There’s Big Money in Global Warming Alarmism

[Old Rocks]

The earth's climate system is warmed by 35 C due to the emission of downward infrared radiation by greenhouse gases in the atmosphere (surface radiative forcing)

huh? 35C ? please. make it stop.

How many times do you have to be shown this information before you understand what it is?

Break it down for us into little chunks because it makes no sense at all to normal citizens.

OK, here you go. From the American Institute of Physics, the largest Scientific Society in the world.

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect

sucks that CO2 lags behind temp increase

--LOL

Sucks that you are too damned lazy to research the lack of validity as to what you are stating. Just mindlessly repeating the nonsense put out the rightwingnuts is hardly the way to impress anyone with your intellect.

You should follow your own advice. Other than a single paper put out by one of your faithers, every single other paper published shows that CO2 lags temperature by hundreds of years.

You are talking about the glacials and interglacials. CO2 did not lag in the extinction periods in geologic history. Whether the PT or Ordivician.

 

[westwall]

Not bad, not bad at all.

You got that from Pete Danko's website I am guessing. The problem is there is nothing to back up the graph.

 

[Old Rocks]

The earth's climate system is warmed by 35 C due to the emission of downward infrared radiation by greenhouse gases in the atmosphere (surface radiative forcing)

huh? 35C ? please. make it stop.

How many times do you have to be shown this information before you understand what it is?

Break it down for us into little chunks because it makes no sense at all to normal citizens.

OK, here you go. From the American Institute of Physics, the largest Scientific Society in the world.

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect

sucks that CO2 lags behind temp increase

--LOL

Sucks that you are too damned lazy to research the lack of validity as to what you are stating. Just mindlessly repeating the nonsense put out the rightwingnuts is hardly the way to impress anyone with your intellect.

your folks consensus is not science

not even close

In other words, you get your science from obese junkies on the AM radio, fake English Lords, and ex-tv weathermen without any sort of scientific credentials. And state that the scientists haven't the slightest idea of what they have spent decades studying.

 

[westwall]

huh? 35C ? please. make it stop.


Break it down for us into little chunks because it makes no sense at all to normal citizens.

OK, here you go. From the American Institute of Physics, the largest Scientific Society in the world.

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect

sucks that CO2 lags behind temp increase

--LOL

Sucks that you are too damned lazy to research the lack of validity as to what you are stating. Just mindlessly repeating the nonsense put out the rightwingnuts is hardly the way to impress anyone with your intellect.

You should follow your own advice. Other than a single paper put out by one of your faithers, every single other paper published shows that CO2 lags temperature by hundreds of years.

You are talking about the glacials and interglacials. CO2 did not lag in the extinction periods in geologic history. Whether the PT or Ordivician.

Yes, it did. And further no mass extinction can be laid at the table of global warming. The only evidence for that is in computer models. There is actual real physical evidence for glaciation being the cause for two of the extinctions. Cooling bad, warm good.

 

[jon_berzerk]

huh? 35C ? please. make it stop.


Break it down for us into little chunks because it makes no sense at all to normal citizens.

OK, here you go. From the American Institute of Physics, the largest Scientific Society in the world.

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect

sucks that CO2 lags behind temp increase

--LOL

Sucks that you are too damned lazy to research the lack of validity as to what you are stating. Just mindlessly repeating the nonsense put out the rightwingnuts is hardly the way to impress anyone with your intellect.

your folks consensus is not science

not even close

In other words, you get your science from obese junkies on the AM radio, fake English Lords, and ex-tv weathermen without any sort of scientific credentials. And state that the scientists haven't the slightest idea of what they have spent decades studying.

apparently you are looking in a mirror parrot

 

[jon_berzerk]

OK, here you go. From the American Institute of Physics, the largest Scientific Society in the world.

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect

sucks that CO2 lags behind temp increase

--LOL

Sucks that you are too damned lazy to research the lack of validity as to what you are stating. Just mindlessly repeating the nonsense put out the rightwingnuts is hardly the way to impress anyone with your intellect.

You should follow your own advice. Other than a single paper put out by one of your faithers, every single other paper published shows that CO2 lags temperature by hundreds of years.

You are talking about the glacials and interglacials. CO2 did not lag in the extinction periods in geologic history. Whether the PT or Ordivician.

Yes, it did. And further no mass extinction can be laid at the table of global warming. The only evidence for that is in computer models. There is actual real physical evidence for glaciation being the cause for two of the extinctions. Cooling bad, warm good.

