Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

Big Oil repeatedly claims that global warming is psuedoscience...


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> Big Oil repeatedly claims that global warming is psuedoscience... Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Big Oil repeatedly claims that global warming is psuedo... - 1/1/2016 4:42:05 PM   
jlf1961


Posts: 14840
Joined: 6/10/2008
From: Somewhere Texas
Status: offline
But, while publicly making these claims, they were privately taking all necessary measures to safeguard infrastructure and facilities against rising sea levels and rising temperatures due to global warming.

quote:

A joint investigation by the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism’s Energy and Environmental Reporting Project and the Los Angeles Times earlier detailed how one company, Exxon, made a strategic decision in the late 1980s to publicly emphasize doubt and uncertainty regarding climate change science even as its internal research embraced the growing scientific consensus.

An examination of oil industry records and interviews with current and former executives shows that Exxon’s two-pronged strategy was widespread within the industry during the 1990s and early 2000s.

As many of the world’s major oil companies — including Exxon, Mobil and Shell — joined a multimillion-dollar industry effort to stave off new regulations to address climate change, they were quietly safeguarding billion-dollar infrastructure projects from rising sea levels, warming temperatures and increasing storm severity.

From the North Sea to the Canadian Arctic, the companies were raising the decks of offshore platforms, protecting pipelines from increasing coastal erosion, and designing helipads, pipelines and roads in a warming and buckling Arctic.
source


So, it seems that Big Oil already had a clue as to what was going on with the climate, the probabilities, and proceeded to lie through their collective teeth denying climate change while spending billions to make sure new operations were not harmed by the effects of climate change.

So, climate change is pseudo science?

_____________________________

Boy, it sure would be nice if we had some grenades, don't you think?

You cannot control who comes into your life, but you can control which airlock you throw them out of.

Paranoid Paramilitary Gun Loving Conspiracy Theorist AND EQUAL OPPORTUNI
Profile   Post #: 1
RE: Big Oil repeatedly claims that global warming is ps... - 1/1/2016 6:46:52 PM   
Phydeaux


Posts: 4828
Joined: 1/4/2004
Status: offline
Making the decision to deal with existing realities: coastal erosion etc. says nothing about the validity about current AGW. Do you really think that raising the height of a sea platform 12 feet is in response to an increase is sea level of .02 mm?

(in reply to jlf1961)
Profile   Post #: 2
RE: Big Oil repeatedly claims that global warming is ps... - 1/1/2016 11:47:35 PM   
MrRodgers


Posts: 10542
Joined: 7/30/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

Making the decision to deal with existing realities: coastal erosion etc. says nothing about the validity about current AGW. Do you really think that raising the height of a sea platform 12 feet is in response to an increase is sea level of .02 mm?

Ask the people of the Marshall Islands about that .02 mm.

HERE

Look here for 6 years ago. HERE

Plus, taking the expense of raising that oil platform wasn't done...for nothing.

_____________________________

You can be a murderous tyrant and the world will remember you fondly but fuck one horse and you will be a horse fucker for all eternity. Catherine the Great

Under capitalism, man exploits man. Under communism, it's just the opposite.
J K Galbraith

(in reply to Phydeaux)
Profile   Post #: 3
RE: Big Oil repeatedly claims that global warming is ps... - 1/2/2016 12:02:40 AM   
bounty44


Posts: 6374
Joined: 11/1/2014
Status: offline
while i totally agree with what phydeaux wrote and one would hope that could be/should be the end of the story, let me add:

oh please not another global warming thread...here's roughly, eventually how it will go.

the whole area is incredibly complex. the science and the "evidence" is not settled, except for that the global warming/man-man climate change folks will say it is despite evidence to the contrary.

the global warming/man-made climate change folks will continue to cite information that is not true, has been debunked and ignore all the evidence from the other side as to how they have manipulated data and systematically silenced opposition/studies that show contrary information.

the end result of that all, despite what I have written above, will be the global warming/man-made climate change folks will call the folks on the other side "deniers" (and that with no irony either).



< Message edited by bounty44 -- 1/2/2016 12:03:37 AM >

(in reply to MrRodgers)
Profile   Post #: 4
RE: Big Oil repeatedly claims that global warming is ps... - 1/2/2016 1:30:26 AM   
CentralFLDomCPL


Posts: 10
Joined: 3/18/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

Making the decision to deal with existing realities: coastal erosion etc. says nothing about the validity about current AGW. Do you really think that raising the height of a sea platform 12 feet is in response to an increase is sea level of .02 mm?


No... It's in response to storms of record-setting severity, which are causing higher waves and storm-related tides than at any time in recorded history.

