If you want to beleive anything about global warming then I'd advise tracing the information back to it's source and seeing just how credible it really is.
The scientific info is easy to trace back as there's no attempt made to cover up where it comes from. Often the arguments refuting global warming are almost impossible to trace to source and where they can be traced it often leads to individuals, obscue websites, front organisations and the media - none of which have credibility.
2007-08-08 15:21:03
·
answer #1
·
answered by Trevor 7
·
2⤊
4⤋
Here's the deal, anthropogenic emissions are PART of what is causing temperatures to rise. I have been saying that on this forum for years now. HOWEVER, the Republicans do have several good points. 1) The UN IPCC and the climatological community has COMICALLY over-estimated the sensitivity of the climate to these forcings. They have CONSISTENTLY come in well above actual observations. 2) The climatological community has engaged in an irresponsible downplaying of natural factors. Michael Mann's ridiculous hockey stick was an attempt to statistically massage the data to hide the fact that temperatures actually began to rise in the mid 1800s, LONG before carbon emissions were sufficient to explain them, and rose quite rapidly in the early 20th, again, before carbon emissions were large enough to explain such a rise. The late 20th cetury rise from the late 70s through the late 90s of course maps well to carbon emissions, especially in it's distribution (drier climates warmed more which is consistent with GW predictions). 3) The UN IPCC has also BADLY overstated the effects of the warming. It has actually been willing to flat out make stuff up along these lines. One example is when an official claimed that the entire Himalayan glacier was going to melt by 2100, and the Indian and Chinese govt scientists said it would not, and the IPCC official said they were engaging in "vodoo science" and derided them...and then had to admit later that he based his claim and ABSOLUTELY NO SCIENCE WHATSOEVER. Not studies or even back-of-the-cocktail-napkin calculations supported his claim. I see these kinds of deliberate exagerrations over and over and over, and yet the media never calls the climatological community to task for past mistakes. So are Republicans RIGHT about AGW? No. But they do have some good points.
2016-05-17 09:57:30
·
answer #2
·
answered by janice 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Big Oil won't lose a cent. They don't produce CO2 - they produce hydrocarbons. We are the ones who take it and produce CO2. As Harry H pointed out, any tax levied to decrease CO2 will be passed on to the consumer. Most non-OPEC Big Oil companies will probably increase profits because currently, demand outstrips supply, forcing them to purchase from OPEC countries. By artificially decreasing demand, they will be more able to cover this with domestic production and reserves, increasing their profit margin.
Who owns all the service stations that will be the easiest to retrofit to alternative fuels? Even if you could change the auto industry overnight, you couldn't change the fuel deliver infrastructure that quickly.
Since hydrogen powered and electric vehicles have considerably less range than their gasoline counterparts, how many more gasoline stations will be needed to support more frequent "fill-ups"? How much more will rural suppliers be able to charge, knowing that the buyer has less competition and less ability to drive until finding a cheaper station?
The least expensive source of hydrogen is "extracting" it from hydrocarbons - and who was it again that has this great supply of hydrocarbons? Yeah...Big Oil.
Do you believe the science of Global Warming, or are you simply refusing to believe whatever stance YOU THINK that Big Oil is endorsing?
2007-08-08 21:56:28
·
answer #3
·
answered by 3DM 5
·
1⤊
1⤋
Conservatives are much better at seeing the big picture than libreals. Sure its possible that big oil has their hand in some of the anti-man-made Global WArming stories. But we are smart enough to sniff this stuff out. That is why we are absolutely BESIDE ourselves regarding the shameless lobbying of liberal groups for the global warming cause. Many are flat-out lying, everyone knows it but the "Sky-Is-Falling" croud turns the other cheek because they are fighting for the same cause. And in the end they stand to profit BIG TIME by all of this. It is really sad. REAL scientists were outraged when they heard othe so-called scientists say that this debate was over. That is scientific blasphemy.
2007-08-08 14:47:58
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
1⤋
Not just the big Oil guys but also the Big Coal guys as well, and I don't listen to any of those guys I believe what I see and yes I see the earth is heating up but not for man made issues but for natural cycles and that I didn't get from those big guys and no I don't work for them either, I'm just a simple college student trying to get a degree in elementary Education.......
2007-08-08 16:13:43
·
answer #5
·
answered by william8_5 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
Exactly! You took the words right out of my mouth!
Look into these oil companies and energy conglomerates:
British Petroleum (BP), Royal Dutch Shell (Shell), Sunoco, Con Edison, Sun Edison, General Electric, Duke Energy, and Alcan.
Guess what? They have always supported the alarmists. Alarmism artificially raises the price of energy. Look them up, don't be lazy.
By the way, a carbon tax doesn't hurt the gas company. That cost simply gets passed on to you, the consumer. If there is no alternative energy to gas, what are you gonna do? Pay!
Check out how BP is destroying the environment in Brazil to help stop global warming:
http://www.carbontradewatch.org/news/0707_A_gift_from_Scotland_to_Brazil_drought_and_despair.html
Check out DuPont and their plan to make lots of money off global warming by selling synthetic chemicals that will replace CO2 emissions with toxic waste.
http://www2.dupont.com/Media_Center/en_US/position_statements/global_climate.html
Check out how this plan is working in India which is pumping HFC which is 11,000 times more powerful a greenhouse gas then CO2 and is also toxic to life (scroll down to the 13th paragraph if you are too lazy to read.)
http://business.guardian.co.uk/story/0,,2093816,00.html
Wonder why LIBERAL ACTIVISTS ALL OVER THE WORLD are fighting for climate justice:
http://www.tni.org/list_page.phtml?&keywords=CARB&show_orderby_form=N
http://www.seen.org/
http://www.ejcc.org/
http://www.carbontradewatch.org/
See who is behind such companies as Carbon Investments, Generation Investment Management etc and the Carbon Trade Industry, Carbon Offset companies, and a carbon tax system. All your big wig multinational corporations.
You may realize that all this focus on Exxon/Mobil is quite silly when there are bigger corporate interests that want us to believe in Global warming.
Tremendous amounts of money is going to be spent on climate change instead of real problems facing the world like hunger, economic development of the third world, clean water, fighting disease, conservation of natural forests. Already billions and billions of dollars are spent every year on Global warming that could have gone to feed all the worlds hungry people! Imagine that! Tremendous amounts of money are being funneled into a hoax that is being blamed for everything you can imagine.
Something as natural as CO2 is the focus of an emerging industry. Tremendous money is going into controlling this bogeyman instead of the real environmental problems and the problem of world poverty.
Please do your own research and then respond to what I'm saying. There is more money and corporate lobbyists on the side of Global Warming. That is why the media is saturated with Global warming alarmism. Follow where the money is being spent and by who. There are voices being shut so that you think the screaming is coming only from Fox News and Rush Limbaugh. But it is NOT WHAT YOU THINK IT IS! The real voices have been silenced. In the meantime legistlation is being passed all over the world which will give multinational corporations dominance over the atmoshpere!
2007-08-08 14:40:08
·
answer #6
·
answered by Harry H 2
·
5⤊
3⤋
These people aren't paid, you need to think about the issue from their point of view.
It's hard to explain this to people with so thick skulls shielding such small brains. We only hear about this bullsqueeze is because if a politician says he'll save your children from an apocalyptic hell of global warming, he's gonna get your vote. If he passes a bill to fund bridge repair (yawn), he's not going to stay in office for long.
You should be thankful for "Big Oil", without it you wouldn't be driving your car to work everyday.
2007-08-08 14:35:39
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
Can you show me a web site or a link, which shows a financial analysis of the concerts. I'd like to know how much actually went into helkping do something about global warming., and how much went into"retained earlings, " (Translation: PROFIT!
2007-08-08 14:04:33
·
answer #8
·
answered by Barry auh2o 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
why believe Al Gore that its real? he uses the same amount of electricity a month that a normal person uses in a year.
2007-08-08 13:53:55
·
answer #9
·
answered by Reality Has A Libertarian Bias 6
·
3⤊
2⤋
Why believe failed politicians and Hollywood celebrities?
2007-08-08 14:05:06
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
1⤋