diagnoses severely lacking in the DSM:

So how come they got all those rockets in to space? Do you think its all a hoax.

You mean ask any American. Stop acting like a climate change skeptic would know it was from air.

If you removed "in the atmosphere" that would be the right answer. Congrats you can trick people with qualifiers.

We have the largest emissions per capita of a nation our size Canada and Saudi Arabia are basically just American states anyway

It's humans. Who would say climate change starts fires? The narrative is that it makes the fires worse.

Strawman/10 good effort though.

Are you pretending to have a reading disability or are you actually retarded?

Underrated post. 10/10

Attached: d3bed350c611569be5a4eef92fe97f97f477eb39480dd98f97451dc73a0144a7.jpg (480x370, 21.9K)

fucking hell OP, spoiler that pic

Let's both agree that I read your post as well as you read OPs.

No idiot, NASA understands science, the OP doesn't understand science.

So in your opinion the earth isnt getting greener?

Psychopathologists sometimes ignore one extreme end on a bipolar axis and emphasise the other, e. g., trust-suspicion, Type I-Type II thinking. I had to come up with and coin a word for a psychiatric symptom that they're not interested in (entonoia, the pathological opposite of paranoia).

Type I-Type II thinking errors, I should have written.