This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
NY Attorney General Launches Crack Down On Exxon Over Global Warming Denial
Last May, when the Obama administration was furiously cracking down on the Kremlin in the aftermath of the CIA-backed Ukraine presidential coup and the resulting "territorial expansion" by Russia which promptly took over the Crimea peninsula (and is on its way to annexing the Donetsk republic) with attempts to "isolate" Russia, one prominent US company dared to defy the White House embargo and extended its partnership with Moscow.
This is what we posted last May: "Several of the largest oil companies in the world are doubling down in Russia despite moves by the West to isolate Russia and its economy. ExxonMobil and BP separately signed agreements with Rosneft – Russia’s state-owned oil company – to extend and deepen their relationships for energy exploration. The U.S. slapped sanctions on Rosneft’s CEO Igor Sechin in late April, freezing his assets and preventing him from obtaining visas.
However, the sanctions do not extend to Rosneft itself, allowing western companies to continue to do business with the Russian oil giant. ExxonMobil signed an agreement with Rosneft, extending its partnership to build a liquefied natural gas (LNG) terminal on Russia’s pacific coast. Known as the Far East LNG project, the export terminal will receive natural gas from Russia’s eastern fields as well as from Sakhalin-1, an island off Russia’s east coast. Rosneft announced the deal in a press release on its website on May 23.
By defying the White House, the oil majors salvaged what would have otherwise been an embarrassing event for the Kremlin. The absence of the world’s largest companies would have demonstrated Russia’s increasing isolation. Instead, Russia used the event to detail plans to expand its massive energy sector. “(They're) eager to continue work on projects in Russia,” Russia’s Energy Minister Alexander Novak said of ExxonMobil and Royal Dutch Shell.
To be clear, the oil companies are not legally running afoul of international sanctions. But their collective shrug in the face of European and American pressure to boycott Russia – along with the $400 billion natural gas deal Russia signed with China last week – illustrates the difficulty with which the West will have at undermining Russia’s energy sector, if it chose to do so. Russia is too big of a prize for the likes of ExxonMobil, BP, and Shell. Or viewed another way, the moves to deepen business in Russia suggest that the world’s biggest oil companies are confident that the U.S. and Europe won’t be so bold as to truly attack Russia’s energy machine.
To be sure, back than oil was over $100, and perhaps now that it is below $50 a different reality would have been unveiled, but for all intents and purposes, the take home was that while Obama was scrambling to show a united front in his ideological war against Russia, Exxon dared to cross Obama's latest "red" line.
And now it's payback time.
As the NYT reports, the New York AG has "begun a sweeping investigation of Exxon Mobil to determine whether the company lied to the public about the risks of climate change or to investors about how those risks might hurt the oil business."
According to people with knowledge of the investigation, Attorney General Eric T. Schneiderman issued a subpoena Wednesday evening to Exxon Mobil, demanding extensive financial records, emails and other documents.
The NYT adds that "the focus includes the company’s activities dating to the late 1970s, including a period of at least a decade when Exxon Mobil funded groups that sought to undermine climate science."
It is unclear just which science is envisioned: perhaps the "science" that was purchased thanks to the more than $79 billion in "climate change" money spent in the 21st century as the infamous 2009 Climate Money report by Joanne Nova revealed.
Or perhaps it was the "science" that Australia PM Tony Abbott dared to challenge? Recall Abbott previously questioned the reliability of climate science, and had proceed to probe the "statistics and data" behind the Australian Bureau of Meteorology. This "probe" threatened a potentially massive revenue stream for Goldman in the form of carbon credits, and which is why Abbott was replaced by Malcolm Turnbull: a former Chairman of Goldman Sachs Australia from 1997 to 2001.
Which "science" the NY AG is referring to is unclear, but one thing is clear: Exxon has dared to deny "climate change" and now it must be punished. As the NYT says "a major focus of the investigation is whether the company adequately warned investors about potential financial risks stemming from society’s need to limit fossil-fuel use."
A "need" spearheaded, incidentally, by the "bleeding heart humanitarian" and infinite humanist, Goldman Sachs, which stands to make billions from such programs as cap-and-trade. Here is a quick reminder of just how Goldman's profit motive is aligned with the "science" Obama finds beneficial to society, from 2009:
it’s early June in Washington, D.C. Barack Obama, a popular young politician whose leading private campaign donor was an investment bank called Goldman Sachs – its employees paid some $981,000 to his campaign – sits in the White House. Having seamlessly navigated the political minefield of the bailout era, Goldman is once again back to its old business, scouting out loopholes in a new government-created market with the aid of a new set of alumni occupying key government jobs.Gone are HankPaulson and Neel Kashkari; in their place are Treasury chief of staff Mark Patterson and CFTC chief Gary Gensler, both former Goldmanites. (Gensler was the firm’s co-head of finance.) And instead of credit derivatives or oil futures or mortgage-backed CDOs, the new game in town, the next bubble, is in carbon credits – a booming trillion dollar market that barely even exists yet, but will if the Democratic Party that it gave $4,452,585 to in the last election manages to push into existence a groundbreaking new commodities bubble, disguised as an “environmental plan,” called cap-and-trade.
The new carbon-credit market is a virtual repeat of the commodities-market casino that’s been kind to Goldman, except it has one delicious new wrinkle: If the plan goes forward as expected, the rise in prices will be government-mandated. Goldman won’t even have to rig the game. It will be rigged in advance.
Here’s how it works: If the bill passes, there will be limits for coal plants, utilities, natural-gas distributors and numerous other industries on the amount of carbon emissions (a.k.a. greenhouse gases) they can produce per year. If the companies go over their allotment, they will be able to buy “allocations” or credits from other companies that have managed to produce fewer emissions: President Obama conservatively estimates that about $646 billion worth of carbon credits will be auctioned in the first seven years; one of his top economic aides speculates that the real number might be twice or even three times that amount.
The feature of this plan that has special appeal to speculators is that the “cap” on carbon will be continually lowered by the government, which means that carbon credits will become more and more scarce with each passing year. Which means that this is a brand-new commodities market where the main commodity to be traded is guaranteed to rise in price over time. The volume of this new market will be upwards of a trillion dollars annually; for comparison’s sake, the annual combined revenues of all’ electricity suppliers in the U.S. total $320 billion.
