GM is pulling back on EVs

[RagmopInKona]

Or maybe, just maybe, the reason the results seem to all point in one direction is because that IS the direction…

Do you think that the scientists at the CSIRO (a government funded research group) got extra funding from the climate change denial government here when they kept finding results that conflicted with the governments preferences?
Or, is it more likely that most people have more integrity than that?

I kinda feel like your accusation is an admission of your own shortcomings. Maybe YOU don’t have that much integrity.

Yawn. some see this play out in person.
But carry on. Sell your ice gas hog, if climate change is your religion .
Fun facts, earth went through these same changes dozens of times, and without humans or industry . If you were HONEST ,You would stop with the hyperpole b/s. of the BIGGEST CASH GRAB IN HUMAN HISTORY.
CUZ, buddy, if earths climate changes dozen times without industry or humans, it will again no matter what we do.
Those that push this b/s are earning money through this farce , how they sleep at night knowing the fraud they are part of, judgement day they will not far well.

Sponsored

 

[K4fxd]

What were the predictions for “this winter”? Who made them? Where were they published? (Maybe I missed it)

I don't know the source. It was plastered over every news site, even the TV weather was predicting it. So much so I made sure I had good working heat tape on my pipes.

 

[sk47]

I kinda feel like your accusation is an admission of your own shortcomings. Maybe YOU don’t have that much integrity.

Exactly - judging the scientific world by his own low standards

It’s actually funny because these guys seem to think that scientists would suddenly be out of a job if they don’t come up with “the right answers”. As if the entire scientific world will suddenly stop measuring and recording the planet we live on if AGW is disproven.

I wonder how scientists got the funding to measure ocean levels and migratory patterns of birds (as just two examples) back in the days before AGW became an issue….?

Hello; I considered going back thru the Covid posts to find similar comments as these back a couple years ago. You know back when these guys were putting others down because we had a different take on the vaccines, masks or even natural immunity. Thing is I bet those who followed the threads can recall for yourself.

It was Covid before and currently it is man caused climate change. So, we who question have low integrity because we question. Used to be part of good science was to question and challenge. A thing, but not the only thing, is that we now have proof of how the medical science community was complicit in many ways during Covid and arguably did cause harm, but at the very least went along with an agenda not supported by the science.
The worst of the personal attacks, name calling and putdowns came when one of us posted something close to the truth. For me it was my stance about natural immunity. For others it was when the vaccine or mask effectiveness was challenged. You recall same as i do.

These personal attacks do accomplish sidetracking any productive discussion.

EDIT- Several time during my time as a science teacher I filled out requests for grants to get extra for my science classes. You do learn to write a proposal so it has a better chance to be approved by catering to the prevailing attitudes. It is simple enough. Get too far away and the grants are not approved.
I recall when computers in the classroom was the shinny new big thing. I tried to get funding for more hands on basic science equipment. Physical equipment which i could have used in my 7th and 8th grade classes to ground students in the basics. That proposal failed but my room got a shiny new computer. (this was during the 80's) Thing turned out all the money was spent on the computers, but none was set aside for software.
We wound up borrowing 5 1/4-inch floppy disks from the special ed teachers. They had lots of them. Problem was they were mostly games. I did find a couple with decent science content. One was a ballistics program that di fit into the science a bit. Did not last long tho. Only one computer so I set up a plan so the students rotated use of the computer until each had time with it. One constant troublemaker wanted to play games during his turn and when i did not have any, he damaged the fragile floppy disk beyond use.
My point being I wound up with an expensive but useless shiny new computer and not the hands-on equipment i could have used.

 

[Gregs24]

What were the predictions for “this winter”? Who made them? Where were they published? (Maybe I missed it)

This winter was a third winter in a row with a 'La Nina' pattern (unusual to have three in a row) and this winter a west based QBO which tends towards blocking in the northern hemisphere, which is exactly what we got. These 'drivers' of the weather are pretty well understood at a macro level but obviously local weather will vary within that macro framework.

Climate change is having an impact on these global drivers (of which there are a few) and these then impact on the weather at a regional and local level. These can make places drier, warmer, colder and wetter depending on where the patterns setup.

