How Silly is Climate Change Denial?

[Tyger]

 

[Tyger]

U.S. Climate Has Already Changed, Study Finds, Citing Heat and Floods
LINK: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/07/s...0140507&nl=todaysheadlines&nlid=54852892&_r=0

 

[BoyintheMachine]

It has not been demonstrated that this is a fraud. Indeed energy companies benefit more from status quo.

Gene, that's not quite how science works. Global Warming/Man-Made Climate Change did not go through the scientific process of acceptance. Instead, the UN shoved it down the world's throats. If you watch that documentary I posted in the first reply in this thread then it reveals how the UN deliberately lied about it by claiming the world's top 2500 scientists supported it. In reality they put down the names of scientists who opposed it and made it look like they supported it as well as put down names of non-scientists and tried to make it look like they were real scientists. This is most definitely a fraud. Going further, this fraud committed by the UN was used to support the position of federal financing of any scientist who supports it. If you are a scientist who supports it you get the grant money. If you don't support it you do not get grant money. This creates a situation where unethical scientists are fudging data in order to get the money. After all, scientists are people too and they have to put food on the table for their families. So yes, this whole thing is a fraud. It can not be established that CO2 is driving factor for global warming/climate change, thus it can not be proven that man-made CO2 is likewise responsible. There have been periods of time with up to 10x the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere than today. The world's most hottest periods occurred prior to human industrialization. Just think about that Gene. If this is such an issue why are we nowhere close to the levels of CO2 and earth warming that occurred thousands of years ago? If man-made climate change is true than today, this very moment, should be the hottest the earth has ever experienced. It's not and is nowhere near it. Thus it is evidence indicating the man-made global warming threat is a farce.

 

[Gene Steinberg]

Yes, all these scientists around the world were hoodwinked into believing in climate change. So they aren't tools of the energy industry. Tell me another one.

 

[Charlie Prime]

..the 97% of climate scientists who accept the theory of man-made global warming are all in the pockets of the energy companies

No. As I posted above and you ignored, the "97%" statistic used in the Viacom Corporation video above is FRAUDULENT. Here is an explanation of how that piece of science fraud was generated:

Cook’s survey not only meaningless but also misleading « De staat van het klimaat

...energy companies who expect to receive imaginary carbon tax benefits, doesn't stand up to the logic test.

Carbon taxes are highly regressive. Carbon taxes extract wealth from poor people and transfer it to corporations via government subsidy.

Think by Numbers » Government Spends More on Corporate Welfare Subsidies than Social Welfare Programs

Corporate Subsidies

Corporate Welfare Grows to $154 Billion even as Government Cuts Spending

Subsidy Tracker 2.0 | Good Jobs First

The sad part is how easy it is for the 1% to use government to extract wealth from poor people. Throw well-meaning but intellectually lazy voters enough propaganda videos and faked statistics, and they will support it.

 

[Charlie Prime]

Global Warming/Man-Made Climate Change did not go through the scientific process of acceptance.

This is what shocked me several years ago. I tried to look at the "science" behind AGW and discovered:

- the faked data (dry-labbing)
- the secret or "proprietary" data
- the secret computer models that can't back-cast, and generate the same result even when you feed them random data!
- the withholding of research funding based on politics
- the locking up in the bottom drawer of the file cabinet any findings which disagree

It's insane. Americans willfully ignore the Scientific Method taught to them in 9th grade.

 

[Charlie Prime]

This was so sad it's funny.

Note that this does NOT include the TRILLIONS of dollars in sweet-heart government contracts like when Microsoft sells 100,000 over-priced copies of Windows XP to the state government of Texas, or when Haliburton builds a prison...

Subsidy Tracker Top 100 Parent Companies | Good Jobs First


Subsidy Tracker Top 100 Parent Companies


Rank Parent Subsidy Value Number of Subsidies
1 Boeing $13,174,075,797 137
2 Alcoa $5,635,305,059 91
3 Intel $3,867,492,085 58
4 General Motors $3,494,237,703 307
5 Ford Motor $2,522,304,454 173
6 Fiat $2,060,988,039 93
7 Royal Dutch Shell $2,038,202,298 66
8 Nike $2,024,582,002 23
9 Nissan $1,799,585,041 25
10 Cerner $1,732,784,334 15
11 Cheniere Energy $1,693,646,504 10
12 Dow Chemical $1,408,228,374 416
13 ArcelorMittal $1,338,284,411 58
14 Advanced Technology Investment Company $1,224,997,961 4
15 Berkshire Hathaway $1,063,809,399 310
16 Toyota $1,051,586,557 77
17 IBM $1,026,845,249 208
18 Delta Air Lines $869,754,989 7
19 Texas Instruments $727,848,327 39
20 Pyramid Companies $703,596,595 15
21 Goldman Sachs $661,979,222 28
22 Volkswagen $657,778,311 14
23 JPMorgan Chase $653,474,481 133
24 Hyundai Motor $649,041,683 7
25 Google $632,044,922 26
26 Teck Resources $597,871,991 5
27 Mayo Clinic $585,000,000 1
28 Forest City Enterprises $582,389,708 37
29 Clean Coal Power Operations $550,000,000 1
29 Sematech $550,000,000 3
30 Scripps Research Institute $545,000,000 1
31 Daimler $544,749,000 42
32 Sears $535,988,568 62
33 Nucor $534,974,717 46
34 Silver Lake $482,025,256 85
35 FedEx $456,750,126 222
36 NRG Energy $449,990,674 49
37 Apple $446,485,233 6
38 Honda $438,179,224 38
39 McEagle Properties $430,650,000 5
40 Cornell University $400,000,000 1
41 Shin-Etsu Chemical $398,842,605 40
42 Severstal $396,013,300 26
43 General Electric $394,212,107 255
44 Onex $388,603,757 118
45 Walt Disney $381,525,727 36
46 Mitsubishi Group $379,243,036 42
47 Morgan Stanley $366,284,480 47
48 Triple Five Worldwide $358,000,000 2
49 Michelin $357,416,880 46
50 Community Health Systems $355,703,779 94
51 Aker $350,000,000 1
52 H&R Block $341,317,824 9
53 Exxon Mobil $340,271,846 71
54 United Continental $337,081,638 20
55 Amazon.com $330,756,147 39
56 LG $327,082,717 14
57 Duke Energy $325,877,242 15
58 Revel AC $323,000,000 2
59 Samsung $317,148,838 17
60 Huntington Ingalls Industries $312,056,400 5
61 Weyerhaeuser $300,575,457 92
62 Orca Bay Seafoods $296,849,235 6
63 UBS $293,608,178 12
64 Anschutz Company $291,395,815 7
65 Jackson Laboratory $291,000,000 1
66 Areva $289,116,137 13
67 Citigroup $286,378,767 65
68 Sasol $279,262,538 27
69 Peabody Energy $278,095,289 22
70 Electrolux $278,068,356 19
71 ConAgra Foods $271,306,014 145
72 Nestle $264,262,725 163
73 General Dynamics $262,528,332 84
74 Valero Energy $262,298,522 54
75 Yahoo $261,078,455 17
76 Eli Lilly $258,216,376 15
77 BMW $254,326,405 13
78 Orascom Group $251,000,000 1
79 Cabela's $247,189,539 16
80 Wacker Chemie $241,325,051 34
81 Comcast $239,337,579 62
82 Sanford-Burnham Medical Research Institute $233,600,000 2
83 Virdia $230,000,000 1
84 Prudential Financial $225,734,997 30
85 International Paper $222,836,793 196
86 Baxter International $212,892,487 20
87 Johnson Controls $210,010,267 106
88 Caterpillar $208,982,443 127
89 Blackstone $203,193,594 141
90 Pfizer $200,899,038 118
91 Convergys $199,690,351 21
92 Triumph Group $196,342,629 57
93 Max Planck Florida Institute $193,000,000 2
94 Goodyear Tire & Rubber $190,432,390 118
95 CME Group $188,000,000 6
96 Simon Property $187,000,000 2
97 Summit Power $183,221,842 2
98 CA Inc. $181,258,193 20
99 Bank of America $179,959,106 119

 

[Gene Steinberg]

None of that has anything to do with climate change politics, where the opposition, those who oppose it, is often funded by oil companies and similar interests.

Hint: Microsoft stopped selling Windows XP a long time ago.

 

[Charlie Prime]

A regressive tax on poor people supported by fraudulent science promoted by mega-corpororations who receive trillions in tax money and government contracts has nothing to do with anything.

I got it now. Thanks Mr. Gene.

 

[Gene Steinberg]

Welcome to the Bizarro world. Actually the key climate change denial comes from the conservative media, such as Fox News, with those who oppose it most often on the payroll of energy companies who don't want us to use less oil, for example, such as the ones owned by the Koch brothers, who are responsible for financing the Tea Party. I thought of that when the last tank of gas on my car registered 29.9 miles per gallon for mixed highway/city driving. Maybe I'll get a hybrid or a diesel next time and get 40 mpg.

You got this so backwards it's incredible. But we also have the crazy theory that it's all a UN plot, so please get your conspiracies straight.

 

[SillyRaabit]

On covering up data, activism v. science, and the limits of computer modeling:

The video also addresses the climate change on Jupiter, the failure of the hockey stick / computer models to predict real-world temperature changes in the past ten years, and why we should be skeptical about government- or corporate-driven research.

 

[BoyintheMachine]

Yes, all these scientists around the world were hoodwinked into believing in climate change. So they aren't tools of the energy industry. Tell me another one.

No, Gene. The world's scientist are not unified in their acceptance of Global Warming/Man-Made Climate Change. There is a considerable opposition. However, a system has been set up in the U.S. and pretty much all Western nations, so that scientists who want to write/publish papers in favor of it get the money. Those who are not supportive do not get the grant money. Not only that, but scientists in other fields don't keep up on the drama that is unfolding and they just *assume* the science is correct.

Climate Change is REAL, Gene. The earth's climate is not static. The issue is whether or not human activity is the driving factor of climate change and the answer is most assuredly NO. Humans are so freaking egostistical that they once believed the earth was the center of the Universe. Now they believe earth's climate revolves around human activity. The nerve!