(in reply to Phydeaux)
Profile   Post #: 5
RE: Big Oil repeatedly claims that global warming is ps... - 1/2/2016 1:54:01 AM   
epiphiny43


Posts: 688
Joined: 10/20/2006
Status: offline
WHICH Big Oil? The EU association of energy companies (Big Oil in my estimation) has already come out that they full agree with current projections of Global Warming, accept the responsibility of the carbon based energy sector to that dynamic and are internally addressing where and how they can prepare for the inevitable change to carbon neutral or carbon negative technologies as well as cooperate with similar technologies in other industry sectors. Am I the only forum member who reads international news?

(in reply to CentralFLDomCPL)
Profile   Post #: 6
RE: Big Oil repeatedly claims that global warming is ps... - 1/2/2016 6:16:12 AM   
jlf1961


Posts: 14840
Joined: 6/10/2008
From: Somewhere Texas
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

while i totally agree with what phydeaux wrote and one would hope that could be/should be the end of the story, let me add:

oh please not another global warming thread...here's roughly, eventually how it will go.

the whole area is incredibly complex. the science and the "evidence" is not settled, except for that the global warming/man-man climate change folks will say it is despite evidence to the contrary.

the global warming/man-made climate change folks will continue to cite information that is not true, has been debunked and ignore all the evidence from the other side as to how they have manipulated data and systematically silenced opposition/studies that show contrary information.

the end result of that all, despite what I have written above, will be the global warming/man-made climate change folks will call the folks on the other side "deniers" (and that with no irony either).





Lets see, over 90% of climatologists agree that climate change due to the increased greenhouse gases in the atmosphere due to humanity burning fossil fuels at unheard of rates, and other non-naturally occuring greenhouse gases, depletion of the ozone layer due to various other gases breaking down the ozone are practicing pseudo science?

And the article specifically cites "global warming" as the reason for the storm and sea level change.

According to every ice core and all the historic evidence, the planet should be entering a cooling cycle, and it is not. It is warming at a phenomenal rate.

Hell, lets look at other things oil producers have denied over the past few years that has been proven to be actually man caused....

Earthquakes in Oklahoma, Texas and other states that are directly the result of the practice of fracking. Well water that actually burns due to the suspended gas caused again by fracking, or the polluted ground water that is undrinkable due to the chemicals used in fracking being present.

Of course there is this tidbit.

Not to mention the fact that glaciers are receding at a rate that is unprecedented rate due to what? The planet getting colder? Gee, in science class in elementary school they told us that ice melts above freezing.

Antarctic ice shelves are collapsing due to ocean temperature rise during a period when ocean temps, according to climate cycles of the past few million years should be cooling.

The point is that even when spending millions in a public way to deny the science, American oil companies were concerned enough about the data to spend billions to make damn sure their projects were designed to deal with the effects of a problem they denied existed.

Strangely enough, some of these firms have scientists who are researching ways to REMOVE CO2 and other greenhouse gases from the atmosphere on industrial scales.

These same firms have scientists working on ways to get more than just biodiesel from plant oils, quoting the "carbon neutral" benefits from such fuels.

All of which point to a simple fact, while European oil producers have accepted climate change as scientific fact, American firms are still publicly denouncing it while spending billions in R&D to limit the effects on their profit margins and looking into solutions, alternative fuel sources that mitigate the effect of hydrocarbon fuels.

And finally, the biggest joke of all in my opinion, in a very conservative state, at a very conservative university, there are some botanists and engineers who have gotten together and figured out that you can take oil from the cannabis plant (aka pot) and make a bio fuel that is better than any made with most other plant oils. The engineers even went so far as to modify a turbine engine (and put it in a pickup) as a test vehicle.

The school, FYI is LSU. And they actually submitted a report last year to two government agencies pointing out that legalizing the growing of pot for medical and biofuel production would substantially cut dependence on imported oil in a very short time. Their point was since pot grows in places that most cash crops wont, it would utilize land that is currently unproductive, increasing farm incomes, increasing the tax revenues across the board.

Funny thing, the existing infrastructure for producing fuel from crude oil would be perfectly suited for producing fuel from plant sources.



_____________________________

Boy, it sure would be nice if we had some grenades, don't you think?

You cannot control who comes into your life, but you can control which airlock you throw them out of.

Paranoid Paramilitary Gun Loving Conspiracy Theorist AND EQUAL OPPORTUNI

(in reply to bounty44)
Profile   Post #: 7
RE: Big Oil repeatedly claims that global warming is ps... - 1/2/2016 11:39:14 AM   
Phydeaux


Posts: 4828
Joined: 1/4/2004
Status: offline


Oh brother.

Recent study said 36% of papers supported AGW. Fred Singer https://www.nas.org/articles/Estimated_40_Percent_of_Scientists_Doubt_Manmade_Global_Warming
estimates the number of client skeptics at 40%.

The 97% has been debunked again, and again, and again, and again. That number was pushed by Cook, an alarmist who founded skepticalscience with the intent of silencing "deniers" (Note - not with the intent of proving the science)
That same number, was arrived at also by Naomi Orestes, by a survey of ISI (a pro AGW web site). Widely debunked.

