Global warming

Aviation Trivia, Jokes & Humour

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
cage
Niner Tousand
Niner Tousand
Posts: 9572
Joined: Mon Dec 23, 2013 9:47 am
Closest Airfield: FAGC
Location: ..for the grass 35
Has liked: 6 times
Been liked: 114 times

Re: Global warming

Unread post by cage » Mon Jan 28, 2019 9:48 am

heisan wrote:
Mon Jan 28, 2019 9:44 am
Hmmm... I wonder if this research also applies to climate change :twisted: :

https://edmontonjournal.com/news/canada ... 1c9df46672
Across four studies conducted in three countries — the U.S., France and Germany — the researchers found that extreme opponents of genetically modified foods “display a lack of insight into how much they know.” They know the least, but think they know the most.

“The less people know,” the authors conclude, “the more opposed they are to the scientific consensus.”
It's just Dunning Kruger being proven again and again.
User avatar
zander
Take off Clearance
Posts: 131
Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2015 1:33 pm
Closest Airfield: fala
Location: Honeydew
Has liked: 13 times
Been liked: 10 times

Re: Global warming

Unread post by zander » Mon Jan 28, 2019 10:19 am

vanjast wrote:
Sun Jan 27, 2019 11:12 pm
A civilised chat about it...
There are plenty of these, as the wave of truth starts to hit home :wink:

and this is where the looneys come from..

The revolution is coming .. :lol:
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: deniers digging themselves deeper and deeper into a pit with each post..

What revolution quoting clowns dating back from 2010 ? :lol: looneys indeed... :wink:

One of them richard lindzen a Known Liar funded by fossil fuel interests, such as Peabody Coal.

In a biographical note at the foot of a column published in Newsweek in 2007, Lindzen wrote that "his research has always been funded exclusively by the U.S. government. He receives no funding from any energy companies." (Emphasis added).However, analysis of Peabody Energy court documents showed that the fossil fuel company backed Lindzen,proving that Lindzen was lying. #-o :lol:

In a section on the "Role of Water Vapor", the GCC's Science and Technical Advisory Committee wrote that "In 1990, Prof Richard Lindzen of MIT argued that the models which were being used to predict greenhouse warming were incorrect because they predicted an increase in water vapor at all levels of the troposphere. Since water vapor is a greenhouse gas, the models predict warming at all levels of the troposphere. However, warming should create convective turbulence, which would lead to more condensation of water vapor (i.e. more rain) and both drying and cooling of the troposphere above 5 km. This negative feedback would act as, a "thermostat" keeping temperatures from rising significantly."

However, the GCC's science advisers noted that this argument had been disproven to the point that Lindzen himself had ceased to use it. "Lindzen's 1990 theory predicted that warmer conditions at.the surface would lead to cooler, drier conditions at the top ofthe troposphere. Studies of the behavior of the troposphere in the tropics fail to find the cooling and drying Lindzen predicted. While Lindzen remains a critic of climate modeling efforts, his latest publications do not include the convective turbulence argument." #-o #-o

The others aren't even climate scientists :lol:
Last edited by zander on Sun Apr 28, 2019 11:12 am, edited 6 times in total.
User avatar
zander
Take off Clearance
Posts: 131
Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2015 1:33 pm
Closest Airfield: fala
Location: Honeydew
Has liked: 13 times
Been liked: 10 times

Re: Global warming

Unread post by zander » Mon Jan 28, 2019 10:21 am

cage wrote:
Mon Jan 28, 2019 9:48 am
heisan wrote:
Mon Jan 28, 2019 9:44 am
Hmmm... I wonder if this research also applies to climate change :twisted: :

https://edmontonjournal.com/news/canada ... 1c9df46672
Across four studies conducted in three countries — the U.S., France and Germany — the researchers found that extreme opponents of genetically modified foods “display a lack of insight into how much they know.” They know the least, but think they know the most.