Unfortunately extremes get more extreme and frequent (hot, cold, wet or dry)

Increasing global average temperature by 1C DOES NOT just mean we all get 1C or so warmer, some will get MUCH warmer, some will get colder, some wetter some dry.

Of course I expect you realise all this because you are capable of doing basic research in the subject that doesn't involve MSN or Tucker !

 

[AZlb5.0]

After year of working with our government, propping up puppet governments world wide in 3rd and 2nd world countries, I knew the power of psychological operations. What I and those in my capacity did, helped those who tailored the Psyops messaging. I and others who did my job, would sit around and see how the news outlets(FOX MSNBC CNN Et Al) where working and pushing these agendas. We would laugh because we thought, in our ignorance, that the American people, for the most part, where smarter then to fall for these psyop campaigns. Where we ever so wrong.

 

[raptor17GT]

It’s actually funny because these guys seem to think that scientists would suddenly be out of a job if they don’t come up with “the right answers”. As if the entire scientific world will suddenly stop measuring and recording the planet we live on if AGW is disproven.

I wonder how scientists got the funding to measure ocean levels and migratory patterns of birds (as just two examples) back in the days before AGW became an issue….?

so i did some digging re the oil companies research back in the 1960's and 70's re burning fossil fuels. Aye, talk about falling down the rabbit hole. Turns out scientists working for the oil companies came up with same results / predictions as pretty much everyone has since. Who knew that science could be repeatable.. I said, who knew... you get the joke. The smoking gun seems to be the American Petroleum Institute 1968 paper.

Anyhow, would it surprise anyone if we find out big oil was paying car makers to continue to make ICE using fossil fuels as it continued to make big oil companies big profits. No i didn't think so. Follow the money eh ?

https://e360.yale.edu/features/climate-lawsuits-oil-industry-research

greenpeace because why not
https://www.greenpeace.org/usa/figh...sis/exxons-climate-denial-history-a-timeline/

exxon's own research from decades ago, pretty accurate as noted today
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/jan/12/exxon-climate-change-global-warming-research

good old BBC
https://www.bbc.com/mediacentre/2022/big-oil-vs-the-world


found this as well, 1959. P16 is interesting
https://www.documentcloud.org/docum...troleum-institute-study#document/p16/a2061940

Edit: decades ago not decade

Haven't read everything as it's a lot but yeah they knew, they knew damn well

 

[K4fxd]

Lawsuits huh? So it's all a money grab. In the 1960's and 70's they were ballyhooing about a coming ice age.

The Earth warms and cools naturally. Yea, lets sue the oil companies. Shakes head.

 

[AZlb5.0]

Lawsuits huh? So it's all a money grab. In the 1960's and 70's they were ballyhooing about a coming ice age.

The Earth warms and cools naturally. Yea, lets sue the oil companies. Shakes head.

You do have to understand that it’s an agenda. Fear though personal loss of rights and possessions. It’s working though.

 

[Burkey]

Lawsuits huh? So it's all a money grab. In the 1960's and 70's they were ballyhooing about a coming ice age.

The Earth warms and cools naturally. Yea, lets sue the oil companies. Shakes head.

1. Who were ”they”?
2. In what journal were they publishing their findings?
3. Was global cooling the established consensus among climatologists or was it more of a fringe theory or perhaps an idea that was worthy of some scrutiny? (All ideas are worthy of scrutiny).
4. Did you get this information from the scientific literature directly or were you relying on the media to provide you with an accurate depiction of what was being said and just how well supported it was by the scientific community at large?

It is absolutely true that there was some debate at the time (as there absolutely should be until the data is compelling), but to suggest that the majority of scientists thought the planet was going to start cooling in the coming decades isn’t a fair portrayal of the situation.

Nowadays, the debate rages around other areas of climate science, because the idea that carbon dioxide can warm the planet is irrefutable. The part that’s up for debate is by how much, and what the likely impacts might be.
Hell, they’ll even argue about the confidence level that should be attributed to each specific claim. Again, that’s exactly how it should be. Science isn’t a monolith.