Goldman wants this bill. The plan is (1) to get in on the ground floor of paradigm-shifting legislation, (2) make sure that they’re the profit-making slice of that paradigm and (3) make sure the slice is a big slice. Goldman started pushing hard for cap-and-trade long ago, but things really ramped up last year when the firm spent $3.5 million to lobby climate issues. (One of their lobbyists at the time was none other than Patterson, now Treasury chief ofstaff.) Back in 2005, when Hank Paulson was chief of Goldman, he personally helped author the bank’s environmental policy, a document that contains some surprising elements for a firm that in all other areas has been consistently opposed to any sort of government regulation. Paulson’s report argued that “voluntary action alone cannot solve the climate-change problem.” A few years later, the bank’s carbon chief, Ken Newcombe, insisted that cap-and-trade alone won’t be enough to fix the climate problem and called for further public investments in research and development. Which is convenient, considering that Goldman made early investments in wind power (it bought a subsidiary called Horizon Wind Energy), renewable diesel (it is an investor in a firm called Changing World Technologies) and solar power (it partnered with BP Solar), exactly the kind of deals that will prosper if the government forces energy producers to use cleaner energy. As Paulson said at the time, “We’re not making those investments to lose money.”
* * *
Cap-and-trade is going to happen. Or, if it doesn’t, something like it will. The moral is the same as for all the other bubbles that Goldman helped create, from 1929 to 2009. In almost every case, the very same bank that behaved recklessly for years, weighing down the system with toxic loans and predatory debt, and accomplishing nothing but massive bonuses for a few bosses, has been rewarded with mountains of virtually free money and government guarantees – while the actual victims in this mess, ordinary taxpayers, are the ones paying for it.
And, best of all, Goldman's next and potentially perhaps largest ever revenue stream has the cover of doing what is "socially right", and is, according to the NY AG, "backed by science."
That, in a nutshell, are the two sides of the "climate change" debate, and without taking either side, we show whose financial interests are most at stake.
But back to Exxon, whose financial interests are certainly at stake now that it is suddenly in the crosshairs of allegedly denying "climate change", a charge which will result in billions in settlement fees or worse.
Here is the NYT:
The Exxon Mobil investigation might expand further, to encompass other oil companies, according to the people with knowledge of the case, though no additional subpoenas have been issued to date.
The people spoke on the condition they not be identified. The Martin Act, a New York state law, confers on the attorney general broad powers to investigate financial fraud.
Mr. Schneiderman’s decision to scrutinize the fossil-fuel companies may well open a sweeping new legal front in the battle over climate change. To date, lawsuits trying to hold fossil-fuel companies accountable for the damage they are causing to the climate have been failing in the courts, but most of those have been pursued by private plaintiffs.
Attorneys general for other states could join in Mr. Schneiderman’s efforts, bringing far greater investigative and legal resources to bear on the issue. Some experts see the potential for a legal assault on fossil fuel companies similar to the lawsuits against the tobacco companies in recent decades, costing those companies tens of billions of dollars in penalties.
“This could open up years of litigation and settlements in the same way that tobacco litigation did, also spearheaded by attorneys general,” said Brandon L. Garrett, a professor at the University of Virginia law school. “In some ways, the theory is similar — that the public was misled about something dangerous to health. Whether the same smoking guns will emerge, we don’t know yet.”
The premise behind the probe is whether Exxon was "funding", and thus influencing, the other side of the argument, namely "deniers".
The sources said the attorney general’s investigation of Exxon Mobil began a year ago, focusing initially on what the company had told investors over the course of decades about the risks that climate change might pose to its business.
News reporting in the last eight months added impetus to the investigation, the sources said. In February, several news organizations, including The New York Times, reported that a Smithsonian researcher who had published papers questioning established climate science, Wei-Hock Soon, had received extensive funds from fossil fuel companies, including Exxon Mobil, without disclosing them.
This reminds us of the NYT's other expose on "pay-for-research" professors such as University of Houston's very own Craig Pirrong who recently made waves reporting that commodity traders are not a "systemic risk" when it quickly became clear that they are. However, the truth is that there have been such anti-intellectual mercenaries for decades: people who will goalseek a conclusion to benefit the party that commissioned the study; Pirrong is just one of them, Wei-Hock Soon may be another, but what about the tens of billions spent to fund research slamming "climate change deniers" which incidentally, is far more prevalent and far more pervasive among the progressive media than the counter?
Logic aside what happens next is that "climate change deniers" will be treated just the same as big tobacco.
That struck some experts as similar to the activities of tobacco companies that had contrived scientific papers to suggest that smoking was safe, ultimately leading to court findings that they had defrauded the public.
More recently, Inside Climate News and The Los Angeles Times have reported that Exxon Mobil was well aware of the risks of climate change from its own scientific research, and used that research in its long-term planning for activities like drilling in the Arctic, even as it funded groups from the 1990s to the mid-2000s that denied serious climate risks.
To be sure, Exxon has a different take on things.
Mr. Cohen, of Exxon, said on Thursday that the company had made common cause with such groups largely because it agreed with them on a policy goal of keeping the United States out of a global climate treaty called the Kyoto Protocol.
Ah yes, the Kyoto Protocol treaty which commits member states to reduce greenhouse gases emissions, and which the overly sensitive about global climate change United States (together with India and China) has refused to sign and has said will not ratify any treaty that will commit it from legally reducing CO2 emissions.
It is almost as if the US is applying a double standard: one when applying moral suasion in preaching what is good for the public, and why Exxon must be punished, and a totally different one when actually implementing the pursuit of reducing cabon emissions.
But everyone knows the US would never do that.
As for Exxon, "Wall Street analysts reacted to the legal action against Exxon Mobil with mixed concerns about a company that, like other oil and gas companies, is already suffering from a plunge in commodity prices. "This is not good news for Exxon Mobil or Exxon Mobil shareholders,” said Fadel Gheit, a senior oil company analyst at Oppenheimer & Company. “It’s a negative, though how much damage there will be to reputation or performance is very hard to say.”
Brian Youngberg, senior energy analyst at Edward Jones, said, “There is headline risk, but the actual financial impact will not affect the company for a long time, if ever. I think there will be a modest overhang.”
And that is precisely what Obama wants: to keep a lid, both literally and metaphorically, on yet another sector, and have all the leverage (mostly monetarily) over an industry that for the past decade was one of the few bright spots in the US economy. Because soon energy companies, like banks, like biotechs, are about to become another "utility" of the government which will decide just how much profit is fair, and how much isn't... and has to go into the government's pocket.
More importantly, as the title suggest, with this salvo, it is now open season on "climate change deniers" everywhere. And it will certainly teach companies far and wide to defy Obama in public and make a global mockery of his ironclad foreign policy.
- 1180 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -


An institutionalized secular religion with believers being a minority of the populace. Historically, this has been called totalitarian.
If you believe in nothing, you'll believe in anything. I'm too lazy to find the citation. - Ned
FUCK THIS FUCKING SHIT. IF THE MOTHERFUCKING GLOBAL WARMING CLOWNS WANT A FUCKING WAR, THEN IT'S TIME TO GIVE IT TO THEM.
Everyone just seems to vent on their keyboard
Naw, it's just easy.
