• After 15+ years, we've made a big change: Android Forums is now Early Bird Club. Learn more here.

Climate change ?

Canesfan said:
". I don't, off hand, know of anybody who has gotten filthy rich as a Denier,
Click to expand...

OK.. well hope this helps then

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/jul/08/exxon-climate-change-1981-climate-denier-funding

"ExxonMobil gave more than $2.3m to members of Congress and a corporate lobbying group that deny climate change and block efforts to fight climate change – eight years after pledging to stop its funding of climate denial, the Guardian has learned."

"Exxon channeled about $30m to researchers and activist groups promoting disinformation about global warming over the years, according to a tally kept by the campaign group Greenpeace. But the oil company pledged to stop such funding in 2007, in response to pressure from shareholder activists."

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/jul/08/exxon-climate-change-1981-climate-denier-funding

"ExxonMobil, the world’s biggest oil company, knew as early as 1981 of climate change – seven years before it became a public issue, according to a newly discovered email from one of the firm’s own scientists. Despite this the firm spent millions over the next 27 years to promote climate denial."


http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/global-warming/climate-deniers/koch-industries/
"The Koch Brothers have sent at least $79,048,951 to groups denying climate change science since 1997."


http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/dark-money-funds-climate-change-denial-effort/
In all, 140 foundations funneled $558 million to almost 100 climate denial organizations from 2003 to 2010.

and for those people who like pie charts
http://drexel.edu/~/media/Images/no...hash=30052FDB846CC069545780C414A9EADA2D46C695

Figure%201.ashx
 
Depends on who they are, what they said, and who they said it to.....

Generally speaking, lying to shareholders and a companies auditors are committing Fraud, and that's generally considered to be against the law*

On the other hand, If a bloke down the pub wants to deny the earth is round, and that unicorns are blowing on the air to keep things cool, then as long as he buys a round for everyone, he can stay there all night.


*.... assuming that you could get a court that would find them guilty.
 
On the other hand, If a bloke down the pub wants to deny the earth is round, and that unicorns are blowing on the air to keep things cool, then as long as he buys a round for everyone, he can stay there all night.

Where perhaps I differ from you is that I think a comment like this could be applied to both sides of the argument.
 
Nope... I seem to agree with you...

You missed out the first part of my post though that put it in context..
"Depends on who they are, what they said, and who they said it to....."

Now... (depending on who you drink with) talking about unicorns as real animals in the pub is acceptable... However if you try and claim that they were the reason why you were speeding, then the cops may not agree.
 
Ok... Skipping over the fact that the website starts with the incredibly slanted quote "The great bloviator has been pwned again," the graph in that article (although its confusing) does seem to imply that the arctic sea ice extent IS decreasing , although not at the rate as one person thought 5 years ago...

What exactly where you using this as an example of?

It seems to be a good example of 'the bloke down the pub' who in this case seems to be shooting his mouth off....

For example, he's quoting information from the ESA website, which (to be fair) he linked to.

If he had read it for example he'd have read "
Professor Andrew Shepherd, Director of CPOM, said, “Understanding what controls the amount of Arctic sea ice takes us one step closer to making reliable predictions of how long it will last, which is important because it is a key component of Earth’s climate system.

“Although the jump in volume means that the region is unlikely to be ice free this summer, we still expect temperatures to rise in the future, and so the events of 2013 will have simply wound the clock back a few years on the long-term pattern of decline."

Now if this is a bloke down the pub, or a blogger on the net, then no they shouldn't be prosecuted... Laughed at, ridiculed, mocked, ignored maybe... argued with (possibly, but drunk blokes in pubs who have got to this point, don't tend to like entering to debates about facts)... Anyone who knows what he's talking about wouldn't take him seriously.
 
Last edited:
Ok... Skipping over the fact that the website starts with the incredibly slanted quote "The great bloviator has beenpwned again," the graph in that article (although its confusing) does seem to imply that the arctic sea ice extent IS decreasing , although not at the rate as one person thought 5 years ago...

What exactly where you using this as an example of?

I think the bloke at the pub you talk about is the bloviator, LOL. Still not ready to step on his band-wagon.
 
Last edited:
just because someone proposing to prosecute.. does not = guilt!!!
it don't mean anything!
I would consider it a move to confuse the public...
bombard the public with as much STUFF as possible (even nonsense)..so that truth is hidden behind too much STUFF to see easily.


if that is the reason.. then if someone gets a lawsuit against them.. then they must be guilty.
any one can file a lawsuit against anyone for anything... it only cost $$ to file it.
 
I do think.. if/when global warming is proven.. and linked to man / industrial use.

and companies like Exxon are PROVEN that they knew.. and actively try to confuse and hide the fact.
delaying public awareness .. and it caused our environment to be further damaged... for generations to come.
all in the name of profit or whatever..

YES.. these entities / individuals.. must be prosecuted and punished by the law..
all profits and more.. be used to correct their damage.
 
dan330 said:
I do think.. if/when global warming is proven.. and linked to man / industrial use.

and companies like Exxon are PROVEN that they knew.. and actively try to confuse and hide the fact.
delaying public awareness .. and it caused our environment to be further damaged... for generations to come.
all in the name of profit or whatever..

YES.. these entities / individuals.. must be prosecuted and punished by the law..
all profits and more.. be used to correct their damage.
Click to expand...

