20 new science papers find climate driven by solar changes

originally posted by: GetHyped
a reply to: pheonix358

How much money is there in denying AGW? How many Big Businesses, oil companies, Big Industry, etc.?

Yeah, vested interests and all that.

You tell us? It's your claim.

a reply to: pheonix358


People can claim anything they want but it does not mean they know what they are talking about.

Therefore it could obviously mean other things like

Source?

originally posted by: D8Tee

originally posted by: GetHyped
a reply to: pheonix358

How much money is there in denying AGW? How many Big Businesses, oil companies, Big Industry, etc.?

Yeah, vested interests and all that.

You tell us? It's your claim.

The total spending on obstructive climate policy lobbying by the representative selection of fossil fuel industry entities we assessed amounts to almost $115 million annually. This represents the direct spending on climate obstruction by ExxonMobil ($27m), Shell ($22m), the American Petroleum Institute (API) ($65m) and $9m by two smaller trade associations - the Western States Petroleum Association (WSPA) in the US and the Australian Petroleum Production & Exploration Association (APPEA) in Australia. In the absence of specific disclosure from the companies on the amounts they pay trade associations, we roughly estimate that Shell and ExxonMobil contribute almost $10m between them to the above three trade associations' obstructive lobbying spending.

senate.ucsd.edu...

a reply to: Kashai

“The U.S. government has provided over $79 billion since 1989 on policies related to climate change, including science and technology research, foreign aid, and tax breaks.” $79 billion.

link

a reply to: D8Tee


So why do you think they are doing that?

Have you ever submitted a resume to the University of Queensland?

www.uq.edu.au...

nwm, not worth it.

a reply to: D8Tee


Why are you trying so hard to offend someone you really do not know?

Source?

Actually its a shame we are not standing right in front of each other.

originally posted by: D8Tee
nwm, not worth it.

So how about a game of internet Chess or are you more into Billiards?

“If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.”

Sun Tzu

nvm

nvm

a reply to: D8Tee


Yeah I am a guy.

Source?

If it's not too much trouble...


Y'all could try posting to the topic of the thread?

The personal stuff can really stop. Now.

Do not respond to this post.

About NRDC NRDC (Natural Resources Defense Council) is a national nonprofit environmental organization with more than 1.2 million members and online activists. Since 1970, our lawyers, scientists, and other environmental specialists have worked to protect the world’s natural resources, public health, and the environment. NRDC has offices in New York City, Washington, D.C., Los Angeles, San Francisco, Chicago, and Beijing. Visit us at www.nrdc.org.

www.nrdc.org...

When we tried to reproduce their model of the lunar and solar influence on the climate, we found that the model only simulated their temperature data reasonably accurately for the 4,000-year period they considered. However, for the 6,000 years’ worth of earlier data they threw out, their model couldn’t reproduce the temperature changes. The authors argued that their model could be used to forecast future climate changes, but there’s no reason to trust a model forecast if it can’t accurately reproduce the past.

www.businessinsider.com...

originally posted by: GetHyped
a reply to: pheonix358

How much money is there in denying AGW? How many Big Businesses, oil companies, Big Industry, etc.?

Yeah, vested interests and all that.

It appears that the amount is going to end up in the Trillions of dollars being generated by this scam of all scams. And something even bigger than gold, power over the 'useless eaters'. That is my conclusion . There is excellent data for you that is all over this thread. The deniers of true scientific process here like our most famous member and others, have not produced anything but rhetoric so far and used the IPP, Cook BS that is debunked. That is, In my personal and professional opinion. I could care very little if those types believe in my background as they attack the messengers in their attempt to convince those who are not strong in the field of science.

originally posted by: Justoneman

originally posted by: Kashai
a reply to: Justoneman

Empirical evidence that humans are causing global warming

www.skepticalscience.com...

It is actually really not difficult to understand; the crap we are spewing into our atmosphere cannot leave the earth's atmosphere because of conditions inherent (like gravity).

Not really rocket science.

And you are a rocket scientist or Chemist or Physicist? THE THEORY has failed to predict, period , exclamation point!

As Lincoln so eloquently stated, "you can fool some of the people most of the time and most of the people some of the time"

I would add and a few every time will believe any BS if the people bringing it make you feel good about it and there are others that never fall for it.... Which of the 4 choices you are decides a lot about your beliefs.

So your "professional" opinion is based upon the idea that you have a PHD in environmental science but you have no apparent idea how such a background relates to chemistry and

originally posted by: Kashai

originally posted by: Justoneman

originally posted by: Kashai
a reply to: Justoneman

Empirical evidence that humans are causing global warming

www.skepticalscience.com...

It is actually really not difficult to understand; the crap we are spewing into our atmosphere cannot leave the earth's atmosphere because of conditions inherent (like gravity).

Not really rocket science.

And you are a rocket scientist or Chemist or Physicist? THE THEORY has failed to predict, period , exclamation point!

As Lincoln so eloquently stated, "you can fool some of the people most of the time and most of the people some of the time"

I would add and a few every time will believe any BS if the people bringing it make you feel good about it and there are others that never fall for it.... Which of the 4 choices you are decides a lot about your beliefs.

So your "professional" opinion is based upon the idea that you have a PHD in environmental science but you have no apparent idea how such a background relates to chemistry and

Clearly, you are in no logical position at this point, based on your solid attempt to derail the thread, to make an accurate statement whatsoever in this thread. Not trying to be arrogant but, truthfully you have ignored D8tee and ElectricUniverse's reading material , as well as mine, so that you could stay in a place YOU are comfortable. Kinda like the ostrich's do in the cartoons.

My degree is in Chemistry, Graduate study was Environmental Chemistry to be exact with a double major during my Bachelor of Science study's in Biology. I started out performing Bio-Assay of chemical pollutants and moved on to study Air Pollution data. I taught Physical Science lab classes, and graded Chemistry papers to pay my way through Grad School, but i am sure you don't dare believe that. I am a rare individual in that I am all that and a conservative (not a Republican mind you) Christian who also happens to love music of all genre's.

a reply to: Kashai

I have seen a good bit of his links for you to study and you say that?