Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Did I say that oil producers receive the subsidy?
A subsidy is still a subsidy.
Sorry.
Yeah, welfare is welfare. Which has nothing to do with fossil fuels still being the best, most cost effective energy source out there today.
Going back to the original point - if fossil fuel production is so much more efficient and cost-effective than renewables then why does it need subsidies at all.
It doesn't need subsidies to encourage production, unlike renewables which will shut down when the government money is cut off.
Did I say that oil producers receive the subsidy?
A subsidy is still a subsidy.
Sorry.
Yeah, welfare is welfare. Which has nothing to do with fossil fuels still being the best, most cost effective energy source out there today.
Going back to the original point - if fossil fuel production is so much more efficient and cost-effective than renewables then why does it need subsidies at all.
It doesn't need subsidies to encourage production, unlike renewables which will shut down when the government money is cut off.
Take a look at my sig line - fossil fuels have received FAR more in subsidies than renewables.
So when people say follow the money to understand climate change - I guess what they mean is look at what the coal, nuclear and il industries are doing, and you'll see why climate change science is so widely accepted.
Todd -
Which industry has received more subsidies in the US in the past 25 years - solar or nuclear?
Climate change science is accepted by 59 of the largest international scientific bodies in the world, and the remaining one is neutral. Not one scientific body backs your position.
Todd -
Your position is one of blind, political denial.
btw, The word climate change has been used for 30 years now - so if you can use the word 'website' I'd imagine you can learn to use 'climate change' as well.
I have to say, man - there are days you come across as being a little....um.....simple, you know?
Todd -
Your position is one of blind, political denial.
btw, The word climate change has been used for 30 years now - so if you can use the word 'website' I'd imagine you can learn to use 'climate change' as well.
I have to say, man - there are days you come across as being a little....um.....simple, you know?
Billy, stop lying. It's always been and still is global warming. Except when Bush tried to change it to "climate change", because he wanted to divert away from the fact of the warming.
2014 on track to be hottest year on record says US science agency Environment The GuardianBilly, stop lying. It's always been and still is global warming. Except when Bush tried to change it to "climate change", because he wanted to divert away from the fact of the warming.
What warming? F'ing Moron... You lie so much..
LOL... THE GUARDIAN.... LOL.....2014 on track to be hottest year on record says US science agency Environment The GuardianBilly, stop lying. It's always been and still is global warming. Except when Bush tried to change it to "climate change", because he wanted to divert away from the fact of the warming.
What warming? F'ing Moron... You lie so much..
The Guardian is only reporting the story.LOL... THE GUARDIAN.... LOL.....2014 on track to be hottest year on record says US science agency Environment The GuardianBilly, stop lying. It's always been and still is global warming. Except when Bush tried to change it to "climate change", because he wanted to divert away from the fact of the warming.
What warming? F'ing Moron... You lie so much..
And they Cite the GISS data set which has been adjusted upward 1.2 deg C.. And if you track the UNADJUSTED data set it is the 24th warmest out of 31 years...
The Guardian is only reporting the story.LOL... THE GUARDIAN.... LOL.....2014 on track to be hottest year on record says US science agency Environment The GuardianBilly, stop lying. It's always been and still is global warming. Except when Bush tried to change it to "climate change", because he wanted to divert away from the fact of the warming.
What warming? F'ing Moron... You lie so much..
And they Cite the GISS data set which has been adjusted upward 1.2 deg C.. And if you track the UNADJUSTED data set it is the 24th warmest out of 31 years...
Would you believe Fox?
NOAA Globe sets 5th hottest-month record of 2014 FOX 11 Online WLUK-TV
dude, dude. hmmmm dude. it is so so simple. Just show me the experiment. Got it. You rambling like this, I already stated does zilch to your effort. show me the experiment.jc456,that dude's been hit with a stupid stick a long time ago. he doesn't understand climate and so I know he doesn't understand economics..Awe... Poor little libtard is using John Cooks FALSE STATEMENTS (which are quoted in both papers) as fact when they have been show a lie...So is there a mass conspiracy to pull the wool over the world’s eyes? It seems highly unlikely, considering the numerous studies that show overwhelming consensus among respected scientists that anthropogenic (human-caused) global warming is indisputable.
at least 97 percent believe in anthropogenic climate change
The study says that the few "contrarian" scientists are a vocal, but small, minority. They also found that those scientists denying human-caused climate change tend to have less expertise in the subject than those who believe in it.
