Official Global Warming thread (merged)

#6,776
#6,776
BartW said:
“The Old Normal Is Gone”: February Shatters Global Temperature Records

UAH_LT_1979_thru_February_2016_v6-768x443.jpg
Click to expand...
February obliterated global heat records, NASA confirms

The 1.35-degree Celsius temperature anomaly in February beat the anomaly recorded in January, which itself was a record high departure from average for any month. According to NASA, the global average surface temperature during January was 1.14 degrees Celsius above average, or 2.3 degrees Fahrenheit, compared to the 1951 to 1980 average.

The previous warmest February, according to NASA, was in 1998, which was also a year with an extremely strong El Niño.

However, in an important indication of how far human-caused global warming has shifted the baseline state of the planet's climate, February 2016 came out 0.846 degrees Celsius, or 1.52 degrees Fahrenheit, warmer than February 1998, despite the similar intensity of the El Niño events in both years.

In fact, studies indicate that with the highest levels of carbon dioxide in the Earth's atmosphere in all of human history, global average temperatures may now be higher than any time since at least 4,000 years ago.
Click to expand...
So much for that 1.5C target
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#6,778
#6,778
BartW said:
Yes, I’m glad the authorities are finally taking a look. And Bret Baier (& VN) losing its **** more than made up for witnessing Rubio’s painfully lame evasion of the debates’ rare climate question.


Lol. Lookout science deniers, Obama’s gestapo is coming for you!

Talk about scare tactics…
Click to expand...

You would be happy. You're a statist and your agenda is what this all about.
 
#6,780
#6,780
BartW said:
Yes, I’m glad the authorities are finally taking a look. And Bret Baier (& VN) losing its **** more than made up for witnessing Rubio’s painfully lame evasion of the debates’ rare climate question.


Lol. Lookout science deniers, Obama’s gestapo is coming for you!

Talk about scare tactics…
Click to expand...

Yeah, it's really nice when the Department of Justice gets to decide what you think in this land.

I guess Room 101 and the Miniluv weren't as fiction as one might have thought it once was.
 
#6,781
#6,781
Grand Vol said:
Yeah, it's really nice when the Department of Justice gets to decide what you think in this land.

I guess Room 101 and the Miniluv weren't as fiction as one might have thought it once was.
Click to expand...
Wow, we’ve gone from speech patrol to thought police and a full-blown galileo gambit. That’s some doubleplusgood scaremongering!

First of all, a RICO lawsuit would be a civil and not a criminal case. Nobody is getting locked up. The suit would target companies, not individuals (and certainly not random message board posters). Just look at who did and didn’t get punished in the Big Tobacco racketeering case. Even professional disinformers like Milloy, Seitz, and Singer got off scot-free. That said, a higher-up could hypothetically face criminal charges under New York’s Martin Act or some sort of SEC enforcement, but methinks you climate deniers can sleep safely for now…

Anyway, this isn’t about freedom of speech or thought policing. This is about companies illegally defrauding investors and the public. Freedom of speech does not give you the freedom to incite panic by shouting “Fire!” in a crowded theater. It doesn’t give you the freedom to make verbal threats or sexually harass someone. It does not give you the freedom to lie under oath. It does not give you the freedom to lie to your investors or consumers.

It does, thankfully, give average Joe the freedom to make a fool of himself on the internet. So carry on; the rustling pleases me. 10/10 on the cartoons. I especially love the Galileo touch. ’69 would be proud :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#6,782
#6,782
BartW said:
Wow, we’ve gone from speech patrol to thought police and a full-blown galileo gambit. That’s some doubleplusgood scaremongering!

First of all, a RICO lawsuit would be a civil and not a criminal case. Nobody is getting locked up. The suit would target companies, not individuals (and certainly not random message board posters). Just look at who did and didn’t get punished in the Big Tobacco racketeering case. Even professional disinformers like Milloy, Seitz, and Singer got off scot-free. That said, a higher-up could hypothetically face criminal charges under New York’s Martin Act or some sort of SEC enforcement, but methinks you climate deniers can sleep safely for now…

Anyway, this isn’t about freedom of speech or thought policing. This is about companies illegally defrauding investors and the public. Freedom of speech does not give you the freedom to incite panic by shouting “Fire!” in a crowded theater. It doesn’t give you the freedom to make verbal threats or sexually harass someone. It does not give you the freedom to lie under oath. It does not give you the freedom to lie to your investors or consumers.

It does, thankfully, give average Joe the freedom to make a fool of himself on the internet. So carry on; the rustling pleases me. 10/10 on the cartoons. I especially love the Galileo touch. ’69 would be proud :)
Click to expand...

So not falling for a scam is akin to shouting fire in a crowded theatre? You're such a statist!
 
#6,783
#6,783
I watched a film last night that said global warming was due to the overpopulation of the world and that the world needed to have population stabilization.

These opionions are shared by both Gates and Turner.
 
#6,784
#6,784
Obsessed said:
I watched a film last night that said global warming was due to the overpopulation of the world and that the world needed to have population stabilization.

These opionions are shared by both Gates and Turner.
Click to expand...

Countries like India do need to limit their baby production
 
#6,787
#6,787
I contributed my share of toxins today, burned a bunch of stuff including aerosol cans exploding in the fire, it was awesome.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#6,793
#6,793
Obsessed said:
I've often wondered if they would blow up like they do on tv.

I've got some 1 pounders I may try out.....
Click to expand...
They tried it on Mythbusters on larger propane tanks and couldn't make one go boom without incendiary rounds. Couldn't even penetrate the tanks, actually.

In general I think you shouldn't be able to do it with regular bullets. The fuel-air ratio inside the tank is not right for combustion, even if you were to get a lucky spark. You'd have to shoot (piercing) a mostly empty tank, or maybe shoot a full one repeatedly. Mythbusters used a minigun...

