climate change and climbing

There is a lot of money to be made by influence peddlers, example: the Solyndra "scheme". Tesla, wind farms, etcetera. How are the people making decisions connected to such and such business owner, board member, market maker, other that makes/sells such and such product for said scheme?

The Grant's handed out for the most ridiculous nonsense in "scientific research" is obscene!

"Lots of money" You do know that the Fossil Fuel industry is worth trillions of dollars (4.25trillion) right? You bring up Tesla as thats a good example of the money in renewable energy, you know what Teslas net worth is? 22.3 billion. ExxonMobil is worth 18 times that at 422billion and there are 10 oil companies valued above 85billion. If you are honestly going to sit here and say there is more money for climate change than against it you are so clueless it's actually sad. Most of you "quotes" are out of context and a couple of them don't even prove you points lol. Get the fuck out of here with this bullshit that theres a lot of money in supporting climate change. Honestly it's really hard to not just ignore climate deniers because you know they have to be either brainwashed or dumb as fuck.

Don't let the fossil fuel industry control our world.

B Jolley wrote:

No, just trying to make sense of it all. I've been researching for only a few years on the topic. I don't believe there is enough evidence to suggest climate change is solely caused by humans. I believe the sun and space are the main contributor to "climate change". It's kind of out of our hands. I do think we should take care of earth, leave no trace and reduce pollution. but in the grand scheme of things it's going to take care of it self. 

How can you believe this if there is almost no evidence to support that our current spike in rising temperatures is related to the sun and space. I mean you're just believing pseudoscience. 

B Jolley wrote:

I believe the sun and space are the main contributor to "climate change". 

Show me one legitimate reference from your "research" that can explain the mean global temperature increase over the past 50 years by "sun and space".  

B Jolley wrote:

No, just trying to make sense of it all. I've been researching for only a few years on the topic. I don't believe there is enough evidence to suggest climate change is solely caused by humans. I believe the sun and space are the main contributor to "climate change". It's kind of out of our hands. I do think we should take care of earth, leave no trace and reduce pollution. but in the grand scheme of things it's going to take care of it self. 

This is the equivalent of "Jesus, take the wheel!"

I'm with Sam Harris and Andrew MacAfee on this one:  For 1 unit of (the modern West's) economic output, the amount of energy input has been steadily decreasing in the computer age.  It's more probable that technology can compensate and allow the non-West their industrial revolution than it is for the modern West to deny most of the planet an electric grid and their version of industrial revolution (modernity).  Certainly conservation by the West, while a good thing in general, is not by itself the complete answer.

And by the way, Mike Lane has a great point about Thorium Molten Salt Reactors (a great technology, retarded only by a lack of vision) and the myopia of the Greens with respect to Nuclear power.  

Technology is the only practical answer.  Duh!

I only posted to get people to question things. If one person decides to look into what I've posted and sparks further investigating, mission accomplished. 
There is a problem today and it all started with the birth of the internet, too much knowledge and not enough wisdom. Everything is believed blindly as fact when everything should be questioned.

If anyone wants to have a constructive conversation, please come to Zion. We can climb hard and finish they day around a campfire (fuelled by Styrofoam, nuclear waste and old car batteries, jk;), drink some whiskey and discuss rabbit holes like climate change, 5g, 9/11, 411, Epstein, Aliens, Smith-Mundt act ect... or any other topic.

B Jolley wrote
"Climate change" is similar to a form of religion extremism, and in some cases terrorism. 180+ arrested in Australia for arson, contributing to the mass loss of land and wildlife, this will lead to increased taxes and more unnecessary regulation and the sheeple will welcome it (banning back burning has increased the size of those fires, bad policy). ISIS has told its followers to start fires all over the world as seen in Australia, Greece and the USA,

B Jolley wrote: I only posted to get people to question things. If one person decides to look into what I've posted and sparks further investigating, mission accomplished.
There is a problem today and it all started with the birth of the internet, too much knowledge and not enough wisdom. Everything is believed blindly as fact when everything should be questioned.

If anyone wants to have a constructive conversation, please come to Zion. We can climb hard and finish they day around a campfire (fuelled by Styrofoam, nuclear waste and old car batteries, jk;), drink some whiskey and discuss rabbit holes like climate change, 5g, 9/11, 411, Epstein, Aliens, Smith-Mundt act ect... or any other topic.

Questioning things is good and all except when it comes to the questioning scientific facts. We can debate all we want about how to combat climate change, but debating the science supporting man made climate change is just a waste of time and is just stalling any potential to revert the negative effects of climate change that we are already seeing.

B Jolley wrote: I only posted to get people to question things. If one person decides to look into what I've posted and sparks further investigating, mission accomplished.
There is a problem today and it all started with the birth of the internet, too much knowledge and not enough wisdom. Everything is believed blindly as fact when everything should be questioned.