But, more to the point. Who the hell cares how many scientists think its true. Science is either true or false. Since the IPCC have overstated global warming by 2.5 times, and that using falsified data it is FALSE.

quote:

And the article specifically cites "global warming" as the reason for the storm and sea level change.


Try googling Global warmng and storm strength. Even alarmists now concede their is no correlation.

quote:

Earthquakes in Oklahoma, Texas and other states that are directly the result of the practice of fracking. Well water that actually burns due to the suspended gas caused again by fracking, or the polluted ground water that is undrinkable due to the chemicals used in fracking being present.


There is certainly no doubt that fracking causes minor earthquakes (roughly 3.8); funds have been set up to pay for them.

Well water that burns actually existed before fracking - and in all the more than 40,000 fracking wells that have been drilled - there have only been 2 instances of groundwater contamination. The movie gasland - where you seem to be getting your information from - was a deliberate fraud.

Of course neither eitherquakes nor burning water have anything to do with global warming.

quote:

Of course there is this tidbit.


LOLOLOL. Yeah, you know this study you were quoting? Since the already established temperature stations wouldn't cooperate and generate a warming trend NOAA used temperature sensors on ships.
Cherry pick your data, get any result you want.

I kid you not jilf, I maintained land and satellite archives for more than 20 years. I found systematic manipulation of the data, some of which other people have picked up on and published.

1. 350 Siberian sites were removed from the sample site at one point. The alteration in the sample set was enough to explain the entire putative global warming.
2. Correction factors were applied to land stations. The corrections applied were always warmer, and were twice the adjustment permitted by WMO rules.
3. Changes were made to data sets in the 20's 30's and 50's. These changes were designed to removed 1934 from being the hottest year on record.

Now, since you won't accept my word - try: http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/barbara-hollingsworth/german-scientist-accuses-nasa-massive-alteration-temperature
Where a fellow found massive tampering of temperature records - and published the data.

http://www.thefederalistpapers.org/world/global-warming-climate-models-have-been-wrong-for-over-half-a-century. If you look at the actual data (picture in red) you see
that there actually is a pronounced cooling trend.

quote:

Not to mention the fact that glaciers are receding at a rate that is unprecedented rate due to what?


Except they aren't.
http://climate.nasa.gov/news/2361/ READ THE DAMN ARTICLE. NASA itself saying that Greenland and the Antartica are gain billions of tonnes of ice NET.
https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2015/10/29/greenland-blowing-away-all-records-for-ice-gain/

Not to mention Greenland and Antartica, and the Artic are ADDING ice. To the tune of 80 billion tonnes a year.

http://www.longrangeweather.com/ArticleArchives/GreenlandIceSheet.htm

quote:

blah blah biofuels


Jilf - there is no question you can make biofuels from plants. Hell, you can make it from air, if you're willing to pay enough money.

The bottom line issue is that you can't make oil from plants costeffectively. Google RIN/RVO to see how much money the government is paying per gallon to support the
the renewable biofuel market. Start here, for example:https://lawofalgae.wiki.zoho.com/Renewable-Fuel-RIN-Categories-and-Factors-Impacting-Value-of-RINs.html


Returning to the question of scientific consensus - neither the Chinese, the Indian, nor the Russian bodies of science have established agreed that AGW is fact.
Ie., the biggest country in the world, the most populous. Covering I'd say what.. 40% of the earth's landmass?



< Message edited by Phydeaux -- 1/2/2016 12:25:37 PM >

(in reply to jlf1961)
Profile   Post #: 8
RE: Big Oil repeatedly claims that global warming is ps... - 1/2/2016 4:36:29 PM   
jlf1961


Posts: 14840
Joined: 6/10/2008
From: Somewhere Texas
Status: offline
Ground water contamination due to fracking, 2 Cases you say.

Four states have confirmed pollution due to drilling and the practice of fracking here

Ocean level rise here

Glacial recession due to warming of planet here

Of course, ice sheet collapse due to ocean temp rise can be found here

There was the collapse of the Larsen Ice sheet, there is the record receding of the sea ice in the northern hemisphere both of which made major headlines.

The Larsen ice shelf breakup was called unusual and unprecedented. And the only scientists still claiming that climate change and the warming of the planet is all a hoax are under the payroll of American owned oil companies. Every independent study has not only confirmed the fact of global warming due to climate change, but emphasized it.

The whole 'debunk' effort is so remarkably like the Tobacco industry research to disprove the link between smoking and lung diseases not the least of which is cancer.

Worse, it is so much like the 9/11 conspiracy idea that means that every scientist that has supported climate change and global warming theory is part of some grand conspiracy. Every study that has proved the point has been duplicated so many times it is no longer funny.

Every climatologist that has studied ice cores that date back millions of years has confirmed the planet, by historic record, should be cooling.

Acidification of the oceans due to increased carbon dioxide beyond the scope of what the environment can handle has been documented for 25 years.

