AOC states we haven't seen Co2 levels like this since the Pliocene period

[RealDave]

There's every reason to believe humans are causing this.
Carbon concentration in the atmosphere is measurable. It's 50% higher today than it was before the industrial revolution.
Carbon emissions are measurable from both natural and man made sources.
The amount of carbon humans emit is measureable. It's a lot. ( 37.1 billon metric tons at the end of 2018 )
There is no natural source of carbon emissions that come anywhere close to accounting for the rise we see.

High concentrations in earth's past prior to human activity obviously came from natural sources that aren't active today.

Can you point to any natural source of carbon emissions that even comes close to or surpasses the levels emitted by human activity?

Killing off some humans would probably take care of it.

You first. Getting rid of Trumpettes is a good start as it would reduce the number of stupid people.

 

[RealDave]

It's an odd claim. Let's say for the sake of argument that what she said is true.

Then the earth has lived through previous periods like this. So why worry about it?

Her claim undercuts her own apocolyptic arguments

Humans have never had to live through this. That's her point.

Yes but if the planet has been like this beforr humans existed there is no reason to bekieve humans are causing this

No one is saying ONLY humans can cause a rise in CO2 levels you stupid fuck. How stupid are you people?

 

[RealDave]

AOC is possibly the most reliable measure of truth. If she said it, it probably isn’t true.

She said the Republicans amended the Constitution so FDR couldn't get re-elected.
That could be true when you consider that if the Progressives don't mind dead people voting, then they probably wouldn't have a problem with a dead person running for office.

You prefer voter suppression

 

[RealDave]

It's an odd claim. Let's say for the sake of argument that what she said is true.

Then the earth has lived through previous periods like this. So why worry about it?

Her claim undercuts her own apocolyptic arguments

The planet will survive.

How about people?

Were people around then? How did it effect animal life? What changes would need made from today's society to exist under those circumstances?

Those are the questions you are too stupid to even consider.

 

[Lesh]

It's an odd claim. Let's say for the sake of argument that what she said is true.

Then the earth has lived through previous periods like this. So why worry about it?

Her claim undercuts her own apocolyptic arguments

Ummm what? The claim was that CO2 levels haven’t been this high in the history of ... read this slowly... humans.

The fact that they may have been higher at some time when humans didn’t exist is meaningless .

The point is that CO 2 levels this high affect human life in ways we are not going to like

 

[Ambivalent1]

There's every reason to believe humans are causing this.
Carbon concentration in the atmosphere is measurable. It's 50% higher today than it was before the industrial revolution.
Carbon emissions are measurable from both natural and man made sources.
The amount of carbon humans emit is measureable. It's a lot. ( 37.1 billon metric tons at the end of 2018 )
There is no natural source of carbon emissions that come anywhere close to accounting for the rise we see.

High concentrations in earth's past prior to human activity obviously came from natural sources that aren't active today.

Can you point to any natural source of carbon emissions that even comes close to or surpasses the levels emitted by human activity?

Killing off some humans would probably take care of it.

You first. Getting rid of Trumpettes is a good start as it would reduce the number of stupid people.

Go for it kid, pick up a weapon and start killing conservatives.

 

[Ambivalent1]

It's an odd claim. Let's say for the sake of argument that what she said is true.

Then the earth has lived through previous periods like this. So why worry about it?

Her claim undercuts her own apocolyptic arguments

Ummm what? The claim was that CO2 levels haven’t been this high in the history of ... read this slowly... humans.

The fact that they may have been higher at some time when humans didn’t exist is meaningless .

The point is that CO 2 levels this high affect human life in ways we are not going to like

Perhaps you'll die soon.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

God damn asshole I made threads on it here

I am putting this one in politics this is where climate change funding money goes... To anything but real science.



