Big Oil's Long-Running Climate Disinformation Campaign Detailed in Congressional Report

[Crick]

You are an idiot that doesn't know enough about science to understand that all that shit they are telling you is bogus.

You chose to believe the lies so that pretty well makes you the sucker that PT was talking about.

Fraudulent and cherry picked data. Admitted dishonesty by the scammers. Nothing they have ever predicted has ever come true. Dismissing when organizations like NOAA and NASA are caught red handed lying about their data. Ignoring any contradicting evidence, even when it is overwhelming.

Yea, you are a sucker for this AGW scam.

So, you believe that very, very close to all the world's climate scientists are lying and pulling a scam over on the public. But you refuse to believe that the existentially threatened fossil fuel industry might take the sort of measures by which the tobacco industry successfully fought the same sort of threats: a perfectly safe, fully deniable PR campaign where they just claim to be exploring all the possibilities. I ask once again, whose the sucker?

I am not a climate expert but I do have advanced degrees in Environmental Engineering. I understand real science to include atmospheric chemistry. In fact my graduate thesis was pertaining to atmospheric pollution. I spent 30 years cleaning up real pollution. I have taught college level courses in Environmental Science with a section on climate change where we discussed the real facts.

If you're as intelligent as you'd like us to think you are, how can you believe it more likely that thousands of scientists would be all participating in a vast conspiracy without a single one of them ever confessing or getting caught while rejecting out of hand the possibility that the fossil fuel industry might be acting in a slightly underhanded manner to slow down public acceptance of the fact that their product is fucking the world? Your position fails the smell test. It fails the sanity test. It simply fails.

Having a background in real science I understand a science scam when I see it.

Son, AGW is a scam.

You need to think seriously about pulling your head out of your Environmental Wacko ass because you look like a fool when you post your silly shit. You are definitely the sucker PT warned us about.

I need a little more than your unsupported opinions and your condescension (I doubt you're old enough to be my father). Please explain, as if you were talking to someone who understood some science, WHY you think it's a scam.

 

[Flash]

I need a little more than your unsupported opinions and your condescension (I doubt you're old enough to be my father). Please explain, as if you were talking to someone who understood some science, WHY you think it's a scam.

The thing is, you fucking moron, is that in order understand that it is scam all you have to do is a take a little time and look at the bullshit.

When your education is nothing more than reading bullshit posted on the Internet by the very people that are doing the scam then you are always going to be confused and you will never pull your head out of your ass.

Before I taught my first class in Environmental Science where we were going to have a section on climate change I spent the time to actually research some of the bullshit the Wackos were saying. I wanted to get it right.

It all is predicated on fraudulent and cherry picked proxy data that does not withstand any scrutiny. Hell, they can't even prove that CO2 is a greenhouse gas in the levels we are seeing now.

They have even admitted it was a scam and they were lying but yet you suckers still will not give it up. PT Barnum had you pegged.

By the way Moon Bat. I have no problem in accepting that humans have altered the climate with pollution if it was true. In my career as an Environmental Engineer I have identified more pollution and abated more pollution than your little Moon Bat brain could ever imagine. We are polluting the hell out of the earth. However, there are absolutely no credible data that man has changed the climate of the earth. None at all.

You don't want to hear it so you will continue to keep your head up your ass.

 

[Crick]

The thing is, you fucking moron, is that in order understand that it is scam all you have to do is a take a little time and look at the bullshit.

Look at what, specifically?

When your education is nothing more than reading bullshit posted on the Internet by the very people that are doing the scam then you are always going to be confused and you will never pull your head out of your ass.

So you believe that all the world's scientists are pulling a perfect scam. That every single scientista agreed to lie and to coordinate their data to maintain the lie and that in several decades of this conspiracy, no one has ever been caught or confessed. Gosh, that seems so sensible...

Before I taught my first class in Environmental Science where we were going to have a section on climate change I spent the time to actually research some of the bullshit the Wackos were saying. I wanted to get it right.

Wanted to get the bullshit right. Got it.

It all is predicated on fraudulent and cherry picked proxy data that does not withstand any scrutiny.

What fraudulent and cherry picked proxy data?

Hell, they can't even prove that CO2 is a greenhouse gas in the levels we are seeing now.

Whatever the levels, CO2 is a greenhouse gas because of the frequencies of IR it absorbs. And the amount of energy that it will absorb and retransmit is calculable

They have even admitted it was a scam

Where? When? Who? Do you have a link?

and they were lying but yet you suckers still will not give it up. PT Barnum had you pegged.

I'm certainly not going to give up from arguments like these. You keep ranting about evidence without ever actually presenting any. Reminds me of an ex-president that's been in the news lately.