If anyone wants to have a constructive conversation, please come to Zion. We can climb hard and finish they day around a campfire (fuelled by Styrofoam, nuclear waste and old car batteries, jk;), drink some whiskey and discuss rabbit holes like climate change, 5g, 9/11, 411, Epstein, Aliens, Smith-Mundt act ect... or any other topic.

You aren't questioning anything.  You are just being willfully ignorant.

Ted Raven wrote: I never thought there would be so many climate change deniers on MP. Especially not of the "it's a hoax to take our precious freedoms" variety. You people are special.

I’m guessing that the shuttering of supertopo is a contributing factor...

Owen Donnelly wrote:

Many trad dads tend to be what we'd call boomers....... you know the less scientifically literate part of our population.

Owen, you're not helping your cause.  This is rank ageism.  There are folks who deny science regardless of age, stature, or education.

Blek Le Rat wrote:
This is absolutely untrue - see below links: 
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/jan/08/police-contradict-claims-spread-online-exaggerating-arsons-role-in-australian-bushfires  
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/jan/08/twitter-bots-trolls-australian-bushfires-social-media-disinformation-campaign-false-claims

Please do your research before spouting dangerous trash on MP.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/07/australia/australia-fires-police-action-trnd/index.html 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2020/01/07/australia-fires-people-charged-starting-wildfires-arson/2831063001/

Here’s an incontrovertible fact I discovered recently (I actually ran the statistics).....99.9% of people who use the term “sheeple” are among the most uneducated, dimmest bulbs I’ve ever met.  

Owen Donnelly wrote:

"Lots of money" You do know that the Fossil Fuel industry is worth trillions of dollars (4.25trillion) right? You bring up Tesla as thats a good example of the money in renewable energy, you know what Teslas net worth is? 22.3 billion. ExxonMobil is worth 18 times that at 422billion and there are 10 oil companies valued above 85billion. If you are honestly going to sit here and say there is more money for climate change than against it you are so clueless it's actually sad. 

You do realize you are trying to compare two entities that are not remotely comparable?

The petroleum industry built empires the tried and true old fashioned way, and over a long period of time, by selling a product for a profit. The profit is reinvested back into the company for R&D, exploration, etcetera. They also give back to the community through charities, other at their own expense. They have budgets to meet, liabilities to cover, etcetera. If their decisions aren't correct they stand a chance at losing business, and not being competitive in the future market... going bust. They are having to deal with reality of using their own funds.

Tesla couldn't stand on their own if not for federal loans (taxpayer money). Same with the wind farm and solar industries. It means there is no downside for their screw ups, or ability to meet said goals, for they only have to ask for more taxpayer money. At times those loans aren't even paid back - it is not their money they're playing with. Solyndra fits as a perfect example of the free money scheme with no accountability (hundreds of millions of dollars up for grabs just vanished). No, no money to be made through those ventures, huh? There are many more out there too.  

Yeah, good comparison you have there... the sale of product for profit by long established companies vs. government loans to new startups with no downside of loss and accountability.

Most of you "quotes" are out of context and a couple of them don't even prove you points lol.

I see, is that why you didn't even try to approach them? Comprehension isn't your strong point is it? Those were reference for the person stating of not believing the "scare" tactics used by the watermelons out there. Glad we have you around to keep us all on point.

 Get the fuck out of here with this bullshit that theres a lot of money in supporting climate change. Honestly it's really hard to not just ignore climate deniers because you know they have to be either brainwashed or dumb as fuck.

Don't let the fossil fuel industry control our world.

You are so smart and cool - all emotional too. Maybe that is why you call us dumb as f@ck, etcetera. Can't refute the statements, so bash them in an emotional tirade - professional form of discourse, huh?

Bigfeet- can you research for me where those oil and gas companies do their drilling and extraction?  No public assistance?  No “government loans”?

Mark Pilate wrote: Bigfeet- can you research for me where those oil and gas companies do their drilling and extraction?  No public assistance?  No “government loans”?

This is very true. One also needs to consider the military industrial complex and who funds that (tax payers). We didn’t overthrow the Mosadeq regime, prop up the Saud and Pahlavi regimes, and liberate Kuwait out of the goodness of our harts. 

Mark Pilate wrote: Bigfeet- can you research for me where those oil and gas companies do their drilling and extraction?  No public assistance?

Don't need to. Never said they didn't get public assistance.

The petroleum companies have made it so that we can live the lifestyle we all enjoy. Without them we would all have a much harder go at life. The petroleum companies are the life blood of our economy - an integral part for sustaining our country. I can give them the benefit of the doubt that it is in everyone's best interest to get the job done. Everyone believes the petroleum companies just have gobs of cash sitting in their offices, or whatever. Completely incorrect, for most of their funds are tied up for reinvestment, research, other.