Climate change musical funded by $700,000 National Science Foundation grant


Climate change musical funded by $700,000 National Science Foundation grant


Republican U.S. Rep. Lamar Smith, whose district stretches from San Antonio north into Austin, recently pressed an official about the government bankrolling a musical

Smith, chairman of the House Science, Space & Technology Committee, listed six National Science Foundation grants as questionable--including, Smith said at the panel’s March 26, 2014, hearing, a "climate change musical that was prepared for Broadway but I’m not sure ever was actually produced, $700,000."

Smith then asked John Holdren, the White House science czar, if the foundation should justify such grants to the public, whose tax dollars fund them, the Texan reminded.

Holdren replied that the foundation, which is entrusted with promoting scientific progress, already justifies its grants in online posts.


Grant confirmed

To our inquiry, a foundation spokeswoman, Dana Topousis, said by email the grant was awarded in 2010, adding: "The Civilians, Inc., a Brooklyn, N.Y., theatre company, developed an innovative, out-of-the-box approach to exposing U.S. citizens to science. The project represents the unique cultural leverage of theater in its attempt to inspire the public’s imagination and curiosity about basic science and its relation to their everyday lives."

A grant to educate the public.

OMG OMG OMG OMG

The government should not try to make Americans smarter. Noooooooooooo.

Global Warming: Follow the Money

Citing documents uncovered by the radical environmental group Greenpeace, a group of media outlets — including the New York Times and the Boston Globe — have attacked global-warming skeptic Wei-Hock (Willie) Soon for allegedly hiding $1.2 million in contributions from “fossil fuel companies.” The articles were the latest in an ongoing campaign by greens and their media allies to discredit opponents of the warming agenda.

But in allying themselves closely with activist groups with which they share ideological goals, reporters have fundamentally misled readers on the facts of global-warming funding.


In truth, the overwhelming majority of climate-research funding comes from the federal government and left-wing foundations. And while the energy industry funds both sides of the climate debate, The government/foundation monies go only toward research that advances the warming regulatory agenda. With a clear public-policy outcome in mind, the government/foundation gravy train is a much greater threat to scientific integrity.




Officials with the Smithsonian Institution — which employs Dr. Soon — told the Times it appeared the scientist had violated disclosure standards, and they said they would look into the matter. Soon, a Malaysian immigrant, is a widely respected astrophysicist, and his allies came quickly to his defense


Indeed, experts in the research community say that it is much more difficult for some of the top climate scientists — Soon, Roger Pielke Jr., the CATO Institute’s Patrick Michaels, MIT’s now-retired Richard Lindzen — to get funding for their work because they do not embrace the global-warming fearmongering favored by the government-funded climate establishment.

Global Warming: Follow the Money



Yep follow the money , it's all about man made climate change and not much funding for natural causes.

Nonsense written by and for retards and liars. The money is in fossil fuels.

so you deny facts?


by the way...........

Climate change creating havoc on mental health


Well this explains the AGW cult.



https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.th...experts.html?client=ms-android-sprint-mvno-us

Our fast-changing climate has long been identified as a threat to physical health, but more psychologists are warning that the mental health impacts and the economic toll they take are real, likely to spread and need closer study.

Article Continued Below
“We may not currently be thinking about how heavy the toll on our psyche will be, but, before long, we will know only too well,” warned a 2012 report from the U.S. National Wildlife Federation.

It predicted that cases of mental and social disorders will rise steeply as the signs of climate change become clearer and more frequent, and as more people are directly affected by heat waves, drought and other extreme events that put pressure on clean water resources, food prices and public infrastructure.

“These will include depressive and anxiety disorders, post-traumatic stress disorders, substance abuse, suicides and widespread outbreaks of violence,” predicted the report. It singled out children, the poor, the elderly and those with existing mental health problems as those likely to be hardest hit.

“At roughly 150 million people, these groups represent about one half of the American public,” it calculated. In addition, the mental health profession is “not even close to being prepared” and the report warned the existing problem is likely being underestimated because most research is based on self-reporting.