We are tuning our engines, mixing nitro-methane, checking tire pressure, and getting ready to hole-shot the bastards off-the-line, hotrod.
So Goldman wants a piece of the action that picks every persons pocket because you know that all extra energy costs will be passed to the consumer. People need to wake up
Actually...
If governments demand more taxes for "global warming" they admit responsability.
SO!
After every big storm
After every hot day, a day above the 200 year average...
They become responsible and can be sued if they didn't do all in their power to prevent it.
And all damages should be paid asap to the person.
Won't happen off course but how can they defend a tax if they only spend 1% on the environnement?
A park won't do it because that's cityplanning.
Will they buy land an create forests?
Will they forcefeed us insects because a steak uses 3000 liters of water to produce?
And how do they defend geoengineering that actually causes the warming effect?
So this is a WORLD WIDE TAX
Actually no, it's extorting Exxon for right now, to be followed by a world wide tax on only WESTERN COUNTRIES because clearly, implementing a tax to be paid by corporations (really you and I as the corp just passes the cost of doing business to us) is computer model proven to arrest global warming!...lmao!
They are NOT extorting Exxon.
They are attempting to SILENCE them.
Obama doesn't really need the money.
He was probably smoking a Virginia Slim cigarette and sucking down a 32 oz diet soda while typing his manifesto.
Too funny.
I really don't want to move to Russia.
Seems like that is the only viable bugout location left.
I can make a good living in China, but the pollution is too bad.
What do the energy producers care they will just pass the cost along. I think BARRY did his job and that is why he gets to spend billions in his final year. ACA biggest tax increase ever
U.N. wants to criminalize man-made climate change skeptics, too:
It is high past time to disband the UN and its farcical human rights commission among other things
That was brilliant! The Earth sitting in the middle of the Syrian desert.
[WordPlay]
I'm sure all of the NOAA/NASA ground sensors are floating on tethers just above the ground, with direct feeds into UTAH.
Come get me you Commie Soro's "One World", {late stage} syphilis infected losers.
Umm who are you and how did you get picture posting cred??
Some are more equal than others ;-)
¿ Liers v deniers ?
I G Y
MOARRRR WE NEEED MOAAAAAR TAXES. AND YOU EVIL PEOPLE BURNING OIL AND CREATING THE NON EXISTANT CLIMATE CHANGE PROBLEM MUST PAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! MOAR I SAY YOU PEASANTS!
this is what happens when the sight of commie blood can't be countenanced. only salvation.
Shouldn’t attorney generals be going after Exxon for shielding their income in Panama?
Most of Exxon’s profits are taken on the ledger in Panama, where there is no income tax.
Exxon boosts input prices of crude before Tankers off load in Texas Gulf Refineries. The refinery input price is calibrated so the refinery makes the minimum required profit, and hence has low taxes.
This action forces U.S. government to tax income on individuals at a higher rate than they would otherwise. Since income taxes are regressive, then sheeple are forbidden from savings and being able to be entrepreneurial. The big company gets bigger.
Russia is NOT going to let their economy become debt laden to foreign dollar denominated big banks. There will be no “economic hit” on Russia, to then take over the country.
Russia has now inoculated itself against most of the known full spectrum attack means. Isolating NGO’s was the latest Russian move to insulate her body politic.
The Treason law, which prohibits spy operations that use NGO as a front:
Updates to the anti-treason law and new internet laws are here:
http://www.icnl.org/research/monitor/russia.html
It further delineates when a NGO is acting as foreign agent, and when it should be registered, basically as a spy operations.
The new blogger law confuses me a bit. From a Russian perspective it could keep out propaganda, as it states that the information needs to be accurate. It looks like it will encourage lots of smaller websites:
“which stipulates that any website with more than 3,000 visitors daily will be responsible for the accuracy of all information published and that search engines and social networks maintain computer records on Russian soil of everything posted for the previous six months, with fines for violators that can reach up to $142,000.”
With regards to the ARTIC, Russia is moving ahead with their portable nuclear reactors, and staking claims.
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/energy/2013/10/131023-russia-floating-nuclear-power-plants/
If you are not using the current system, you are snoozing.
And dead.
Yup. Nor do people understand the implications of President Putin's address to the UNGA 28SEP15 on AGW. I said here many moons ago that it won't be Hugo Chavez pounding the podium in Paris...
"CONVENING A SPECIAL FORUM"
Paris is the de facto end of the road for the "controlled opposition" United Nations.
ALL roads lead to Paris.
Well there it is. The marriage of (climate change) church and state.
WHO DECIDES how this WORLD WIDE TAX is going to be spent
Silly. silly (rhetorical) question.
I thought it was renamed again to climate chaos. Which is certainly on its way per the headlines.
What temperature do those Aviation Thermobaric Bombs operate at?
FAEs can get into plasma regime with respectable EMP if configured right.
Collapsing of our Atmosphere - YouRTubeNews
2MIN News October 26, 2012 - YouTube
If it's moving, tax it. Watch if they can dodge a 30 clip automatic weapon.
Science so needs the support of a political attorney general. The entire system will be improved by the AG's interest, yes it will step up everyone's game and focus on the science, not the politics and who turned who in.
Ted Striker: Surely you can't be serious.
Rumack: I am serious... and don't call me Shirley.
Will 'truth' not be a defense here, either?
Such as evidence that there has been no warming for 15+ years, no crazy superstorms bearing down on us constantly, wildly inaccurate models that don't account for variations either in the sun's energy or the earth's orbit?
In other words, it will be very important that the crime be understood as *disagreeing* with what the Inner Party has declared true.
The "facts of the matter" simply don't enter into the thing.
Exactly.
Will "the NY state attorney general" now subpoena NASA officials for hiding the FACT of the ice growth in Antarctica this year? I mean WTF?! What, did they just get a call from some ship captain saying "Ya know, all this ice is really fucking up our shipping lanes here. What does your "computer model" say about all this, should we just plow on through...is it real?"
These fucking people are incomprehensible.
your question answers itself.
See, thats exactly what I'm talking about.
Its the omnipotent Naaazzzaaahhh, they want everyone in the world to believe they've got the planet covered under its solitary glowering eyeball...and they can't see this massive ice cap forming...ALL-SEASON-LONG?
Why...that's "suppression of evidence" counselor ;-)
Decade of global cooling coming...
http://www.express.co.uk/news/science/616937/GLOBAL-COOLING-Decade-long-ice-age-predicted-as-sun-hibernates
Wait, you mean the government is going to extort money out of the businesses that produce the necessities of life and employ people? I'm shocked. Then the oil companies pay a multibillion dollar settlement to the government and then fire people to cut costs and raise energy prices 50% to consumers to cover the costs as has been done in tobacco and so many other businesses.
I remember when they nailed the tobacco companies claiming that they wanted the money to pay for educating kids about the dangers of smoking and paying for health issues caused by tobacco. Then, they got the money and spent the large majority on of it on everything but those things.
