Global Climate Changes

[Deeeefense]

Even though “Climate Change” is the new buzzword rather than “Global Warming”, I find it kind of funny people don’t realize India and China aren’t going to do anything to effectively change their energy practices. They’d rather we suffer economically so they can virtue signal. Maybe in 10 years we can celebrate all the doomsday predictions by meeting up and going skiing on Kilimanjaro.

You are right to point to China and India as the major culprits in fossil fuel combustion, especially China that needs all the energy they can muster to serve the growing economy, but somewhat to the credit they are spending 100 Billion a year on alt energy development. They just need energy period. With the coming boom in AI based systems in manufacturing and services , plus the increase in EVs world wide the demand for electric power is going to increase substantially. Here in the US we will need all the energy sources we have and can add including alt energy sources but also the new nuclear technology.

Also for clarity, Global Warming is what is occurring, Climate Change is the result of Global Warming.

 

[Bill Cosby]

I wonder how much of my tax dollars were funneled through USAID to the “climate scientists” tasked with providing support for the man made global warming narrative.

 

[GJNorman]

I wonder how much of my tax dollars were funneled through USAID to the “climate scientists” tasked with providing support for the man made global warming narrative.

Yes, the climate scientists have all the money. Not the oil tycoons.

 

[Bill Cosby]

Yes, the climate scientists have all the money. Not the oil tycoons.

You mean climate science isn’t as lucrative as the oil business, and therefore the climate scientists are solely dependent on sources of revenue that aren’t supported by markets? And if climate scientists aren’t being granted money by governments to get conclusions that support more government, they wouldn’t have any money at all?

Yeah they’re probably totally independent.

 

[wkycatfan]

The goal of global warming/climate change movement is to establish a world regulating body and redistribution of wealth. You can do the math from there. It has nothing to do with changing the climate.

 

[cole854]

Yes, the climate scientists have all the money. Not the oil tycoons.

$150B + wasn't enough for the tree huggers last year? What did you all spend it on?

 

[GJNorman]

$150B + wasn't enough for the tree huggers last year? What did you all spend it on?

7 trillion for subsidies in fossil fuels
-150 billion for renewables

Oil wins by 6,850,000,000,000


In 2022, global fossil fuel subsidies reached $7 trillion, which was a record high. This was equivalent to 7.1% of the world's gross domestic product (GDP).

 

[Caveman Catfan]

Not one person is communicating on the thread without oil. As a product, it has probably saved more lives over history than any other product. Demeaning it is foolhardy and ignorant.

Without oil subsidies, one estimate for gas prices is $12.75 per gallon. Try and guess the harm that would do in this country. 🤦‍♂️

 

[cole854]

7 trillion for subsidies in fossil fuels
-150 billion for renewables

Oil wins by 6,850,000,000,000


In 2022, global fossil fuel subsidies reached $7 trillion, which was a record high. This was equivalent to 7.1% of the world's gross domestic product (GDP).

You didn't answer the question. This has nothing to do w/ oil.

 

[GJNorman]

You didn't answer the question. This has nothing to do w/ oil.

For starters, liquid green hydrogen plants at about 12 locations around the country for around 1.5 billion in loans that will be paid back. 1000s of jobs created

 

[GJNorman]

Climate change target of 2C is ‘dead’, says renowned climate scientist

Prof James Hansen says pace of global heating has been significantly underestimated, though other scientists disagree

www.theguardian.com

 

[megablue]

Just released … 02/04/25

Temperatures at north pole 20C above average and beyond ice melting point

Scientists say unusually mild temperatures linked to low-pressure system over Iceland directing strong flow of warm air towards north pole

www.theguardian.com

 

[GJNorman]

https://www.npr.org/2025/02/05/nx-s1-5286701/trump-neil-jacobs-noaa-sharpiegate-misconduct

Sharpie gate crony to head our NOAA

I guess Claude Bassett wasn’t available

 

[megablue]

Here is an AI Overview ... fwiw:

"To argue against a scientific consensus held by 99% of scientists, you would need to present extremely strong evidence and well-supported counterarguments, likely focusing on scrutinizing the methodology, data analysis, or potential biases within existing research, while also acknowledging the overwhelming body of evidence supporting the majority view; essentially, you would need to demonstrate a significant flaw in the current scientific understanding that hasn't been considered by the majority.

Key points to consider:

• Challenge the data:
  Analyze the existing data closely, looking for potential errors in collection, interpretation, or statistical analysis.
  
  
• Highlight methodological issues:
  Question the research design, experimental setup, or sampling methods used in key studies.
  
  
• Present alternative explanations:
  Offer a well-supported hypothesis that could explain the observed phenomena differently than the prevailing theory.
  
  
• Cite credible dissenting research:
  If there are a small number of studies that contradict the consensus, present them carefully and explain their significance.
  
  
• Engage in respectful debate:
  Acknowledge the vast majority of scientific opinion and focus on constructive criticism, not personal attacks.

Important considerations:

• Burden of proof lies with the minority:
  When arguing against a strong consensus, the onus is on you to provide exceptionally robust evidence to overturn the established view.
  
  
• Consult experts:
  Seek advice from qualified scientists in the relevant field to ensure your arguments are scientifically sound and well-informed.
  
  
• Be aware of potential biases:
  Recognize your own potential biases and actively work to avoid cherry-picking data or misrepresenting information."
  

"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."
--- Carl Sagan