By the way Moon Bat. I have no problem in accepting that humans have altered the climate with pollution if it was true. In my career as an Environmental Engineer I have identified more pollution and abated more pollution than your little Moon Bat brain could ever imagine. We are polluting the hell out of the earth. However, there are absolutely no credible data that man has changed the climate of the earth. None at all.

You just said you accepted "that humans have altered the climate" then said there is no "credible data that man has changed the climate". Do you need some time to sort that out?

You don't want to hear it so you will continue to keep your head up your ass.

I'd love to hear it. But you just don't seem capable of delivering any. How may chances do you actually require?

 

[Flash]

Look at what, specifically?

So you believe that all the world's scientists are pulling a perfect scam. That every single scientista agreed to lie and to coordinate their data to maintain the lie and that in several decades of this conspiracy, no one has ever been caught or confessed. Gosh, that seems so sensible...

Wanted to get the bullshit right. Got it.

What fraudulent and cherry picked proxy data?

Whatever the levels, CO2 is a greenhouse gas because of the frequencies of IR it absorbs. And the amount of energy that it will absorb and retransmit is calculable

Where? When? Who? Do you have a link?

I'm certainly not going to give up from arguments like these. You keep ranting about evidence without ever actually presenting any. Reminds me of an ex-president that's been in the news lately.

You just said you accepted "that humans have altered the climate" then said there is no "credible data that man has changed the climate". Do you need some time to sort that out?

I'd love to hear it. But you just don't seem capable of delivering any. How may chances do you actually require?

Years ago I would have got into an extended debate. I had all the pertinent references bookmarked. After all I had done the research prior to teaching my class.

In other internet discussions I have gone back and forth with the person believing in the scam. They would post their bullshit and I would show them where their source material would be corrupted. Then they would ignore what I had posted and post even more bullshit from another corrupted source. Just going round and round in circle with the base source of the scam always being fraudulent.

After doing this several times I decided that it is not worth the effort. If you believe in the scam then you really don't want want to hear the truth about it. It is like a religion to you idiots. You have your faith and no amount of reasoning is going to change it. You have faith in the scammers and nothing is ever going to change you mind, is it Moon Bat?

You are the sucker that PT Barnum was referring to and no amount of typing on a keyboard is going to change anything.

It is a fact that the shithead scammer have admitted to the scam. Their emails have been published. I'm not going to spend a half hour Googling and posting the accounts. It is a fact government agencies like NOAA and NASA have published false data. You can look that up yourself. The accounts of those are well known. It is a fact that the proxy data is cherry picked to ignore conflicting data. Also well documented and I am not going to waste another hour posting the references. Michael Mann even admitted that. It is a fact that none of the dire predictions that have been made in the past have ever come true. Just look at the beachfront properties the scammers have invested after getting rich with the scam in if you have any doubts.

I am not going to spend a lot of time going through all the trouble of posting the evidence like I have done in the past just to have suckers like you deny and counter with the very shit that had been debunked. It is like arguing Economics with a Marxist. Just a waste of time. In other threads people have posted conflicted data and you have ignored it so you have intentions of pulling your head out of your ass. No intentions at all.

If you want to continue to be an idiot and believe in bad science then go ahead. It really doesn't make any difference. The climate is going to be what it is going to be. Nature is in charge, not suckers like you.

 

[ding]

Years ago I would have got into an extended debate. I had all the pertinent references bookmarked. After all I had done the research prior to teaching my class.

In other internet discussions I have gone back and forth with the person believing in the scam. They would post their bullshit and I would show them where their source material would be corrupted. Then they would ignore what I had posted and post even more bullshit from another corrupted source. Just going round and round in circle with the base source of the scam always being fraudulent.

After doing this several times I decided that it is not worth the effort. If you believe in the scam then you really don't want want to hear the truth about it. It is like a religion to you idiots. You have your faith and no amount of reasoning is going to change it. You have faith in the scammers and nothing is ever going to change you mind, is it Moon Bat?

You are the sucker that PT Barnum was referring to and no amount of typing on a keyboard is going to change anything.

It is a fact that the shithead scammer have admitted to the scam. Their emails have been published. I'm not going to spend a half hour Googling and posting the accounts. It is a fact government agencies like NOAA and NASA have published false data. You can look that up yourself. The accounts of those are well known. It is a fact that the proxy data is cherry picked to ignore conflicting data. Also well documented and I am not going to waste another hour posting the references. Michael Mann even admitted that. It is a fact that none of the dire predictions that have been made in the past have ever come true. Just look at the beachfront properties the scammers have invested after getting rich with the scam in if you have any doubts.

I am not going to spend a lot of time going through all the trouble of posting the evidence like I have done in the past just to have suckers like you deny and counter with the very shit that had been debunked. It is like arguing Economics with a Marxist. Just a waste of time. In other threads people have posted conflicted data and you have ignored it so you have intentions of pulling your head out of your ass. No intentions at all.