“People may, indeed, suffer from anxiety about climate change but not know it. They will have a vague unease about what is happening around them, the changes they see in nature, the weather events and the fact that records are being broken month after month. But they won’t be sufficiently aware of the source, and furthermore, we all conflate and layer one anxiety upon another.”

You are a lying freak who not only knows less than nothing about this topic, you didnt even read a single word of your own copy paste jobs. Not a single word. You're a fraud. You have never made a single point about this topic, nor could you do so if your life depended on it.

 

[Ambivalent1]

I am putting this one in politics this is where climate change funding money goes... To anything but real science.



Climate change musical funded by $700,000 National Science Foundation grant


Climate change musical funded by $700,000 National Science Foundation grant


Republican U.S. Rep. Lamar Smith, whose district stretches from San Antonio north into Austin, recently pressed an official about the government bankrolling a musical

Smith, chairman of the House Science, Space & Technology Committee, listed six National Science Foundation grants as questionable--including, Smith said at the panel’s March 26, 2014, hearing, a "climate change musical that was prepared for Broadway but I’m not sure ever was actually produced, $700,000."

Smith then asked John Holdren, the White House science czar, if the foundation should justify such grants to the public, whose tax dollars fund them, the Texan reminded.

Holdren replied that the foundation, which is entrusted with promoting scientific progress, already justifies its grants in online posts.


Grant confirmed

To our inquiry, a foundation spokeswoman, Dana Topousis, said by email the grant was awarded in 2010, adding: "The Civilians, Inc., a Brooklyn, N.Y., theatre company, developed an innovative, out-of-the-box approach to exposing U.S. citizens to science. The project represents the unique cultural leverage of theater in its attempt to inspire the public’s imagination and curiosity about basic science and its relation to their everyday lives."

A grant to educate the public.

OMG OMG OMG OMG

The government should not try to make Americans smarter. Noooooooooooo.

Global Warming: Follow the Money

Citing documents uncovered by the radical environmental group Greenpeace, a group of media outlets — including the New York Times and the Boston Globe — have attacked global-warming skeptic Wei-Hock (Willie) Soon for allegedly hiding $1.2 million in contributions from “fossil fuel companies.” The articles were the latest in an ongoing campaign by greens and their media allies to discredit opponents of the warming agenda.

But in allying themselves closely with activist groups with which they share ideological goals, reporters have fundamentally misled readers on the facts of global-warming funding.


In truth, the overwhelming majority of climate-research funding comes from the federal government and left-wing foundations. And while the energy industry funds both sides of the climate debate, The government/foundation monies go only toward research that advances the warming regulatory agenda. With a clear public-policy outcome in mind, the government/foundation gravy train is a much greater threat to scientific integrity.




Officials with the Smithsonian Institution — which employs Dr. Soon — told the Times it appeared the scientist had violated disclosure standards, and they said they would look into the matter. Soon, a Malaysian immigrant, is a widely respected astrophysicist, and his allies came quickly to his defense


Indeed, experts in the research community say that it is much more difficult for some of the top climate scientists — Soon, Roger Pielke Jr., the CATO Institute’s Patrick Michaels, MIT’s now-retired Richard Lindzen — to get funding for their work because they do not embrace the global-warming fearmongering favored by the government-funded climate establishment.

Global Warming: Follow the Money



Yep follow the money , it's all about man made climate change and not much funding for natural causes.

Nonsense written by and for retards and liars. The money is in fossil fuels.

so you deny facts?


by the way...........

Climate change creating havoc on mental health


Well this explains the AGW cult.



https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.th...experts.html?client=ms-android-sprint-mvno-us

Our fast-changing climate has long been identified as a threat to physical health, but more psychologists are warning that the mental health impacts and the economic toll they take are real, likely to spread and need closer study.

Article Continued Below
“We may not currently be thinking about how heavy the toll on our psyche will be, but, before long, we will know only too well,” warned a 2012 report from the U.S. National Wildlife Federation.

It predicted that cases of mental and social disorders will rise steeply as the signs of climate change become clearer and more frequent, and as more people are directly affected by heat waves, drought and other extreme events that put pressure on clean water resources, food prices and public infrastructure.

“These will include depressive and anxiety disorders, post-traumatic stress disorders, substance abuse, suicides and widespread outbreaks of violence,” predicted the report. It singled out children, the poor, the elderly and those with existing mental health problems as those likely to be hardest hit.

“At roughly 150 million people, these groups represent about one half of the American public,” it calculated. In addition, the mental health profession is “not even close to being prepared” and the report warned the existing problem is likely being underestimated because most research is based on self-reporting.

“People may, indeed, suffer from anxiety about climate change but not know it. They will have a vague unease about what is happening around them, the changes they see in nature, the weather events and the fact that records are being broken month after month. But they won’t be sufficiently aware of the source, and furthermore, we all conflate and layer one anxiety upon another.”

You are a lying freak who not only knows less than nothing about this topic, you didnt even read a single word of your own copy paste jobs. Not a single word. You're a fraud.

Projection chile.

 

[Wyatt earp]

You really hate the truth /facts and don't know how grants work do you?


Educate yourself, the truth will set you free.

You presented no facts. Just your ignorance.

God damn asshole I made threads on it here

God damn assshole? Fuck you. You know nothing about grants. You know little alout anything. I have debunked every post you made.

Lol.....always angry!

Translation on the optics?

"I'm losing and looking silly!"

Hanging your hat on symbolic stuff is ghey

Telling the truth is not losing.

Losing is keep repeating bullshit lies over & over.

The Alarming Cost Of Climate Change Hysteria


The Alarming Cost Of Climate Change Hysteria





A May 20 report noted that while annual federal funding for such activities has been increasing substantially, there is a lack of shared understanding of strategic priorities among the various responsible agency officials. This assessment agrees with the conclusions of a 2008 Congressional Research Service analysis which found no "overarching policy goal for climate change that guides the programs funded or the priorities among programs."

According to the GAO, annual federal climate spending has increased from $4.6 billion in 2003 to $8.8 billion in 2010, amounting to $106.7 billion over that period. The money was spent in four general categories: technology to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, science to understand climate changes, international assistance for developing countries, and wildlife adaptation to respond to actual or expected changes. Technology spending, the largest category, grew from $2.56 billion to $5.5 billion over this period, increasingly advancing over others in total share. Data compiled by Joanne Nova at the Science and Policy Institute indicates that the U.S. Government spent more than $32.5 billion on climate studies between 1989 and 2009. This doesn't count about $79 billion more spent for climate change technology research, foreign aid and tax breaks for "green energy."

 

[Wyatt earp]

You presented no facts. Just your ignorance.

God damn asshole I made threads on it here

I am putting this one in politics this is where climate change funding money goes... To anything but real science.



Climate change musical funded by $700,000 National Science Foundation grant


Climate change musical funded by $700,000 National Science Foundation grant


Republican U.S. Rep. Lamar Smith, whose district stretches from San Antonio north into Austin, recently pressed an official about the government bankrolling a musical

Smith, chairman of the House Science, Space & Technology Committee, listed six National Science Foundation grants as questionable--including, Smith said at the panel’s March 26, 2014, hearing, a "climate change musical that was prepared for Broadway but I’m not sure ever was actually produced, $700,000."

Smith then asked John Holdren, the White House science czar, if the foundation should justify such grants to the public, whose tax dollars fund them, the Texan reminded.

Holdren replied that the foundation, which is entrusted with promoting scientific progress, already justifies its grants in online posts.


Grant confirmed

To our inquiry, a foundation spokeswoman, Dana Topousis, said by email the grant was awarded in 2010, adding: "The Civilians, Inc., a Brooklyn, N.Y., theatre company, developed an innovative, out-of-the-box approach to exposing U.S. citizens to science. The project represents the unique cultural leverage of theater in its attempt to inspire the public’s imagination and curiosity about basic science and its relation to their everyday lives."

A grant to educate the public.

OMG OMG OMG OMG

The government should not try to make Americans smarter. Noooooooooooo.

They signed a piece of paper you fucker, what does music have to do with climate change?


God damn it educate yourself

Sesame Street is like a musical & it educates children.

How Much Is The Government Spending On Climate Change? We Don’t Know, And Neither Do They


How Much Is The Government Spending On Climate Change? We Don’t Know, And Neither Do They


The 2018 GAO report found that, while the Office of Management and Budget has reported that the federal government spent more than $154 billion on climate-change-related activities since 1993, much of that number is likely not being used to directly address climate change or its risks. Many of the projects reported as “climate-change-related activities” are only secondarily about climate change.

For instance, the U.S. nuclear energy program predates serious concerns about climate change and would likely exist in its current form even if it did not produce fewer greenhouse-gases than some other forms of energy production, like burning coal. But the nuclear program’s budget is counted as climate spending. All told, when the GAO evaluated six agencies that report their climate spending to the OMB, it found that 94 percent of the money was going to programs that weren’t primarily focused on climate change —

 

[percysunshine]

Pontificating at a Green New Deal rally on Monday, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), who just claimed on Sunday that her apocalyptic prediction in January that the world would end in 12 years unless serious action was taken to combat climate change had just been "dry humor," suddenly returned to her climate change hysteria, stating CO2 levels had reached the highest levels in recorded history and the last time the levels were this high "bacteria and diseases we have never seen before roamed the Earth."

Ocasio-Cortez ranted, “It was reported today that this weekend for the first time in human history we have reached atmospheric levels of carbon at 415 parts per million. This has never been seen in recorded human history. In fact meteorologist Eric Holthaus and journalist said simply about this measurement, ‘We do not know a planet like this.’ The last time our planet hit 415 we were in the Pliocene period. Oceans were 90 feet higher. Bacteria and diseases we have never seen before roamed the Earth. Humans did not exist. We have never seen a planet like this. And a planet like this is exactly what we are going to get, and it is exactly what we are going to inherit from previous generations if we do not act positively now."

Ocasio-Cortez Issues Another Apocalyptic Climate Rant. Is This More Of Her ‘Dry Humor’?

Only one question here: What technology and devices were used to make this measurement during the Pliocene period? I didn't even know what the pliocene period was. So I looked it up. It was a time frame between 2 and 5 million years. The wheel wasn't even invented yet.

Oceans were 90 feet higher? So why aren't oceans 90 feet higher today?

Don’t even try to use logic with one of these aoc rants. This is Rod Serling territory.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

It's an odd claim. Let's say for the sake of argument that what she said is true.

Then the earth has lived through previous periods like this. So why worry about it?

Her claim undercuts her own apocolyptic arguments

Ummm what? The claim was that CO2 levels haven’t been this high in the history of ... read this slowly... humans.

The fact that they may have been higher at some time when humans didn’t exist is meaningless .

The point is that CO 2 levels this high affect human life in ways we are not going to like

If nature caused CO2 to be much higher than before humans, then what is to say that very same nature isn't the cause of it today?

What you'd then be admitting to is all of the past promises by the global warming crowd was a lie. They told us we'd save the earth with CAFE standards. They told us we'd save the earth by making fuel burn cleaner. They told us we'd save the earth by eliminating the burning of our garbage in incinerators, getting lead out of all our products, and adding ethanol to our gasoline.

We did it all, and ten times more. And now we find out after all the trillions of dollars we've spent, it was all a lie? Not that I'm surprised mind you.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Ocasio was an economics major but she still believes we can afford healthcare for all and the green deal. That's pretty dumb considering her (education?) So It shouldn't come as a big surprise that she is an ignoramus where science is concerned.

And this economics major thought that NYC was going to give Amazon 3 billion dollars, and said she stopped the project because they could use that 3 billion dollars for better things.