“The less people know,” the authors conclude, “the more opposed they are to the scientific consensus.”
It's just Dunning Kruger being proven again and again.
=D> #-o
User avatar
zander
Take off Clearance
Posts: 131
Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2015 1:33 pm
Closest Airfield: fala
Location: Honeydew
Has liked: 13 times
Been liked: 10 times

Re: Global warming

Unread post by zander » Mon Jan 28, 2019 10:21 am

These users liked the author zander for the post:
sampie
User avatar
zander
Take off Clearance
Posts: 131
Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2015 1:33 pm
Closest Airfield: fala
Location: Honeydew
Has liked: 13 times
Been liked: 10 times

Re: Global warming

Unread post by zander » Mon Jan 28, 2019 10:29 am

All The Lies and Deceit knows no boundries... =D> :lol: #-o

Skymaster
Frequent AvComer
Posts: 713
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2009 4:32 pm
Closest Airfield: FAGM
Location: Johannesburg
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 3 times

Re: Global warming

Unread post by Skymaster » Thu Jan 31, 2019 11:07 pm

You gotta just love the way alarmists hysterically jump to try and defend the unproven theory of Co2 with the most illogical, unscientific jabberwocky whenever weather happens.
This amusing article, (written by someone who the alarmists will scream hysterically is in the pay of "big oil") not without home truths, sent to me by an old McGill Prof., friend of mind in a local paper kinda sums up their muddled thinking.

America enjoys a winter filled with tons of snow and frigid cold weather and out pops the Climate Hoaxsters to assure this kind of weather only further proves our planet is getting, uhm… warmer.
This current Climate Hoaxster freak-out is largely in reaction to President Trump’s tweet earlier this week mocking the Climate Hoaxsters.
He tweeted with tongue in cheek:

“In the beautiful Midwest, windchill temperatures are reaching minus 60 degrees, the coldest ever recorded,” he tweeted. “What the hell is going on with Global Warming? Please come back fast, we need you!”

Naturally, this launched a million reactionary headlines from our oh-so objective, unbiased, not-at-all well left-wing media.
“Look at This Embarrassing F*cking Moron,” screamed Esquire.
“Debunking the utter idiocy of Donald Trump’s global warming tweet,” pouted CNN.
“Here’s Why the Crazy Cold Temperatures Prove Global Warming is Real,” Forbes says reassuringly.
“What Trump keeps getting wrong about Global Warming,” the Washington Post helpfully reports.
But here is my personal favorite headline from, where else?, NBC News…. “Yes, it can be this cold outside in a time of global warming.” (Ha ha ha ha!)
There are three Party slogans in George Orwell’s 1984, his masterpiece about an all-controlling centralized government that runs on lies, terror, and propaganda. See if you can pick out which Party slogan I invented among the four:

• War is Peace
• Freedom is Slavery
• Ignorance is Strength
• Frigid Weather Means Our Planet is Getting Warmer

The Climate Hoaxsters say that this run of cold weather does not mean the planet will not warm over the course of years, which would sound reasonable if these were not the same Climate Hoaxters who told us Global Warming meant the “end of snow,”( David Viner alarmist Met Office UK) or that this winter would be “warmer-than-average,” or that a run of warm weather last winter proved the planet is warming.
That last example is interesting, no?
You see, last year our Climate Hucksters told us that a run of warm weather proved the planet is warming, which means we all have to give up our freedoms to a centralized government in order to save the planet. BUT… a run of frigid weather this year also proves the planet is warming and we all have to give up our freedoms to a centralized government in order to save the planet.
So no matter what happens, no matter how cold or warm or temperate it is, everything proves Global Warming is for real.
Hey, remember when the Climate Grifters told us Global Warming would make hurricanes worse?( They did not.)
Remember how, when that scientific prediction was humiliated in the face of record low hurricane activity, these same Climate Grifters told us this lack of hurricane activity proved Global Warming was really fer real?
Remember in 2005 when the establishment media told us that by 2015 Global Warming would drive gas up to $9 a gallon (it’s $2.08 here today), milk up to $12 a gallon ($2.99), and New York City would be underwater?
Remember how during that crucial time between 2005 and 2015, that decade before the imminent flooding of Manhattan, the establishment media did not remove any of its personnel from a New York City that was about to be drowned? In fact, while CNN was telling us the seas were certain to rise, CNN shifted much of its base of operations from the inland safety of Atlanta to Manhattan; while CNN’s then-parent company, Time Warner, spent billions relocating its headquarters just two blocks from the water’s edge in New York.
And, soon enough, I’ll be asking if you remember how Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez — a sitting member of Congress — went on TV and said the world would end in 12 years because of Global Warming.
You see, no matter what happens, no matter what the weather looks like, no matter how false their predictions turn out to be, no matter often they act as though they don’t believe in Global Warming, the Climate Swindlers still scream See! See! Toldjaso! — and almost always do it from a wildly expensive base of operations on the same coast they claim will soon be underwater.
Any student of history can look back and discover that all of history’s mass-murdering socialists — from Hitler to Stalin to Mao — have manufactured audacious lies and scapegoats as a means to consolidate power into a malevolent Central Authority.
Freedom is Slavery.
War is Peace.
Ignorance is Strength.
Cooling is Warming.
(Ends)

I guess you gotta tell as many porkies as necessary to protect your tax-payer funded gravy train grants, your several annual soirees to 5 star venues around the world only to repeat the same old tired doom and gloom stories which never come true.
The world may indeed be warming but is Co2 really the only cause?
User avatar
MadMacs
Too Tousand
Too Tousand
Posts: 2288
Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 3:41 pm
Closest Airfield: GRJ
Location: On my bed
Has liked: 138 times
Been liked: 25 times

Re: Global warming

Unread post by MadMacs » Fri Feb 01, 2019 8:00 am

Well one thing I can tell you for sure, this is the coldest summer we've had here in George area. My grass has gone yellow already and it seems that autumn/winter is early.
The closest I get to flying these days is when I put my cellphone in 'flight mode'.
User avatar
sampie
Incipient Spin
Posts: 368
Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2013 1:33 pm
Closest Airfield: fakr
Location: Roodepoort
Has liked: 14 times
Been liked: 18 times

Re: Global warming

Unread post by sampie » Fri Feb 01, 2019 9:33 am

Skymaster wrote:
Thu Jan 31, 2019 11:07 pm
You gotta just love the way alarmists hysterically jump to try and defend the unproven theory of Co2 with the most illogical, unscientific jabberwocky whenever weather happens.
This amusing article, (written by someone who the alarmists will scream hysterically is in the pay of "big oil") not without home truths
No Entirely Wrong CO2 increase by Fossil Fuels is Causing the earth to warm up, it is Real Science not political claptrap and it is not argued it is Proven :wink: This can be backed up by Emperical evidence, (i will spare the embarrassment of posting the long list of Nasa climate scientists presenting the evidence.
What have You to provide as evidence in contradiction (Donald Trump ?) :lol:

Most if not almost all of the denier clowns posted right here by the deniers themselves! lied, or contradicted their statements, tried to mislead and cherry picked, all for everyone to see.. a hilarious comedy shooting themselves in the foot each time #-o

A tiny phrase out of the barrage of evidence:

The greenhouse effect works like this: Energy arrives from the sun in the form of visible light and ultraviolet radiation. The Earth then emits some of this energy as infrared radiation. Greenhouse gases in the atmosphere 'capture' some of this heat, then re-emit it in all directions - including back to the Earth's surface.

Through this process, CO2 and other greenhouse gases keep the Earth’s surface 33°Celsius (59.4°F) warmer than it would be without them. We have added 42% more CO2, and temperatures have gone up. There should be some evidence that links CO2 to the temperature rise.

So far, the average global temperature has gone up by about 0.8 degrees C (1.4°F):

"According to temperature analysis conducted by scientists at NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS)…the average global temperature on Earth has increased by about 0.8°Celsius (1.4°Fahrenheit) since 1880. Two-thirds of the warming has occurred since 1975, at a rate of roughly 0.15-0.20°C per decade."

The temperatures are going up, just like the theory predicted. But where’s the connection with CO2, or other greenhouse gases like methane, ozone or nitrous oxide?

The connection can be found in the spectrum of greenhouse radiation. Using high-resolution FTIR spectroscopy, we can measure the exact wavelengths of long-wave (infrared) radiation reaching the ground.

America enjoys a winter filled with tons of snow and frigid cold weather and out pops the Climate Hoaxsters to assure this kind of weather only further proves our planet is getting, uhm… warmer.
a typical cave man quote repeated by the same backward thinking denial groups year after year, just because america is cold now, doesn't mean the whole world is cold, the cavemen grew more evolved over the years, and discovered there was a broad world, other than their little patch of sky they existed on.. ;)

This current Climate Hoaxster freak-out is largely in reaction to President Trump’s tweet earlier this week mocking the Climate Hoaxsters.
He tweeted with tongue in cheek:

“In the beautiful Midwest, windchill temperatures are reaching minus 60 degrees, the coldest ever recorded,” he tweeted. “What the hell is going on with Global Warming? Please come back fast, we need you!”
sounds like an idiot indeed, just because his little patch is cold, doesn't mean the whole world is cold.
Naturally, this launched a million reactionary headlines from our oh-so objective, unbiased, not-at-all well left-wing media.
“Look at This Embarrassing F*cking Moron,” screamed Esquire.
“Debunking the utter idiocy of Donald Trump’s global warming tweet,” pouted CNN.
“Here’s Why the Crazy Cold Temperatures Prove Global Warming is Real,” Forbes says reassuringly.
“What Trump keeps getting wrong about Global Warming,” the Washington Post helpfully reports.
But here is my personal favorite headline from, where else?, NBC News…. “Yes, it can be this cold outside in a time of global warming.” (Ha ha ha ha!)
So just because donald dumb says it's cold global warming does not exist..? :D the hilariousness of denier rational never seizes to entertain :lol:

There are three Party slogans in George Orwell’s 1984, his masterpiece about an all-controlling centralized government that runs on lies, terror, and propaganda. See if you can pick out which Party slogan I invented among the four:

• War is Peace
• Freedom is Slavery
• Ignorance is Strength
• Frigid Weather Means Our Planet is Getting Warmer

The Climate Hoaxsters say that this run of cold weather does not mean the planet will not warm over the course of years, which would sound reasonable if these were not the same Climate Hoaxters who told us Global Warming meant the “end of snow,”( David Viner alarmist Met Office UK) or that this winter would be “warmer-than-average,” or that a run of warm weather last winter proved the planet is warming.
That last example is interesting, no?
You see, last year our Climate Hucksters told us that a run of warm weather proved the planet is warming, which means we all have to give up our freedoms to a centralized government in order to save the planet. BUT… a run of frigid weather this year also proves the planet is warming and we all have to give up our freedoms to a centralized government in order to save the planet.
So no matter what happens, no matter how cold or warm or temperate it is, everything proves Global Warming is for real.
This clown posting this quote really has no clue, nor understand even basic science, and is mixing up misleading statements as they always do.

It really is not hard to understand. Scientists takes the whole earth in consideration, they do not say like deniers because one patch of earth is cold, everything is cold, that is ludicrous.

Site your source, don't post a load of drivel, manipulated by clueless media propagandists.
The earth is Warming and continues to do so by Man Made Fossil Fuels.
Hey, remember when the Climate Grifters told us Global Warming would make hurricanes worse?( They did not.)
Again some propagandist taking words out of context without having a clue. site your source.

Yes it will ,over time. Gotta think further than just your flat earth mentality.

Hurricanes tend to become more destructive as ocean temperatures rise, and
An unchecked rise in greenhouse gas concentrations will very likely increase ocean temperatures further, ultimately overwhelming any natural oscillations.
Scenarios for future global warming show tropical SST rising by a few degrees, not just tenths of a degree (see e.g. results from the Hadley Centre model and the implications for hurricanes shown That is the important message from science.
Delworth, T.L., Mann, M.E., Observed and Simulated Multidecadal Variability in the Northern Hemisphere, Climate Dynamics, 16, 661-676, 2000.

Emanuel, K. (2005), Increasing destructiveness of tropical cyclones over the past 30 years, Nature, online publication; published online 31 July 2005 | doi: 10.1038/nature03906

Goldenberg, S.B., C.W. Landsea, A.M. Mestas-Nuñez, and W.M. Gray. The recent increase in Atlantic hurricane activity. Causes and implications. Science, 293:474-479 (2001).

Kerr, R.A., 2000, A North Atlantic climate pacemaker for the centuries: Science, v. 288, p. 1984-1986.

