Billion-dollar climate denial network exposed

Vehemens
reply to post by GrantedBail

 

Billion-dollar climate denial network exposed?

What about the "Trillion-dollar pro Anthropogenic Global Warming network exposed" which included Goldman Sachs, the Jesuits, New World Order, the U.N and the usual criminals?

Billions vs Trillions... hmm, you so the math on who gets to profit the most.

Sources, please.

Lipton

talklikeapirat

So, with BIg Oil lined up behind the 'scientific consensus' what is this apparently not so well funded, super-secretive denial counter-movement supposed to accomplish? Issue not so secret reports every year that everyone can read or ignore?

Doesn't the very notion that Big Oil is publicly and emphatically AGREEING WITH SOMETHING THAT SPELLS THEIR DEMISE run contrary to everything that an evil corporation would do?

You'd think that the deniers' camp would be on the receiving end of a nonstop deluge of blank checks from the oil/gas/mining industry. So you tell me, to what advantage do these corporations gain by spreading doom porn?

Add this.....

Pentagon to rank global warming as destabilising force

www.theguardian.com...:in%20body%20link

The CIA late last year established a centre to collect intelligence on climate change. Earlier this month, CIA officials sent emails to environmental experts in Washington seeking their views on climate change impacts around the world, and how the agency could keep tabs on what actions countries were taking to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

The CIA has also restarted a programme – scrapped by George Bush – that allowed scientists and spies to share satellite images of glaciers and Arctic sea ice.

Lipton

talklikeapirat

So, with BIg Oil lined up behind the 'scientific consensus' what is this apparently not so well funded, super-secretive denial counter-movement supposed to accomplish? Issue not so secret reports every year that everyone can read or ignore?

Doesn't the very notion that Big Oil is publicly and emphatically AGREEING WITH SOMETHING THAT SPELLS THEIR DEMISE run contrary to everything that an evil corporation would do?

You'd think that the deniers' camp would be on the receiving end of a nonstop deluge of blank checks from the oil/gas/mining industry. So you tell me, to what advantage do these corporations gain by spreading doom porn?

Big oil stands to make a huge profit off carbon taxes trust me their not going to do anyrhing that hurts their profits. Big Oil stands firmly behind the man-made theory and the drive to massively increase energy prices.Also they have bought the carbon trading firms and profit from carbon credit trading/carbon capture.So they own the companies that sell carbon credits they own the devices to capture carbon its a win win for them.

sequestration.mit.edu...

SOS 54 years ago warned about vanishing glaciersText

TORONTO: At a time when glaciers are melting at an alarming pace, an SOS buried in a bottle 54 years ago in the Canadian Arctic, and unearthed now, sent a distress signal about the world's rapidly disappearing glaciers.

An American geologist Paul Walker, concerned about the melting of ice, buried a message in a bottle during his exploration of Ward Hunt Island in Nunavut, Canada, in 1959.

He measured the distance - about 1.2 metres - from a glacier to where he buried the message in a bottle, requesting that anyone who found the note contact him with an update on the glacier's distance to the bottle site, Chronicle Herald reported.

To his astonishment, in little more than 50 years, the original distance of 1.2 metre between the glacier and the bottle was now measured at 101.5 metres - approximately a soccer field's length of ice melted away.


Source : timesofindia.indiatimes.com...

reply to post by GrantedBail


Yeah because it's the "climate deniers" that have been busted OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER lying.... oh wait.... NO that's the "climate change proponents"

And it's not like the "climate change proponents" have been exposed for having EXTENSIVE financial interests in companies that would just so happen to get BILLIONS of dollars from the "reforms" they propose... OH WAIT THEY DO (COUGH AL FREAKING GORE!)

So yeah ... have you ever considered that maybe just maybe it's the other side that's lying?

reply to post by GrantedBail


Ummm...ANTHROPOGENIC GLOBAL WARMING...Err...Global Warming...Err...climate change...which was proceeded by...Anthropogenic global cooling...The coming Ice age...CFC's and ozone depletion.

Now don't get me wrong....This fine Christmas day with it's ten below might be considered warm by some......but it sure makes me thankful for the thermal undies I just unwrapped.