The coming of Amazon would have destroyed existing neighborhoods by priocing the current residents out of theor rented home & raising local prices.

Fuck Amazon

How do you figure that when most of the people approved of the move?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

How have progressives missed the memo the rest of the public got? That China continues to build coal plants like they are going out of style so d0y.....climate change action is thus retarded!

The United States represents less than 5% of the world population, and the sheep are convinced that we 5% can change the climate.

And yet we are second in overall emissions. We rank top in emissions per capita.

There was the Paris Accord that go nearly every nation involved in lowering emissions.

Your post is a lie, dishonest, and dumber than shit

My post is dumber than shit?

 

[Wyatt earp]

It's an odd claim. Let's say for the sake of argument that what she said is true.

Then the earth has lived through previous periods like this. So why worry about it?

Her claim undercuts her own apocolyptic arguments

Ummm what? The claim was that CO2 levels haven’t been this high in the history of ... read this slowly... humans.

The fact that they may have been higher at some time when humans didn’t exist is meaningless .

The point is that CO 2 levels this high affect human life in ways we are not going to like

Uhm educate yourself...

NASA’s carbon-monitoring OCO-2 satellite confirms that El Nino weather boosts CO2


NASA’s carbon-monitoring OCO-2 satellite confirms that El Nino weather boosts CO2


Readings from NASA’s Orbiting Carbon Observatory-2 have confirmed that the El Niño weather pattern of 2015-2016 was behind the biggest annual increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide levels in millennia.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

A grant to educate the public.

OMG OMG OMG OMG

The government should not try to make Americans smarter. Noooooooooooo.

Global Warming: Follow the Money

Citing documents uncovered by the radical environmental group Greenpeace, a group of media outlets — including the New York Times and the Boston Globe — have attacked global-warming skeptic Wei-Hock (Willie) Soon for allegedly hiding $1.2 million in contributions from “fossil fuel companies.” The articles were the latest in an ongoing campaign by greens and their media allies to discredit opponents of the warming agenda.

But in allying themselves closely with activist groups with which they share ideological goals, reporters have fundamentally misled readers on the facts of global-warming funding.


In truth, the overwhelming majority of climate-research funding comes from the federal government and left-wing foundations. And while the energy industry funds both sides of the climate debate, The government/foundation monies go only toward research that advances the warming regulatory agenda. With a clear public-policy outcome in mind, the government/foundation gravy train is a much greater threat to scientific integrity.




Officials with the Smithsonian Institution — which employs Dr. Soon — told the Times it appeared the scientist had violated disclosure standards, and they said they would look into the matter. Soon, a Malaysian immigrant, is a widely respected astrophysicist, and his allies came quickly to his defense


Indeed, experts in the research community say that it is much more difficult for some of the top climate scientists — Soon, Roger Pielke Jr., the CATO Institute’s Patrick Michaels, MIT’s now-retired Richard Lindzen — to get funding for their work because they do not embrace the global-warming fearmongering favored by the government-funded climate establishment.

Global Warming: Follow the Money



Yep follow the money , it's all about man made climate change and not much funding for natural causes.

Nonsense written by and for retards and liars. The money is in fossil fuels.

so you deny facts?


by the way...........

Climate change creating havoc on mental health


Well this explains the AGW cult.



https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.th...experts.html?client=ms-android-sprint-mvno-us

Our fast-changing climate has long been identified as a threat to physical health, but more psychologists are warning that the mental health impacts and the economic toll they take are real, likely to spread and need closer study.

Article Continued Below
“We may not currently be thinking about how heavy the toll on our psyche will be, but, before long, we will know only too well,” warned a 2012 report from the U.S. National Wildlife Federation.

It predicted that cases of mental and social disorders will rise steeply as the signs of climate change become clearer and more frequent, and as more people are directly affected by heat waves, drought and other extreme events that put pressure on clean water resources, food prices and public infrastructure.