If man's role in Climate Change is ever proven, it could take years to do so. I would think it would be hard to prosecute companies who caused related problems many years before then, not knowing it was a problem as it was unproven when they did it.
 
The whole thing about prosecutions is nothing but a red herring and a distraction anyway. Someone ran their mouth, and the right ran with it, knowing it has never happened, and will never happen.

Pretty much every civilized nation in the world are meeting in Paris right now, but it's all part of the worldwide conspiracy to...what, exactly? Never quite understood that part.
 
Obama's Organizing for Action Group: 'Call Out the Climate Change Deniers'

It's always been clear that to Barack Obama, his only real enemies are his political enemies, including all conservatives, the entire GOP and everyone who resists "fundamental transformation." I wish I was making this up, but I'm not. It's from the president of the United States's "community organizing" non-profit group, Organizing for Action:

97% OF CLIMATE SCIENTISTS AGREE that climate change is real and man-made, and affecting communities in every part of the country.

Yet too many of our elected officials deny the science of climate change. Along with their polluter allies, they are blocking progress in the fight against climate change.

Find the deniers near you—and call them out today.

There follows a list of so-called "deniers" -- the Holocaust terminology is both offensive and deliberate -- with thumbnail pictures of folks like Mitch McConnell, Marco Rubio and Paul Ryan, with a button below each so the Obamabots can call them out. If this isn't enough, the other side of the page consists of a form by which the Believers can "Find Deniers" simply by typing in the name of a suspect.

upload_2015-12-2_14-51-50.png


Obama's National Socialist shock troops (as long as we're invoking WWII, two can play at that game) need to hear about this, and someone -- Ted Cruz? Donald Trump? Ben Carson? -- needs to rub their nasty fascist noses in it before things get entirely out of hand.​

Call them out today.

​
 
Shock horror... Suggesting politicians should listen to facts... And have to justify themselves to the electorate....

I can see why that would scare people who just want to ignore the problem and pretend it will just go away.

How dare they upset your sweet dreams of unicorns and jellybeans with their facts about the real world.

Better get on the net and write an angry blog post about it... And if you can call them names at the same time then even better as it will increase your word count and avoid getting your brain dirty with any nasty facts.

Job Done.
 
I can't get angry about something I can't change. I'll just have to watch some bill pass and the price of gas shoot up to fifty bucks a gallon, and then maybe the 'believers' will realize that this was never about man-caused carbon pollution, but about your money. It'll eventually go down as the most elaborate and widespread hoax ever concocted, but it'll be too late by then.
 
I admit .. I aint the smartest person. there are many that know more.. or have access to more info than me.
and there is a lot of crap and BS in the world. Hoaxes and Conspiracies ... and REAL warnings.

but if a bunch of Scientist (smarter people / people with more info)... from around the world...
get together in 1 location to discuss 1 hughe issue they believe to be a crisis.

I have to stop and listen and give them SOME credit. and keep an open mind. not bury my head in denial.
 
I take it you've read the referenced letter in the blog post you linked to.. because they weren't asking for a prosecution....

http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2...esident-obama-investigate-deniers-under-rico/

The actions of these organizations have been extensively documented in peerreviewed academic research (Brulle, 2013) and in recent books including: Doubt is their Product (Michaels, 2008), Climate Cover-Up (Hoggan & Littlemore, 2009), Merchants of Doubt (Oreskes & Conway, 2010), The Climate War (Pooley, 2010), and in The Climate Deception Dossiers (Union of Concerned Scientists, 2015). We strongly endorse Senator Whitehouse’s call for a RICO investigation.
Click to expand...


If it turns out that there's no evidence of criminal action, or enough evidence to secure any convictions (and based on the way that these things go down, that seems a strong possibility) there wouldn't be any prosecution.
 
Andy, there's no point in disagreeing with me, for two reasons. First, I don't believe anything in the the mountains of 'evidence' out there, and second, I think they're going to win anyway. I'm just trying to enjoy what I can in this swan song.
 
And if you'd did a little bit of checking... you'd have also found out that Senator Whitehouse isn't calling for a prosecution either. In his call referenced by the letter above
http://www.whitehouse.senate.gov/news/speeches/time-to-wake-up-touched-a-nerve

“Crime”? “Lock people up”? Let’s remember, Mr./Madam President, that we are talking about civil RICO, not criminal. No one went to jail in the tobacco case. Investigating the organized climate denial scheme under civil RICO is not about putting people in jail. Query why the National Review would mislead people about such an obvious fact.

All a civil RICO case does is get people to have to actually tell the truth, under oath, in front of an actual impartial judge or jury, and under cross-examination—which the Supreme Court has described as “the greatest legal invention ever invented for the discovery of truth.” No more spin and deception.
Click to expand...

Now.. this is at least the 3rd time you've posted about these so called presentations.... I hope this finally reassures you that the mailing list you subscribe to is at the very least misleading, and is clearly causing you to worry about things that are untrue.
 
I'll be honest..
with all this back and forth .. quoting this and that...
I am confused to who believes in global warming and who don't.

SUGGESTIONG: can someone.. add a vote to this thread..
opened, so that we all know who does and does not.

I am on the record for. Does believe about Global warming and worried about it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom