Exxon accurately predicted GW in the 70s but kept casting doubt for decades

[Magnus]

For some reason, he really enjoys making himself seem simple in order to get attention. I admit, I don't understand the appeal.

When he first challenged me, I could have gone the right-wing retard route and ignored him or asked him to research it himself.

Instead, I dug up the link and even provided a synopsis, and yet... he keeps coming back with his retarded questions.

Maybe you're right. He enjoys the attention of being the village idiot. Different strokes... and all that.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

It's a lame lawsuit, accusing them of things which are not against the law, clearly.

It will get all the respect it deserves.

Well, surely you understand if your unargued and unevidenced opinion of an article you didn't read on a topic you know little about is considered kind of worthless.

 

[Shareprofit]

Global warming was debunked and exposed over a decade ago.

FYI

Climategate 2.0: New E-Mails Rock The Global Warming Debate​

No it wasn't debunked at all. Just look around the World right now to see its effects.

 

[EMH]

WE are still waiting for the Co2 fraud side to explain how

GREENLAND FROZE while North America THAWED during the past million years.



Every Co2 drone parrot needs to either explain that or STFU

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

WE are still waiting for the Co2 fraud side to explain how

GREENLAND FROZE while North America THAWED during the past million years.



Every Co2 drone parrot needs to either explain that or STFU

Why do you think anyone cares if you understand that or not?

Spoiler alert: Nobody cares

 

[Dagosa]

3% of the total CO2 emissions is quite a bit for the small amount of people that air travel moves.



Where's your proof. Looks like we have some false information here.



False information abounds when one wants to cling to something they consider superior.



Then you'd best show everyone some real information about the differences in how much fuel is used by a jet airliner and a bus traveling the same distance then.

Here's an idea let's go back to the true vehicles that use real renewable fuel sources and are good for the environment.

*****CHUCKLE*****

It’s an uninformed post that says the way out of this is personal responsibility, then use air travel as an example. It’s the cleanest form of long distance travel. You did no research did you ?
97% of the pollution isn’t covered by not taking jets dah.
Then, if youMust travel by car and bus, you INCREASE THE CO2 pollution for long trips. You don’t get it.

 

[Dagosa]

Next on the agenda is we're going to take well over 50% of the farmland out of production and start growing renewable fuel that can heat our homes.

Huh ?
You don’t “ grow” renewables.

 

[Billy_Bob]

Huh ?
You don’t “ grow” renewables.

Moron.... I grow trees... Lodge pole pines... They make excellent heating fuel.

 

[Billy_Bob]

The fossil fuel industries have done their best to suppress and obscure the actual science of global warming. Too many of you have been led astray to become their useful idiots.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/12/business/exxon-climate-models-global-warming/index.html

Not this bull shit again...

You have been shown over and over that Exxon doesn't make their own published science reports they are based on long published research by others going back to Moller 1963.

NY Attorney General Defies Judge’s Order in Exxon Case LINK

Selected Excerpt:

What did Exxon know?

In 1968, Exxon knew that a 25% increase in atmospheric
CO2 might lead to a lead to 1-7 °F rise in Earth’s average surface temperature…


1968 “THE ROBINSON REPORT”

Since Möller (1963) wasn’t a secret oil industry document, anyone else with a subscription to the Journal of Geophysical Research would have also been privy to this information. And anyone who even bothered to read the abstract of this damning paper would also know what we know today: “The theory that climatic variations are effected by variations in the CO2 content becomes very questionable” if you factor in clouds…

==========

The "Exxon Climate Papers" show what Exxon and climate science knew and shared LINK

Here is a long list at the bottom of the post to browse all are LINKS so enjoy.

Further Reading

What did ExxonMobil Know and when did they know it? (Part 1)

What did ExxonMobil Know and when did they know it? (Part Deux, “Same as it ever was.”)

What did ExxonMobil Know and when did they know it? (Part 3, Exxon: The Fork Not Taken

“Smoke & Fumes”… The dumbest attack on ExxonMobil evah’

“Smoke & Fumes,” Part Deux: Exxon Knew “The entire theory of climatic changes by CO2 variations is questionable.”

Even dumber than the dumbest attack on ExxonMobil evah’

What Did Shell Know and When Did They Know It?

The Guardian: “Climate change denial won’t even benefit oil companies soon”… Is it even grammatically possible to deny climate change?

LINK

 

[Damaged Eagle]

It’s an uninformed post that says the way out of this is personal responsibility, then use air travel as an example. It’s the cleanest form of long distance travel. You did no research did you ?
97% of the pollution isn’t covered by not taking jets dah.
Then, if youMust travel by car and bus, you INCREASE THE CO2 pollution for long trips. You don’t get it.

The cleanest form of long distance travel stopped being used nearly 120 years ago when they stopped using the stagecoach and horses.

A 777 flying 1000 miles...

• 777-200ER - Fuel 45,520 US gallons (171,160 litres). Passengers (3 classes) 301. Range 7,730 nms. Therefore 5.85 gallons per mile, 150 gallons per passenger.