Be careful :focus:
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#6,794
#6,794
Sandvol said:
So not falling for a scam is akin to shouting fire in a crowded theatre? You're such a statist!
Click to expand...
You’re insinuating that Exxon’s alleged crime is ‘not believing in climate change’. That’s incorrect. To the contrary, Exxon points out that they’ve published dozens of scientific papers since the ‘80s that all agree with the consensus. Exxon acknowledges climate change; they’re part of your “scam”. The possible crime is that they’ve also funded outside climate ‘skeptics’ for years (even after they publicly promised to stop in the mid 2000s), and they haven’t exactly been transparent on climate change with their investors.

Likewise, Big Tobacco’s crime was not that they honestly held an incorrect belief. It wasn’t about “not falling for a scam” or freedom of speech or thought or whatever (though some conservatives undoubtedly framed it that way). This is about lying and cheating. It’s about defrauding the public on a massive scale. Yes, freedom of speech does have limitations.

The real question here is just how organized is the climate denial scheme, and that will only be revealed by a proper investigation. The Tobacco industry’s internal documents were absolutely damning. If a RICO investigation of Exxon turns up half as much, fossil fools should be happy to get off with another $200 billion slap on the wrist.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#6,795
#6,795
S.E.C. Orders Exxon Mobil Shareholder Vote on Climate Data
The Securities and Exchange Commission has told Exxon Mobil it must include a resolution on its annual shareholder proxy that, if approved, would force the company to outline for investors how its profitability may be affected by climate change and the legislation that aims to combat it.

The decision was a defeat for the energy giant, which had fought against it. The proposal was introduced in December, after the Paris accord on climate change, by a coalition of investors led by New York State’s comptroller, Thomas P. DiNapoli, who is the trustee of New York State Common Retirement Fund, and the Church of England.


Late Wednesday, The Houston Chronicle reported that Chevron had received a similar notice from the S.E.C.

The coalition that introduced the Exxon proposal represents over $1 billion in Exxon shares, according to a statement released in July by Mr. DiNapoli’s office. Other members of the group include the Vermont State Employees’ Retirement System, the University of California Retirement Plan and the Brainerd Foundation.

The group’s leaders greeted the S.E.C. decision as a victory for investors concerned with the possible impact of climate change on their portfolios.
Click to expand...
 
#6,796
#6,796
BartW said:
You’re insinuating that Exxon’s alleged crime is ‘not believing in climate change’. That’s incorrect. To the contrary, Exxon points out that they’ve published dozens of scientific papers since the ‘80s that all agree with the consensus. Exxon acknowledges climate change; they’re part of your “scam”. The possible crime is that they’ve also funded outside climate ‘skeptics’ for years (even after they publicly promised to stop in the mid 2000s), and they haven’t exactly been transparent on climate change with their investors.

Likewise, Big Tobacco’s crime was not that they honestly held an incorrect belief. It wasn’t about “not falling for a scam” or freedom of speech or thought or whatever (though some conservatives undoubtedly framed it that way). This is about lying and cheating. It’s about defrauding the public on a massive scale. Yes, freedom of speech does have limitations.

The real question here is just how organized is the climate denial scheme, and that will only be revealed by a proper investigation. The Tobacco industry’s internal documents were absolutely damning. If a RICO investigation of Exxon turns up half as much, fossil fools should be happy to get off with another $200 billion slap on the wrist.
Click to expand...

I know you academic elitist types don't spend much time in the free market but Exxon Mobil is a corporation. It isn't a scientific organization. It's a thing run by people. Any papers that are published in industry journals are mostly the views of those individual researchers doing the research. They might work for Exxon Mobil but again Exxon Mobil is a thing. People change. Sometimes leadership is weak and sometimes it's strong. Sometimes it succumbs to political correctness and media pressure and sometimes it doesn't. Also, again equating the global warming scam to smoking tobacco is a statist heavy handed tactic. You're trying to use the power of the government (while Obama is in office) to force your position.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#6,798
#6,798
We all see what is happening with the Marxist in Chief Obama. Statist can't win in the arena of ideas so while they have this Marxist in office they use the power of the government, the only ones who can legally use guns, to force their positions. They're using the EPA and now the SEC to force their position on climate on the American People whether the people want it or not because just like with healthcare, they (Bart and his like minded minions) know better than everyone else. Bart, just remember turnabout is fair play. I hope the next President will gut many of these agencies like the EPA and the SEC.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#6,799
#6,799
BartW said:
You’re insinuating that Exxon’s alleged crime is ‘not believing in climate change’. That’s incorrect. To the contrary, Exxon points out that they’ve published dozens of scientific papers since the ‘80s that all agree with the consensus. Exxon acknowledges climate change; they’re part of your “scam”. The possible crime is that they’ve also funded outside climate ‘skeptics’ for years (even after they publicly promised to stop in the mid 2000s), and they haven’t exactly been transparent on climate change with their investors.

Likewise, Big Tobacco’s crime was not that they honestly held an incorrect belief. It wasn’t about “not falling for a scam” or freedom of speech or thought or whatever (though some conservatives undoubtedly framed it that way). This is about lying and cheating. It’s about defrauding the public on a massive scale. Yes, freedom of speech does have limitations.

The real question here is just how organized is the climate denial scheme, and that will only be revealed by a proper investigation. The Tobacco industry’s internal documents were absolutely damning. If a RICO investigation of Exxon turns up half as much, fossil fools should be happy to get off with another $200 billion slap on the wrist.
Click to expand...

Also, Exxon's only job is to maximize returns for their investors. It is not to take a position or be forced to take a position on climate change.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top