 

[Burkey]

Hello; I considered going back thru the Covid posts to find similar comments as these back a couple years ago. You know back when these guys were putting others down because we had a different take on the vaccines, masks or even natural immunity. Thing is I bet those who followed the threads can recall for yourself.

It was Covid before and currently it is man caused climate change. So, we who question have low integrity because we question. Used to be part of good science was to question and challenge. A thing, but not the only thing, is that we now have proof of how the medical science community was complicit in many ways during Covid and arguably did cause harm, but at the very least went along with an agenda not supported by the science.
The worst of the personal attacks, name calling and putdowns came when one of us posted something close to the truth. For me it was my stance about natural immunity. For others it was when the vaccine or mask effectiveness was challenged. You recall same as i do.

These personal attacks do accomplish sidetracking any productive discussion.

EDIT- Several time during my time as a science teacher I filled out requests for grants to get extra for my science classes. You do learn to write a proposal so it has a better chance to be approved by catering to the prevailing attitudes. It is simple enough. Get too far away and the grants are not approved.
I recall when computers in the classroom was the shinny new big thing. I tried to get funding for more hands on basic science equipment. Physical equipment which i could have used in my 7th and 8th grade classes to ground students in the basics. That proposal failed but my room got a shiny new computer. (this was during the 80's) Thing turned out all the money was spent on the computers, but none was set aside for software.
We wound up borrowing 5 1/4-inch floppy disks from the special ed teachers. They had lots of them. Problem was they were mostly games. I did find a couple with decent science content. One was a ballistics program that di fit into the science a bit. Did not last long tho. Only one computer so I set up a plan so the students rotated use of the computer until each had time with it. One constant troublemaker wanted to play games during his turn and when i did not have any, he damaged the fragile floppy disk beyond use.
My point being I wound up with an expensive but useless shiny new computer and not the hands-on equipment i could have used.

My comment wasn’t intended as a put-down. It was the observation that a person who thinks that most people lack integrity, is most likely someone who lacks integrity themselves.

Put differently, from my perspective, there’s no amount of money that can buy my integrity. Why should I think that most people are THAT different from me?

Yeah sure, there are some people who can be bought and sold, but if you think that represents the majority, that says more about you than it does about them.

To be clear, for the “corruption” hypothesis to work, you’d literally have to be buying nearly every research scientist on the planet, along with the people involved in the peer-review process. You’re talking 100’s of thousands of people, some of them who probably hold traditionally conservative views. unless of course you believe that there’s almost nobody in science who votes red?

You‘re also ignoring that research will continue regardless of the findings. We don’t suddenly stop measuring the planet and its inhabitants if global warming turns out to be a hoax. Quite the opposite. The new line of questioning would be “how did we get it so wrong? We need to do MORE research”.

 

[K4fxd]

4. Did you get this information from the scientific literature directly or were you relying on the media to provide you with an accurate depiction of what was being said and just how well supported it was by the scientific community at large?

Science class in school

 

[K4fxd]

Then when it actually started warming they called it global warming. Then when it didn't warm as fast as they predicted they called it climate change.

Then wacko's like Gore and company and I call BS on it all especially since the earth has warmed and cooled several times since it was formed.

 

[Burkey]

Science class in school

So if your science teacher taught you that evolution wasn’t true, that would be an accurate representation of the scientific consensus?

I don’t need to take the piss out of you. You’re doing a stellar job all by yourself.

 

[K4fxd]

I'll say it again then I'll probably go back to just watching this thread for awhile.

The earth has warmed and cooled several times in the past. It is warming right now. Sometime in the future it will cool again. There is nothing we as humans can do to stop it. We will not die. We will adapt. The Jurassic period was lush with plant and animal life. It was 20F avg warmer and Co2 levels were somewhere above 3000 PPM. The Earth and life on it did not die, nor did the earth and life on it die when temps cooled off.

I'll go with Gates. Us going without heat A/C or efficient forms of transportation will not change anything.

 

[K4fxd]

So if your science teacher taught you that evolution wasn’t true, that would be an accurate representation of the scientific consensus?

All I can say is that was the approved curriculum at the time. Had nothing to do with any individual teacher. Just like right now, our kids are being taught the earth will not survive another 50 to 100 years due to us humans.

Sponsored