YouSir

gort51
reply to post by spartacus699

 

Yes, I was going to say the same thing.....NO-ONE is denying "Climate Change"....that is inevitable, it is our Earth, it is our Solar System, it has Always happened.

The Argument is.....In the 1970s it was Pollution (fair enough too..has been mostly addressed by the West), Population growth, and Ice Age to return....Then in the 1980s it was suddenly the Greenhouse effect, Ozone layer disappearing,... then in the 1990s it was Global Warning, seas will rise 10 feet by 2001, the Ice caps WILL melt by 2001 etc.....Then when that didnt happen...well its now Climate Change, its ALLLLL MANS Fault, those big V8s etc etc....ok yes, Climate Change, we agree...it is happening daily....that is Earth...Welcome.

here's the thing. nothing is happening at all. Just that they no longer have the russians and the cold war to put fear into the masses. So they need new fears. They now use tar-r-is-m and global warming. Yes as we speak a snowman is melting under your bed, plus been laid in his hiding under your bed with a butcher knife wating until you fall asleep..... BOOOO!!!

crazyewok
Sorry but why are Scientists opposed to current climate change models treated as criminals?
You make it sound like a pedo ring thats been busted.

Sorry but healthy debate in sceince is vital. As soon as 100% of reserachers are forced to go along with a single view point and and diviation punnshied you dont get sceince anymore just ridgid thinking with little chance to correct any wrong thinking even if small. Its no diffrent to 1000 years ago of catholics burning people at stakes for holding diffrent view points, as soon as science becomes rigid and inflexable you get the same thing.

edit on 23-12-2013 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)

Exactly, right or wrong we should never submit to a flat earth dogma. A population is more amenable to the appeal of rhetoric than to any other force. You see the same in all aspects of our lives. Say Jew in public or Gay etc..

We give it up so plain, and now we find ourselves in an Orwellian world where our every word is recorded and secret police rule the day.

Lets just hope our babies are not marched off to die by the millions like the German youth.

Man made global warming is a flat out lie, a fraud, they only worry about carbon dioxide, and don't give a damn about water, ground, GMO, nuclear waste and radiation pollution. They don't have a tax and control scheme built around those. They had to change it from "global warming" to "climate change" because the earth wasn't warming like they said. To top this off the sun is what affects the weather mostly and an honest climate scientist will admit this.

What a load of crap.

I'll try to remember this all-consuming conspiracy to deny global warming and climate change the next time I see a "Love your mother" bumper sticker... oops, too late.

The only people I see cramming bad science and lies down the public's throats are the Climate Change zealots (formerly known as the Global Warming people, but it was changed because reality wasn't fitting their claims).

Should mankind make efforts to keep the air clean and garbage from piling up? Sure. Should we bow down to elitists telling us how to live our lives while they do as they please regardless? Hell no.

This pro Global warming B.S. has been going on for a LONG LONG time, in fact, I can remember being in 5th grade in the early 80's having this spew forced on my classmates and me. Not ONCE have I seen any anti global warming propaganda on ANY mainstream medium, you know why? The extremists are conjuring a boogeyman-like opposition to strengthen their own position in the eyes of the public.

This is a dog and pony show, and we're the dupes forking over money for the tickets. Enjoy the show, peasants...

Watch the counter-argument to Al Gore's film. It's called An Inconsistent Truth, and was made by talk radio host Phil Valentine.

If you pay attention and consider the points made in this informative and entertaining documentary, and still insist that climate change is caused by human activity, then I have nothing more to say to you.

spartacus699
reply to post by GrantedBail

 

So what exactly are you trying to say? That there is or is not climate change? Well first it was global warming. Then they realized that there's no "warming" going on so they changed the name to "climate change". All in an attempt to push the whole carbon credits scheme on big corporations. Trust me we still get minus 20-30c conditions here like clockwork even as soon as oct, and nov guaranteed. Nothing changed at all in terms of temperatures. If anything was changing all we'd know. We don't have to go by the BS research that is put out there by scientists that are told what findings they need to produce to back some adgenda. All we need to do is look around and see for ourselves if anythings changed. And no, nothing has changed on the planet. Any slight changes are completely normal and well within a range of normal changes that have occured since the dawn of time where we go through ice ages and back to warmer weather. And ya I agree anything in the media is pretty much 110% bs. Just do your own research by going outside and asking yourself "has anything changed?"