Watch the documentary. CO2 can not be proven to be the driving factor of global warming. This means the entire pro-man-made climate change argument falls to pieces. If the basic premise can not be proven then the entire thing is a farce.

 

[BoyintheMachine]

.

You got this so backwards it's incredible. But we also have the crazy theory that it's all a UN plot, so please get your conspiracies straight.

It's a FACT, Gene. The UN's paper on "The World's Top 2500 Scientists Support Man-Made Global Warming" contains the names of scientists who oppose it, not support it, and it contains the names of non-scientists. I'm not sure why you can't understand this means that it's a fraud, a hoax and that the UN is behind it.

 

[Gene Steinberg]

So it's an energy industry conspiracy, it's a UN conspiracy. It's a.....

And can you list the scientists who were misrepresented on that list?

 

[BoyintheMachine]

None of that has anything to do with climate change politics, where the opposition, those who oppose it, is often funded by oil companies and similar interests.

Hint: Microsoft stopped selling Windows XP a long time ago.

Watch the documentary, Gene. Once again you are pretending to be knowledgeable while not being so. All the men in the documentary saying that man-made climate change is a lie have NO CONNECTIONS to big oil, gas or anything like that.

 

[BoyintheMachine]

So it's an energy industry conspiracy, it's a UN conspiracy. It's a.....

And can you list the scientists who were misrepresented on that list?

No I will not because you are trying to paint the picture that your side is the logical, proven side and that my side must present proof to back up it's claims when in reality the situation is reversed. You are the one who has accepted something as true without proof and without researching it. If you want to know you can watch the documentary I posted in the first reply to this thread and you can research it for yourself.

 

[BoyintheMachine]

Look, everyone, a key thing to understand here is that science has been hijacked. Let me explain. The problems started with the Aids epidemic and then has just exponentially grown with the global warming/man-made climate change issue.

It use to be that the majority of funding that scientists receive came from the public. Businesses, organizations and wealthy people invested in grants for scientists to carry out their research and publish. This has all now changed. Starting with the Aids epidemic the U.S. government got into the mix and began offering big grant money to scientists. However, there is a catch. You have to believe the accepted opinion of the U.S. government in order to get the funding. So with global warming/man-made climate change you have to support it if you want to get the grant money. People who oppose it aren't getting the grants from the U.S. government. This mean the U.S. government has hijacked science and is now dictating to science what it deems to be real and valid and science must conform to it.

Scientists are people too. They have families they have to feed, clothe and put a roof over. There is considerable pressure placed on scientists to go along with the flow in order to get paid.

In order to stop this and return to true science we have to cut the head off of the snake and stop U.S. funding of scientists. It's the only way. Scientists must return to getting money from local industries, businesses and wealthy donors. If this doesn't happen then we are pretty much doomed and Big Government will be in full control of everything.

****This issue is not just happening in the U.S. It's also happening in the UK and most European nations.

 

[Gene Steinberg]

OK, so you won't answer the question.

I don't claim to be a climate change expert or scientist, but there are clearly indications of climate change. You can argue that it's natural, not caused by human abuse.

But that doesn't mean we shouldn't conserve energy and not pollute the environment. That's a given regardless of what you believe to be the cause of climate changes.

 

[Gene Steinberg]

No I will not because you are trying to paint the picture that your side is the logical, proven side and that my side must present proof to back up it's claims when in reality the situation is reversed. You are the one who has accepted something as true without proof and without researching it. If you want to know you can watch the documentary I posted in the first reply to this thread and you can research it for yourself.

The evidence has already been widely posted. I don't need to locate the references for you. Spend 1 minute on Google and you'll get the UN report, NASA report, U.S. gov. report, etc.

 

[BoyintheMachine]

The evidence has already been widely posted. I don't need to locate the references for you. Spend 1 minute on Google and you'll get the UN report, NASA report, U.S. gov. report, etc.

OK, so you won't answer the question.

I don't claim to be a climate change expert or scientist, but there are clearly indications of climate change. You can argue that it's natural, not caused by human abuse.

But that doesn't mean we shouldn't conserve energy and not pollute the environment. That's a given regardless of what you believe to be the cause of climate changes.

Yes, Gene. The climate changes. But the key thing you are missing is that people behind this are not interested in real pollution. Their claim is that CO2 is pollution. CO2 is not pollution and their claims that CO2 is the driving force behind all climate change can not be proven. They can not prove this. They convinced much of the world that this is the case but the evidence is clear that CO2 is not the driving force behind climate change. What the people pushing this nonsense are truly interested in is $$$$. Billions of dollars are spent in favor of man-made climate change. Scientists supporting it are making 6 figure salaries based on U.S. government grant money. This is a billion dollar industry but the propaganda suggests that it's Big Oil and Gas who is supporting the opposition. The opposition funding in no way matches the billions spent by the U.S. government. If you want to follow the money then do so and it will lead you to those pushing it as a reality, not the opposition.

Gene, also research what the "solution" is. Find out what the powers that be want to enact to "solve" this alleged problem. Maybe then you will see it for being the farce that it is.