Ok, this global warming shit is getting out of hand...

[ron johnson]

This is such a crock of bullshit. We've had the need for climate scientists for eons. They plan corp engineering so seeds are designed to thrive in predicted climate. National security is another key aspect of the climate forecasting. Yelling at people to go green is about way more than energy futures and the climate scientists aren't the ones lining their pockets from that aspect.

Obviously I'm not saying climate scientists are useless. I am saying that without the billions of dollars directed toward human caused global warming research, there will be less jobs available.

For example, Trump doesn't view global warming as a threat so he tried to axe a $10mm NASA climate science program, fortunately for those working in that program, the House of Representatives voted to restore the the program: https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018...ved-restore-it

[Mofro261]

Annual climate science budget: 2 Billion. Annual Oil subsidies from gov't: 20 billion.

Follow the money indeed.

[ron johnson]

Annual climate science budget: 2 Billion. Annual Oil subsidies from gov't: 20 billion.

Follow the money indeed.

You are comparing climate science funding vs energy subsidies... they have nothing do with each other. Try taking a look at how much climate research is fossil fuel industry funded.

[MultiVerse]

Nearly a billion dollars a year is flowing into organized climate change denial.

There is a very well-funded, well-orchestrated climate change-denial movement, one funded by powerful people with very deep pockets. 91 think tanks and advocacy organizations and trade associations that make up the American climate denial industry pull down just shy of a billion dollars each year, money used to lobby or sway public opinion on climate change and other issues.

What you see is the tactics that this movement uses were developed and tested in the tobacco industry first, and now they’re being applied to the climate change movement, and in fact, some of the same people and some of the same organizations that were involved in the tobacco issue are also involved in climate change.

http://www.drexel.edu/~/media/Files/...%20Change.ashx

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart...ent-180948204/

[SumJongGuy]

Nearly a billion dollars a year is flowing into organized climate change denial.

There is a very well-funded, well-orchestrated climate change-denial movement, one funded by powerful people with very deep pockets. 91 think tanks and advocacy organizations and trade associations that make up the American climate denial industry pull down just shy of a billion dollars each year, money used to lobby or sway public opinion on climate change and other issues.

What you see is the tactics that this movement uses were developed and tested in the tobacco industry first, and now they’re being applied to the climate change movement, and in fact, some of the same people and some of the same organizations that were involved in the tobacco issue are also involved in climate change.

http://www.drexel.edu/~/media/Files/...%20Change.ashx

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart...ent-180948204/

Pffft, someone's gotta tell the truth that tobacco is harmless..

[k2skier112]

Those climate scientists don't have a job if global warming isn't viewed as a major problem.

shut the fuck up you ignorant cunt. posting here so much doesn't leave you much time to rape the children

[k2skier112]

You are comparing climate science funding vs energy subsidies... they have nothing do with each other. Try taking a look at how much climate research is fossil fuel industry funded.

you can't make 'em much dumber, brainwashed or corrupt as you, fuck me it's painful to read your shit, on ignore you go

[ron johnson]

Nearly a billion dollars a year is flowing into organized climate change denial.

There is a very well-funded, well-orchestrated climate change-denial movement, one funded by powerful people with very deep pockets. 91 think tanks and advocacy organizations and trade associations that make up the American climate denial industry pull down just shy of a billion dollars each year, money used to lobby or sway public opinion on climate change and other issues.

What you see is the tactics that this movement uses were developed and tested in the tobacco industry first, and now they’re being applied to the climate change movement, and in fact, some of the same people and some of the same organizations that were involved in the tobacco issue are also involved in climate change.

http://www.drexel.edu/~/media/Files/...%20Change.ashx

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart...ent-180948204/

When will you guys start to learn that there is probably a >90% chance that every climate related headline is a gross exaggeration or straight BS? This article implies that nearly $1 billion/year is being spent on 'climate denial.' That is not the case. The only thing this paper finds is that of the subjectively chosen 91 think tanks, advocacy organizations, and trade associations that make up the 'climate denial' industry, they have a combined income of nearly $1 billion/year. They have no idea how much of this money is directed toward 'climate denial', but we can be sure it is significantly less than $1billion/year since, "the majority of the organizations are multiple focus organizations, not all this money was devoted to climate change activities."

[MultiVerse]

The article says outright, "the American climate denial industry pull down just shy of a billion dollars each year, money used to lobby or sway public opinion on climate change and other issues."

[JONG SLAUGHTER]

RECORD LOWS BEING SET EVERYWHERE AND YOU DUMB CUNTS STILL WHINING ABOUT GLOBAL WARMING. IPCC ONLY EXISTS TO PROVE ANTHROPOGENIC GLOBAL WARMING. IF CONSTITUENTS DIDN'T CRY LIKE YOU BITCHES HERE, IPCC WOULD GO BYE-BYE. COOL RELIGION DOUCHES.

[MultiVerse]

Snow in Colorado. Jong Slaughter's mom called to say she got 5 inches and plowed by Kenny.

[SkiCougar]

for your next alarmist protest rally:

https://www.visualcapitalist.com/com...bon-emissions/

inforgraphic: "Which Companies Are Responsible For the Most Carbon Emissions?"

[WMD]

When will you guys start to learn that there is probably a >90% chance that every climate related headline is a gross exaggeration or straight BS?

Clearly you don't know any real climate scientists. I do. They are terrified and depressed because the reality is much worse than the news makes it sound.

They are upset with the headlines but for sugar coating the truth instead of really telling how bad it is.

[skaredshtles]

You guys still arguing with that bot?

[ron johnson]

The article says outright, "the American climate denial industry pull down just shy of a billion dollars each year, money used to lobby or sway public opinion on climate change and other issues."

