Global warming
- Thread starter mthbstr8
- Start date
MAKAVELI
Well-Known Member
"We know enough based on the research and science that the risk (of climate change) is real and appropriate steps should be taken to address that risk," Ken Cohen, Exxon's government affairs chief, said in an interview.
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/apr/01/exxon-mobil-climate-change-fossil-fuels-oil
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/apr/01/exxon-mobil-climate-change-fossil-fuels-oil
Bringdough
Well-Known Member
Is that research based on the hockey stick model based on manipulated data? The inaccurate computer models?
Sent using BrownCafe App
MAKAVELI
Well-Known Member
As mentioned in the quote, this was said by an Exxon official. Did you miss that part?
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/apr/01/exxon-mobil-climate-change-fossil-fuels-oil
Exxon and the environmental groups agree that climate change is a risk and that society will take steps to reduce emissions from fossil fuels to slow the buildup of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. They differ, however, on how drastic society's response could be, and what would cost more severely restricting fossil fuel consumption or not doing so and allowing more carbon dioxide to build in the atmosphere.
Bringdough
Well-Known Member
Bringdough
Well-Known Member
You might convince me to be concerned about climate change, except:
Algore doesn't live his like there is global warming. If Algore hadn't sold his tv station to Al Jazeera, they are heavily invested in oil.
Computer models consistently predict more warming than has actually happened. In fact there may have been cooling going on.
There is only .004% of co2 in the atmosphere. How could that low level of co2 produce warming? And finally, if our govt wasn't using the IPCC reports, that include the hockey stick graph, to try and sell us on man made global warming.
Sent using BrownCafe App
Algore doesn't live his like there is global warming. If Algore hadn't sold his tv station to Al Jazeera, they are heavily invested in oil.
Computer models consistently predict more warming than has actually happened. In fact there may have been cooling going on.
There is only .004% of co2 in the atmosphere. How could that low level of co2 produce warming? And finally, if our govt wasn't using the IPCC reports, that include the hockey stick graph, to try and sell us on man made global warming.
Sent using BrownCafe App
MAKAVELI
Well-Known Member
MAKAVELI
Well-Known Member
Climate and weather have a direct relationship but I guess that's too difficult for you to understand. The oceans are at record temperature levels as well. That sand must taste good to you
oldngray
nowhere special
Are you still sad about your climate change models not working?
What are you talking about??
California is experiencing the warmest year in recorded history. Our drought is the worst ever. And yet, you dont believe there is any change in the climate?
blinders.
TOS.
MAKAVELI
Well-Known Member
What's sad is that you actually think you have a valid argument.
oldngray
nowhere special
So you admit you can't support your argument? Just attempt to deflect attention away?
Overpaid Union Thug
Well-Known Member
Global warming is the biggest scam in human history.
Sent using BrownCafe App
Sent using BrownCafe App
oldngray
nowhere special
California Isn't Warming, It's Probably Getting Colder
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2014/07/california_isnt_warming_its_probably_getting_colder.html
Again, another NON scientist trying to decipher scientific data. You links author has a phoney name.. SIERRA RAYNE...
Seriously bro.
You can do better.
TOS.
Bringdough
Well-Known Member
Picture this, I'm out on the ramp, it's July in the ohio valley, it's 59*, I have a sweatshirt on. In my 17 years at UPS I've never worn a sweatshirt at work in July.
Sorry about your water problems out there but the delta smelts need that water more than you do.
Sent using BrownCafe App
Overpaid Union Thug
Well-Known Member
Global warming fanatics' whole THEORY depends on climate models that don't work even though they are fed "data" that are actually assumptions or outright lies. Part of that data comes from ATTEMPTING to measure past temperature and weather readings. The problem with that is that our ACCURATE records only go back less than a couple of hundred years. If that. The Earth is something like 4 billion years old. So that is like measuring a nanosecond out of a ten year time period. I've said it before and I must say it again....using such a short time period as a way to explain temperature patterns is like looking at how temperature rises between May and September and assuming that the temperature in January will be 150.
