07-25-2019, 09:37 PM
(07-09-2019, 07:34 PM)Dill Wrote: LOL you keep "telling" us what the extraction industry tells us,
and calling "junk science" projections underwritten by the overwhelming majority of the world's climate scientists--those not on the Exxon/BP payroll.
So one hurdle to OUR education is YOUR inability to identify the primary "debunkers" of the anthropogenic thesis.
We should expect to find some some climate change skeptics in the US, GB, China, Australia, Russia, and Saudi Arabia, and to read their "research" in Forbes and the Wall Street Journal. Could you perhaps link us to the REAL climate science?
So overconfident and carefree about what you don’t know, you couldn’t even be bothered to spend 30 seconds doing a google search for Forbes/WSJ articles. Your post is great – you intended to mock me but all you really accomplished was to demonstrate how extremely unread on the subject you are.
But I don’t expect someone who makes an appeal to authority by pretending to read the WSJ to have anything insightful to add to the debate. If you actually read the WSJ, you’d know they fairly regularly have articles on climate alarmism. And until leaving for NYT a few years ago, Bret Stephens was a pretty well-known climate change skeptic.
And before you start throwing the talking point “extraction industry” at people who doubt the climate change alarmism, you should probably try reading something on the subject since you clearly haven’t. Also, you might consider green & climate change related business is a $2T+ global industry that would be significantly smaller without massive govt subsidies and funding. Speaking of which, if there was even a remote chance of an “existential threat” the world would have been all-in on nuclear power 20 years ago. Fortunately for you there’s no need to google to guess at how many nuclear plants have been built in the US in the last 20 years. Certainly action speaks louder than words, and global policy and actions should inform people as to what the science more realistically is - “solutions” to the “crisis” are literally tilting at windmills. That, and the crusade to silence debate and label people who reject alarmism as “deniers” should also be informative.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2011/10/12/a-case-against-climate-change-alarmism/#216d324d5dd9
https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2015/02/09/top-10-global-warming-lies-that-may-shock-you/#60ec5c6053a5
https://www.forbes.com/sites/robertbradley/2015/11/17/climate-alarmism-statisms-new-clothes/#491622417ae5
https://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybell/2012/05/29/global-warming-alarmism-when-science-is-fiction/#7ff5fcc97012
https://www.forbes.com/sites/kylesmith/2014/05/21/global-warming-alarmists-are-getting-desperate/#3fa5f4e63a98
https://www.wsj.com/articles/bjorn-lomborg-the-alarming-thing-about-climate-alarmism-1422832462?mod=rsswn
https://www.wsj.com/articles/climate-alarmists-may-inherit-the-wind-1522605526?mod=rsswn
https://www.wsj.com/articles/no-need-to-panic-about-global-warming-1386195856?mod=rsswn
https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-u-n-s-doomsday-climate-clock-1539645402?mod=rsswn
https://www.wsj.com/articles/environmentalists-need-to-get-real-1536010580?mod=rsswn
--------------------------------------------------------