Which is why the headline, "Meet the Money Behind The Climate Denial Movement: Nearly a billion dollars a year is flowing into the organized climate change counter movement" is a gross exaggeration. If you are just seeing the headline, or not paying close attention to the article, you would be led to believe there is close to $1 billion/year being spent on 'climate denial'. In reality they have no idea how much money is being spent on 'climate denial.' It could be as little as $10mm for all they know.

[ron johnson]

Clearly you don't know any real climate scientists. I do. They are terrified and depressed because the reality is much worse than the news makes it sound.

They are upset with the headlines but for sugar coating the truth instead of really telling how bad it is.

Clearly the climate scientists you know from your activist circles are not representative of everyone.

[mcski]

Clearly the climate scientists you know from your activist circles are not representative of everyone.

They’re representing over 97 percent of climate scientists and all people w a working brain

[ron johnson]

They’re representing over 97 percent of climate scientists and all people w a working brain

It's already been beaten to death in this thread how that number is bogus.

[WMD]

It's already been beaten to death in this thread how that number is bogus.

Just because you've said it over and over doesn't make it any truer than the first time you said it.

[ron johnson]

Just because you've said it over and over doesn't make it any truer than the first time you said it.

I've proven it.

[Buster Highmen]

I never extrapolated that solar is the only answer. Everyone agrees it has to be a big part of a non carbon future. You are the one touting how cheap it is, and I'm showing you that you don't understand the real costs involved in a 100% non carbon future.

How dumb do you have to be to think anyone is going to pay money to shill on such a small forum? Change for a nickel anyone?

No deep thought required. Just a healthy dose of reality.

I'd suggest staying out of a discussion you clearly have no clue about.

"You argue the temperature reading sites, not the actual temps."

-I have no idea what this is supposed to mean.

"You argue that the temps have been this high before, but leave out the fact that the rate of increase we have now could only have been possible hundreds of years ago, or longer, from a catastrophic incident like a meteor or volcano"

-This isn't close to true. Please take a look for yourself at the temperature record of the last 10,000 years. The temperature spikes during the Younger Dryas (12,800 - 13,200 years ago) were likely caused by comets. That was a 12 degree celsius temperature change in ~100 years or less, talk about real climate change.

WMD,

By this point you should at least be starting to realize that any claims connecting global warming to extreme weather events are rooted in bullshit. Especially anything US centric, the US weather record is indisputable. From that point maybe you might start wondering what other bullshit you are being sold, but....

Choices always were a problem for you.
What you need is someone strong to guide you.
Deaf and blind and dumb and born to follow,
What you need is someone strong to use you
Like [Al Goreeee],
Like [Al Goreeee].

You've already demonstrated that you aren't informed enough to have any place in this discussion.

How dense can you be? In the top right of your link it says 3.3mm/year. The study I previously linked said 3.1mm/year. Congrats, sea level rise has increased by 2 tenths of a millimeter per year. Ready the sandbags!!

I can't believe how much you guys appeal to authority and refuse to even try to use your brains. Are you guys able to get dressed in the morning without your mom laying out your clothes the night before?

If you believe that is the crux of my argument you are either not paying attention or just dumb. I don't believe I have ever argued that we do nothing simply because we don't know how bad it will be.

What am I getting wrong on solar? My stance is that 100% non carbon renewables is unfeasible with our current tech. Given that we don't have a single solar plant with adequate backup to look at for an example proves my point.

Your reading comprehension skills... they are lacking.

I've proven it.

No, you have not.

Everything you claim has been refuted, you just won't accept it.

All you have are the above ad hominems.

[MultiVerse]

https://www.visualcapitalist.com/com...bon-emissions/

inforgraphic: "Which Companies Are Responsible For the Most Carbon Emissions?"

Exxon Former CEO Says Climate Change ‘With Us Forever More’

"It’s rare for a current or former leader of one of the world’s largest energy firms to testify under oath about climate change. That’s why a New York courtroom was packed on Wednesday to see ex-Exxon Mobil Corp. Chief Executive Officer Rex Tillerson take the witness stand and explain, in the context of a securities-fraud trial, that the company knew for years how global warming was a significant threat."

“We knew, we knew it was a real issue,” said Tillerson, 67. “We knew it was a serious issue and we knew it was one that’s going to be with us now, forevermore, and it’s not something that was just suddenly going to disappear off of our concern list because it is going to be with us for certainly well beyond my lifetime.”


https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...s-forever-more

[ron johnson]

No, you have not.

Everything you claim has been refuted, you just won't accept it.

All you have are the above ad hominems.

You are too funny. I have never been the initiator of any attack to anyone on here. All of you quotes are in response to people who were already insulting me... some of your quotes aren't even attacks.

And no, very little of anything I have said on here has been refuted.

[Bunion 2020]

[MultiVerse]

Pffft, someone's gotta tell the truth that tobacco is harmless..

Yeah even though deniers are refuted by reality, delay and obfuscation are their goals. There's also a lot of untraceable dark money being donated so the annual billion is just the visible part of the iceberg.


What denier charlatans don't want people to realize is it's not a billion dollars spent on climate change denial or other issues. The analysis says it's a billion dollars spent annually on climate change denial and other issues. The goal is to conflate x and y and z. If a person is opposed to some cultural issue (x), or gay marriage or whatever (y), then climate change (z) makes the list too because petro donors mostly care about z (climate denial).

The peripheral cultural issues that get people riled up may come and go, but the core components underlying the financial interests of the donors remains. The goal is to create controversy in the face of scientific fact some of which is accomplished by inciting unrelated cultural contests.