Global Warming is this election's insidious theme.

[washamericom]

it's everywhere, and it will be at the epicenter of the campaign if it generates money and votes.
i watched this older documentary again last night, and it's gotten my global blood boiling.

i'm tired of hearing everything tied to the bullshit science and contrived cooked data they use to advance the socialist agenda.

i implore everyone to watch this, i willl post an updated version of this argument. i think people will be surprised when they know what's in this short film.

i know there will be no liberal shortage of dissent.

 

[Contumacious]

it's everywhere, and it will be at the epicenter of the campaign if it generates money and votes.
i watched this older documentary again last night, and it's gotten my global blood boiling.

i'm tired of hearing everything tied to the bullshit science and contrived cooked data they use to advance the socialist agenda.

i implore everyone to watch this, i willl post an updated version of this argument. i think people will be surprised when they know what's in this short film.

i know there will be no liberal shortage of dissent.

The war against Exxon Mobil

"If you care about free speech, you should pay attention to the campaign now being waged against Exxon Mobil. More than 50 environmental and civil rights groups have written Attorney General Loretta Lynch urging her to open a “federal probe” of the giant energy firm. Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton have also joined the chorus. The charge is that Exxon Mobil “systematically misled the public” on climate change, even as its executives recognized the dangers. New York’s attorney general has already launched an investigation.

What’s behind the latest assault are two recent pieces of investigative journalism that, based on company documents, concluded that Exxon Mobil played a double game. In the 1970s, when global warming began attracting scientific attention, the firm “assembled a brain trust [that deepened] the company’s understanding” of climate change, reported InsideClimate News. But in the late 1980s, the company switched to “climate denial,” manufacturing “doubt about . . . global warming its own scientists” had confirmed. Stories in the Los Angeles Times told a similar tale.

Robert J. Samuelson writes a weekly column on economics. View Archive
Not so, responds Exxon Mobil (unsurprisingly). The investigative pieces “cherry-pick” their evidence, exaggerating the divide between the company’s scientists and corporate policy, says Ken Cohen, vice president of public and government affairs.

As an example, he cites a scientific presentation made to Exxon’s board of directors in early 1989 concluding that global warming is, in the briefing’s words, “deeply imbedded in scientific uncertainty . . . [and] will require substantial additional investigation.” Instead, Cohen asserts, the Los Angeles Times portrayed the presentation as demonstrating that the enormity of global warming was settled."

 

[The VOR]

Global Warming is this election's insidious theme.

No, it isn't.

 

[washamericom]

state funded pbs wouldn't show the documentary. that concerns me.
http://richardminiter.com/pdf/19910217-art-seattle_pi.pdf

1991:
The Public Broadcasting Service recently turned down what the London Financial Times called "quite possibly the best science documentary of the year" on the grounds that it was "too one sided." "The Greenhouse Conspiracy," a 55minute program televised in the United Kingdom last August, won praise from both the public and the press.

It highlights the scientific uncertainties of global warming, relying on the expert testimony of respected scientists from NASA, MIT, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute, and the British Antarctic Survey. Each of these scientists expresses varying degrees of doubt about global warming, yet PBS and much of the American press have consistently ignored them.

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

state funded pbs wouldn't show the documentary. that concerns me.
http://richardminiter.com/pdf/19910217-art-seattle_pi.pdf

1991:
The Public Broadcasting Service recently turned down what the London Financial Times called "quite possibly the best science documentary of the year" on the grounds that it was "too one sided." "The Greenhouse Conspiracy," a 55minute program televised in the United Kingdom last August, won praise from both the public and the press.

It highlights the scientific uncertainties of global warming, relying on the expert testimony of respected scientists from NASA, MIT, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute, and the British Antarctic Survey. Each of these scientists expresses varying degrees of doubt about global warming, yet PBS and much of the American press have consistently ignored them.

The truth is too one sided. Isn't that the truth!
The truth does not compromise. If it did? It wouldn't be the truth now would it?

 

[washamericom]

Global Warming is this election's insidious theme.

No, it isn't.

i contend that the fake global warming argument to enhance political power is happening (continuing), and it's wrong.

my old friend bernie is leading the charge, feel the bern.

