Climate Change Science 2021

Thanks W4U
I always suspected that Al Gore was a mole for the Chinese Communist Party.

Al Gore’s message will be regarded as a visionary by our descendants.

1 Like

Write4u.

“A couple degrees warmer water in the Gulf of Mexico and the southern part of the US will be wiped clean by hurricanes and flooding.”

If the science is not there to follow, which it is not currently. Then follow the money.

A house on the beach, $1M. 500 homes packaged equal ½ B. Sells on Wall Street to retirement funds.

The house is insured. The package is insured. The retirement fund is insured. Insured by three to four levels of coverage. Each to different insurance companies. The Wall Street funds are going crazy for houses. Can not find enough to fund.

If any of these items in “Global Warming and Hurricanes” were out of the normal weather, then the insurers would not be insuring housing funds for twenty years and the whole market would collapse. This is not the case. It is just the opposite. The governments would be shoring up the banks and Stock Market would be crashing. Not happening either.

You posted tropical cyclones could increase by 1 to 10% due to temperature increase. Already experiencing that. Do to the Grand Solar Minimum. Climatologists made us aware and to expect this ten years ago. But the media is lying to the public by saying it is the Climate Change when it is really the natural Global Warming cycle.

Point being two degrees should not be too much different than what we have today with the GSM. The GSM is worst in many ways because the particles from the sun is heating the depth of the crust by up to 2 degrees. Which we were told to expect more earthquakes and volcanos during the GSM. Which is happening right now. If the GSM will heat the earth’s crust, think of what it is doing to oceans and ice caps. Question, is the ice caps melting from the top or bottom? If it is the bottom. How is the Co2 doing that? If you are following the news. It is because of volcanic activity. Not buying that, too farfetched when you look at the total area involved. It’s exactly what the climatologists said would be happen during the GSM. Along with more powerful hurricanes, but less in the total number of hurricanes. To expect snow in late spring. Which is all happening.

Reminds me of years ago watching the top nuclear scientists on TV in front of congress telling the American people. That spending this extremely large sum of money on a complex in Washington state that would burn radioactive waste into a nonradioactive material was proven by the science. The science was politically driven. Need I say how that worked out for the taxpayers. And here is a list of the scientists who got rich off the project that were reprimanded for bad data. List – 1. Nobody.

What is the driver of the earth’s heat. The Co2 or the sun? The sun is what we should be watching. The Co2 is just going to keep the earth a little warmer which will benefit the people.

Remember 33% of the earth’s land is desert. Is more rain really going to be that bad for us?

Now explain to me how removing wealth from the taxpayers and giving our wealth to other countries will make America stronger. It will not. China knows that. It will make Americans much poorer. You say that’s ok if we save the earth. Is that really what is happening? China is singing the same song. But building coal plants as fast as they can. Actions speak louder than words. If China believed for one second that Co2 was going to destroy the earth. They would not be building coal plants.

Where is America really at with Climate Change?

Rising Seas costs estimated at $416B in 2019. The infrastructure bill has money for climate change mitigation, resilience and equity. But nothing earmarked for sea level rise. The problem was not seen as an issue in Biden’s $2.25 trillion proposal.

Are we still following the money? How much is spent on looking at the GSM? That would be zero dollars. Let’s compare that to money spent on the Co2 pathway, GOA says $154B and it is still not enough. The NRDC (Natural Resources Defense Council) is a national nonprofit environmental organization with more than 1.2 million members and online activists claims that the yearly cost will reach $1.9 trillion annually in the future if the spending trends continual.

It was back in 68’ when the news was talking about Hudson Bay triggering the new Ice Age. I was roughnecking near the Canada boarder in Montana. Man, was it cold. The company I was working for discovered the oil in the North Slope of Alaska and told me to get ready for Alaska. I figured that if the Ice Age was coming, then I would be better off in Southern California.

73’ and crocodile rock was playing on the radio in S. Cal. The news came on and was talking about a new stock exchange in Chicago that was going to trade in carbon. This was coming about because of acid rain. The science was that the smog in LA was killing the trees in the Colorado Rockies. The carbon in the air caused the acid in rain. The exchange did get up and running in 2003. In 2010 the Chicago CCX expanded to trade in Climate offsets that are registered as emission reductions. In Europe it is the ETS, Canada, the MCeX. The MCeX is now closed. But the WCI is taken its place.

The point being Write4u is that political driven science has been around for a long time. And it is driven by money. The way it works is to take a little bit of science and a lot of fear to get the public to back the issues that are sensitive to the public. The sales of beach front property in Florida are selling today for more than the asking price. Do they not know about the southern part of the US that will be wiped clean by hurricanes and flooding? Or are they not buy into the fear of Climate Change?

Excellent example of science by rhetoric. The strategic/tactical liar Mike Yohe, (creating doubt and derision is his goal. Learning, understanding what we do know for certain, that he disregards.) he makes a lot of strong claims, yet never produces solid evidence in support. It’s supposing, and hypothetical stories about following the money and all that poop.

How about following the well understood physics!!! Economic driven delusional thinking be damned.

Al Gore. The jury is still out.

A project I researched was fully understanding our government’s monetary system. I was researching German Gold Bonds at the time and need to figure out why the government was screwing the American bond holders time after time. Ended up following the career of an NSA banker. Totally amazing. I was lucky because I did my research before all the damaging data was wiped from the computer systems.

The NSA banker today is a philanthropist. Giving away money to projects to influence the outcome. He was doing the same thing before becoming a philanthropist. Mainly dumping millions of dollars from worldwide companies like RCA and GE. To name two of many. On countries to fight becoming communists. Every dime was lost. He got awards from four Presidents for doing such a good job. It is really the taxpayer’s money that can’t be connected to the government. What a job to have. Live like a billionaire and give away money. It looks to me, that the Clintons wanted to do the same job in retirement. And are.

Did Al Gore do the same with Climate Change for the NSA is the question. After WWII the government took over the Associated Press and controlled the news. My banker was training with JP Morgan at the time. Not just the company, the man himself. He was sent to Texas to shut down radio stations using the IRS that did not change to AP at time.

So naturally I wondered if Gore was doing the Climate Change for the NSA. The news was so controlled that it was almost impossible to get the real story on subjects that mattered. Al Jazeera was one news outlet that I could trust for the truth. But I wondered how long it would take for the NSA to get control of Al Jazeera. Sure enough, Al Jazeera was broken up and Al Jazeera America was what we were given. And who was involved in the breakup? Yep, Al Gore. That is why the jury is still out with Gore.

That being said, Gore may not be regarded as a visionary by our descendants.

What can be said is that Gore is a decent person who would have made an excellent president. And he was very much a visionary. You cannot dismiss his message. He was on the right track in identifying industrial pollution. Nobody listened, and here we are!

I think everyone listened. I know I did. I am just tired of waiting for the science to back up his claims.

[quote=“mikeyohe, post:27, topic:8211, full:true”]

I think everyone listened. I know I did. I am just tired of waiting for the science to back up his claims.

You’re addressing the wrong people. Talk to the oil people. They prefer to make profits over taking ecological responsible action.

The oil people. Trump had Americans as the oil people. Now I would have to talk to Sadia Arabia. Are you sure the Sadia’s have ecological responsibility?

[quote=“mikeyohe, post:29, topic:8211”]
Are you sure the Saudis have ecological responsibility?

Unfortunately they have not much else. Oil is their sole natural treasure.

Just read a paper in a French media this morning.

The archives of “Total” which is roughly the 9th Gas company in the world have been partially opened. A searcher has studied them and has discovered that, partly using studies produced by US companies, in 1973, Total knew that the use of fossiles energies was damaging the climate.

With other companies, they hide the fact, contested it for years, lobbied against its recognition, and, when given no choice, converted to green washing, at least in speeches.

They did this concerning lead gas. The leaded gas would pump lead into the air, causing lead poisoning or at least had the potential to cause lead poisoning. This lead in the air caused brain damage in some kids, but the gas companies hid this for years. This isn’t the first time gas companies had hid studies, data, and facts.

Mriana

Think American Petroleum Institute

to be continued …

The video does get the IPCC thing wrong - what the IPCC stated:

In 1995, when the IPCC released its second report, it found that the evidence suggested a “discernible human influence” on the climate.

It was the line in the sand that signaled the f’n damnable Oil company execs and other soulless gluttonous monsters, er pigs went to the mattresses with their no holds barred war on science and their all out attack on honesty and our children’s future in favor of extra cash bonuses in their sweaty greasy hands. Man how I wish there really were a burning pit of hell fire to house those pigs, so they can fry and mediate on their monstrosity for ever and ever. While Earth gets sent back to it’s foundational epochs to start all over again. (excuse me, but I’m writing this as a beautiful 3 month old boy, that I’m charged with caring over, is sleeping across the room and I’ll admit to feeling a certain rage towards all who helped create this self-destructive society and a most hideously failing future - and for what?
So the lucky few can become all consuming gluttonous pigs who’ve lost touch with their families, and themselves for that matter??? Hideous retrogression not progress, oh but hey, we dream of burning up hundreds of millions of dollars worth of resources to send a few people to Mars. Ain’t we the cats-paw. )

For a look at some of the substantive evidence that this videographer used in his video:


**Global Environmental Change

Early warnings and emerging accountability: Total’s responses to global warming, 1971–2021

Christophe Bonneuil, Pierre-Louis Choquet, Benjamin Franta.