If you want to continue to be an idiot and believe in bad science then go ahead. It really doesn't make any difference. The climate is going to be what it is going to be. Nature is in charge, not suckers like you.

They cook the books in other ways now. They use the low variability solar output dataset instead of the high variability dataset that NASA uses, they include urban temperature readings which are skewed by the urban heat island effect and they routinely tune their models to remove natural climate variation. All of which lead to the opposite conclusion reached by other climate scientists.

 

[Crick]

Years ago I would have got into an extended debate. I had all the pertinent references bookmarked. After all I had done the research prior to teaching my class.

I bet you did.

In other internet discussions I have gone back and forth with the person believing in the scam. They would post their bullshit and I would show them where their source material would be corrupted. Then they would ignore what I had posted and post even more bullshit from another corrupted source. Just going round and round in circle with the base source of the scam always being fraudulent.

Corrupted? What is that supposed to mean? Has someone gotten into all the Assessment Report files and dicked with 'em?

After doing this several times I decided that it is not worth the effort. If you believe in the scam then you really don't want want to hear the truth about it.

They why do you bother starting debates like this? Particularly when the obvious conclusion I'm going to come to is that you DON'T have any evidence supporting your claims and you're trying to do a runner without it being too obvious.

It is like a religion to you idiots. You have your faith and no amount of reasoning is going to change it. You have faith in the scammers and nothing is ever going to change you mind, is it Moon Bat?

Faith is belief without evidence and I have absolute mountains of it. It is you suffering the shortfall but maintaining a grip on your beliefs. And whether or not YOU want to accept the evidence, the world's scientists accept it and agree with the IPCC's conclusions. YOU are the outlier.

You are the sucker that PT Barnum was referring to and no amount of typing on a keyboard is going to change anything.

I know its difficult, but its not impossible. I once convinced a woman on another forum to vote differently than she had planned. And I've always hoped that she was simply the only one willing to tell me she'd done so. I know the odds of changing your mind and the minds of your brethren is slim, but there are lots of people who read this stuff that don't post and I might actually convince one of them that believing what all the scientists believe is not as irrational as believing what almost no one believes, particularly when you're talking about a potential threat that could harm millions of people for centuries. I'm not the only human that worries about their children's futures.

It is a fact that the shithead scammer have admitted to the scam.

As I've asked repeatedly, who, when and where?

Their emails have been published.

So, you're talking about the Climategate emails stolen from the Hadley CRU server? You're talking about "Mike's Nature trick" and "Hide the decline"? That's your evidence that the entire AGW theory is a political scam?

I'm not going to spend a half hour Googling and posting the accounts.

They why did you bother posting anything?

It is a fact government agencies like NOAA and NASA have published false data. You can look that up yourself.

I'll try it right now. I went to Google and entered "Have government agencies like NASA and NOAA published false climate data?" Here are the responses with no censorship

People wrongly claimed that a major government institution faked environmental data — and it caused an uproar

The issue was never the truth of the global warming pause, which most scientists agree likely didn't happen. It was a straightforward debate about data archiving.

www.businessinsider.com

The Raw Truth on Global Temperature Records - NASA Science

Ensuring the accuracy of Earth’s long-term global and regional surface temperature records is a challenging, constantly evolving undertaking. There are lots of reasons for this, including changes in the availability of data, technological advancements in how land and sea surface temperatures are...

climate.nasa.gov

Scientific Consensus - NASA Science

It’s important to remember that scientists always focus on the evidence, not on opinions. Scientific evidence continues to show that human activities (primarily the human burning of fossil fuels) have warmed Earth’s surface and its ocean basins, which in turn have continued to impact Earth’s...

climate.nasa.gov

Climate Change Evidence: How Do We Know?

The rate of change since the mid-20th century is unprecedented over millennia.

climate.nasa.gov

Nope, Earth Isn't Cooling - NASA Science

By Alan Buis,NASA Global Climate Change Periodically, we receive queries asking if Earth is cooling. Although multiple lines of converging scientific evidence show conclusively that our climate is warming, stories sometimes appear in the media calling that into question. New studies are...

climate.nasa.gov

NASA

NASA.gov brings you the latest news, images and videos from America's space agency, pioneering the future in space exploration, scientific discovery and aeronautics research.

www.nasa.gov

Global Surface Temperature | NASA Global Climate Change

Vital Signs of the Planet: Global Climate Change and Global Warming. Current news and data streams about global warming and climate change from NASA.

climate.nasa.gov

Frequently Asked Questions | U.S. Climate Resilience Toolkit

toolkit.climate.gov

Climate Change: Global Temperature

Earth's surface temperature has risen about 2 degrees Fahrenheit since the start of the NOAA record in 1850. It may seem like a small change, but it's a tremendous increase in stored heat.

