wayneL
VIVA LA LIBERTAD, CARAJO!
- Joined
- 9 July 2004
- Posts
- 25,594
- Reactions
- 12,720
Is Global Warming becoming unstoppable?
- Thread starter basilio
- Start date
-
- Tags
- global warming
The logic of science is a beautiful thing like Logique who has greater scientific ability than most and can easily answer this opportunity to expose fakes and hoaxers.
Logique
Investor
- Joined
- 18 April 2007
- Posts
- 4,290
- Reactions
- 768
Sorry Bi-p, I was out of line with my comments, and those to Red also
. It was quite correct of IF to pull me up on it.I do think ASF must at all times remain a tolerant place of diverse opinions
Last edited:
- Joined
- 30 June 2008
- Posts
- 15,361
- Reactions
- 7,234
Sorry Bi-p, I was out of line with my comments, and those to Red also
I do think ASF must at all times remain a tolerant place of diverse opinions
What might be really special would be voicing opinions informed by evidence.
Or is that pushing the boat a bit too far ?
- Joined
- 30 June 2008
- Posts
- 15,361
- Reactions
- 7,234
The week of Extinction Rebellion activity is over. Everyone can go back to business as normal....
And what does that mean in 2019 ?
Worth checking this story out with its eye on the past as well as the future.
One of my favourite lines in an article on the climate crisis is by American science journalist Sharon Begley: “If a rich technologically advanced nation won’t put its own house in order, then developing countries have a perfect excuse to do nothing.”
She also wrote in the same article: “For those who fear that the greenhouse will arrive – and no responsible scientist denies that possibility – it seems imperative to take immediate steps to mitigate it.”
Great lines. Written 30 years ago.
Begley wrote them in the same 1989 Newsweek magazine that reported on the fall of the Berlin Wall.
https://www.theguardian.com/busines...r-30-years-of-inaction-not-climate-protesters
And what does that mean in 2019 ?
Worth checking this story out with its eye on the past as well as the future.
One of my favourite lines in an article on the climate crisis is by American science journalist Sharon Begley: “If a rich technologically advanced nation won’t put its own house in order, then developing countries have a perfect excuse to do nothing.”
She also wrote in the same article: “For those who fear that the greenhouse will arrive – and no responsible scientist denies that possibility – it seems imperative to take immediate steps to mitigate it.”
Great lines. Written 30 years ago.
Begley wrote them in the same 1989 Newsweek magazine that reported on the fall of the Berlin Wall.
https://www.theguardian.com/busines...r-30-years-of-inaction-not-climate-protesters
- Joined
- 30 June 2008
- Posts
- 15,361
- Reactions
- 7,234
Why do so many people including many on this Forum reject outright the evidence of climate scientists on the cause and effects of human caused global warming?
Meet the Money Behind The Climate Denial Movement
Nearly a billion dollars a year is flowing into the organized climate change counter-movement
The overwhelming majority of climate scientists, international governmental bodies, relevant research institutes and scientific societies are in unison in saying that climate change is real, that it's a problem, and that we should probably do something about it now, not later. And yet, for some reason, the idea persists in some peoples' minds that climate change is up for debate, or that climate change is no big deal.
Related Content
Actually, it's not “for some reason” that people are confused. There's a very obvious reason. There is a very well-funded, well-orchestrated climate change-denial movement, one funded by powerful people with very deep pockets. In a new and incredibly thorough study, Drexel University sociologist Robert Brulle took a deep dive into the financial structure of the climate deniers, to see who is holding the purse strings.
According to Brulle's research, the 91 think tanks and advocacy organizations and trade associations that make up the American climate denial industry pull down just shy of a billion dollars each year, money used to lobby or sway public opinion on climate change and other issues.