Do we need solar, wind, electric, other for our lifestyles? So you are okay with handing out money to startups because they say something may be possible over a company that is highly invested in credible/usable infrastructure and has proven itself in sustaining our way of life?

I think I would be okay with helping out a company that keeps the world turning instead of someone's unproven, non-goal reaching, possibility. It is good that there is research going on to improve the crappy short term battery tech, deteriorating solar capacity, etcetera. Let venture capitalists get them going instead. There would be a better outcome.

I feel like a Jehova’s Witness just knocked at the door...

Ok I give.  I get it now.  
Big Oil = our friend who sustains all life as we know it through goodwill and compassion.  
Sustainable Energy = a money sucking scam to enslave the populace and give our children to the Clinton pornography ring.  

Case closed.  Move this to community

Owen Donnelly wrote:

Oh look another boomer who took a science class in college +40 years ago and now thinks he knows more than 97% of climate scientists. Why are boomers always so arrogant, clearly you guys don't know that much because all you've really done is got us into never ending wars, created the largest wealth gap ever, and fucked our planet. 

Ok, Owen.  I'm supposed to be the derisive dick, here.  The real problem is multi-faceted.  The main contributors are the fact that there are tons of breeders spitting out record numbers of dumbass consumers, and the consumer culture itself, which is inspired and perpetuated by the perpetual debt monetary system, which most countries' elites have caught onto as the best way to exploit the masses to grow MORE rich and powerful.   Also, instant gratification culture.  You combine those things- the increase in livestock to feed the population explosion, more people driving more cars, and more goods being delivered to more stores to feed all these mouth breathers (of which we are all one) you have the perfect recipe for a drastic increase of CO2 ppm in the atmosphere.  As far as proving that humans' activity directly correlates to the increase of carbon dioxide parts per million in the atmosphere, there is no jury, no debate, because everyone pretty much agrees on that point.  The major points of contention, based on what I've read, is the effect that extra CO2 in the atmosphere has on overall climate change, polar ice caps, ocean life, etc. and the result that will have on catastrophe-level severity of climate events and if/when/how that will contribute to societal collapse.

Regarding those of you that so confidently state that there is no consensus among scientists working in the climate science field concerning whether or not our latest rendition of climate change is human-induced or not- where are you getting this information?  How are you measuring your claim?  As far as where I get my number, I actually read published, peer-reviewed papers by actual accredited climate scientists that also provide their data, where it was obtained, over what period of time, and collection method.  In fact, the percentage of consensus seems to directly correlate with the level of education of the scientist and longevity in the field.  What I mean is that if you collected all the published scientific peer-reviewed papers that share data and have a conclusion one way or the other, the conclusion is way more likely to be that climate change is human-induced if that scientist has been in the field longer, and has a higher level of education and understanding in that field.
 
This is not a coincidence.

Boomers aren't arrogant, although it comes across like that.  They're just absolutely terrified of change and anything that challenges their steadfast belief of things that they have deemed "that's just the way it is".  They've heard things parroted by others that they believe to be an authority so much and so often that they just accept it as "truth".  This truth defines who they are, and so to pick apart that truth, is to force them to realize that maybe they aren't right, that maybe they haven't read all the peer-reviewed research and maybe the beliefs that have defined their very existence and the way they think and live, might just be bullshit.   That maybe, just maybe, if they looked hard enough, most of the people touting this denier philosophy are ones that simply refuse to consider the opposition's side and refuse to look up the source of this idiotic claim with so much contrary evidence.  So good luck shattering lazy peoples' reality.  There's not much opportunity for change in that realm.

By the way, it's not the sheepish boomers with the loud voices that toe the line and walk the straight and narrow and start every other sentence with "back in my day" that have waged endless war.  It's the corporations that prop up the Congressmen and women that allow it to continue (because they all profit from it) that have done so.  I invite you to do some research.  We have all failed to stop that.  That's why people still volunteer for the military.  Same reason- refusal to look at the evidence and dig and do some research.  It's much easier not to, and just to parrot some bullshit that agrees with your point of view that was originally uttered by someone that sounds smart or that is respected in your circle of political beliefs.  The truth that's out there is much more difficult, much more sinister and much more prone to dismissal via jeers of "conspiracy theory" etc.  It's easy to ignore and inspires cognitive dissonance to an unprecedented degree.  We have all fucked our planet.  Don't ride that pedestal so hard that it penetrates you.

For you trogs that want to quote the "Petition Project" as your foundation for denial of human-induced climate change- please do.  It'll be fun.