The Federal and State governments have learned well from the mafia.
I think you got it ass-backwards. One mafia got so big and powerful it started calling itself government. As they say, if it smells like shit, feels like shit and tastes like shit, it is imost likely government.
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act. George Orwell.
Please watch, educate others. Thank you.
"If I wanted America to fail" - YouTube
Not sure if "Atlas shrugged" Or "Idiocracy"...
We were taught to hide under a wooden desk for nuclear drills. Global cooling was the bullshit sold back then. Call it mid- 1970's.
In the last 20 years CO2 has increased by ~10% (40 ppm). Yet, there has been no change in global average temperatures as measured radiometrically by satallites covering both ocean (70%) and land surface areas. So, the short term experiment shows CO2 absorbance at the current concentrations has no effect on global mean temperatures. That's without dispute. Prior to the satallite era temperature measurements were not global in scope (pretty hard to continuously measure the mid ocean troposphere temperature without radiometry from above). So, data for the 1850 to 1980 period were based mainly on land based thermometry and "extrapolated" to locations where people didn't live (deserts, mountains, and oceans). So, serously flawed methodology to say the least. But on a longer time scale (hundreds of thousands of years) ice core temperature data is unambiguous, there is no causal link between CO2 and global T. In fact, the observation is first T increases and then with a time lag of several hundred years, CO2 levels increase (probably due to outgassing of CO2 from the oceans). When you understand the Beer-Lambert aborbance law and concentration dependence of the absorbance strength this is easy to understand. Namely, 90% of the greenhouse absorbance of 15 micron radiation trapped by CO2 occurs in the first 20 ppm of its addition to the troposphere. Its so weak after that level is reached natural variation such as cloulds and the hydrological cycle will totally dominate climate. Which agrees nicely with modern observations.
Ain't the scientific method great? Beats superstitions and AGW religion 7 days of the week and through 100 thousands of years.
Undermine so-called 'climate science?'
If it goes back that far, then the so-called 'scientific consensus' was for Global Cooling.
Galileo is rolling in his grave.
- Ned
What everyone seems to have overlooked (of course) is that the AG could spend 18 months coming to the conclusion that Exxon is clean, or there will be a tiny wrist-slap "harshly worded rebuke" and maybe a fine. Exxon will have to donate to a habitat restoration fund, which they will leverage for marketing purposes.
You know that's how it will go.
AGW will not have it's day this decade, at least. We are a few years (maybe a few major climate disasters) away from anybody giving two shits. Though after they give a shit, all bets are suddenly off. It will be really fun to watch the masses lose their collective minds and go all out beast mode on the global corporations have been mind-fucking them for 50 years.
Something to look forward to.
Four Legs Good:
What is a "Climate Disaster?" I'm having (beef) chili tonight, no beans, but kinda' hot.
I'm expecting to have two shits by tomorrow.
Does that count?
- Ned
You don't recognize a climate disaster until after it happens. Same as you don't recognize most anything else until after. Sometimes, long after. But a climate disaster will mess with people at the time and they'll feel it. They won't know what is happening to them, all they'll know is that they are really afraid. They'll lash out at the wrongs things in the wrong way as a result, everyone will be pointing fingers, and then a while later someone will notice that a significant component of how people used to live their lives -- is gone. Or is unrecognizable. Or is beyond endurance. They'll look around and not even knowing why they will know that they cannot continue.
Won't be the same planet we evolved to fill. Don't see how that works out at all.
so climate disasters are like Greenspan or Yellin bubbles?
I think there are lotsa' folk around here who see dem bubblez.
Or, since they can't be detected, are climate disasters preventable? Who is to say that the prescriptions (all of which boil down to moar taxes and less freedom) make the problem worse when they might be put into effect.
How do YOU know? Gawd I love this kinda' science. Too bad I can't sell into it.
- Ned
A "climate disaster" for cougar is when the commercial power goes out and it's cloudy outside, with no wind and she has guests coming for dinner ;-)
Well I guess that puts me in my place, doesn't it.
Climate disasters are not bubbles. There is no forgiving cycle of up and down, no do-over. Climate disasters are bottomless holes into which everthing falls dragging everything else with it.
Go to Easter Island. Walk the grand streets, talk to the clever natives, hike in the vast and shaded forest.
Not going to happen. Go to Easter Island and you'll not see any of those things anymore. That was not even a climate disaster, just one island where people completely over-shot everything. The hole opened and swallowed them up and we have no idea of any kind who they were or where they went. Just gone and their whole world gone.
No, they cannot be prevented. That's where I wonder why we're even bothering now. I run climate simulations on my computer, I don't think the effort will ever pay off. The damage is already done. Maybe the models will be part of knowing where things will fall apart first or fastest -- where the hole will open under whose feet. But probably not even that.
It's hopeless, I'm afraid. If something bad might come, then it's just coming now. We can ignore that or wait for it but it doesn't matter, it's just coming now. We'll discover how bad it is just in time to look up and see it on the horizon devouring everything.
Just like on Easter Island. They vanished so fast they didn't even leave us a note.
The only climate disaster that *might* be happening is going into a cold phase.
the Mayans believed in climate change and most explicitly human caused climate change. Their solution, their 'human" response, was murdering people on an alter to their "climate gods".
The climate, be it caused by whatever, has been fucking with us from the beginning of time, and for those "scientists' out there, they will concede that it has been a significant driver of EVOLUTION. What is odd is that while acknowledging and being absolute in their acceptance of evolution, will equally and absolutely believe they can alter its ongoing effects as well as ignore every underlying feature of life on this planet that it has created. We are who we are BECAUSE of climate change. We are a result of our ENVIRONMENT.
I sit here and watch a young puppy demonstrating its evolutionary nature to bury its bones, having never been taught this by another animal. It just knows. Yet we can look at people, at cultures and races that have evolved within their own environments, and absolutely deny that they have any specific underlying characteristics and "natural" tendencies, weaknesses or abilities, as that would be racist or sexist or otherwise "phobic".
It's humanity, it's weather. Live with it...or don't.
browser crash is on you. Hahahahaha. Still logged in. Better check your log files.
How many financial crimes happened in NY on wall street, and Schneiderman uses the Martin Act for this?!?!?!?! Doesnt anyone notice this? I feel like Im taking crazy pills!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ilcRS5eUpwk
We are collecting to IP addresses. It doesn't look good for you.
/smiles
Jamie Gorelick likes Abengoa
I guess sanctions aren't what they used to be?
Puff---Puff, the "petro dollar" is dead.
Stealing social security, pension funds to ramp up oil. Then you're selling battery / windmill / Solar to merge the broken European Union to buy off the stupid debt. Do you think we aren't fucking stupid?