Cooling bad, warm good.

yes

 

[Crick]

The only evidence for that is in computer models

There is significant evidence that the most likely cause of the PT extinction event - the largest in Earth's history - was a dramatic and precipitous rise in GHGs.

From Permian–Triassic extinction event - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
There is evidence for between one to three distinct pulses, or phases, of extinction.[7][11][12][13] There are several proposed mechanisms for the extinctions; the earlier phase was probably due to gradual environmental change, while the latter phase has been argued to be due to a catastrophic event. Suggested mechanisms for the latter include one or more large bolide impact events, massive volcanism, coal or gas fires and explosions from the Siberian Traps,[14] and a runaway green house effect triggered by sudden release of methane from the sea floor due to methane clathrate dissociation or methane-producing microbes known as methanogens;[15] possible contributing gradual changes include sea-level change, increasing anoxia, increasing aridity, and a shift in ocean circulation driven by climate change.

 

[westwall]

The only evidence for that is in computer models

There is significant evidence that the most likely cause of the PT extinction event - the largest in Earth's history - was a dramatic rise in CO2.

No, there isn't. It exists only in a "simple" (their word, not mine) computer model.

 

[Weatherman2020]

what he found folks. is it's a big freaking SCAM. and it's being played on YOU and your families, your grandchildren, your great grand children, etc ...... wake up

SNIP:
There’s Big Money in Global Warming Alarmism

iStockphoto
1.8K114
By William M Briggs Published on November 27, 2015 • 6 Comments

William M Briggs
A sociologist with no training in the physical sciences is puzzled why most Americans think the world is not doomed by global warming. So flummoxed is Yale’s Justin Farrell that he decided to study the question in the most scientific way possible. And he managed to publish his results, “Corporate funding and ideological polarization about climate change,” in the prestigious Proceedings of the National Academy of Science.

What do you think his conclusions were? Perhaps that thirty years of failed temperature predictions boosted Americans’ skepticism? Or that the obvious eagerness of politicians to leverage exaggerated fears have left many skittish? Or maybe it’s the dearth of severe storms, despite the many promises that floods and droughts would drown and parch us all?

No, none of that. Farrell discovered that private groups spent their own money to say that things were not as bad as alarmists claimed. He told TheWashington Post that these “contrarian efforts have been so effective for the fact that they have made it difficult for ordinary Americans to even know who to trust.” Indeed, I, myself a climate scientist, no longer trust anything non-scientists like Farrell tell me about global warming (which he incorrectly calls “climate change”).

Farrell is right about one thing: Global warming alarmism is big business. On one side you have Greenpeace, the Sierra Club, The Nature Conservancy, World Wildlife Fund, Environmental Defense Fund, The Climate Project and dozens upon dozens of other non-governmental organizations who solicit hundreds of millions from private donors and from government, and who in turn award lucrative grants to further their agenda.

You also have the Environmental Protection Agency, the National Science Foundation, the National Institute of Health, the Departments of Commerce and Agriculture, both Houses of Congress and many more government agencies, spraying global warming money at anything that moves and at staggering rates — billions of dollars.

And then you also have every major and minor university — with contributions from every department, from Critical Literature Theory to Women’s Studies — all with their hands out and eager to provide the support Greenpeace, the government and others desire. Add to that another two or three dozen think tanks which are also sniffing for grants or which support government intervention to do the impossible and stop the earth’s climate from changing.

Every scientific organization which is dependent on grant money has released a statement saying “something must be done” about global warming. They’re supported, fawned over and feted by just about every news and media agency. And don’t forget the leadership of most major organized religions have their own statements — and their hands out.

We’re not done: we still have to add the dozens of Solyndra-type companies eager to sell the government products, to get “green” subsidies or to support its global-warming agenda. Included in that list are oil companies. Oil companies?

ALL of it here:
There's Big Money in Global Warming Alarmism | The Stream

Every year hundreds of people from all over the world fly in private jets to a climate conference to discus manmade global warming.

For 20 years I've been using video conferencing for meetings with people around the world, and I don't think Man can control the weather.

 

[Old Rocks]

PV Solar Could Have Some Serious Competition | OilPrice.com

Though power markets came first for big trough arrays, it is worth noting that large scale thermal only applications are coming on line. The most impressive may be the massive 1 GW thermal (GW) enhanced oil recovery (EOR) project in Oman, Saudi Arabia’s neighbor, being built by a company called Glasspoint.

