Here's the fraud

[frigidweirdo]

A scheme cooked up by a PR firm and the fossil fuel industries 30 years ago that has provided all you deniers nearly every word you've ever posted.

The audacious PR plot that seeded doubt about climate change

Thirty years ago, a bold plan was hatched to persuade people that climate change was not a problem.

www.bbc.com

Reality is both sides have their narratives and both sides are willing to be very loose with the facts and with reality.

 

[Crick]

Since no one said we have only 12 years to live,

'The world is going to end in 12 years if we don't address climate change,' Ocasio-Cortez says​

'The world is going to end in 12 years if we don't address climate change,' Ocasio-Cortez says

The youngest woman ever elected to Congress said climate change is her generation's World War II.

www.usatoday.com

Durr.....

Around the year 2030, 10 years 252 days and 10 hours away from now, we will be in a position where we set off an irreversible chain reaction beyond human control, that will most likely lead to the end of our civilisation as we know it. That is unless in that time, permanent and unprecedented changes in all aspects of society have taken place, including a reduction of CO2 emissions by at least 50%.

'You did not act in time': Greta Thunberg's full speech to MPs

Read the full text of the speech Greta Thunberg gave to MPs at the Houses of Parliament

www.theguardian.com

ROFLMAO!

Quotes from serious climate scientists? No.
Poster being a dick and not addressing the OP? Yes.

The denial of AGW has been, almost in its entirety, a fabrication of the fossil fuel industry. You have all been, as several of you like to say, "useful idiots". You've been had. That you should have missed the old rubrik "follow the money", that would clearly have shown you the fossil fuel industry to, by FAR, the most likely agent in this debate to be untrustworthy, was an abysmal failure on all your parts. Virtually EVERY argument every ONE of you has used in these arguments has had its origin in the mind of an amoral and willfully deceitful PR person working for the fossil fuel industry.

And when this topic is brought up, NOT ONE OF YOU will do anything but RUN LIKE A SCARED BUNNY from anything resembling an actual conversation on the topic. You know you don't have a leg to stand on and that has made you all spineless cowards. Sit down and think to yourself if that is really where you want to be.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Quotes from serious climate scientists? No.
Poster being a dick and not addressing the OP? Yes.

The denial of AGW has been, almost in its entirety, a fabrication of the fossil fuel industry. You have all been, as several of you like to say, "useful idiots". You've been had. That you should have missed the old rubrik "follow the money", that would clearly have shown you the fossil fuel industry to, by FAR, the most likely agent in this debate to be untrustworthy, was an abysmal failure on all your parts. Virtually EVERY argument every ONE of you has used in these arguments has had its origin in the mind of an amoral and willfully deceitful PR person working for the fossil fuel industry.

And when this topic is brought up, NOT ONE OF YOU will do anything but RUN LIKE A SCARED BUNNY from anything resembling an actual conversation on the topic. You know you don't have a leg to stand on and that has made you all spineless cowards. Sit down and think to yourself if that is really where you want to be.

Quotes from serious climate scientists? No.

Hey......snapperhead! What did I say?

The denial of AGW has been, almost in its entirety, a fabrication of the fossil fuel industry.

Stop whining about fossil fuels and stop using them already.

I'm not denying AGW because of the fossil fuel industry, I'm denying it because greens are, almost without exception, whiny twats who have zero understanding of economics. And did I mention they're whiny twats?

Virtually EVERY argument every ONE of you has used in these arguments has had its origin in the mind of an amoral and willfully deceitful PR person working for the fossil fuel industry.

You're right, we should listen to the willfully deceitful watermelons.

 

[ReinyDays]

Quotes from serious climate scientists? No.
Poster being a dick and not addressing the OP? Yes.

The denial of AGW has been, almost in its entirety, a fabrication of the fossil fuel industry. You have all been, as several of you like to say, "useful idiots". You've been had. That you should have missed the old rubrik "follow the money", that would clearly have shown you the fossil fuel industry to, by FAR, the most likely agent in this debate to be untrustworthy, was an abysmal failure on all your parts. Virtually EVERY argument every ONE of you has used in these arguments has had its origin in the mind of an amoral and willfully deceitful PR person working for the fossil fuel industry.

And when this topic is brought up, NOT ONE OF YOU will do anything but RUN LIKE A SCARED BUNNY from anything resembling an actual conversation on the topic. You know you don't have a leg to stand on and that has made you all spineless cowards. Sit down and think to yourself if that is really where you want to be.