You're cunts that think we are going to merge the debt. The EU created it's fucked up free money marxists system.
We have 300,000 million people that will execute you for central banker planning.
Give it a try. The negro president will be hidden. Once he becomes a nigger on the run, I'll tell everyone were he's hiding. Cannot until we take over this country. Have to do it legally.
Queer is the new Tranny Movement. Thank goodness TX told them to fuck themselves in the desert.
I love this guy from Africa in 2011. He makes Obama what he is. A faggot!
The Queers now want to manipulate and control the world using money,this is the system of the anti Christ. i urge my fellow africans to refuse bribery unto sin, and walk in holiness to the end even if you suffer,this world is temporary and passing, we will enjoy heaven soon the eternal is important the temporary things of this world fades, and perishes.
END GAME OF QUEERS & PERVERTS - YouTube
This has to stop. We have to stand up as patriotic Americans and demonstrate, at the point of a gun, that this corruption will not stand and we wont negotiate, or compromise or have a "national conversation" about it. Anyone who doesnt agree with us is welcome to try and stop us...but they better be armed and willing to die because we are. DC is a small place... How many of us would it actually take to occupy it? Though we may have to go after the traitors who own the media first to make organization easier. Police and military would stand down and lots would join our ranks. If the CIA can organize isis in short order, why cant we organize enough men? where are the oathkeepers? why arent men that have large audiences trying to organize?...Alex Jones, James Wesley Rawles, oathkeepers. We have lots of guns, PMs and food, whats mine is yours as long as we're in it together. Its do or die time and its our duty. If we dont our country and our kids futures are toast.
What are you fighting for, exactly? Unless you can clearly articulate that then I don't think anyone will join you. Not a soul. Just so you know.
And you probably need to evaluate what lots is because I'm pretty sure that unless you're a millionaire couple times over you don't have anything near enough of anything you listed.
It would take about 50K armed men to make any kind of dent. "Fighting" (whatever that means) for months or years. Maybe the Russians would air-drop you ammo and supplies and send in "advisors", or the ChiComms or Norks, you want to keep company like that? Once you blow shit out pf DC they'll just come in with a UN charter and take over "humanitarian mission" and all that, set up a provisional government to broker a cease fire between your leader (someone you never heard of) and some oligarch in DC who would love to take/share power without an election. Refuse to negotiate and you'll be firing on English and Australian troops. Funny that, the English back at Concorde except with APCs and attack helicopters.
In California we'll be watching them blast you out of bunkers and wondering what the fuck got into those hillbillies anyway.
So, great TV. I think you should just do it.
People fight back initially by sharing their feelings with their neighbors, family, and friends. The Banksters and their co-religionists (the Khazarian mafia) cannot withstand the public laughing at them. The Russians got rid of the Communists using passive resistance and humor; ordinary citizens became unafraid to talk in public against the crap the same Khazarian mafia was doing in Russia as they are doing in the West. We are just as smart if not smarter (thanks to less inbreeding) and outnumber them 100 to 1.
"It would take about 50K armed men to make any kind of dent."
Or a 1000 with screwdrivers to take it down completely in a week.
Count me in, I got some tools last Christmas.
Obviously the best way to fight or resist oppression is to proclaim its ultimate futility.
Thanks
If there were internets then, the ZH headline would be "NY Attorney General Launches Crack Down On Phillip Morris Over Tobbacco Causing Cancer Denial". You know how much Big Oil took from the 7 dwarfs of then...
This is the research Exxon covered, is its own.
http://insideclimatenews.org/content/exxon-road-not-taken
Counter sue the fuckers and bankrupt the state...oh wait.
In this instance its up to the NY loser general to prove his case
What about all the hot air,CO2 and methane emmitted from Schneiderman that is causing climate change? Can we sue him for that?
Schneiderman......
tribe member?
welcome to the New Cultural Revolution.
It's not like a NY Attorney General would be busy with prosecuting bankers or anything so he needs something to pass the time between elections.
Humans blamed for climate change becomes more HYPER-COMPLICATED, the more that one attempts to investigate that ...
When it comes to any articles that raise issues regarding the environment, the typical patterns of comments and voting on Zero Hedge manifest the ways that cynicism can be pushed to the point of stupidity.
The overall basic social situation is civilization NECESSARILY operates according to the principles and methods of organized crime, since social pyramid systems were always based upon backing up lies with violence, which gradually became the currently established political economy based upon governments ENFORCING FRAUDS by privately controlled banks.
That is the background to the various ways that the funding of the scientific enterprise can bias the outcomes of that enterprise. The history of science was full of compromises that the philosophy of science made with the biggest bullies' bullshit world view. The pyramidion people in the social pyramid systems always have had evil ulterior agendas, the most important of which are now the systems of debt slavery, backed by wars based on deceits. Since that is the basic background, that everything operates through the social pyramid systems of Neolithic Civilization, the potential to engage in genuine science becomes EXTREMELY HYPER-COMPLICATED.
In my view, there has been an abundance of relatively valid science which has been developed, while bits and pieces of that can be applied through attempts to better understand climate science, and the roles that human beings might be playing to influence that. However, doing so is far from straightforward, due to the ways that civilization actually operates according to the principles and methods of organized crime.
Quite paradoxically, the oldest and best developed forms of social science and social engineering were warfare, whose success was based upon deceits and treacheries. Thousands of years of those developments have resulted in a political economy based upon governments ENFORCING FRAUDS by privately controlled banks. That is the sociopolitical context inside of which one may attempt to sift through the relatively valid physical science that has been done, in order to attempt to build up a better big picture view of climate science, which, in turn, may try to estimate the human activities' influences upon the climate. However, to the practical political situation, it barely matters whatever "the truth" about those issues might be (other than personally understanding things for their own sake, while attempting to preserve one's intellectual integrity when doing that.)
While climate science is quite hyper-complicated, and I am certain that human beings do NOT yet fully understand all of the relevant factors, and particularly do not understand the more cosmic factors, such as the combined Sun/Earth magnetic fields, and so on, what I AM SURE ABOUT is that civilization operates on the basis of the applications of principles and methods of organized crime. Hence, those basic social facts makes doing better climate science extremely problematic. Moreover, inside of that context, with respect to pretty well all articles regarding environmental issues, and their following patterns of comments and voting manifested on Zero Hedge, those tend to routinely push cynicism to the point of stupidity, and excessively indulge in over-simplifications of how HYPER-COMPLICATED those issues actually are.
A couple of sayings I think apply to the basic issues of the degree to which humans blamed for climate change may have some merit:
"Throwing the baby out with the bathwater."
&
"The boy who cried wolf."
That there has been some fraudulent science tends to have enabled over-reactions to that ...
I believe we are currently getting a "lucky break" that the more cosmic factors are mitigating the influences caused by human activities. However, in my view, the threat from human activities causing runaway climate change has not be stopped, but only postponed by the "lucky break" we are currently getting from the more cosmic factors. Eventually, human driven climate change could return with a vengeance later, although, that has not become as bad as otherwise could have been expected, due to the "lucky break" that we appear to now be getting from more cosmic factors influencing the Earth's climate in ways that are mitigating the human driven effects upon those systems.
MOREOVER, IT STILL DOES NOT MATTER THAT MUCH, SINCE THE MOST IMPORTANT THINGS THAT PEOPLE WOULD HAVE TO AGREE UPON, IF THEY WERE GOING TO HAVE THEIR ARTIFICIAL SELECTION SYSTEMS BECOME BETTER INTEGRATED WITH THE NATURAL SYSTEMS, WOULD NECESSARILY BE THE HUMAN DEATH CONTROLS, THAT BACK UP THE HUMAN DEBT CONTROLS.
Since that is politically impossible to be done in any better ways, but rather the established money/murder systems are already based upon the maximum possible frauds and deceits, and already runaway psychotic insanities, taking the form of ENFORCED FRAUDS (that have become globalized systems of electronic monkey money frauds, backed by the threat of force from apes with atomic bombs), within that context, for enough human beings to agree enough upon what they should do to change their influence upon the planet's climate is politically impossible to be done in any ways other than through sociopolitical systems that continue to be operated upon the basis of the maximum possible frauds and deceits.
AGAIN & AGAIN, MORE & MORE, THE INTENSE PARADOXES ARE THAT NATURAL SELECTION PRESSURES DROVE THE HUMAN ARTIFICIAL SELECTION SYSTEMS TO BECOME BASED ON THE MAXIMUM POSSIBLE DECEITS AND FRAUDS.
Therefore, the most important points worth repeating are:
The only real connection between human laws and natural laws in the ability to back up lies with violence, which currently manifests through the established combined money/murder systems, whereby governments ENFORCE FRAUDS by privately controlled banks. The entire political economy is operating through fundamentally fraudulent financial accounting systems, which are deeply entrenched vicious spirals base upon POLITICAL FUNDING ENFORCING FRAUDS ... Those social pyramid systems are the actual context in which the scientific enterprise has been developed. Inside that context, there has been plenty of relatively valid science. However, there has also been plenty of biased, junk science, and/or fraudulent science, as well.
THE BASIC PROBLEM WITH RESPECT TO INTEGRATING THE HUMAN WORLD WITH THE NATURAL WORLD IS THAT, AFTER LIFE EXISTS, THEN THE DEATH CONTROL SYSTEMS DIRECT THE DEVELOPMENT OF THAT LIFE. Therefore, in order to actually come up with theoretically coherent human responses to the human influences upon overall environmental factors, such as causing climate change, the essential core of any such responses would necessarily have to be changes in the human death control systems. Therefore, not only is climate science quite HYPER-COMPLICATED (and not fully understood by any groups of human beings at the present time), it becomes even MORE HYPER-COMPLICATED to then attempt to develop more seriously scientific attitudes towards human beings and civilization, as being entropic pumps of environmental energy flows, since the ways that those things actually developed were primarily through the history of warfare based upon backing up deceits with destruction, to gradually morph to become economics based upon enforcing frauds.
Since that is the context inside of which one has to attempt to better understand what may or may not be the effects of overall human activities upon the global climate, and that would be the context inside of which any genuine solutions to those problems would have to be developed and implemented, what we are actually observing are various ways in which public debates about climate science and the effects of human activities upon climate, are being expressed by various professional liars and immaculate hypocrites, because the entire structure of social pyramids systems is based upon being able to back up lies with violence, and therefore, the whole of the currently established sort of Neolithic Civilization is primarily dominated and operated by various groups of professional hypocrites.
From my point of view, it becomes quite overwhelmingly HYPER-COMPLICATED to attempt to develop better environmental science, upon which basis some better public policies could be developed, due to the INTENSE PARADOXES that human beings and civilization necessarily operate as entropic pumps of environmental energy flows, which make their death control systems (with the human murder systems as the most extreme form of those) necessarily take the central, crucial roles, with respect to everything else that human beings might do, such as their activities' impacting the climate, or perhaps that they may change those activities, in order to perhaps change their impact upon the climate.
There has been prodigious progress in physical science, which has been relatively valid, and which deserves to be relatively respected. HOWEVER, when one actually attempts to better reconcile understanding general energy systems with the particularly human energy systems, one then finds that those lines of inquiry converge, from both a theoretical and empirical perspective, upon the conclusions that civilization both does, and necessarily must, operate according to the principles and methods of organized crime, because the death controls are, and necessarily must be, the central systems.
Of course, those death controls developed through the history of civilization to become most socially successful when done through the maximum possible deceits and treacheries. In turn, economics was actually developed inside the history of warfare, and therefore, the actual political economy became based upon governments ENFORCING FRAUDS by privately controlled banks, as manifestations of the biggest forms of organized crime, controlled by the best organized gangsters, who are currently the banksters. Those are the basic social systems which already exist, because those are the systems of artificial selection which were driven to develop by natural selection pressures.
Since those are the ALREADY existing and entrenched social pyramid systems that human beings have made and maintained, and currently live inside, those are also the actual systems whose activities are influencing the Earth's climate, and only by changing those actual systems, and their activities, would it perhaps become possible to change the human driven effects upon the climate.
At the present time, the prospects of doing that must appear to be laughable to those with a sufficiently macabre sense of humour. One only has to review the pattern of articles republished on Zero Hedge that raise environmental issues, and the responses from the comments and voting patterns appearing under those kinds of articles, to recognize that most of those manifest the ways that cynicism has been pushed to the point of stupidity.
In my view, the main feature of both the various articles, and the related comments, and voting upon those comments, that one can observe on Zero Hedge, is the overall pattern of relatively childish over-simplifications. Natural processes like the Earth's climate are quite hyper-complicated, and so, still beyond being fully understood by any groups of human beings. However, that does NOT stop the various different groups of professional hypocrites from continuing to attempt to advance their own ulterior agendas, as if they knew for sure, regarding whatever is their own preferred presumptions.
Overall, there are Grand Canyon Chasms growing between prodigious progress in physical science, which as not been matched nor surpassed by any progress in political science. The reasons for that are as I have outlined above: the only real connection between human laws and natural laws are the abilities to back up lies with violence. Therefore, that is the real context in which any human efforts to develop public policies actually exist, or ever could actually exist. That is NOT to say that there is no valid science, but rather to emphasize that the oldest and best developed forms of social science and social engineering were warfare whose social success was based upon deceits, that enabled political economy to manifest its social successfulness on the basis of enforcing frauds. Within that extremely entangled predicament are the threads of genuine climate science, or the component sciences that contribute to being woven together into climate science.
The INTENSE PARADOXES with respect to attempting to understand how human systems related to natural systems are as I have outlined above: human beings and civilization operate as entropic pumps of environmental energy flows, while natural selection pressures have driven those social systems of artificial selection to become based on the maximum possible deceits and frauds. Since the existing political economy was built by the biggest bullies, and is publicly presented through their bullshit social stories, that is also the context inside of which the issues of possible human effects upon climate change are publicly presented.
Since the political economy is actually based upon ENFORCING FRAUDS, the vast majority of people have adapted to living inside of those systems by developing attitudes which deliberately ignored the principle of the conservation of energy as much as possible, and also deliberately misunderstood the concept of entropy in the most absurdly backward ways possible. The up-shot of that situation is that the central issues to any human responses to environmental issues would necessarily have to be the human death control systems, within which context the human murder systems would be the most extreme forms, BUT, BUT, BUT, those systems are the most deliberately denied and lied about systems!
As the realities of the effects of human activities upon the climate might become better understood in the future, the actual responses to that would first and foremost have to become changes in the human death control systems. After life exists, then natural selection operates through the death control systems. (Of course, the bullshit language that we tend to use regarding that presents false fundamental dichotomies between the death controls versus the birth controls, while everything that we call "birth controls" actually are forms of the death controls.) Similarly, throughout all of the rest of how civilization developed to become manifestations of the dynamic equilibria between different systems of organized lies operating robberies, so too, everything that the biggest bullies' developed as their bullshit to discuss that more and more became Wonderland Matrix Bizarro Worlds, where everything is publicly presented in the most absurdly backward ways possible.
What makes dealing with the hyper-complicated issues of human activities driving climate change DIFFICULT & DANGEROUS are that governments are necessarily the biggest forms of organized crime, controlled by the best organized gangs of criminals. Moreover, everyone actually lives by being entropic pumps of environmental energy flows, and so, everyone is living as some systems of more or less organized lies operating robberies. Since practically everyone deliberate ignores and denies that (and especially so do bankster controlled governments continue to deliberately ignore and deny those facts), for those systems to adapt to what they may well be really doing to their environment is extremely problematic, to the point of practically being politically impossible.
From within that context, the title of the article above, "NY Attorney General Launches Crack Down On Exxon Over Global Warming Denial," illustrates how crazy and convoluted the overall situation has become. Moreover, there are no good grounds to believe that will get better, rather than worse, since the INTENSE PARADOXES continue to develop at almost an exponential rate, that there actually do exist laws of nature, that human beings can better understand and apply, however, meanwhile, the only real connection between human laws and natural laws is ability to back up lies with violence. Clearly, the resonating ironies found in level after level through those infinite tunnels of deceits and frauds are IMPORTANT, but quite HYPER-COMPLICATED!
At the present time, some human beings have made prodigious progress in the areas of physical science, as demonstrated by the various working technologies based upon that science. However, nothing like that kind of progress has been achieved in political science. Therefore, when it comes to the relationships between political and environmental processes, the currently existing kinds of social pyramid systems are extremely psychotic. The real relationships between human beings and natural laws tend to be as deliberately ignored, and/or lied about, as is humanly possible to do.
Elaborate systems, based upon the biggest bullies' bullshit, have been developed, in order that civilization can be operated by the best available professional liars and immaculate hypocrites. The dominate natural languages and philosophy of science tend to continue to deliberately promote the dualities of false fundamental dichotomies, and the related impossible ideals, rather than operate through unitary mechanisms based upon there being the same energy operating through general energy systems.
The basic, background issue is that our political economy is actually based upon governments ENFORCING FRAUDS by privately controlled banks. Therefore, every economic decision is made through using fundamentally fraudulent financial accounting systems. Since governments are the biggest forms of organized crime, controlled by the best organized gangs of criminals, and must necessarily be, but also simultaneously get away with their bullshit that they are not doing that (as sets of consistent contradictions, built into the basic relationships between natural selection and artificial selection systems), dealing with the threats of human activities driving disastrous climate change, which would be bad for everyone in the foreseeable future, is an extremely problematic and hyper-complicated issue.
At the present time, it is politically impossible to reconcile our economic systems with their environmental ecologies, because those economic systems are based upon ENFORCING FRAUDS, whose social successfulness depends upon them being able to continue to ignore and deny that, while also being able to continue to actually operate those systems through being professional hypocrites, whose impossible ideals always backfire badly, and cause the opposite to actually happen, because that kind of professional hypocrisy deliberately misunderstand its real mechanisms in the most absurdly backward ways possible.
In order start making our economic systems become better integrated with their environmental ecologies, it would first be required that we began to more comprehensively understand human beings and civilization acting as entropic pumps of environmental energy flows. However, since that means facing the facts that the death controls are central to everything else, and therefore, civilization actually operates according to the principles and methods of organized crime, changing public attitudes regarding that would be what both the ruling classes, and most of those they rule over, do NOT like and do NOT want to consider, much less more thoroughly understand and apply.
Inside that context, it is barely possible to exaggerate the degree to which the currently established human activities, operating through the existing economic systems, are operating through ENFORCING FRAUDS, which require almost everyone to deliberately ignore the principle of the conservation of energy as much as possible (in order that the public "money" supply can continue to appear to be made out of nothing and disappear back to nothing), while the concept of entropy is deliberately misunderstood in the most absurdly backward ways, in order that the actually existing systems of organized lies operating robberies can pretend to be, and be publicly be presented to not actually be doing that, but rather to be presented as doing the opposite to that. Furthermore, it is generally approved of to continue to be professional hypocrites spouting impossible ideals regarding all of that, as being the good and moral things to do, in order to be "productive members of society" ... when actually everyone is always increasing the overall entropy by what they are really doing.
Indeed, human beings should develop better integrated systems of human, industrial and natural ecologies. However, actually doing that would require making greater use of unitary mechanisms, which regarded all of those as being the same energy, flowing through the same general energy systems. The basic issues with respect to the relationships of the human economic activities to the environmental ecologies are totally entangled, in extremely hyper-complicated ways, with the actual history of successful warfare based on backing up deceits with destruction, becoming successful finance based upon backing up frauds with force. Buried deep under all the biggest bullies' bullshit about that is somewhere the real relationships between human activities and their influence upon the climate ...
No wonder that most people who address those issues tend to grossly over-simplify that situation, and why such over-simplifications often result in pushing cynicism to the point of stupidity!
I find it very curious that China announced that it is altering the one-child policy to a two child policy this close to COP 21. After 37 years they certainly could have announced it some other time. I think it signals to the rest of the world that this UNFCCC is not working and since China took the path of greater resistance (which obviously was in China's best interests but had some benefits for the human race), China will no longer be denied, and now has the necessary baseline to play the game and win.
Michel Jarraud, Sec/Gen of the WMO says that the climate system is perhaps the most studied area of science ever. Perhaps you are undersetimating just how collasally huge it is? Jarraud says he wants to begin AR6 because there;s more to learn, but when he says "we know" I take that to mean that we know enough to take concrete action. As relates to this article, failure to do so now, he warns, means governments and decision makers at every level (which I take to include individuals and their reproductive decisions) can be held accountable 30 years from now. This rediculous lawsuit is control freaks (lawyers lol) trying to make money today so ergo they will be held accountable. The business of cap-and-trade or carbon tax etc are the same old neolithic way. not going to change much, likely backfire : (
Indeed, why NOW would China announce that?
Of course the timimg could be pure coincidence. Speculating is fun and I've really enjoyed this ~ two year run-up to Paris here on Zero Hedge.
I said here last winter(?) that if China didn't put population policy on the table in Paris then likely nobody would. Looks like China just did in a "fuck you" kinda way. I'm ok with that too. China took the signals coming out ~40 years ago and acted despite the accusations hurled at them. The advantage of a command political economy laid bare and roundly criticized. These days the criticisms continue by harping on and on about the marginal imbalance of the sexes. This compared to the very deep doo-doo China would have been had it not acted? LULZ
China took the path of greater resistance, to borrow your phrase. The path of least morality the ROW agrandizes itself in has continued to promote "family values" and helped bankers issue moar debt "for the children". And just like clockwork, shock and surprise, there's been moar war too. WhocouldaKNoWd? Well, I mean, besides you?
So now it's crying time. China ascends to deal with it's demographic issues the old-fashioned way when the ROW finds itself caught with it's pants down. China has has virtually everything it needs to survive the coming social storms, including a higher moral ground. China has done a great deal on the climate change storm front too, and this two-child policy announcement is saying:
"We did our part. If anyone is going to survive this, we will. Grow a pair ROW!"
------------
p.s. funny that Obama was on the phone with Trudeau (just too fuckin weird to say "Prime Minister Trudeau" LOL) about KXL today. Not often you see POTUS & VPOTUS & SOS all in the same room together. I believe President Obama is deeply concerned but to dare suggest that USA is the exceptional one when obviously it has in reality been China for decades? LULZ.
Moving into winter now, and the weather seems to be getting colder. Something's wrong.
I predict a trend of lower highs and lower lows. My crystal ball extends only a bit into the future, say for the next 4 months or so. Then there is a conjestion zone and the trend might, in fact, reverse. Watch the amount of sunlight minutes generated, although this is a lagging indicator.
My predictions have succeeded in the past, when I proved that both the Red Sox and Celtics would have multiple year losing seasons.
- Ned
Oh! The terror...the terror!
Front groups for green energy financial frauds operating illegal electricity distribution extortion cartels probably shouldn't threaten an Investigation, they may end up prosecuting their own benefactors.
If there was any fraud it came from Solyndra and Abengoa, not Exxon.
Not that I'm a fan of Exxon, (let's face it, it tastes like shit), but it is always fun to see TPTB fighting amongst themselves. Do I detect a disturbance in the Force?
global warming is a scam - global government needs a global threat to scare people with so they made one up
It is much more hyper-complicated than that, tumblemore! As I explain in my comment above, your comment appears to be the common sort of over-simplification which can be read on Zero Hedge.
I can neither confirm nor deny "climate change".
+1 now, if you had listened to me saying the same thing to my American family members... you would have been surprised by the reactions
with the same words, I became in their eyes a rabid "climate denier". interestingly, right after a discussion where I was the "rabid tree-hugger european"
our Cousins overseas are being victims of one of their "choose one side of two, fight it out" political distractions
Hey Ghordius,
Must be great to have family in so many countries.
My line was mildly ironic. It were my weasel words in the face of the thought police.
My position on this issue is a bit complex. In general I am a sceptic, largely because I consider it politically motivated science, but I am in favour of some of the policies that might flow from this, albeit for different reasons.
If in Paris they can come to a negotiated, civilized agreement on the partition of the world's resources (who uses what and and what rate), instead of having that determined by war, then I am for it.
If it means accelerating an energy revolution away from hydrocarbons and towards renewables with the concomitant increase in energy indepence for Europe and more silent and less polluting electric cars, then I am for it.
If a global carbon tax results in a further concentration of power in the hands of a few, I am against it. (it is interesting to see the centralising and decentralising (renewables) forces at work).
Generally I think the future looks great. less traffic fumes, self-driving, less noisy, electric cars. Think of it, what a leap!
piratepiet, excellent exposition, I could agree with such dealings. add in sensible, small, new generation nuclear and you have me fully on board
electric cars are swell for the cities, but if their energy comes from coal... then it becomes a bit difficult to call them "environmentally friendly"
We have been hearing for years the growing threat to our planet from the accumulated remains of electronics as well as the byproducts of their production. How in the hell does electric cars, batteries and rare earth mining and production fit into the "earth first" scheme?
ssshhhhh..they dont like you asking that!
or pointing out the massive poisoning/cancer/pollution caused by RE mining n processing.chinas got 97 or more % of global supply:-)
its all nice clean hitekky energysaving green ness doncha know.
agree with both of you. the question is always "how much". oil and coal aren't "green", nevertheless,
while... public transport makes some shriek
over at Wattsupwiththat
What did ExxonMobil Know and when did they know it? (Part 3, Exxon: The Fork Not Taken)
Guest post by David Middleton This just keeps getting more hilarious… Exxon Confirmed Global Warming Consensus in 1982 with In-House Climate Models The company chairman would later mock climate models as unreliable while he campaigned to stop global action to reduce fossil fuel emissions. Lisa Song, Neela Banerjee, David Hasemyer Sep 22, 2015 Steve Knisely…
2 weeks ago October 24, 2015 in Climate FAIL, Climate News, Energy, Environment, Politics.
What did ExxonMobil Know and when did they know it? (Part Deux, “Same as it ever was.”)
Guest post by David Middleton If you thought Part 1 was a doozy, “you ain’t seen nothing yet”… Exxon Believed Deep Dive Into Climate Research Would Protect Its Business Outfitting its biggest supertanker to measure the ocean’s absorption of carbon dioxide was a crown jewel in Exxon’s research program. Neela Banerjee, Lisa Song, David…
2 weeks ago October 23, 2015 in Climate FAIL, Energy.
What did ExxonMobil Know and when did they know it? (Part 1)
Guest post by David Middleton Maybe ExxonMobil should file a RICO lawsuit against the “Shukla 20”, Inside Climate, the LA Times and this gentleman… Exxon Knew Everything There Was to Know About Climate Change by the Mid-1980s—and Denied It And thanks to their willingness to sucker the world, the world is now a chaotic mess.…