The recent Renewable Energy World article on this project explains: “At an astonishing 1,021 megawatts, Miraah is almost three times the capacity of Ivanpah, which at 377 MW is currently the world's largest CSP project delivering electricity. Yet not only will Miraah (mirror in Arabic) produce steam at gigantic scale, but it does so at much lower cost than CSP and about half the cost of gas. The 1 GW project will cost a mere $600 million.”

Another way to crunch that number is to say it costs 60 cents per Watt. Though the Watts are thermal and not electric, that price is in line with the ‘China price’ of PV cells, which still need to be set in place, connected to an inverter, and then hooked up to the grid. Utility PV in the U.S. is coming in at just under $2 per Watt now, but developers, planners and dreamers alike should be aware that a trough, that will produce steam for 50 years, using a rudimentary steel pipe, costs about the same as the inverters alone for a power project. Inverters do not last 50 years so you must pay for the replacement units.

More than one way to skin a cat.

 

[Old Rocks]

what he found folks. is it's a big freaking SCAM. and it's being played on YOU and your families, your grandchildren, your great grand children, etc ...... wake up

SNIP:
There’s Big Money in Global Warming Alarmism

iStockphoto
1.8K114
By William M Briggs Published on November 27, 2015 • 6 Comments

William M Briggs
A sociologist with no training in the physical sciences is puzzled why most Americans think the world is not doomed by global warming. So flummoxed is Yale’s Justin Farrell that he decided to study the question in the most scientific way possible. And he managed to publish his results, “Corporate funding and ideological polarization about climate change,” in the prestigious Proceedings of the National Academy of Science.

What do you think his conclusions were? Perhaps that thirty years of failed temperature predictions boosted Americans’ skepticism? Or that the obvious eagerness of politicians to leverage exaggerated fears have left many skittish? Or maybe it’s the dearth of severe storms, despite the many promises that floods and droughts would drown and parch us all?

No, none of that. Farrell discovered that private groups spent their own money to say that things were not as bad as alarmists claimed. He told TheWashington Post that these “contrarian efforts have been so effective for the fact that they have made it difficult for ordinary Americans to even know who to trust.” Indeed, I, myself a climate scientist, no longer trust anything non-scientists like Farrell tell me about global warming (which he incorrectly calls “climate change”).

Farrell is right about one thing: Global warming alarmism is big business. On one side you have Greenpeace, the Sierra Club, The Nature Conservancy, World Wildlife Fund, Environmental Defense Fund, The Climate Project and dozens upon dozens of other non-governmental organizations who solicit hundreds of millions from private donors and from government, and who in turn award lucrative grants to further their agenda.

You also have the Environmental Protection Agency, the National Science Foundation, the National Institute of Health, the Departments of Commerce and Agriculture, both Houses of Congress and many more government agencies, spraying global warming money at anything that moves and at staggering rates — billions of dollars.

And then you also have every major and minor university — with contributions from every department, from Critical Literature Theory to Women’s Studies — all with their hands out and eager to provide the support Greenpeace, the government and others desire. Add to that another two or three dozen think tanks which are also sniffing for grants or which support government intervention to do the impossible and stop the earth’s climate from changing.

Every scientific organization which is dependent on grant money has released a statement saying “something must be done” about global warming. They’re supported, fawned over and feted by just about every news and media agency. And don’t forget the leadership of most major organized religions have their own statements — and their hands out.

We’re not done: we still have to add the dozens of Solyndra-type companies eager to sell the government products, to get “green” subsidies or to support its global-warming agenda. Included in that list are oil companies. Oil companies?

ALL of it here:
There's Big Money in Global Warming Alarmism | The Stream

Every year hundreds of people from all over the world fly in private jets to a climate conference to discus manmade global warming.

For 20 years I've been using video conferencing for meetings with people around the world, and I don't think Man can control the weather.

And who that matters cares at all what you think?

 

[Weatherman2020]

what he found folks. is it's a big freaking SCAM. and it's being played on YOU and your families, your grandchildren, your great grand children, etc ...... wake up

SNIP:
There’s Big Money in Global Warming Alarmism

iStockphoto
1.8K114
By William M Briggs Published on November 27, 2015 • 6 Comments

William M Briggs
A sociologist with no training in the physical sciences is puzzled why most Americans think the world is not doomed by global warming. So flummoxed is Yale’s Justin Farrell that he decided to study the question in the most scientific way possible. And he managed to publish his results, “Corporate funding and ideological polarization about climate change,” in the prestigious Proceedings of the National Academy of Science.