How does this explain the radical changes in glaciers? They are disappearing before our eyes?
Global warming has nothing to do with this?

You know what I find absolutely hilarious about this? The very idea that if someone does research that fits an agenda, their pay and research funds are absolutely acceptable, while someone who does research that does not agree with the agenda should not be paid or have research money at all. That is the most lopsided, uninformed, unintelligent, and unbelievably warped concept of science I have ever heard.

Every scientist who works at the IPCC gets paid and has research funding. Every scientist who works with East Anglica gets a paycheck and has research funds. Every scientist who works for NASA gets paid and has research funds. So will someone please tell me why they think a scientist employed at the Heritage Foundation shouldn't get paid and should be forced to pay for expensive research materials out of their pocket?

Someone? Anyone?

Even wilder is the notion that this is new information. Come on, people, please tell me you didn't think scientists worked for nothing? Please tell me you didn't think they were paid on the basis of what they published and whether or not it supported your pet theory? And please, please, please, for the love of God tell me you don't think that thinking the above is logical or realistic?

Of course scientists get paid! They get paid for doing experiments, not for producing results... that's the only possible way the truth can be found! Well, OK, most scientists don't get paid on commission; I know there have been so many stories about East Anglica/IPCC scientists caught manipulating data and hiding information that maybe some of them are on some sort of commission.

You want to get a headline? Show evidence that scientific results are being dictated by those paying the salaries. That will make a difference. That is a big problem and taints everything those scientists and even that entire organization says. Oh, wait... we have those reports from East Anglica and the IPCC. Sorry, my bad.

TheRedneck

reply to post by wrkn4livn


You do realize the ice has been melting for the last 10,000 years right? Do you want to go back in time and stop the warming trend that ended the ice age? Or the cooling trend that brought it in the first place and killed thousands of species of animals?

First it was "global warming". After a few minor changes, we are now at "climate change".

The goal posts in the debate are moving. Because of that, one side (to me) has very little creditiblity.

wrkn4livn

spartacus699
reply to post by GrantedBail

 

So what exactly are you trying to say? That there is or is not climate change? Well first it was global warming. Then they realized that there's no "warming" going on so they changed the name to "climate change". All in an attempt to push the whole carbon credits scheme on big corporations. Trust me we still get minus 20-30c conditions here like clockwork even as soon as oct, and nov guaranteed. Nothing changed at all in terms of temperatures. If anything was changing all we'd know. We don't have to go by the BS research that is put out there by scientists that are told what findings they need to produce to back some adgenda. All we need to do is look around and see for ourselves if anythings changed. And no, nothing has changed on the planet. Any slight changes are completely normal and well within a range of normal changes that have occured since the dawn of time where we go through ice ages and back to warmer weather. And ya I agree anything in the media is pretty much 110% bs. Just do your own research by going outside and asking yourself "has anything changed?"

How does this explain the radical changes in glaciers? They are disappearing before our eyes?
Global warming has nothing to do with this?

glaciers have been coming and going for 100's of thousands of yrs.

what's the problem?

we did just get out of an ice age about 12k ya. right?

maybe people shouldn't be cutting down rain forests and destroying coral reefs?

reply to post by wrkn4livn


what radical changes in glaciers? Ya glaciers melt that's they're job

We are all getting way ahead of this arguement.

Before the debate about the meaning of a pile of numbers can begin:

1. Where is the scientific equipments calibration certification documents for each every sensor used to derive said numbers over the time span of the collection sample?

2. Is the calibration certification verifiable and not possible to be altered by any source once the certification is sealed?

3. For the data from these calbrated sensors, demonstrate the chain of custody that is unalterable from the sensor, its time and date, to the output final documents (charts, graphs, tables). The data must be verifiable as unchanged, accurate and true by any and all that investigate the data. This includes surprise inspections.

If workers are required to work under these condition inside a nuke plant (and they are) why should data that supposedly threatens the entire Earth in one way or another not be held to the same scrutiny?

reply to post by tkwasny


In many cases, the thermometers used to collect data were hung over bbq pits and blacktop asphalt. So you tell me......

Only Five words to say about this, Duh, Duh, Duh, Duh,and Duh! any agenda a pres or a vice pres pushes usually equals fraud. Ok and a few more.