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smar...behind-the-climate-denial-movement-180948204/
Meet the Money Behind The Climate Denial Movement
Nearly a billion dollars a year is flowing into the organized climate change counter-movement
The overwhelming majority of climate scientists, international governmental bodies, relevant research institutes and scientific societies are in unison in saying that climate change is real, that it's a problem, and that we should probably do something about it now, not later. And yet, for some reason, the idea persists in some peoples' minds that climate change is up for debate, or that climate change is no big deal.
Related Content
- 2013 Continues 37-Year Warm Streak
- No One Trusts Geoengineering—But Pretty Soon It's Not Going To Be a Choice
- The Cold Snap Wasn’t Actually That Extreme, Global Warming Has Just Made Us Wimpy
Actually, it's not “for some reason” that people are confused. There's a very obvious reason. There is a very well-funded, well-orchestrated climate change-denial movement, one funded by powerful people with very deep pockets. In a new and incredibly thorough study, Drexel University sociologist Robert Brulle took a deep dive into the financial structure of the climate deniers, to see who is holding the purse strings.
According to Brulle's research, the 91 think tanks and advocacy organizations and trade associations that make up the American climate denial industry pull down just shy of a billion dollars each year, money used to lobby or sway public opinion on climate change and other issues.
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smar...behind-the-climate-denial-movement-180948204/
Swings both ways. Which reminds me that I need to finish posting on here
- Joined
- 29 January 2006
- Posts
- 7,217
- Reactions
- 4,437
False argument.
The publication of science is about properly informing people, but denialism is the complete opposite.
The other point is that when you make a claim, it carries no weight unless you are able to support it, so what do you have?
Pretty sure you are the empty vessel on every one of our interactions on here. Perhaps read my post again where it says: "Which reminds me that I need to finish posting on here".
Generally that means there is more to come. But I do enjoy your attempts to discredit prematurely on a two sentence post.
- Joined
- 29 January 2006
- Posts
- 7,217
- Reactions
- 4,437
That's just another of your diversions given you keep making claims you cannot support.
Yeah I'm the one that doesn't back up claims
- Joined
- 29 January 2006
- Posts
- 7,217
- Reactions
- 4,437
Your evidence for this was?
Nowhere... as usual.
Absolutely nothing prevents good science from being published.
More evidence from you....
... like that "big business machine" you touted, which is a complete fabrication - a figment of your imagination.
https://www.ioes.ucla.edu/news/busting-the-dirty-myth-of-corporate-environmental-lobbying/
I'll start here to back up post #2667
This was based on data from about 10 years ago:
https://hbr.org/2016/10/research-whos-lobbying-congress-on-climate-change
I'll start here to back up post #2667
This was based on data from about 10 years ago:
https://hbr.org/2016/10/research-whos-lobbying-congress-on-climate-change
Its big business. In fact its a great platform to lobby from and get the upper hand on the competition. I've got plenty more to post over the next couple of days.
Keep bleating that ignorance though.
Awww robbie open your eyes. I provided a full post.
And you are all the evidence I need right here. But do keep trying.
- Joined
- 29 January 2006
- Posts
- 7,217
- Reactions
- 4,437
Lobbying is not "denialism."
There may be overlap, but you have confused concepts.
- Joined
- 29 January 2006
- Posts
- 7,217
- Reactions
- 4,437
Weeks and weeks ago you made the same claims, and failed to provide anything close to medium, let alone "big."
I would argue that coal and oil lobbying isn't into "denialism" either. I never made that point. Lobbying by companies is generally to gain an edge and profit. My original statement that: "it swings both ways" in reply to bas is true. Theres a similar setup on the opposite side (though not as big at this point) that is gaining traction.
- Joined
- 29 January 2006
- Posts
- 7,217
- Reactions
- 4,437
Bas posted about DENILAISM:
The coal lobby group in Australia has been advertising heavily for years. When have they ever mentioned their contribution to global CO2 emissions?
How about you tell us where the million$ are on "the opposite side" as apart from Greenpeace there is not a great deal else.
Smoking lobbyists were not into "denialism" either. They already knew the facts behind it (decades after). Profiting off a situation while feeding false data is not "denialism".