Nixon established the EPA because his advisers predicted an increase of global temperatures when he was in office, and they were right, and they linked it to air pollution.

Even if you through climate change out of the argument, you cannot deny that most days the you can see the air in the LA basin is brown, major cities have air quality problems that impact the health of the people living there. If the air is unhealthy for humans, it sure as hell aint gonna be healthy for the planet.

Christ, what do you people want, a world where our grandkids have to wear respirators to go outside and play? I sure as hell aint a liberal or a tree hugger, but I can tell you that in my life time, droughts have gotten worse in West Texas. Hell we got twice our normal rainfall last year and guess what, it will take 8 more years of that to make up for the decade long drought that depleted the water across the biggest part of the southwest.

Annual snow fall has dropped to the point that snow melt in the rockies no longer replenish all of the lakes along the Colorado river. The same is true for the snow fall along the west coastal mountain ranges.

The reason, winters have been significantly warmer.

_____________________________

Boy, it sure would be nice if we had some grenades, don't you think?

You cannot control who comes into your life, but you can control which airlock you throw them out of.

Paranoid Paramilitary Gun Loving Conspiracy Theorist AND EQUAL OPPORTUNI

(in reply to Phydeaux)
Profile   Post #: 9
RE: Big Oil repeatedly claims that global warming is ps... - 1/2/2016 7:29:04 PM   
Phydeaux


Posts: 4828
Joined: 1/4/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

Ground water contamination due to fracking, 2 Cases you say.

Four states have confirmed pollution due to drilling and the practice of fracking here

Ocean level rise here

Glacial recession due to warming of planet here

Of course, ice sheet collapse due to ocean temp rise can be found here

There was the collapse of the Larsen Ice sheet, there is the record receding of the sea ice in the northern hemisphere both of which made major headlines.

The Larsen ice shelf breakup was called unusual and unprecedented. And the only scientists still claiming that climate change and the warming of the planet is all a hoax are under the payroll of American owned oil companies. Every independent study has not only confirmed the fact of global warming due to climate change, but emphasized it.

The whole 'debunk' effort is so remarkably like the Tobacco industry research to disprove the link between smoking and lung diseases not the least of which is cancer.

Worse, it is so much like the 9/11 conspiracy idea that means that every scientist that has supported climate change and global warming theory is part of some grand conspiracy. Every study that has proved the point has been duplicated so many times it is no longer funny.

Every climatologist that has studied ice cores that date back millions of years has confirmed the planet, by historic record, should be cooling.

Acidification of the oceans due to increased carbon dioxide beyond the scope of what the environment can handle has been documented for 25 years.

Nixon established the EPA because his advisers predicted an increase of global temperatures when he was in office, and they were right, and they linked it to air pollution.

Even if you through climate change out of the argument, you cannot deny that most days the you can see the air in the LA basin is brown, major cities have air quality problems that impact the health of the people living there. If the air is unhealthy for humans, it sure as hell aint gonna be healthy for the planet.

Christ, what do you people want, a world where our grandkids have to wear respirators to go outside and play? I sure as hell aint a liberal or a tree hugger, but I can tell you that in my life time, droughts have gotten worse in West Texas. Hell we got twice our normal rainfall last year and guess what, it will take 8 more years of that to make up for the decade long drought that depleted the water across the biggest part of the southwest.

Annual snow fall has dropped to the point that snow melt in the rockies no longer replenish all of the lakes along the Colorado river. The same is true for the snow fall along the west coastal mountain ranges.

The reason, winters have been significantly warmer.



Yep, and just like the usual leftist troll jilf, you ignore accredited scientists with peer reviewed papers published in mainstream journals.
You were originally talking methane contamination, not drilling fluids / water contamination. Either way mate, you are simultaneously ignoring that fracking has nothing to do with global warming AND that problems fracking problems happen .001% of the time - thats a pretty damn good record as far as human endeavors go.

Fracking - and the use of natural gas and power plants is responsible for the decline in Co2 emissions.

As for "the planet should be cooling".. your statement is complete bollux. The period is 69,000 years +/- 35,000 years. Ie., there is no way to make the statement it *should* be cooling.

Second - the ice cores only go back oh call it 4 million years, Ie, to the time all the greenland icecaps melted.

Third - the same ice cores prove that temperature increase LEAD co2 increase. Ie., it wasn't the increase in c02 that increased temperatures, it was the increase in temperature that increased the CO2 concentration. Henry/Boyle's law.

Mate, I've worked cleaning up air pollution for more than 30 years. Perhaps, just perhaps, you might consider I know what the hell I"m talking about. For the love of G-d, will you read Svenmarks papers which were corroborated by the Cern experiment? Please?

If you won't do that - please explain the difference between Hadcrut-4 and observed temperature, and how you can still support AGW.