What do you think his conclusions were? Perhaps that thirty years of failed temperature predictions boosted Americans’ skepticism? Or that the obvious eagerness of politicians to leverage exaggerated fears have left many skittish? Or maybe it’s the dearth of severe storms, despite the many promises that floods and droughts would drown and parch us all?

No, none of that. Farrell discovered that private groups spent their own money to say that things were not as bad as alarmists claimed. He told TheWashington Post that these “contrarian efforts have been so effective for the fact that they have made it difficult for ordinary Americans to even know who to trust.” Indeed, I, myself a climate scientist, no longer trust anything non-scientists like Farrell tell me about global warming (which he incorrectly calls “climate change”).

Farrell is right about one thing: Global warming alarmism is big business. On one side you have Greenpeace, the Sierra Club, The Nature Conservancy, World Wildlife Fund, Environmental Defense Fund, The Climate Project and dozens upon dozens of other non-governmental organizations who solicit hundreds of millions from private donors and from government, and who in turn award lucrative grants to further their agenda.

You also have the Environmental Protection Agency, the National Science Foundation, the National Institute of Health, the Departments of Commerce and Agriculture, both Houses of Congress and many more government agencies, spraying global warming money at anything that moves and at staggering rates — billions of dollars.

And then you also have every major and minor university — with contributions from every department, from Critical Literature Theory to Women’s Studies — all with their hands out and eager to provide the support Greenpeace, the government and others desire. Add to that another two or three dozen think tanks which are also sniffing for grants or which support government intervention to do the impossible and stop the earth’s climate from changing.

Every scientific organization which is dependent on grant money has released a statement saying “something must be done” about global warming. They’re supported, fawned over and feted by just about every news and media agency. And don’t forget the leadership of most major organized religions have their own statements — and their hands out.

We’re not done: we still have to add the dozens of Solyndra-type companies eager to sell the government products, to get “green” subsidies or to support its global-warming agenda. Included in that list are oil companies. Oil companies?

ALL of it here:
There's Big Money in Global Warming Alarmism | The Stream

Every year hundreds of people from all over the world fly in private jets to a climate conference to discus manmade global warming.

For 20 years I've been using video conferencing for meetings with people around the world, and I don't think Man can control the weather.

And who that matters cares at all what you think?

You. You blather every time I post with your 2nd grade ramblings.

 

[leftwinger]

Every year hundreds of people from all over the world fly in private jets to a climate conference to discus manmade global warming.

During peak of 09 Depression/recession Pelosi and a bunch of other Congress took off for Copenhagen to take over entire floors of five star hotels. My blood was on boil for weeks.

 

[Old Rocks]

The only evidence for that is in computer models

There is significant evidence that the most likely cause of the PT extinction event - the largest in Earth's history - was a dramatic rise in CO2.

No, there isn't. It exists only in a "simple" (their word, not mine) computer model.

Odd that almost all the geologists that I have talked to about the PT extinction have said just the opposite. Yes, short duration cooling events, but the worst was the extreme warming from outgassing of CO2 from the Siberian Traps, and outgassing of the methane clathrates, and methane produced from the basalts on coal beds.

http://www.rpgroup.caltech.edu/cour...Permian mass extinction a critical review.pdf

The Siberian Traps and the End-Permian mass extinction: a critical review Andy SAUNDERS† & Marc REICHOW Department of Geological Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, LE1 7RH, United Kingdom The association between the Siberian Traps, the largest continental flood basalt province, and the largest-known mass extinction event at the end of the Permian period, has been strengthened by recently-published high-precision 40Ar/39Ar dates from widespread localities across the Siberian province[1]. We argue that the impact of the volcanism was amplified by the prevailing late Permian environmental conditions―in particular, the hothouse climate, with sluggish oceanic circulation, that was leading to widespread oceanic anoxia. Volcanism released large masses of sulphate aerosols and carbon dioxide, the former triggering short-duration volcanic winters, the latter leading to long-term warming. Whilst the mass of CO2 released from individual eruptions was small compared with the total mass of carbon in the atmosphere-ocean system, the long ‘mean lifetime’ of atmospheric CO2, compared with the eruption flux and duration, meant that significant accumulation could occur over periods of 105 years. Compromise of the carbon sequestration systems (by curtailment of photosynthesis, destruction of biomass, and warming and acidification of the oceans) probably led to rapid atmospheric CO2 build-up, warming, and shallow-water anoxia, leading ultimately to mass extinction.