Knutson, T. K., and R. E. Tuleya, 2004: Impact of CO2-induced warming on simulated hurricane intensity and precipitation: Sensitivity to the choice of climate model and convective parameterization. Journal of Climate, 17(18), 3477-3495.
Remember how, when that scientific prediction was humiliated in the face of record low hurricane activity, these same Climate Grifters told us this lack of hurricane activity proved Global Warming was really fer real?
Remember in 2005 when the establishment media told us that by 2015 Global Warming would drive gas up to $9 a gallon (it’s $2.08 here today), milk up to $12 a gallon ($2.99), and New York City would be underwater?
Remember how during that crucial time between 2005 and 2015, that decade before the imminent flooding of Manhattan, the establishment media did not remove any of its personnel from a New York City that was about to be drowned? In fact, while CNN was telling us the seas were certain to rise, CNN shifted much of its base of operations from the inland safety of Atlanta to Manhattan; while CNN’s then-parent company, Time Warner, spent billions relocating its headquarters just two blocks from the water’s edge in New York.
And, soon enough, I’ll be asking if you remember how Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez — a sitting member of Congress — went on TV and said the world would end in 12 years because of Global Warming.
You see, no matter what happens, no matter what the weather looks like, no matter how false their predictions turn out to be, no matter often they act as though they don’t believe in Global Warming, the Climate Swindlers still scream See! See! Toldjaso! — and almost always do it from a wildly expensive base of operations on the same coast they claim will soon be underwater.
Any student of history can look back and discover that all of history’s mass-murdering socialists — from Hitler to Stalin to Mao — have manufactured audacious lies and scapegoats as a means to consolidate power into a malevolent Central Authority.
Freedom is Slavery.
War is Peace.
Ignorance is Strength.
Cooling is Warming.
(Ends)
Hilarious did you get this of parkers comedy and jive :lol:
I guess you gotta tell as many porkies as necessary to protect your tax-payer funded gravy train grants, your several annual soirees to 5 star venues around the world only to repeat the same old tired doom and gloom stories which never come true.
The world may indeed be warming but is Co2 really the only cause?
Co2 is Proven to be the cause and you cannot disprove it, continually citing the utter most hogwash from people still thinking the moon is made of cheese as evidence does not count :wink:

And even more hilarious trying to compare climate change funding to Big Oil relentless of trillions upon trillions upon trillions of revenue they rake in by destroying the earth, and the hundreds of millions they spend blowing smoke into climate denial propaganda campaigns is beyond hilarious.

https://insideclimatenews.org/news/2212 ... nfographic
Last edited by sampie on Fri Feb 01, 2019 3:54 pm, edited 8 times in total.
User avatar
heisan
Fife Thousand feet
Fife Thousand feet
Posts: 5364
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 3:45 pm
Closest Airfield: Rhino Park
Location: Pretoria
Has liked: 24 times
Been liked: 78 times

Re: Global warming

Unread post by heisan » Fri Feb 01, 2019 9:58 am

Skymaster wrote:
Thu Jan 31, 2019 11:07 pm
You gotta just love the way alarmists hysterically jump to try and defend the unproven theory of Co2 with the most illogical, unscientific jabberwocky whenever weather happens.
Interesting... Just about every climate denier quoted on this thread admits that CO2 affects temperature in some way, yet you insist on claiming it is unproven?

But I suppose in a way you are right. Climate scientists only calculate a 99% probability that CO2 concentration is the primary driver of the recent temperature increase. So maybe you are cheering for that 1% chance that it is not?
America enjoys a winter filled with tons of snow and frigid cold weather and out pops the Climate Hoaxsters to assure this kind of weather only further proves our planet is getting, uhm… warmer.
This current Climate Hoaxster freak-out is largely in reaction to President Trump’s tweet earlier this week mocking the Climate Hoaxsters.
He tweeted with tongue in cheek:

“In the beautiful Midwest, windchill temperatures are reaching minus 60 degrees, the coldest ever recorded,” he tweeted. “What the hell is going on with Global Warming? Please come back fast, we need you!”
Grab a dictionary. Look up the words 'climate' and 'weather'. Once you actually know what these words mean, and how they relate to each other, perhaps you will understand how you can have some cold winter storms in what is by far the hottest La Niña year in recorded history.
I guess you gotta tell as many porkies as necessary to protect your tax-payer funded gravy train grants, your several annual soirees to 5 star venues around the world only to repeat the same old tired doom and gloom stories which never come true.
You always bring this up. Do you have some sort of first hand knowledge, or any reference information we can look at? I know a few people involved in climate science, and I can guarantee you that very few get government grants related to climate work, and they certainly never end up in 5 star venues.

Unlike, of course, the various 'think tank' employees regularly quoted by deniers - who are very well paid to contradict climate science - and they really do go to 5 star venues. (Industry always pays better than academia, unfortunately.)
Justin Schoeman

ZU-FSR (Raven)
User avatar
skytrooper
Too Tousand
Too Tousand
Posts: 2129
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2007 4:39 pm
Has liked: 18 times
Been liked: 22 times