< Message edited by Phydeaux -- 1/2/2016 7:35:10 PM >

(in reply to jlf1961)
Profile   Post #: 10
RE: Big Oil repeatedly claims that global warming is ps... - 1/2/2016 8:44:57 PM   
jlf1961


Posts: 14840
Joined: 6/10/2008
From: Somewhere Texas
Status: offline
I keep hearing deniers claim that the majority of papers supporting climate change are not peer reviewed, and that all the ones that deny it are peer reviewed, however, I have never seen a one of them provide proof, except from conservative web sites.

However, NASA says differently.
Of course, others have researched these claims Fact check.org
Snopes
Of course, you may even read this
And finally there is this nice tidbit

You say you have been working on controlling air pollution for 30 years, then answer me this, is it normal on a day with little wind for the air to be brown?

_____________________________

Boy, it sure would be nice if we had some grenades, don't you think?

You cannot control who comes into your life, but you can control which airlock you throw them out of.

Paranoid Paramilitary Gun Loving Conspiracy Theorist AND EQUAL OPPORTUNI

(in reply to Phydeaux)
Profile   Post #: 11
RE: Big Oil repeatedly claims that global warming is ps... - 1/2/2016 9:08:48 PM   
Termyn8or


Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline
So let's just assume it is for real. What do you propose we do about it ?

More taxes ?

T^T

(in reply to jlf1961)
Profile   Post #: 12
RE: Big Oil repeatedly claims that global warming is ps... - 1/2/2016 10:45:12 PM   
Phydeaux


Posts: 4828
Joined: 1/4/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

I keep hearing deniers claim that the majority of papers supporting climate change are not peer reviewed, and that all the ones that deny it are peer reviewed, however, I have never seen a one of them provide proof, except from conservative web sites.

However, NASA says differently.
Of course, others have researched these claims Fact check.org
Snopes
Of course, you may even read this
And finally there is this nice tidbit

You say you have been working on controlling air pollution for 30 years, then answer me this, is it normal on a day with little wind for the air to be brown?


You never heard me say that a majority of papers supporting climate change are not peer reviewed. Because, in fact, I've never said it. Take Mann's work, that said that tree rings can be an analog for temperature. Peer reviewed, published. But the fact of the matter is that if you take *any* data set and treat it the same way that mann did, you will come up with the exact same hockey stick.

Air being brown is a freaking shame -but in fact it has nothing to do with CO2 emissions. Rather, LA is because of Nox emissions primarily, tossing in a smorgasbord of things such as ground ozone and fine particulates from diesel emissions. Ironically, by the way, in the 70's etc we put on Sox emission controls on power plants that helped stop acid rain. Side effect: Sox emmisions actually cooled the planet, via aerosol action.

I've given you a dozen links to peer reviewed science. three recommendations to read. One of the authors wrote a chapter in the damn IPCC report. Judith Curry. Read the german guy who published how the ground station data has been altered. Read Svenmark, whose science actually matches observed temperater data.

Paraphrasing one of her recent papers - not only are the atmospheric models for cloud formation wrong - they are completely wrong. And the models for co2 induced temperature change are completely wrong.

Or you could read , as I have, the nasa paper that said the net effect of CO2 in the atmospheric column is not known.

Look mate. We both actually want the same thing. We want cleaner air, cleaner water for our children. We would like to protect the environment. I'm telling you, as someone that has studied this for way more than 10,000 hours that AGW as proposed by the IPCC is wrong. Flat out wrong. There is not a single year where the predictions of any of the 41 different IPCC models have correctly predicted temperatures.

Or read this: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/11/25/climategate-hide-the-decline-codified/ where the comments of the programmer reveal that they are artificially cooking the numbeers.

I am not in the pocket of any oil industry, or any government. The US is spending more than $157 billion dollars a year to further the idea of AGW. That is a hell of a gravey train.


(in reply to jlf1961)
Profile   Post #: 13
RE: Big Oil repeatedly claims that global warming is ps... - 1/2/2016 10:50:48 PM   
Phydeaux


Posts: 4828
Joined: 1/4/2004
Status: offline
Or you could read where Weaver (leading climate modeler) sued Dr. Ball (skeptic) for saying in essence that his work was fudged. After multiple years - more than 4, the suit was lost for lack of prosecution - because Weaver refused to provide the data. He is now being countersued for 10 million dollars.

In the same way, the esteemed Dr. Mann has tried to sue Dr. Ball - and lost for the same reason - refusing to release the data. Also open to a $10 million dollar countersuit.
Dr. Mann has also sued Mark Steyn.


These people engaged Canada's highest price libel attorney-and yet failed to press their claim or win. In fact what they were doing was an attempt to sue the other person into penury. Steyns legal bill so far is more than 7 figures... and no discovery in sight.

(in reply to Phydeaux)
Profile   Post #: 14
RE: Big Oil repeatedly claims that global warming is ps... - 1/2/2016 11:00:31 PM   
Termyn8or


Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline
There is no denying that we are warming up the place and emitting CO2.