Caltech has a pretty good reputation.

 

[Old Rocks]

Every year hundreds of people from all over the world fly in private jets to a climate conference to discus manmade global warming.

During peak of 09 Depression/recession Pelosi and a bunch of other Congress took off for Copenhagen to take over entire floors of five star hotels. My blood was on boil for weeks.

And that is differant from a business conferance in what way?

 

[westwall]

The only evidence for that is in computer models

There is significant evidence that the most likely cause of the PT extinction event - the largest in Earth's history - was a dramatic rise in CO2.

No, there isn't. It exists only in a "simple" (their word, not mine) computer model.

Odd that almost all the geologists that I have talked to about the PT extinction have said just the opposite. Yes, short duration cooling events, but the worst was the extreme warming from outgassing of CO2 from the Siberian Traps, and outgassing of the methane clathrates, and methane produced from the basalts on coal beds.

http://www.rpgroup.caltech.edu/courses/Evolution_GIST_2013/files_2013/articles/Saunders, Reichow - 2009 - The Siberian Traps and the End-Permian mass extinction a critical review.pdf

The Siberian Traps and the End-Permian mass extinction: a critical review Andy SAUNDERS† & Marc REICHOW Department of Geological Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, LE1 7RH, United Kingdom The association between the Siberian Traps, the largest continental flood basalt province, and the largest-known mass extinction event at the end of the Permian period, has been strengthened by recently-published high-precision 40Ar/39Ar dates from widespread localities across the Siberian province[1]. We argue that the impact of the volcanism was amplified by the prevailing late Permian environmental conditions―in particular, the hothouse climate, with sluggish oceanic circulation, that was leading to widespread oceanic anoxia. Volcanism released large masses of sulphate aerosols and carbon dioxide, the former triggering short-duration volcanic winters, the latter leading to long-term warming. Whilst the mass of CO2 released from individual eruptions was small compared with the total mass of carbon in the atmosphere-ocean system, the long ‘mean lifetime’ of atmospheric CO2, compared with the eruption flux and duration, meant that significant accumulation could occur over periods of 105 years. Compromise of the carbon sequestration systems (by curtailment of photosynthesis, destruction of biomass, and warming and acidification of the oceans) probably led to rapid atmospheric CO2 build-up, warming, and shallow-water anoxia, leading ultimately to mass extinction.

Caltech has a pretty good reputation.

Sulphate aerosols reduce the temperature. There is ample evidence of glaciation. There is no evidence for warming however. There are merely computer models. Yes, Caltech has a great rep (and it's my Alma-mater), that doesn't mean they don't get shit scientists there though.

 

[Stephanie]

One side is spending money on research and mitigation measure. The other side is spending money on lobbying and PR.

And I disagree with your numbers. Over 583 million has been spent in the last decade funding AGW deniers spew. The portion of government AGW spending going to lobbying and PR is microscopic.

so what. you aren't going to tell us all these years the oil companies hasn't being doing any research how to IMPROVE things with oil. why can't you warmers use you windmills, electric cars etc and leave the people who want to us oil alone. you have force yourselves on others by all this: the sky is falling.
that's just shady

 

[Old Rocks]

The only evidence for that is in computer models

There is significant evidence that the most likely cause of the PT extinction event - the largest in Earth's history - was a dramatic rise in CO2.

No, there isn't. It exists only in a "simple" (their word, not mine) computer model.

Odd that almost all the geologists that I have talked to about the PT extinction have said just the opposite. Yes, short duration cooling events, but the worst was the extreme warming from outgassing of CO2 from the Siberian Traps, and outgassing of the methane clathrates, and methane produced from the basalts on coal beds.

http://www.rpgroup.caltech.edu/courses/Evolution_GIST_2013/files_2013/articles/Saunders, Reichow - 2009 - The Siberian Traps and the End-Permian mass extinction a critical review.pdf