Why do you believe in hypercanes? ...

I'm more than happy to have this conversation, but I have to ask: are we discussing theory, observation or both ... and do you consider Chris Landsea at NHC as a serious climate scientist? ...

Why have temperature gone down these past five years ... yet CO2 concentrations continue upwards? ...

 

[flacaltenn]

A scheme cooked up by a PR firm and the fossil fuel industries 30 years ago that has provided all you deniers nearly every word you've ever posted.

The audacious PR plot that seeded doubt about climate change

Thirty years ago, a bold plan was hatched to persuade people that climate change was not a problem.

www.bbc.com

That's strange. How about a couple dozen HIGH PROFILE ads from the GCC -- because I've NEVER HEARD of them and I've following the GWarming circus train since it left the station with Al Gore.

These jerks must NOT BE very effective. NAME ONE AD that denies that increased CO2 has some effect on GreenHouse from GCC. Bet you can't.

IN FACT -- around the SAME TIME FRAME -- there were lies about Exxon suppressing internal docs written by in-house researchers. They had a RIGHT to suppress priority science, but there was NOTHING TO HIDE. Because in the late 90s -- EXXON RELEASED this "suppressed propaganda" and it turned out that EXXON scientists were CLOSER to predicting the GW anomaly 20 years OUT than ANY other science study. And they DIDN'T deny anything. Just rejected the far fetched "acceleration and runaway" fear porn theories that CAUSED the public to get engaged.

 

[flacaltenn]

So no one actually said that. So, you have made up a quote that no one said to attempt to throw some shade on greens, whoever they are. As if I said that Toddsterpatriot said "I always lie and have no morals of any sort"

Since no one said we have only 12 years to live, your attempted defense for nuclear waste is a complete failure.

I was talking about an intentional, willful attempt to deceive the public so as to keep making money hand over fist. Except for the money, I guess you've got them matched.

Your HEROES at the UN IPCC were advertising their conferences with the claim "Only 12 years left to Act on Global Warming".. THAT'S WHO started that. Because when interest waned in their faulty predictions, they had to INVIGORATE the public with the old scary "accelerated and runaway" warming crap and the idea of a "trigger temperature".

So they estimated that if NOTHING WAS DONE SOON -- the planet was gonna commit irreversible Planetcide.

We have 12 years to limit climate change catastrophe, warns UN

Urgent changes needed to cut risk of extreme heat, drought, floods and poverty, says IPCC

www.theguardian.com

We have 12 years to limit climate change catastrophe, warns UN​

This article is more than 3 years old
Urgent changes needed to cut risk of extreme heat, drought, floods and poverty, says IPCC

The world’s leading climate scientists have warned there is only a dozen years for global warming to be kept to a maximum of 1.5C, beyond which even half a degree will significantly worsen the risks of drought, floods, extreme heat and poverty for hundreds of millions of people.

Time and carbon budgets are running out. By mid-century, a shift to the lower goal would require a supercharged roll-back of emissions sources that have built up over the past 250 years.

The IPCC maps out four pathways to achieve 1.5C, with different combinations of land use and technological change. Reforestation is essential to all of them as are shifts to electric transport systems and greater adoption of carbon capture technology.

Johan Rockström, a co-author of the recent Hothouse Earth report, said scientists never previously discussed 1.5C, which was initially seen as a political concession to small island states. But he said opinion had shifted in the past few years along with growing evidence of climate instability and the approach of tipping points that might push the world off a course that could be controlled by emissions reductions.


“Climate change is occurring earlier and more rapidly than expected. Even at the current level of 1C warming, it is painful,” he told the Guardian. “This report is really important. It has a scientific robustness that shows 1.5C is not just a political concession. There is a growing recognition that 2C is dangerous.”

James Hansen, the former Nasa scientist who helped raised the alarm about climate change, said both 1.5C and 2C would take humanity into uncharted and dangerous territory because they were both well above the Holocene-era range in which human civilisation developed. But he said there was a huge difference between the two: “1.5C gives young people and the next generation a fighting chance of getting back to the Holocene or close to it. That is probably necessary if we want to keep shorelines where they are and preserve our coastal cities.”




--------------------------------------------------
They're YOUR drama queens. You should be AWARE of where this FRAUD came from if you're interested in posting threads on frauds that NOBODY has ever read or seen from whatever the hell is the GCC.