Highlights:

  • Archives, interviews used to trace Total’s engagement with global warming since 1970s.

  • Total or predecessors aware of harmful global warming impacts since at least 1971.

  • Total engaged in overt denial of climate science in late 1980s, early 1990s.

  • Various postures and strategies pursued by Total other than overt science denial.

IPIECA played key role in coordinating international oil industry beginning in 1980s.

Abstract

Building upon recent work on other major fossil fuel companies, we report new archival research and primary source interviews describing how Total responded to evolving climate science and policy in the last 50 years.

We show that Total personnel received warnings of the potential for catastrophic global warming from its products by 1971, became more fully informed of the issue in the 1980s, began promoting doubt regarding the scientific basis for global warming by the late 1980s, and ultimately settled on a position in the late 1990s of publicly accepting climate science while promoting policy delay or policies peripheral to fossil fuel control.

Additionally, we find that Exxon, through the International Petroleum Industry Environmental Conservation Association (IPIECA), coordinated an international campaign to dispute climate science and weaken international climate policy, beginning in the 1980s. This represents one of the first longitudinal studies of a major fossil fuel company’s responses to global warming to the present, describing historical stages of awareness, preparation, denial, and delay. …

============================================================

Investigation Finds Exxon Ignored Its Own Early Climate Change Warnings

SEPTEMBER 16, 2015 - by Jason M. Breslow - PBS Frontline

Despite its efforts for nearly two decades to raise doubts about the science of climate change, newly discovered company documents show that as early as 1977, Exxon research scientists warned company executives that carbon dioxide was increasing in the atmosphere and that the burning of fossil fuels was to blame.

The internal records are detailed in a new investigation published Wednesday by InsideClimate News, a Pulitzer Prize-winning news organization covering energy and the environment. …

===============================================

CLIMATE CHANGE - Scientific American

Exxon Knew about Climate Change almost 40 years ago

A new investigation shows the oil company understood the science before it became a public issue and spent millions to promote misinformation

==================================

Shell and Exxon’s secret 1980s climate change warnings

Benjamin Franta, Sept. 19 2018 - The Guardian

Newly found documents from the 1980s show that fossil fuel companies privately predicted the global damage that would be caused by their products.

One day in 1961, an American economist named Daniel Ellsberg stumbled across a piece of paper with apocalyptic implications. Ellsberg, who was advising the US government on its secret nuclear war plans, had discovered a document that contained an official estimate of the death toll in a preemptive “first strike” on China and the Soviet Union: 300 million in those countries, and double that globally.

… In the 1980s, oil companies like Exxon and Shell carried out internal assessments of the carbon dioxide released by fossil fuels, and forecast the planetary consequences of these emissions. In 1982, for example, Exxon predicted that by about 2060, CO2 levels would reach around 560 parts per million – double the preindustrial level – and that this would push the planet’s average temperatures up by about 2°C over then-current levels (and even more compared to pre-industrial levels).

=================================================

Half a century of dither and denial – a climate crisis timeline.

Oct 9, 2019 - The Guardian

Jonathan Watts , Garry Blight , Lydia McMullan Pablo Gutiérrez

For more than 50 years, the petroleum industry and politicians have been warned about the climate risks of burning fossil fuels. Yet the top 20 fossil fuel firms have continued to expand and have been behind a third of all carbon emissions since 1965. This timeline shows who knew what and when, and how they communicated or obscured the threat to the public. …


But hey, it’s not just the oil industrialists.

A Major but Little-Known Supporter of Climate Denial: Freight Railroads

For nearly 30 years, America’s four biggest rail companies—which move the majority of the country’s coal—have spent millions to deny climate science and block climate policy.

By Robinson Meyer

In the fight against climate change, the nation’s freight railroads have painted themselves as heroes. Rail is the “the most environmentally friendly way” to move cargo over land, says the Association of American Railroads, the industry’s trade group. The industry’s four biggest companies agree: “Railroads are essential to moving [climate] objectives forward,” says CSX Transportation, the largest railroad east of the Mississippi.

Yet for almost 30 years, the biggest players in the freight-rail industry have waged a campaign to discredit climate science and oppose almost any federal climate policy, reveals new research analyzed by The Atlantic .

The four largest American freight railroads—BNSF Railway, Norfolk Southern, Union Pacific, and CSX—have sat at the center of the climate-denial movement nearly since it began, documents and studies show. …

1 Like

I think it is time Biden declared Martial Law and take care of this theatre of the absurd.

There is a seditious civil war taking place in the US. The climate is spiralling completely out of control, the States are ignoring the US Constitution, The democratic process may well have been fatally destroyed.

What will it take to take firm control of things and take it out of the hands of criminals and religious zealots.

Mr. President. Don’t bring words to a existential threat. Bring power!!!