The Siberian Traps and the End-Permian mass extinction: a critical review Andy SAUNDERS† & Marc REICHOW Department of Geological Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, LE1 7RH, United Kingdom The association between the Siberian Traps, the largest continental flood basalt province, and the largest-known mass extinction event at the end of the Permian period, has been strengthened by recently-published high-precision 40Ar/39Ar dates from widespread localities across the Siberian province[1]. We argue that the impact of the volcanism was amplified by the prevailing late Permian environmental conditions―in particular, the hothouse climate, with sluggish oceanic circulation, that was leading to widespread oceanic anoxia. Volcanism released large masses of sulphate aerosols and carbon dioxide, the former triggering short-duration volcanic winters, the latter leading to long-term warming. Whilst the mass of CO2 released from individual eruptions was small compared with the total mass of carbon in the atmosphere-ocean system, the long ‘mean lifetime’ of atmospheric CO2, compared with the eruption flux and duration, meant that significant accumulation could occur over periods of 105 years. Compromise of the carbon sequestration systems (by curtailment of photosynthesis, destruction of biomass, and warming and acidification of the oceans) probably led to rapid atmospheric CO2 build-up, warming, and shallow-water anoxia, leading ultimately to mass extinction.

Caltech has a pretty good reputation.

Sulphate aerosols reduce the temperature. There is ample evidence of glaciation. There is no evidence for warming however. There are merely computer models. Yes, Caltech has a great rep (and it's my Alma-mater), that doesn't mean they don't get shit scientists there though.

In other words, anybody who disagrees with you is a shit scientist. About 99% of the scientists in the world.

Climate warming in the latest Permian and the Permian–Triassic mass extinction

Climate warming in the latest Permian and the Permian–Triassic mass extinction

1. Michael M. Joachimski1,
2. Xulong Lai2,3,
3. Shuzhong Shen4,
4. Haishui Jiang2,
5. Genming Luo2,
6. Bo Chen1,
7. Jun Chen4 and
8. Yadong Sun2

+Author Affiliations

1. 1GeoZentrum Nordbayern, University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Schlossgarten 5, 91054 Erlangen, Germany
2. 2Faculty of Earth Sciences, China University of Geosciences, Wuhan, Hubei 430074, China
3. 3State Key Laboratory of Biogeology and Environmental Geology, China University of Geosciences, Wuhan, Hubei 430074, China
4. 4State Key Laboratory of Palaeobiology and Stratigraphy, Nanjing Institute of Geology and Palaeontology, 39 East Beijing Road, Nanjing 210008, China

Abstract
High-resolution oxygen isotope records document the timing and magnitude of global warming across the Permian-Triassic (P-Tr) boundary. Oxygen isotope ratios measured on phosphate-bound oxygen in conodont apatite from the Meishan and Shangsi sections (South China) decrease by 2‰ in the latest Permian, translating into low-latitude surface water warming of 8 °C. The oxygen isotope shift coincides with the negative shift in carbon isotope ratios of carbonates, suggesting that the addition of isotopically light carbon to the ocean-atmosphere system by Siberian Traps volcanism and related processes resulted in higher greenhouse gas levels and global warming. The major temperature rise started immediately before the main extinction phase, with maximum and harmful temperatures documented in the latest Permian (Meishan: bed 27). The coincidence of climate warming and the main pulse of extinction suggest that global warming was one of the causes of the collapse of the marine and terrestrial ecosystems. In addition, very warm climate conditions in the Early Triassic may have played a major role in the delayed recovery in the aftermath of the Permian-Triassic crisis.

 

[Old Rocks]

One side is spending money on research and mitigation measure. The other side is spending money on lobbying and PR.

And I disagree with your numbers. Over 583 million has been spent in the last decade funding AGW deniers spew. The portion of government AGW spending going to lobbying and PR is microscopic.

so what. you aren't you going to tell us all these years the oil companies hasn't being doing any research how to IMPROVE things with oil. why can't you warmers use you windmills, electric cars etc and leave the people who want to us oil alone. you have force yourselves on other by all this the sky is falling. that's just shady

Silly old woman, by the time the electrics take over from the gasoline rigs, you will want one simply for the dependibility and lower fuel cost.

 

[westwall]

The only evidence for that is in computer models

There is significant evidence that the most likely cause of the PT extinction event - the largest in Earth's history - was a dramatic rise in CO2.

No, there isn't. It exists only in a "simple" (their word, not mine) computer model.