 

[Crick]

That's strange. How about a couple dozen HIGH PROFILE ads from the GCC -- because I've NEVER HEARD of them and I've following the GWarming circus train since it left the station with Al Gore.

These jerks must NOT BE very effective. NAME ONE AD that denies that increased CO2 has some effect on GreenHouse from GCC. Bet you can't.

IN FACT -- around the SAME TIME FRAME -- there were lies about Exxon suppressing internal docs written by in-house researchers. They had a RIGHT to suppress priority science, but there was NOTHING TO HIDE. Because in the late 90s -- EXXON RELEASED this "suppressed propaganda" and it turned out that EXXON scientists were CLOSER to predicting the GW anomaly 20 years OUT than ANY other science study. And they DIDN'T deny anything. Just rejected the far fetched "acceleration and runaway" fear porn theories that CAUSED the public to get engaged.

Where in that article does it say that GCC ran advertisements? The pertinent quote I find is "The strategy would be implemented through an extensive media campaign, everything from placing quotes and pitching opinion pieces (so-called op-eds), to direct contacts with journalists." Not ads.

 

[flacaltenn]

Why do you believe in hypercanes? ...

I'm more than happy to have this conversation, but I have to ask: are we discussing theory, observation or both ... and do you consider Chris Landsea at NHC as a serious climate scientist? ...

Why have temperature gone down these past five years ... yet CO2 concentrations continue upwards? ...

Global surface temperature is rising at 0.14DegC per decade. Taking periods SHORTER than 15 or 30 years just isnt productive in finding the actual trend.

That's RSS and UAH satellite measured since 1979. I dont do the chopped and baked 20,000 thermometer cartoons anymore.

 

[flacaltenn]

Where in that article does it say that GCC ran advertisements? The pertinent quote I find is "The strategy would be implemented through an extensive media campaign, everything from placing quotes and pitching opinion pieces (so-called op-eds), to direct contacts with journalists." Not ads.

WHERE ARE THE RESULTS? I've NEVER been pitched on ANTI-GWarming ANYTHING EVER..

NEVER SEEN it.
"placing quotes" WHERE exactly? WHAT MEDIA? For SURE if they wanted to get to the right audience -- these GCC experts would be on NPR twice a day. EVEN NEVER seen them on Fox news for that matter.

Nice emotional hit piece. NO REAL examples of their dastardly lies. I'm not even close to outrage.

 

[flacaltenn]

Where in that article does it say that GCC ran advertisements? The pertinent quote I find is "The strategy would be implemented through an extensive media campaign, everything from placing quotes and pitching opinion pieces (so-called op-eds), to direct contacts with journalists." Not ads.

I tried this search on Bing

quotes from "Global Climate Coalition" on global warming

NO RESULTS.

The media DOES NOT ALLOW "climate deniers" on their platforms. How do these folks SNEAK INTO the media if the media won't ALLOW ANY DISSENT?

You've got the hook all the way down your gullet buddy.

 

[Oddball]

Since no one said we have only 12 years to live,

'The world is going to end in 12 years if we don't address climate change,' Ocasio-Cortez says​

'The world is going to end in 12 years if we don't address climate change,' Ocasio-Cortez says

The youngest woman ever elected to Congress said climate change is her generation's World War II.

www.usatoday.com

Durr.....

Around the year 2030, 10 years 252 days and 10 hours away from now, we will be in a position where we set off an irreversible chain reaction beyond human control, that will most likely lead to the end of our civilisation as we know it. That is unless in that time, permanent and unprecedented changes in all aspects of society have taken place, including a reduction of CO2 emissions by at least 50%.

'You did not act in time': Greta Thunberg's full speech to MPs

Read the full text of the speech Greta Thunberg gave to MPs at the Houses of Parliament

www.theguardian.com

ROFLMAO!

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

WHERE ARE THE RESULTS? I've NEVER been pitched on ANTI-GWarming ANYTHING EVER..

NEVER SEEN it.
"placing quotes" WHERE exactly? WHAT MEDIA? For SURE if they wanted to get to the right audience -- these GCC experts would be on NPR twice a day. EVEN NEVER seen them on Fox news for that matter.

Nice emotional hit piece. NO REAL examples of their dastardly lies. I'm not even close to outrage.

They gave us all our talking points.....secretly. We never saw them, but they're there.
Implanted subliminally. No one could be skeptical on their own. No independent thought possible.
GCC was the source of them all.