Re: NASA scientist debunks man made global warming

Unread post by skytrooper » Sat Mar 09, 2019 3:33 pm

zander wrote:
Tue Jun 26, 2018 12:50 pm
That argument leaves the impression that it's ok to just lay waste and pump forth pollution into the air and oceans as pleased (like the fossil fuel industry is doing without a care in the world) before greedy empires, this was not the case, point being everything begins and ends in this reality yes, how much the process can be slown is what matters.
Exactly =D>
Ubluwulululululu....!
User avatar
skytrooper
Too Tousand
Too Tousand
Posts: 2129
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2007 4:39 pm
Has liked: 18 times
Been liked: 22 times

Re: Global warming

Unread post by skytrooper » Sat Mar 09, 2019 3:33 pm

heisan wrote:
Fri Feb 01, 2019 9:58 am
Skymaster wrote:
Thu Jan 31, 2019 11:07 pm
You gotta just love the way alarmists hysterically jump to try and defend the unproven theory of Co2 with the most illogical, unscientific jabberwocky whenever weather happens.
Interesting... Just about every climate denier quoted on this thread admits that CO2 affects temperature in some way, yet you insist on claiming it is unproven?

But I suppose in a way you are right. Climate scientists only calculate a 99% probability that CO2 concentration is the primary driver of the recent temperature increase. So maybe you are cheering for that 1% chance that it is not?
America enjoys a winter filled with tons of snow and frigid cold weather and out pops the Climate Hoaxsters to assure this kind of weather only further proves our planet is getting, uhm… warmer.
This current Climate Hoaxster freak-out is largely in reaction to President Trump’s tweet earlier this week mocking the Climate Hoaxsters.
He tweeted with tongue in cheek:

“In the beautiful Midwest, windchill temperatures are reaching minus 60 degrees, the coldest ever recorded,” he tweeted. “What the hell is going on with Global Warming? Please come back fast, we need you!”
Grab a dictionary. Look up the words 'climate' and 'weather'. Once you actually know what these words mean, and how they relate to each other, perhaps you will understand how you can have some cold winter storms in what is by far the hottest La Niña year in recorded history.
I guess you gotta tell as many porkies as necessary to protect your tax-payer funded gravy train grants, your several annual soirees to 5 star venues around the world only to repeat the same old tired doom and gloom stories which never come true.
You always bring this up. Do you have some sort of first hand knowledge, or any reference information we can look at? I know a few people involved in climate science, and I can guarantee you that very few get government grants related to climate work, and they certainly never end up in 5 star venues.

Unlike, of course, the various 'think tank' employees regularly quoted by deniers - who are very well paid to contradict climate science - and they really do go to 5 star venues. (Industry always pays better than academia, unfortunately.)
=D>
You can take the monkeys out of the bush, but you cannot take the bush out of the monkeys... :lol:
These users liked the author skytrooper for the post:
sampie
Ubluwulululululu....!
User avatar
MadMacs
Too Tousand
Too Tousand
Posts: 2288
Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 3:41 pm
Closest Airfield: GRJ
Location: On my bed
Has liked: 138 times
Been liked: 25 times

Re: Global warming

Unread post by MadMacs » Sat Mar 09, 2019 10:24 pm

Sorry for you but every denier here believes that it is NOT co2 that causes so called climate change.
The closest I get to flying these days is when I put my cellphone in 'flight mode'.
User avatar
skytrooper
Too Tousand
Too Tousand
Posts: 2129
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2007 4:39 pm
Has liked: 18 times
Been liked: 22 times

Re: Global warming

Unread post by skytrooper » Sun Mar 10, 2019 12:17 pm

No need to be sorry, the deniers "here" have proven their incompetence on the subject beyond even stupidity :lol: Trying to justify all the lies told by their own submitted corrupted politicians caught out on the spot, and corrupted oil scientists so frankly whatever those deniers "here" believe is beyond hilarious :lol:

And in the world of big oil, the lunacy is just as pathetic, showing just how rotten they are and how far they will go to boldly spread their lies for their own greedy selfish gain:

The oil industry’s two-faced behaviour, for decades their own scientists quietly published peer-reviewed research concluding that humans are causing global warming. That was the face we saw from Chevron’s lawyer. But at the same time, oil companies were funding contrarian scientists and think tanks to spread denial and doubt about that same science. That was the face revealed in the denier briefs.

Investigative journalism by Inside Climate News (ICN) into Exxon’s internal documents revealed that the company was at the forefront of climate research, warning of the dangers posed by human-caused global warming from the late-1970s to the late-1980s. As Harvard climate historian Naomi Oreskes noted.