“These will include depressive and anxiety disorders, post-traumatic stress disorders, substance abuse, suicides and widespread outbreaks of violence,” predicted the report. It singled out children, the poor, the elderly and those with existing mental health problems as those likely to be hardest hit.

“At roughly 150 million people, these groups represent about one half of the American public,” it calculated. In addition, the mental health profession is “not even close to being prepared” and the report warned the existing problem is likely being underestimated because most research is based on self-reporting.

“People may, indeed, suffer from anxiety about climate change but not know it. They will have a vague unease about what is happening around them, the changes they see in nature, the weather events and the fact that records are being broken month after month. But they won’t be sufficiently aware of the source, and furthermore, we all conflate and layer one anxiety upon another.”

And that's only the tip of the iceberg (that's going to melt too).

Climate Change Helped Fuel The Syrian Conflict, New Paper Finds | HuffPost

How Climate Change Helped ISIS | HuffPost

Study: Global warming will cause 180,000 more rapes by 2099

Another stupid post from the moron who thinks that fossil fuels have no money invested in denying AGW.

It is science. FUCKING science you God damn idiot.

SCIENCE tells us we are on the road to major priblems & assfuck you is so smart that you think the scientists are wrong.

Yes, fuel companies do have money invested in their own scientists just like Government. Except you're too dumb to understand that government paid scientists wouldn't dare say there is no man made global warming. Government pays them to make such conclusions.

 

[Wyatt earp]

A grant to educate the public.

OMG OMG OMG OMG

The government should not try to make Americans smarter. Noooooooooooo.

Global Warming: Follow the Money

Citing documents uncovered by the radical environmental group Greenpeace, a group of media outlets — including the New York Times and the Boston Globe — have attacked global-warming skeptic Wei-Hock (Willie) Soon for allegedly hiding $1.2 million in contributions from “fossil fuel companies.” The articles were the latest in an ongoing campaign by greens and their media allies to discredit opponents of the warming agenda.

But in allying themselves closely with activist groups with which they share ideological goals, reporters have fundamentally misled readers on the facts of global-warming funding.


In truth, the overwhelming majority of climate-research funding comes from the federal government and left-wing foundations. And while the energy industry funds both sides of the climate debate, The government/foundation monies go only toward research that advances the warming regulatory agenda. With a clear public-policy outcome in mind, the government/foundation gravy train is a much greater threat to scientific integrity.




Officials with the Smithsonian Institution — which employs Dr. Soon — told the Times it appeared the scientist had violated disclosure standards, and they said they would look into the matter. Soon, a Malaysian immigrant, is a widely respected astrophysicist, and his allies came quickly to his defense


Indeed, experts in the research community say that it is much more difficult for some of the top climate scientists — Soon, Roger Pielke Jr., the CATO Institute’s Patrick Michaels, MIT’s now-retired Richard Lindzen — to get funding for their work because they do not embrace the global-warming fearmongering favored by the government-funded climate establishment.

Global Warming: Follow the Money



Yep follow the money , it's all about man made climate change and not much funding for natural causes.

Nonsense written by and for retards and liars. The money is in fossil fuels.

so you deny facts?


by the way...........

Climate change creating havoc on mental health


Well this explains the AGW cult.



https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.th...experts.html?client=ms-android-sprint-mvno-us

Our fast-changing climate has long been identified as a threat to physical health, but more psychologists are warning that the mental health impacts and the economic toll they take are real, likely to spread and need closer study.

Article Continued Below
“We may not currently be thinking about how heavy the toll on our psyche will be, but, before long, we will know only too well,” warned a 2012 report from the U.S. National Wildlife Federation.

It predicted that cases of mental and social disorders will rise steeply as the signs of climate change become clearer and more frequent, and as more people are directly affected by heat waves, drought and other extreme events that put pressure on clean water resources, food prices and public infrastructure.

