Big Oil's Long-Running Climate Disinformation Campaign Detailed in Congressional Report

You’ll note, the Cult cannot ever tell us how increasing CO2 from 280 to 400 ppm measurably raises temperatures because it’s a microscopic number, like .0006F

Manmade Global Warming is THE BIGGEST SCAM AND GREATEST SCIENTIFIC FRAUD IN HUMAN HISTORY
 
global warming can be debated but one thing that cannot be debated is that Uber wealthy oil execs cannot be trusted to debate anything that requires facts. You don't get facts from wealthy people.
 
If you want to refute the science, you're going to have to talk the science. Sorry if that's tough for you but, to be honest, it's quite easy on my side of this argument. When I say that AGW is supported by mountains of evidence, I'm not lying.
anthropogenic supporters cite CO production juxtaposed to CC , yet little 'data' is available pursuant to the loss of the biggest CO sponge on this rock...........


The forces set in play in the Amazon could have serious global consequences. The forest stores up to 120 billion metric tons of carbon, equivalent to almost 12 years of global emissions at current rates. If cleared, much of that will go into the atmosphere. That alone could push the global climate beyond safe limits.

IF the scientific community could nail a linear relationship here, it would grant a pass to the hydrocarbon kings, and subsequently kill any green machine pursuits, legislations, and/or subsidies


which is is exactly why AGW 'science' is in reality, politicized science

~S~
 
anthropogenic supporters cite CO production juxtaposed to CC , yet little 'data' is available pursuant to the loss of the biggest CO sponge on this rock...........


The forces set in play in the Amazon could have serious global consequences. The forest stores up to 120 billion metric tons of carbon, equivalent to almost 12 years of global emissions at current rates. If cleared, much of that will go into the atmosphere. That alone could push the global climate beyond safe limits.

IF the scientific community could nail a linear relationship here, it would grant a pass to the hydrocarbon kings, and subsequently kill any green machine pursuits, legislations, and/or subsidies


which is is exactly why AGW 'science' is in reality, politicized science

~S~
The Amazon might disappear by the end of the next century (ie, in 78 years) but it hasn't disappeared yet and it had hardly been touched at the dawn of the Industrial Revolution when CO2 started climbing. Simple bookkeeping can make (has made) a good estimate of how much fossil fuel has been burned since the Industrial Revolution began and its contribution to the atmosphere can be calculated. Those calculations show that virtually every molecule of CO2 above 280 ppm is of human origin. An isotopic analysis of the CO2 in the atmosphere which readily identifies CO2 produced from the combustion of fossil fuels produces figures in very close agreement. Deforestation in the Amazon and elsewhere will increase CO2 levels in the atmosphere and will slow their decline after our emissions have stopped, but the primary culprit at this point IS the combustion of fossil fuel for energy and transportation.
 
anthropogenic supporters cite CO production juxtaposed to CC , yet little 'data' is available pursuant to the loss of the biggest CO sponge on this rock...........


The forces set in play in the Amazon could have serious global consequences. The forest stores up to 120 billion metric tons of carbon, equivalent to almost 12 years of global emissions at current rates. If cleared, much of that will go into the atmosphere. That alone could push the global climate beyond safe limits.

IF the scientific community could nail a linear relationship here, it would grant a pass to the hydrocarbon kings, and subsequently kill any green machine pursuits, legislations, and/or subsidies


which is is exactly why AGW 'science' is in reality, politicized science

~S~
So the conundrum is remove CO2 kill trees and the dead trees give us more CO2. And demofks say science! Hahaha
 
global warming can be debated but one thing that cannot be debated is that Uber wealthy oil execs cannot be trusted to debate anything that requires facts. You don't get facts from wealthy people.

We need cheap, reliable energy.
At this point, that means lots of fossil fuels.
You can't debate that.
 
We need cheap, reliable energy.
At this point, that means lots of fossil fuels.
You can't debate that.
I was watching ancient aliens on the history channel and the episode claimed the pyramids may have been power plants for electricity! First time I’ve heard that. Very interesting!

 
Last edited:
We need cheap, reliable energy.
At this point, that means lots of fossil fuels.
You can't debate that.
Cheaper than it has been? Why?

More reliable than it has been? Why?

Is there some crisis underway of which I'm just not aware?

There is the global warming crisis but you seem to have given that some really short shrift.
 
Cheaper than it has been? Why?

More reliable than it has been? Why?

Is there some crisis underway of which I'm just not aware?

There is the global warming crisis but you seem to have given that some really short shrift.

Cheaper than it has been? Why?

Cheaper than wind and solar.

More reliable than it has been? Why?

More reliable than wind and solar.

Is there some crisis underway of which I'm just not aware?

There are plenty of things of which you're just not aware.
 
Cheaper than it has been? Why?

Cheaper than wind and solar.

More reliable than it has been? Why?

More reliable than wind and solar.

Is there some crisis underway of which I'm just not aware?

There are plenty of things of which you're just not aware.
Like you and AGW?
 
Cheaper than it has been? Why?

More reliable than it has been? Why?

Is there some crisis underway of which I'm just not aware?

There is the global warming crisis but you seem to have given that some really short shrift.
Warming you can’t seem to justify
 

Forum List

Back
Top