But Exxon was sending a different message, even though its own evidence contradicted its public claim that the science was highly uncertain and no one really knew whether the climate was changing or, if it was changing, what was causing it … Journalists and scientists have identified more than 30 different organizations funded by the company that have worked to undermine the scientific message and prevent policy action to control greenhouse gas emissions.

Exxon has responded to the ICN allegations by pointing out that over the past three decades, the company’s scientists have continued to publish peer-reviewed climate research.

Our scientists have contributed climate research and related policy analysis to more than 50 papers in peer-reviewed publications – all out in the open. They’ve participated in the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change since its inception – in 1988 – and were involved in the National Academy of Sciences review of the third U.S. National Climate Assessment Report.

Finally, I’ll note that we have long – and publicly – supported a revenue-neutral carbon tax as the most effective, transparent, and efficient way for governments to send a signal to consumers and the economy to reduce the use of carbon-based fuels.

While the ICN investigation focused on Exxon’s internal reports, Exxon’s spokesman pointed to the peer-reviewed scientific research published by the company’s scientists between 1983 and 2014 – 53 papers in all.
Exxon scientists’ 100% global warming consensus

I reviewed all 53 of the papers referenced by Exxon’s spokesman, and they indeed consist of high-quality scientific research. Most of them implicitly or explicitly endorsed the expert consensus on human-caused global warming; none minimized or rejected it. This means that there is a 100% consensus on human-caused global warming among Exxon’s peer-reviewed climate science research – even higher than the 97% consensus in the rest of the peer-reviewed literature.

Of the 53 papers, 45 were co-authored by Haroon Kheshgi. I spoke to several climate scientists who worked with him and all agree, Kheshgi is a top-notch climate scientist, for example having constructively contributed to the first IPCC reports that identified a human influence on global warming.

Katharine Hayhoe, one of TIME magazine’s 100 most influential people, did a summer internship with Kheshgi at one of Exxon’s facilities as part of her masters’ thesis research, and subsequently co-authored a number of papers with him. Hayhoe described her experience with Kheshgi and Exxon,

Haroon himself is an outstanding scientist - careful, detailed, methodical, and committed to doing good science, just as we all are. In my experience with Exxon and with Haroon, I never met a scientist who expressed any opinions counter to those prevalent in the academic community.

Much of Exxon’s early research in the 1980s dealt with climate modeling, for example projecting that the planet’s surface temperatures would warm 3–6°C above pre-industrial levels by the year 2100. Their research has often discussed the dangers associated with this degree of global warming, and many studies published by Exxon scientists investigated the possibility of mitigating climate change by sequestering carbon in the deep ocean.

The peer-reviewed research published by Exxon’s climate scientists was entirely in line with the expert consensus that humans are causing potentially dangerous global warming, and that we need to explore ways to mitigate the associated risks.
Exxon funded climate denial misinformation campaign

While Exxon’s own scientists and research were 100% aligned with the expert consensus on human-caused global warming, the company simultaneously funded a campaign to manufacture doubt about that scientific consensus.

A new study published in the Proceedings of the National Academies of Science found that groups with funding from corporations like Exxon have been particularly effective at polarizing and misinforming the public on climate change. Since 1998, Exxon has given over $31 million to organizations and individuals blocking solutions to climate change and spreading misinformation to the public.

Exxon’s funding of the climate misinformation campaign may even have extended further, as a former company executive told the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS),

A former highly placed ExxonMobil executive who requested anonymity told UCS that the company paid out as much as $10 million annually on what insiders called “black ops” from 1998 through 2005, significantly more than what UCS was able to pin down in its 2007 report from company tax records.

After pledging to stop funding these climate denial groups in 2007, Exxon continued to give more than $2.3 million to the American Legislative Exchange Council (Alec) and to members of Congress who denied the expert climate consensus and acted to obstruct climate policies. Exxon also funded outside scientists who published some of the 2–3% of shoddy research that disputed the global warming consensus. For example, Exxon and other fossil fuel companies together gave contrarian scientist Willie Soon over $1 million in funding.
Exxon’s two faces

In short, Exxon’s own scientists have been publishing top-notch research on the dangers of human-caused global warming for 35 years, but for the past several decades, the company simultaneously engaged in a multi-pronged campaign to cast doubt on the expert consensus of which its own scientists were part.

Exxon funded outside scientists to publish shoddy research contradicting that of its own scientists, funded think tanks and other organizations to use that research to manufacture doubt about the consensus, and donated money to politicians and Alec to obstruct efforts to pass critically important climate legislation.