“These will include depressive and anxiety disorders, post-traumatic stress disorders, substance abuse, suicides and widespread outbreaks of violence,” predicted the report. It singled out children, the poor, the elderly and those with existing mental health problems as those likely to be hardest hit.

“At roughly 150 million people, these groups represent about one half of the American public,” it calculated. In addition, the mental health profession is “not even close to being prepared” and the report warned the existing problem is likely being underestimated because most research is based on self-reporting.

“People may, indeed, suffer from anxiety about climate change but not know it. They will have a vague unease about what is happening around them, the changes they see in nature, the weather events and the fact that records are being broken month after month. But they won’t be sufficiently aware of the source, and furthermore, we all conflate and layer one anxiety upon another.”

And that's only the tip of the iceberg (that's going to melt too).

Climate Change Helped Fuel The Syrian Conflict, New Paper Finds | HuffPost

How Climate Change Helped ISIS | HuffPost

Study: Global warming will cause 180,000 more rapes by 2099

Another stupid post from the moron who thinks that fossil fuels have no money invested in denying AGW.

It is science. FUCKING science you God damn idiot.

SCIENCE tells us we are on the road to major priblems & assfuck you is so smart that you think the scientists are wrong.

It's not science, it's junk science propaganda, the deniers are dwarfed money wise by the AGW cult and once again educate yourself fossil fuel spent billions since the 1970s on green energy fool



.

 

[keepitreal]

Pontificating at a Green New Deal rally on Monday, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), who just claimed on Sunday that her apocalyptic prediction in January that the world would end in 12 years unless serious action was taken to combat climate change had just been "dry humor," suddenly returned to her climate change hysteria, stating CO2 levels had reached the highest levels in recorded history and the last time the levels were this high "bacteria and diseases we have never seen before roamed the Earth."

Ocasio-Cortez ranted, “It was reported today that this weekend for the first time in human history we have reached atmospheric levels of carbon at 415 parts per million. This has never been seen in recorded human history. In fact meteorologist Eric Holthaus and journalist said simply about this measurement, ‘We do not know a planet like this.’ The last time our planet hit 415 we were in the Pliocene period. Oceans were 90 feet higher. Bacteria and diseases we have never seen before roamed the Earth. Humans did not exist. We have never seen a planet like this. And a planet like this is exactly what we are going to get, and it is exactly what we are going to inherit from previous generations if we do not act positively now."

Ocasio-Cortez Issues Another Apocalyptic Climate Rant. Is This More Of Her ‘Dry Humor’?

Only one question here: What technology and devices were used to make this measurement during the Pliocene period? I didn't even know what the pliocene period was. So I looked it up. It was a time frame between 2 and 5 million years. The wheel wasn't even invented yet.

Oceans were 90 feet higher? So why aren't oceans 90 feet higher today?

Bacteria and diseases we have never seen before roamed the Earth. Humans did not exist.

What diseases?

If humans weren't around, who did they affect?

Other diseases.They were fighting it out to see which diseases would win to be dominant..

does this mean that all female women should not get pregnant anymore?

I only worry about them getting pregnant from me..

well i do worry about male inflatable dolls getting female inflatable dolls pregnant all the time

Hmmm,....coat hangers would create a problem

 

[Hiryuu]

And that's only the tip of the iceberg (that's going to melt too).

Climate Change Helped Fuel The Syrian Conflict, New Paper Finds | HuffPost

How Climate Change Helped ISIS | HuffPost

Study: Global warming will cause 180,000 more rapes by 2099

Type anything and get loads ... Like "climate change dogs"

NYC To Ban Hot Dogs and Processed Meats To Improve Climate | 106.7 Lite fm

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...of-dogs/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.2a9d4871b766

Will insect-eating dogs help climate change?

Al Gore’s climate group warns that pets are now threatened by global warming

So you think nothing will change as our average global temperatures increase.

No dumbass, I think you can type climate change and any other word into a search engine and come up with some seriously funny crap to read.