It says so, right in the OP.

 

[ReinyDays]

Why do you believe in hypercanes? ...

I'm more than happy to have this conversation, but I have to ask: are we discussing theory, observation or both ... and do you consider Chris Landsea at NHC as a serious climate scientist? ...

Why have temperature gone down these past five years ... yet CO2 concentrations continue upwards? ...

So, chick ... you don't want to have this conversation ... why did you say you did? ...

 

[Deplorable Yankee]

A scheme cooked up by a PR firm and the fossil fuel industries 30 years ago that has provided all you deniers nearly every word you've ever posted.

The audacious PR plot that seeded doubt about climate change

Thirty years ago, a bold plan was hatched to persuade people that climate change was not a problem.

www.bbc.com

You're even losing the average Democrat on the man made global warming religion ....just racently according to the NYT....

the un did a survey of with the populations of every country on the planet years ago and it was at the bottom of concerns on everyone's list....and for good reason.

You're just a useful idiot
Climate scientists and activists are just in it for the cash
Government is also In it for the cash ...especially the bureaucrats and its a just a cover for globo homo Inc's great reset

But if youre gonna preach your watermelon religion you should also lead by example ...chuck your ac ,buy an electric car so you can shop for dinner at pet Co


Thier is no concrete scientific evidence that man's miniscule output of co2 is changing the climate ...

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Quotes from serious climate scientists? No.
Poster being a dick and not addressing the OP? Yes.

The denial of AGW has been, almost in its entirety, a fabrication of the fossil fuel industry. You have all been, as several of you like to say, "useful idiots". You've been had. That you should have missed the old rubrik "follow the money", that would clearly have shown you the fossil fuel industry to, by FAR, the most likely agent in this debate to be untrustworthy, was an abysmal failure on all your parts. Virtually EVERY argument every ONE of you has used in these arguments has had its origin in the mind of an amoral and willfully deceitful PR person working for the fossil fuel industry.

And when this topic is brought up, NOT ONE OF YOU will do anything but RUN LIKE A SCARED BUNNY from anything resembling an actual conversation on the topic. You know you don't have a leg to stand on and that has made you all spineless cowards. Sit down and think to yourself if that is really where you want to be.

When you provide no evidence, it's call skeptical not denial.

 

[ReinyDays]

Thier is no concrete scientific evidence that man's miniscule output of co2 is changing the climate ...

Since when has there been non-concrete evidence? ... I didn't think we have any evidence at all ... where has climate changed? ...

 

[Billy_Bob]

A scheme cooked up by a PR firm and the fossil fuel industries 30 years ago that has provided all you deniers nearly every word you've ever posted.

The audacious PR plot that seeded doubt about climate change

Thirty years ago, a bold plan was hatched to persuade people that climate change was not a problem.

www.bbc.com

\

NO matter how many times you regurgitate the deception, Crick, it will not make it true.

 

[Crick]

View attachment 674811

A count of how many deniers responded to this story with cartoons should give some idea of the depth of their cognition. AGW denialism is the product of the fossil fuel industry, just as the OP's article explains. Considering the numbers of scientists on one side of this argument vs the number of ignorant fools on the other, this should come as no surprise to anyone. And, say, Billy Boy, what was the topic of your thesis?

 

[Crick]

They gave us all our talking points.....secretly. We never saw them, but they're there.
Implanted subliminally. No one could be skeptical on their own. No independent thought possible.
GCC was the source of them all.

It says so, right in the OP.

AGW denialism was spread by funded articles, funded research, biased talking points and background papers provided to science-illiterate journalists. And, of course, when Al Gore became a spokesman for the issue, GCC saw the opportunity to politicize the debate and bring in almost every piece of the right wing media machine. Tell us you got none of your denialism from such sources Todd.

 

[Billy_Bob]

A count of how many deniers responded to this story with cartoons should give some idea of the depth of their cognition. AGW denialism is the product of the fossil fuel industry, just as the OP's article explains. Considering the numbers of scientists on one side of this argument vs the number of ignorant fools on the other, this should come as no surprise to anyone. And, say, Billy Boy, what was the topic of your thesis?

Crick, You only have personal attacks and degradation. No facts, no science, no logical reasoning skills.

The warm weather we are seeing today is normal cyclical response to a cooling ocean. Feel free to keep attacking as I know you will. You can prove nothing because you know nothing..