Another survey out of the University of Illinois found that 82 percent of earth scientists (out of more than 3,000 respondents) believe that global temperature shifts are human-caused. Among climate-specific earth scientists who responded, 97.4 percent said they believe in human-caused climate change.
"It seems that the debate on the authenticity of global warming and the role played by human activity is largely nonexistent among those who understand the nuances and scientific basis of long-term climate processes,"
Your entire position is a lie. 90% say so. Once your side decides it is no longer effective to lie/deny they will argue their second talking point then 3rd. Eventually we will be arguing with you on who should be the ones to pay for the solution. We as a society should decide that the corporate pollutors that contribute the most to GW should but you guys will fight that until ultimately you will make us the people pay.
And I don't blame you. Why not sock it to the people? They don't even show up to vote so keep fucking them until they have had enough. Clearly they haven't had enough. The America people are so dumb.
By the way, this is the same thing happening in Michigan with our roads. Michigan allows corporations to put more weight on trucks than any of the other 50 states. That alone is a reason why corporations do business in Michigan. No need to give them more tax breaks although Snyder did give them more. Anyways, the point is that corporate trucks tear up our roads more than our cars do. So corporations should pay for the roads. But Snyder says no. He gave them tax breaks and says we don't have any $ to fix the roads, so he's going to raise our taxes. Basically proving me right. Republicans are only anti tax for the rich. They actually shift the tax burden from the rich onto us. Essentially they are for raising our taxes so they can lower the taxes for the rich. If you are for that, either you are dumb or rich.
Remember for how many years Republicans said NO NEW TAXES? Suddenly they win a 2nd term and sock it to the middle class? Where are all my middle class buddies who vote Republican? Suddenly they are defending tax increases? Interesting. Just like when they win back the white house they will stop being deficit hawks bet me. THey'll double the debt and you won't hear a sound out of their defenders. In fact remember Chaney said debt was good? I do.
Eventually we will be arguing with you on who should be the ones to pay for the solution. We as a society should decide that the corporate pollutors that contribute the most to GW should
That sounds like a great idea! How do you do it without making "the people pay"?
How can you be so stupid. Time and time again it has been pointed out to you that human caused global warming is real. But you still stick to your denier cult. You are a joke. But the planet isn't laughing. Maybe you should build some cheap land at Love Canal and build a house. All you have to do is deny that the ground is contaminated.
dude, don't you have anything new? My god the same old cliche's over and over is boring. Hmmmm but you feel so much better having gotten them babies off though right. What a fool. BT, you make me laugh!!!!So, you are just mindlessly parroting an opinion piece that contains no evidence at all.Why is it Liberal?
It's either true or it isn't.
Bringing politics into only confuses the issue and hardens positions.
Why is it Liberal?
Why Liberals Love the Global Warming Cause Capitol Commentary
Thanks for clearing that up.
Nope!!!!My, my. Yet every single Scientific Society, every National Academy of Science, and every major University in the world has policy statements that AGW is real, and a clear and present danger. But there is no scientific consensus?
Ah yes, it is all a conspiracy, all these scientists in Russia, Europe, Asia, and North and South America are all in on a giant conspiracy. Tin hats, anyone? LOL
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzWhat message? That there are idiots out there that think what they pull out of their ass is more credible than what scientists who have studied this issue the whole of their lives state?
we don't care you k00k!!!! why not just show us the experiment? do.....you....understand?Really? What a damnable liar you are, Billy Boob. And tell me, how many scientific societies do you belong to? And what is the basis of that lie, other than wishful thinking?