www.climate.gov

https://www.usgs.gov/faqs/what-difference-between-global-warming-and-climate-change [This site is under maintenance]

Global Warming and Hurricanes – Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory

Contents Summary Statement Global Warming and Atlantic Hurricanes Statistical relationships between SSTs and hurricanes Analysis of century-scale Atlantic tropical storm and hurricane frequency Analysis of other observed Atlantic hurricane metrics Model simulations of greenhouse warming...

www.gfdl.noaa.gov

Billion-Dollar Weather and Climate Disasters | National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI)

Summary of U.S. billion-dollar weather and climate related disaster research, methodology, and data sources

www.ncei.noaa.gov

Nothing False About Temperature Data - FactCheck.org

Rep. Gary Palmer falsely claimed on a radio show that temperature data used to measure global climate change have been "falsified" and manipulated.

www.factcheck.org

Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 155 (2009), Part 22 - CLIMATEGATE SCANDAL - Finally, one I think you'll like.

Was Global Warming Data 'Faked' to 'Fit Climate Change Fictions'?

That adjustments are made to records of climate is neither a scoop, nor a secret, nor a controversy.

www.snopes.com

There is a limit to how many hyperlinks you can put into a post and I'm going to stop there. I visited each one to get a clean URL and it looked as if only one might benefit you. Of course, most of them are from NASA and you won't believe anything they have to say so...

The accounts of those are well known. It is a fact that the proxy data is cherry picked to ignore conflicting data. Also well documented and I am not going to waste another hour posting the references.

I'll give it a shot. Going to Google with "Are climate proxy data cherry-picked to ignore conflicting data?"

Washington Examiner op-ed cherry-picks data and misleads readers about climate models

"This article focuses only on specific lines of evidence that climate models disagree with observations. In doing so, the authors ignore research that helps to reconcile differences between models and observations. The authors do not consider alternate datasets and time periods in which models...

climatefeedback.org

"Global Warming Has Stopped"? How to Fool People Using "Cherry-Picked" Climate Data

The current favorite argument of those who argue that climate changes isn’t happening, or a problem, or worth dealing with, is that global warming has stopped. Therefore (they conclude) scientists must be wrong when they say that climate change is caused by humans, worsening, and ultimately a...

www.forbes.com

What do the hacked CRU emails tell us?

Earlier this week, the servers at the University of East Anglia were illegally hacked. Emails dating back to 1996 were stolen and leaked onto the web. Phil Jones, the director of the Climate Research Unit, has confirmed the emails are not forgeries although there is over 60Mb worth of material -...

skepticalscience.com

Climate Science Denial Explained: Tactics of Denial

Continued from Part 1

skepticalscience.com

Mapped: How ‘proxy’ data reveals the climate of the Earth’s distant past

At any one moment in time, thousands of measurements are being taken of the world's weather.

interactive.carbonbrief.org

Alarmists Cherry-Pick Data and Still Can’t Make It Fit – The Heartland Institute - You'll like this one from the Heartland Institute

Michael Mann even admitted that.

Admitted what? If you'll give me a little more detail I bet I can find it myself

It is a fact that none of the dire predictions that have been made in the past have ever come true.

Predictions by nono-scientists rarely do. The predictions of scientists: that CO2 and methane levels, temperatures and global sea level would continue to rise, that snow and ice would continue to melt, that extreme weather events would become more commonplace... those have all depressingly come true.

Just look at the beachfront properties the scammers have invested after getting rich with the scam in if you have any doubts.

There are a great number of wealthy Floridians living in multimillion dollar mansions on the ocean front where they are exceedingly exposed to hurricanes. Should I take that as proof that hurricnaes don't exist or that they will never hit Florida?

I am not going to spend a lot of time going through all the trouble of posting the evidence like I have done in the past just to have suckers like you deny and counter with the very shit that had been debunked.

And instead you will spend even more time and more effort spewing excuses for your inabilty to back up a single one of your claims.

It is like arguing Economics with a Marxist. Just a waste of time.

I bet the Marxists say the very same thing about capitalists.

In other threads people have posted conflicted data and you have ignored it so you have intentions of pulling your head out of your ass. No intentions at all.

Conflicted data? What does that mean? Is that like the conflict you seem to be having about whether or not I'm pulling my head out of my ass?

If you want to continue to be an idiot and believe in bad science then go ahead. It really doesn't make any difference. The climate is going to be what it is going to be. Nature is in charge, not suckers like you.

Eighteen lines of text to tell me you'll provide no evidence to support your claims. What percentage of neutral readers do you think will find you've won this debate? And, again, if you don't care, why are you here?