Oregon Petition - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Arguments from Global Warming Skeptics and what the science really says.

al gore is to science, what tipper gore is to music.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Globull warming is a farce, it's not even on my list

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

it's everywhere, and it will be at the epicenter of the campaign if it generates money and votes.
i watched this older documentary again last night, and it's gotten my global blood boiling.

i'm tired of hearing everything tied to the bullshit science and contrived cooked data they use to advance the socialist agenda.

i implore everyone to watch this, i willl post an updated version of this argument. i think people will be surprised when they know what's in this short film.

i know there will be no liberal shortage of dissent.

Nobody cares. They tried, but their lies and non-solutions have failed.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Global Warming is this election's insidious theme.

No, it isn't.

I wish it were. Without a doubt, its the most important issue we face on this planet. Let the 3% stay willfully ignorant. They're not important. We need to force very aggressive address climate change or none of the rest will matter.

 

[DGS49]

I don't think "Climate Change," per se, will be high on many voters' lists, but if the eventual candidates take positions that are perceived to be either stupid or harmful, that will hurt them.

The fact is that EVERYONE who is concerned about Climate Change is also someone who is Progressive on all the other issues, as well, so none of them would vote Republican under any circumstances. Conversely, EVERYONE who is significantly skeptical about the Global Warming alarms is going to vote Republican.

On balance, the AGW issue will have NO IMPACT on the results of the coming election.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Global Warming is this election's insidious theme.

No, it isn't.

I wish it were. Without a doubt, its the most important issue we face on this planet. Let the 3% stay willfully ignorant. They're not important. We need to force very aggressive address climate change or none of the rest will matter.

3%. LOL!
How many new nuke plants should we build?
Should we build thorium reactors?
What is your aggressive solution?

 

[Freewill]

OK, what I don't get is why Exxon would care, in regards to their oil products?

If anyone it would be the coal companies, one would think.

 

[Contumacious]

OK, what I don't get is why Exxon would care, in regards to their oil products?

If anyone it would be the coal companies, one would think.

Because one miserable piece of shit known as Eric Schneiderman is attempting to extort 209 BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBbillion from Exxon-Mobil.


.

 

[washamericom]

Global Warming is this election's insidious theme.

No, it isn't.

I wish it were. Without a doubt, its the most important issue we face on this planet. Let the 3% stay willfully ignorant. They're not important. We need to force very aggressive address climate change or none of the rest will matter.

see, you quantified three percent and qualified willful ignorance all in one blow..

 

[Wyatt earp]

Global Warming is this election's insidious theme.

No, it isn't.

I wish it were. Without a doubt, its the most important issue we face on this planet. Let the 3% stay willfully ignorant. They're not important. We need to force very aggressive address climate change or none of the rest will matter.

How are you going to stop it?

Click your heels together 10 times and wish it so?

 

[washamericom]

Global Warming is this election's insidious theme.

No, it isn't.

I wish it were. Without a doubt, its the most important issue we face on this planet. Let the 3% stay willfully ignorant. They're not important. We need to force very aggressive address climate change or none of the rest will matter.

How are you going to stop it?

Click your heels together 10 times and wish it so?

well, how do we control the weather now ? darpa ? US Air Force Admits They Can Control Weather
heh

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Why would I have a fantasy anywhere on a list of concerns... ?

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Global Warming is this election's insidious theme.

No, it isn't.

I wish it were. Without a doubt, its the most important issue we face on this planet. Let the 3% stay willfully ignorant. They're not important. We need to force very aggressive address climate change or none of the rest will matter.

How are you going to stop it?

Click your heels together 10 times and wish it so?

How do you stop something that isn't?

 

[NightFox]

Global Warming is this election's insidious theme.

Makes sense with all the copious amounts of hot air flowing from both the Democrats and the Republicans this cycle, actually what we should be really worried about is Solar System warming.

 

[washamericom]

Global Warming is this election's insidious theme.

No, it isn't.

I wish it were. Without a doubt, its the most important issue we face on this planet. Let the 3% stay willfully ignorant. They're not important. We need to force very aggressive address climate change or none of the rest will matter.

How are you going to stop it?

Click your heels together 10 times and wish it so?

How do you stop something that isn't?

well said.