How do we stop ?

When these fuckers started talking about cow farts and we should be vegetarians they lost me period.

Bottom line is we cannot live as we do without polluting. Want to ? Invent something new. All the alternative energy sources are not viable.

How MUCH global warming are we causing ? I don't fucking care. We cannot stop. Ay country stops they will be at a severe economic disadvantage, which seems why the US wants to tax the fuck out of it. They seem to want to destroy the US. It would be nice to know who they really work for.

But they penalize people who have to drive to work, every little bullshit solenoid in your transmission must operate perfectly or you cannot get license plates. That is how it is here. But plants in China make the air so bad they cannot breathe, and their government which is not much better than ours actually is spending money to try to make it better because of the obvious reasons. Health problems and therefore reduced productivity will cost them more. They know how to think like a business.

T^T

(in reply to Phydeaux)
Profile   Post #: 15
RE: Big Oil repeatedly claims that global warming is ps... - 1/3/2016 2:43:52 AM   
bounty44


Posts: 6374
Joined: 11/1/2014
Status: offline
this might be a good place to go back and carefully read my post in #4, observe what has happened since, see what you are doing, and really really let the content of my post sink in.

or go back and read any of the other "global warming/climate change" threads here from the past couple years...

< Message edited by bounty44 -- 1/3/2016 2:57:48 AM >

(in reply to jlf1961)
Profile   Post #: 16
RE: Big Oil repeatedly claims that global warming is ps... - 1/3/2016 8:14:36 AM   
jlf1961


Posts: 14840
Joined: 6/10/2008
From: Somewhere Texas
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

this might be a good place to go back and carefully read my post in #4, observe what has happened since, see what you are doing, and really really let the content of my post sink in.

or go back and read any of the other "global warming/climate change" threads here from the past couple years...


I might consider your statement, but for one little point.

The 'scientist' that led the debunkers was the same man that led the tobacco campaign to prove that tobacco use was not harmful in the slightest.

Secondly, of the op eds and articles posted debunking global climate change, the majority that wrote them either 1) were not specialists in the field or B) not actual scientists are researchers, or C) and most importantly, refused to allow review of their procedures.

The proven points are simple:

1) Since WW2, the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere has risen at a rate that is unprecedented in planet history
2) In the last thirty years, global temperatures have also risen at a rate dramatically higher than in the planet's history, with the exception of two periods, a) the epoch of the siberian pit lava flows and b) the period during which the Deccan traps were erupting lasting 30,000 years

Now, since there has been no massive increase in volcanic activity, nor have we had a massive increase in solar radiation, there has to be a reason for these two facts.

The absolutely hilarious fact is that when 97% of earth scientists are saying the same thing, people are still insisting they are all wrong because of the few that are saying something different.

I call this the "Custer Syndrome."

You see, at the battle of Little Big Horn, Col. Custer was told be every one of his Indian scouts that the Cheyenne/Lakota Sioux camp was bigger than his officers were telling him, and the camp was not just old men, women and children.

Well, Custer decided they were all cowards and liars, and the rest is history.

The simple fact is that the global climate is changing, and there are no historic models to explain it. Looking at the past cycles of heating and cooling, and the frequency of Ice Ages, combined with the eccentricities of the earth's orbit, the planet should be cooling.

Instead it is warming.

Now, since there has not been a large enough celestial body move through the solar system to change earth's orbit, nor has there been a large enough impact to account for the changes.

I will go one step further, according to some, none of the increased carbon emissions would have had near the impact except for one factor, the depletion of the rain forests.

From personal observations, I have seen the longest drought in history in the Southwest, when I was a child, the rockies were snow capped even in summer (they arent now) and lake Mead and lake powell were always full to capacity, with enough over flow that the Colorado actually reached the ocean.

Now, over the last 30 years snow fall in the Rockies has dropped to the point where the spring melt no longer fills the rivers.

Let you in on another shocking secret.

Deserts world wide are expanding at a rate that defies explanation. In point of fact, the Sahara, again looking at geological/ botanical records, should actually be shrinking. It seems that the Sahara has over the past few million years gone from desert to savanah at regular intervals, roughly coinciding to the periods when the earth moves a bit further from the sun in its orbit.

Instead, the Sahara is getting larger.

Again, with no object large enough to change the orbit of the planet, care to explain why this is happening? The main difference is the amount of green house gases in the atmosphere.

Lastly, the man that started the "climate change denial" science program had another misinformation campaign to his credit, besides tobacco, and that was the trying to prove that ozone depletion was not happening.

Now, if you want to throw out what 97% of accredited earth science researchers have stated as fact, with the support of every major scientific agency on the planet, that is fine, you are free to do so.

However, trying to tell those of us who tend to believe the majority that all those agencies and scientists are part of some great conspiracy to cost people, businesses and governments trillions is pushing it.