Odd that almost all the geologists that I have talked to about the PT extinction have said just the opposite. Yes, short duration cooling events, but the worst was the extreme warming from outgassing of CO2 from the Siberian Traps, and outgassing of the methane clathrates, and methane produced from the basalts on coal beds.

http://www.rpgroup.caltech.edu/courses/Evolution_GIST_2013/files_2013/articles/Saunders, Reichow - 2009 - The Siberian Traps and the End-Permian mass extinction a critical review.pdf

The Siberian Traps and the End-Permian mass extinction: a critical review Andy SAUNDERS† & Marc REICHOW Department of Geological Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, LE1 7RH, United Kingdom The association between the Siberian Traps, the largest continental flood basalt province, and the largest-known mass extinction event at the end of the Permian period, has been strengthened by recently-published high-precision 40Ar/39Ar dates from widespread localities across the Siberian province[1]. We argue that the impact of the volcanism was amplified by the prevailing late Permian environmental conditions―in particular, the hothouse climate, with sluggish oceanic circulation, that was leading to widespread oceanic anoxia. Volcanism released large masses of sulphate aerosols and carbon dioxide, the former triggering short-duration volcanic winters, the latter leading to long-term warming. Whilst the mass of CO2 released from individual eruptions was small compared with the total mass of carbon in the atmosphere-ocean system, the long ‘mean lifetime’ of atmospheric CO2, compared with the eruption flux and duration, meant that significant accumulation could occur over periods of 105 years. Compromise of the carbon sequestration systems (by curtailment of photosynthesis, destruction of biomass, and warming and acidification of the oceans) probably led to rapid atmospheric CO2 build-up, warming, and shallow-water anoxia, leading ultimately to mass extinction.

Caltech has a pretty good reputation.

Sulphate aerosols reduce the temperature. There is ample evidence of glaciation. There is no evidence for warming however. There are merely computer models. Yes, Caltech has a great rep (and it's my Alma-mater), that doesn't mean they don't get shit scientists there though.

In other words, anybody who disagrees with you is a shit scientist. About 99% of the scientists in the world.

Climate warming in the latest Permian and the Permian–Triassic mass extinction

Climate warming in the latest Permian and the Permian–Triassic mass extinction

1. Michael M. Joachimski1,
2. Xulong Lai2,3,
3. Shuzhong Shen4,
4. Haishui Jiang2,
5. Genming Luo2,
6. Bo Chen1,
7. Jun Chen4 and
8. Yadong Sun2

+Author Affiliations

1. 1GeoZentrum Nordbayern, University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Schlossgarten 5, 91054 Erlangen, Germany
2. 2Faculty of Earth Sciences, China University of Geosciences, Wuhan, Hubei 430074, China
3. 3State Key Laboratory of Biogeology and Environmental Geology, China University of Geosciences, Wuhan, Hubei 430074, China
4. 4State Key Laboratory of Palaeobiology and Stratigraphy, Nanjing Institute of Geology and Palaeontology, 39 East Beijing Road, Nanjing 210008, China

Abstract
High-resolution oxygen isotope records document the timing and magnitude of global warming across the Permian-Triassic (P-Tr) boundary. Oxygen isotope ratios measured on phosphate-bound oxygen in conodont apatite from the Meishan and Shangsi sections (South China) decrease by 2‰ in the latest Permian, translating into low-latitude surface water warming of 8 °C. The oxygen isotope shift coincides with the negative shift in carbon isotope ratios of carbonates, suggesting that the addition of isotopically light carbon to the ocean-atmosphere system by Siberian Traps volcanism and related processes resulted in higher greenhouse gas levels and global warming. The major temperature rise started immediately before the main extinction phase, with maximum and harmful temperatures documented in the latest Permian (Meishan: bed 27). The coincidence of climate warming and the main pulse of extinction suggest that global warming was one of the causes of the collapse of the marine and terrestrial ecosystems. In addition, very warm climate conditions in the Early Triassic may have played a major role in the delayed recovery in the aftermath of the Permian-Triassic crisis.

What's hilarious is the global temp of the planet has been significantly higher for 75% of its history. The PETM which we have a good paleo record of, shows beyond doubt that warmth is beneficial to terrestrial life. Like I said, no one knows what caused the mass extinction but there are glacial striations all over the world that date to that period. There is no empirical evidence whatsoever that shows warming killed anything. This study is merely the latest in a long effort to vilify CO2 even though all evidence we have shows it to be beneficial. And that meme of 99% of all scientists is just that, a meme, and a lie.