There is a sharp contrast between what Exxon knew and what Exxon did. As Bill McKibben imagined, just think of how the world would be different if Exxon had told the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth on climate change.
Exxon under investigation

While Exxon has supported climate science and policy in public, the company has engaged in a shadowy misinformation campaign behind the scenes. As a result, there have been increasing calls for a civil Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) investigation into Exxon’s behavior.

Calls for such an investigation have been made by a number of climate scientists, joined recently by a petition with 350,000 signatures. Senators Whitehouse (D-RI), Blumenthal (D-CT), Warren (D-MA), and Markey (D-MA) have also sent Exxon an inquiry letter asking whether it has funded Donors Trust/Donors Capital Fund, which funnels money to climate denial organizations while concealing the identity of its donors.

New York State Attorney General Eric Schneiderman has also subpoenaed Exxon for documents spanning four decades of research findings and communications about climate change. House Democrats have announced plans for a broader probe into the fossil fuel industry to determine whether other companies behaved in the same manner as Exxon, funding a denial misinformation campaign after knowing the causes and risks associated with climate change.

It appears that the only difference between the behavior of Exxon and the tobacco industry is that cigarette companies didn’t publish their research linking smoking and adverse health effects. Exxon’s scientists have published research in scientific journals on the human causes and dangers of global warming. However, in both cases, the industries funded an extensive multi-pronged campaign to misinform the public about the expert scientific consensus and the dangers associated with their products.

It remains to be seen whether the investigations into the actions of Exxon and the rest of the fossil fuel industry will yield the same results as the investigations into the tobacco industry racketeering.
These users liked the author skytrooper for the post:
sampie
Ubluwulululululu....!
User avatar
heisan
Fife Thousand feet
Fife Thousand feet
Posts: 5364
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 3:45 pm
Closest Airfield: Rhino Park
Location: Pretoria
Has liked: 24 times
Been liked: 78 times

Re: Global warming

Unread post by heisan » Sun Mar 10, 2019 1:25 pm

MadMacs wrote:
Sat Mar 09, 2019 10:24 pm
Sorry for you but every denier here believes that it is NOT co2 that causes so called climate change.
As an exercise for the reader:

1) Review all the current active threads on Global Warming on Avcom.
2) Watch all the videos posted by deniers to support their stance.
3) Count how many people on those videos admit that CO2 affects climate.
4) If by chance someone in a video does not admit it, search for other videos featuring that speaker, and see if you can find one where they say that CO2 affects climate.

I am way too lazy to do this myself, but if my memory serves me well enough, then I would say at least 80% of the 'climate scientists' quoted on denialist videos will admit that CO2 is a significant driver of climate (actually, I would not be too surprised if the figure was closer to 100%).

What they differ on, is how much of an effect it has, and how much of it is caused by additional human generated CO2.
These users liked the author heisan for the post (total 2):
Mfeziskytrooper
Justin Schoeman

ZU-FSR (Raven)
User avatar
MadMacs
Too Tousand
Too Tousand
Posts: 2288
Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 3:41 pm
Closest Airfield: GRJ
Location: On my bed
Has liked: 138 times
Been liked: 25 times

Re: Global warming

Unread post by MadMacs » Mon Mar 11, 2019 6:42 pm

heisan wrote:
Sun Mar 10, 2019 1:25 pm
MadMacs wrote:
Sat Mar 09, 2019 10:24 pm
Sorry for you but every denier here believes that it is NOT co2 that causes so called climate change.
As an exercise for the reader:

1) Review all the current active threads on Global Warming on Avcom.
2) Watch all the videos posted by deniers to support their stance.
3) Count how many people on those videos admit that CO2 affects climate.
4) If by chance someone in a video does not admit it, search for other videos featuring that speaker, and see if you can find one where they say that CO2 affects climate.

I am way too lazy to do this myself, but if my memory serves me well enough, then I would say at least 80% of the 'climate scientists' quoted on denialist videos will admit that CO2 is a significant driver of climate (actually, I would not be too surprised if the figure was closer to 100%).

What they differ on, is how much of an effect it has, and how much of it is caused by additional human generated CO2.
The Avcom cyber bully is at it again, relentlessly abusing anyone who dares offer an opinion that differs to his. Quite frankly I'm amazed at how long this is going to go on until the mods step in?
The closest I get to flying these days is when I put my cellphone in 'flight mode'.

Return to “123.45”