_____________________________

Boy, it sure would be nice if we had some grenades, don't you think?

You cannot control who comes into your life, but you can control which airlock you throw them out of.

Paranoid Paramilitary Gun Loving Conspiracy Theorist AND EQUAL OPPORTUNI

(in reply to bounty44)
Profile   Post #: 17
RE: Big Oil repeatedly claims that global warming is ps... - 1/3/2016 8:44:40 AM   
WickedsDesire


Posts: 9362
Joined: 11/4/2015
Status: offline
The world warms. Of that there is no doubt. Mother earth is vast and timeless, like my need of the muffin. The sheer number of variables/interactions of mother earth (note I did not use the word climate) are staggering. And that’s not going into orbital variations, natural cycles, solar output, vulcans (hails spock), volcanism, albido, plate tectonics, ocean currents, gyres etc, el nino, thermal expansion heat sink effect (meh), natural too and fro of many a cycle too numerous to mention

So much so I thought I would just pop in. Climate threads tend to meander all over the place.

Few notes:
Your lifetime is but a blink of the eye.
How do we stop it we cannot mother earth tends to find its own equilibrium over epochs
I can assure you the Arctic does not gain ice/mass - Antarctic is a little more complex – an argument can be made more warming more precipitation then it will gain (indefinitely doubtful) at its core, not around the peripherals-it loses here.. Greenland loses too and note the cold blob in the Atlantic which is most likely due to an increase in fresh water - pulse from haughty naughty Greenland...Greenland a little known fact has two distinct domes - why no idea, a curiosity nevertheless.

But Ops post infers did they know, or did they suspect man is a contributor. Of course they knew you cannot pump billions and billions of tonnes of particulate matter into the atmosphere and for there to be no effect on climate..and i am not going into chinas use of coal and has it offset warming.

If man was not on this planet would mother earth be warming at the rate it currently is or would it be cooling. No-one can fully answer that. But we can go with indicators.

Indicators are saying cry havoc – or was that khan.

All i can be bothered typing.

In summary, yes i agree with ops thread, they knew fine well (no imo needed)..further arguments can be made they employed people to wilfully mislead...allegedly.

Do I think it can be stopped.....and the UK has endured its warmest wettest December on record - records go back 100-350 years - a blink of an eye...nope, not from Krakatoa or Iceland - meteor/comet or super eruption/fissure I guess there is always as long as its not atop a bed of coal - Siberian traps - largest known. make your yellowstone look like a pimple, a very small pimple.

Iceland perhaps - and the melting of its ice cap which is occurring at an unprecedented rate (which only covers about 10% of the country methinks or is it 15%..but enough to keep that place in check....

In summary summary mother earth needs to offset it, she can do that over vast epochs or time, or suddenly via an utter calamity.

Your my only hope, or was that star wars....not star wars



< Message edited by WickedsDesire -- 1/3/2016 9:01:01 AM >

(in reply to bounty44)
Profile   Post #: 18
RE: Big Oil repeatedly claims that global warming is ps... - 1/3/2016 11:58:25 AM   
Phydeaux


Posts: 4828
Joined: 1/4/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961


I might consider your statement, but for one little point.

The 'scientist' that led the debunkers was the same man that led the tobacco campaign to prove that tobacco use was not harmful in the slightest.



And yet when I tell you that your dr. mann is using EXACTLY the same techniques that Singer used, you ignore it.

There is no *leader* of people or scientists that deny climate change. The pro-alarmist camp is the organized group - hansen's climate unit at nasa; Met and anglia in england; cook's skepticalscience; sierra club, nature conservancy.

Look mate - I'm giving you peer reviewed literature, by scientists in the field. The whole idea about science is that one should be open to looking at the hypothesis and testing it. But you won't even consider other papers.

quote:


The proven points are simple:

1) Since WW2, the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere has risen at a rate that is unprecedented in planet history
2) In the last thirty years, global temperatures have also risen at a rate dramatically higher than in the planet's history, with the exception of two periods, a) the epoch of the siberian pit lava flows and b) the period during which the Deccan traps were erupting lasting 30,000 years


Simply not true. For example, the transition from the younger donbas period, we saw a change of 15oC in 50 years. The interglacial transition temperatures are almost all faster than what we have seen here.


quote:



The absolutely hilarious fact is that when 97% of earth scientists are saying the same thing,
Except they are not and this is made by a pro AGW scientist subjectively reading abstracts from one pro AGW paper repository.
Despite the fact that more than 70 of the scientists wrote an open letter saying their papers were in fact not pro AGW.


I call this the "Custer Syndrome."

I call this the dishonest-scientists-trying-to-protect-their-gravy-train Cluster fuck.

quote:


The simple fact is that the global climate is changing, and there are no historic models to explain it.


Svenmark explaints it quite well. AGW as proposed by the IPCC does not. Facts are inconvenient things...

quote:


Deserts world wide are expanding at a rate that defies explanation. In point of fact, the Sahara, again looking at geological/ botanical records, should actually be shrinking.