My jeep gets about 29 miles to the gallon. 150 gallons X 29 miles = 4350 miles total. So my gas mileage is 4 times better than a 777 passenger jet. If I have three other passengers that means my personal gas consumption can be divided by 4 for that 1000 miles or another way to put it is it's 16 times better than that 777 passenger jets fuel consumption.

BAN JETS NOW!

*****CHUCKLE*****

 

[Billy_Bob]

Some of my links didnt copy.

What did ExxonMobil Know and when did they know it? (Part 1)

What did ExxonMobil Know and when did they know it? (Part Deux, “Same as it ever was.”)

What did ExxonMobil Know and when did they know it? (Part 3, Exxon: The Fork Not Taken

“Smoke & Fumes”… The dumbest attack on ExxonMobil evah’

“Smoke & Fumes,” Part Deux: Exxon Knew “The entire theory of climatic changes by CO2 variations is questionable.”

Even dumber than the dumbest attack on ExxonMobil evah’

What Did Shell Know and When Did They Know It?

The Guardian: “Climate change denial won’t even benefit oil companies soon”… Is it even grammatically possible to deny climate change?

LINK

 

[DukeU]

No they didn't. And you shout to the world how ignorant you are of all of this to say that. Seriously, what you just said is laughably stupid.

 

[DukeU]

No it wasn't debunked at all. Just look around the World right now to see its effects

Tell me, how smart do you have to be to get your ship stuck in ice for 3 weeks and have to be rescued by helicopter.

 

[Shareprofit]

Tell me, how smart do you have to be to get your ship stuck in ice for 3 weeks and have to be rescued by helicopter.



View attachment 747429

How smart do you have to be to understand what climate is?

 

[DukeU]

How smart do you have to be to understand what climate is?

Fossil fuel to the rescue.

 

[Crick]

Some of my links didnt copy.

What did ExxonMobil Know and when did they know it? (Part 1)

WattsUpWithThat

What did ExxonMobil Know and when did they know it? (Part Deux, “Same as it ever was.”)

WattsUpWithThat

What did ExxonMobil Know and when did they know it? (Part 3, Exxon: The Fork Not Taken

WattsUpWithThat

“Smoke & Fumes”… The dumbest attack on ExxonMobil evah’

WattsUpWithThat

Even dumber than the dumbest attack on ExxonMobil evah’

WattsUpWithThat

What Did Shell Know and When Did They Know It?

WattsUpWithThat

The Guardian: “Climate change denial won’t even benefit oil companies soon”… Is it even grammatically possible to deny climate change?

The Guardian

LINK

WattsUpWithThat

Impressive sources

 

[skookerasbil]

I see you can’t keep up with him. ..

No need....after all these years, Crick still thinks it's all about the climate change scientists. But the energy landscape for solar/wind levels still laughably low.

In other words, the science is not mattering in the real world....fails to transcend beyond its own field...d0y

Which means I don't even have to try hard in here.

 

[Crick]

No need....after all these years, Crick still thinks it's all about the climate change scientists. But the energy landscape for solar/wind levels still laughably low.

In other words, the science is not mattering in the real world....fails to transcend beyond its own field...d0y

Which means I don't even have to try hard in here.

Solar power on pace to save the world

A think tank analysis suggests that if solar power keeps up its growth pace, along with wind, then the global power sector will meet its carbon reduction targets to keep world temperatures in check.

pv-magazine-usa.com

Inflation Reduction Act To Give U.S. Solar Energy Industry A Much Needed Boost

The U.S. solar energy industry has grown tremendously in the past decade. That growth has actually been one of the most phenomenal economic growth stories across the whole U.S. economy. However, the "Covid Era" hit

cleantechnica.com

 

[Dagosa]

Moron.... I grow trees... Lodge pole pines... They make excellent heating fuel.

Guy, that’s not where the vast majority of renewables come from. Now, it’s only carbon neutral renewable if you burn wood byproducts that if left on the ground would release more co2 then burning it.
. That’s saw dust and wood chips and using pellet stoves. So the only reasonable way to be carbon neutral is to burn blowdowns

But the energy landscape for solar/wind levels still laughably low.

hilarious denial on your part. There is more energy hitting earth from the sun in the form of photons in an hour then is needed by the entire earth for a year. It’s free, no moving parts to convert it to electricity. Not only that, but the break even point with fossil fuel was passed a few years back and it’s CHEAPER per btu. So really you’re FOS when it comes to these renewables.

 

[Dagosa]

No need....after all these years, Crick still thinks it's all about the climate change scientists. But the energy landscape for solar/wind levels still laughably low.

In other words, the science is not mattering in the real world....fails to transcend beyond its own field...d0y

Which means I don't even have to try hard in here.

One more to make your claims insignificant.
“There is so much solar energy hitting the earth’s surface that even a single year of sunshine exceeds all known energy reserves of oil, coal, natural gas and uranium put together.”