The Sahara has been growing for more than 8000 years. Why then do you think it is a result of global warming which started when.. 1971?
quote:


Again, with no object large enough to change the orbit of the planet, care to explain why this is happening? The main difference is the amount of green house gases in the atmosphere.


The desert is growing because 10,000 years ago we left the last ice age. With retreating ice, places that were once warm grew hot.

quote:


Lastly, the man that started the "climate change denial" science program had another misinformation campaign to his credit, besides tobacco, and that was the trying to prove that ozone depletion was not happening.


There is no man that started the climate change denial. There are more than 11,000 scientists who have published papers that refute one or more aspects of ipcc agw.


quote:


Now, if you want to throw out what 97% of accredited earth science researchers have stated as fact, with the support of every major scientific agency on the planet, that is fine, you are free to do so.


Except as I said the Russian academy of science, the chinese academies of science, the Indian academy of science,... and dozens more.



(in reply to jlf1961)
Profile   Post #: 19
RE: Big Oil repeatedly claims that global warming is ps... - 1/3/2016 1:08:06 PM   
bounty44


Posts: 6374
Joined: 11/1/2014
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

Now, if you want to throw out what 97% of accredited earth science researchers have stated as fact, with the support of every major scientific agency on the planet, that is fine, you are free to do so.



am going share a response with you I just recently shared with someone else:

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44


quote:

ORIGINAL: Tkman117

...and this one former politician does not account for 97% of climate scientists who agree that climate change is happening.


“There is nothing so absurd that it cannot be believed as truth if repeated often enough.”
--William james--

quote:

Secretary of State John Kerry, President Obama and others frequently claim that climate change will have “crippling consequences,” and that “Ninety-seven percent of scientists agree that climate change is real, man-made and dangerous.” In reality, the assertion is science fiction. The so-called consensus comes from a handful of surveys and exercises in counting abstracts from scientific papers – all of which have been contradicted by more reliable research...

Another widely cited source for the consensus view is an article in Eos: Transactions of the American Geophysical Union. It reported the results of a two-question online survey of selected scientists, and claimed “97 percent of climate scientists agree.” Most scientists who are skeptical of man-made catastrophic global warming would nevertheless answer “yes” to both questions. However, the survey was silent on whether the human impact – or the rise in temperature – is large enough to constitute a problem. It also failed to include scientists most likely to be aware of natural causes of climate change.

There is no basis for the claim that 97% of scientists believe that man-made climate change is a dangerous problem.

To read the rest of their article, go to http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303480304579578462813553136



http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/05/30/the-myth-of-the-97-climate-change-consensus/

quote:



I get soooo tired of hearing about how 97 percent of all climate scientists believe humans are responsible for global warming due to their insatiable addiction to fossil fuels as well as other anthropogenic sources of carbon dioxide generation. My friend Jim Lakely, of the Heartland Institute, has probably put together the best summary to bust this myth, so I’ll let him do the talking:

One of the most commonly cited studies of the “97 percent” was conducted by a University of Illinois professor and a graduate student who asked the following questions to 10,257 Earth scientists working for universities and government research agencies:

Q1. When compared with pre‐1800s levels, do you think that mean global temperatures have generally risen, fallen, or remained relatively constant?”

Q2. Do you think human activity is a significant contributing factor in changing mean global temperatures?

They received responses from 3,146 people, of which only 5 percent self‐identified as climate scientists. To get to the magic 97 percent in the affirmative to both questions — in the answers to questions even many skeptics would answer “yes” — the study’s authors had to whittle down the survey to a paltry 79 “climate scientists,” defined as those who also have “published more than 50 percent of their recent peer‐reviewed papers on the subject of climate change.” The National Academy of Sciences survey is similarly skewed.

So, bottom line: A handful of “qualified” scientists asserting “fact” is not what it seems. Yet the enviro-left still clings to this fraudulent “argument by authority” nonsense.


http://www.theclimategatebook.com/busting-the-97-myth/

and that’s just a very small sampling…the internet is awash with that figure being debunked.

so two things---one is, it should be humbling to you to be running around believing and perpetuating something as true when there is so much evidence indicting it as a falsehood. do you actually examine things, or only those things that jibe with your worldview?

And as importantly---you’ve been smack dab in the middle of conversations where this 97% myth has been pointed out to you before, hard to believe you missed that---if you didn't miss it, but continue to perpetuate it---that should be troubling.


that same sort of response can be given for practically every point you raise---phydeaux's been doing so.

so that said---can you still not see what you are doing, and that this thread is unfolding exactly how I said it would?

if there is anyone "denying" here, it really is you.



< Message edited by bounty44 -- 1/3/2016 1:09:43 PM >

(in reply to jlf1961)
Profile   Post #: 20
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> Big Oil repeatedly claims that global warming is psuedoscience... Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.125