Unmasking Climate Deception - Fossil Fuel Companies' Deceptions Revealed

originally posted by: jrod
I rarely throw insults and try not to. However I've read hundreds of your posts and stand by what I wrote. It is not an insult if its true. Also I noted how you start that paragraph accusing me of insulting you, then go on with your backhanded insult, very cute.

...

Calling me a pathological liar when you have no freaking idea what in the world you are talking about is an insult. Calling you immature for ALWAYS using insults and one liners that never provide anything of substance to a topic is the truth. Very cute of you to now try to play victim when you don't even understand what constitutes an insult...

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Did you NOT accuse 'the scientists' of being liars too?

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
a reply to: jrod

Yeah, like people like you who keep wanting to believe the AGW scientists when they have been caught lying several times. Oh no wait...the people who were involved in the lying, data tampering, etc, investigated themselves, and to help them clear their name groups/agencies that want to FORCE a global government "to combat climate change" also gave them a green light... Got to wonder why...

That is what we call a lie, that is making stuff up that simply is not true. We have shown that Big Oil pays people to spread false and misleading information about climate change, however your claim that 'AGW scientists' are lying to serve some global government agenda has NO evidence, just hot air or a straight up lie.

I have contributed quite a bit to these climate change discussions. Not really fair to try to say I do not what I am writing about. My experience in studying the weather and climate exceeds most and while I may not have the level of understanding as some of the other posters I like to think I understand the science and mechanisms behind the AGW theory a hell of a lot better than most.

I did NOT forget that you claim to have a Master's in an atmosphere related study....I seriously doubt anyone on this forum believes that too.

a reply to: jrod
I retract the part about electricuniverse's degree claim, I was thinking of another poster..
Missed the edit window and need to sleep.

originally posted by: jrod

Did you NOT accuse 'the scientists' of being liars too?

... No, i actually did a couple of posts about it how not all scientists who agree with AGW are lying.

Thousands and Thousands of Scientists Can't be Behind a Hoax(AGW), Right?

A Heated Debate: Are Climate Scientists Being Forced to Toe the Line?


BTW, even among those who agree that mankind does contribute to climate change, they have different ideas of how much mankind is contributing. Just because they agree mankind contributes doesn't mean they all think that mankind is the reason for climate change.

You only need a few main scientists to be part of the hoax, and to control the information and that's what has been happening.

originally posted by: jrod
That is what we call a lie, that is making stuff up that simply is not true. We have shown that Big Oil pays people to spread false and misleading information about climate change, however your claim that 'AGW scientists' are lying to serve some global government agenda has NO evidence, just hot air or a straight up lie.

Really?... There is plenty of evidence shown in these forums that the main proponents of the AGW hoax have been lying, they have been caught making false claims, posting information that they knew was not true, yet it was done to "put pressure on global governments" which a couple of them admitted...

originally posted by: jrod
...
I did NOT forget that you claim to have a Master's in an atmosphere related study....I seriously doubt anyone on this forum believes that too.

WTH are you talking about? I never wrote such a claim...

And the only thing I h ve seen you do every time this subject comes up is claim "but 97-87% of all scientists agree, and CO2 has risen by over 100ppm in the last century so it must be mankind"... That's the sum of your claims, which is what you always say...

“The governments of Europe, the United States, and Japan are unlikely to negotiate a social-democratic pattern of globalization – unless their hands are forced by a popular movement or a catastrophe, such as another Great Depression or ecological disaster“

These governments would not accept a "social-democratic pattern of globalization" unless their hands are FORCED by a popular movement (Occupy and Anthropogenic Global Warming movements), another Great Depression (the current global economic crisis), or an ecological disaster (Global Warming being blamed on humans)

Democratising Global Governance:

The Challenges of the World Social Forum

by

Francesca Beausang


ABSTRACT

This paper sums up the debate that took place during the two round tables organized by UNESCO within the first World Social Forum in Porto Alegre (25/30 January 2001). It starts with a discussion of national processes, by examining democracy and then governance at the national level. It first states a case for a "joint" governance based on a combination of stakeholder theory, which is derived from corporate governance, and of UNESCO's priorities in the field of governance. As an example, the paper investigates how governance can deviate from democracy in the East Asian model. Subsequently, the global dimension of the debate on democracy and governance is examined, first by identification of the characteristics and agents of democracy in the global setting, and then by allusion to the difficulties of transposing governance to the global level.

www.unesco.org...

The above paper is from 1991 from the UN (UNESCO is a branch of the UN in case you didn't know). It, and the meetings these globalists have been having call for a global socialist/fascist government derived from corporate governance...

BTW, and again, why is it that most Global Circulation Models are so wrong?... Perhaps is it because CO2 is not the biggest source of warming and it's in fact water vapor, which is 99.9% natural?...

President Obama's Plan to Fight Climate Change

Even the vatican is behind this global attempt of controlling everything.

Pope Francis calls for a new system of global government to tackle climate change

We can't "fight climate change"... That's just an excuse to get more control of people's lives pretty much "forever", because the climate will ALWAYS change...

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic
In 2007, thanks to a Freedom of Information request, it came to light that fossil fuel companies had hired Wei-Hock "Willie" Soon, among other climate change deniers, to author studies (now discredited), denying human-caused climate change, saying that the sun was the cause.
...

BTW, this question goes to the op. Could you bother to tell us what studies of Soon "were discredited" as you claim?

Among his studies, and sorry to say to the op he is not the only one that found this, he has stated that events like the Medieval Warming, the Roman Warming, and the LIA (Little Ice Age) were global events. Meanwhile the AGW main proponents have always claimed these events were not global in nature. Also, his studies showed that events like the Medieval Warm and Roman Warm periods were warmer than at present. Are those the studies that the op claim "have been discredited"?...

originally posted by: jrod

That is what we call a lie, that is making stuff up that simply is not true. We have shown that Big Oil pays people to spread false and misleading information about climate change, however your claim that 'AGW scientists' are lying to serve some global government agenda has NO evidence, just hot air or a straight up lie.

Not only is it a lie, it makes no sense.

Why would a government engage in a conspiratorial and knowingly false agenda to piss off wealthy and powerful corporations who spend lots of money, and moreover potentially raise citizen's taxes and costs?

If you were a politician, what's in it for you?

Perhaps, on the other hand, some people are not actually civilizational sociopaths.

originally posted by: mbkennel
...
Perhaps, on the other hand, some people are not actually civilizational sociopaths.

Really?... it makes no sense?... Read the damn link I gave which is directly from the UN. Since 1991 they were already setting up a plan on how to FORCE governments to accept the "green agenda". It included a global monetary crisis, environmental crisis with the use of "a popular movement".

Follow the money. Who has been behind many of the "social movements"?... People like George Soros, and other progressives from both parties.

Now you got Presidents, among other world leaders, including the vatican wanting to create a world government to "combat climate change"... Yet you can't connect the dots?...

BTW, what really makes no sense is "civilizational sociopaths"... WTH is that?...

So no show of any proof from the op about the claim that "Soon's studies have been discredited'?... First of all, you should know that Soon's studies have been mostly a compilation of research that dozens of other researches have published and which to this day can be found by anyone who actually bothers to look for them.

The op tried to be very sly by making it look like Soon being "possibly" paid by oil companies to "research" means that all the research is wrong, which is simply not true.

Even if it proves to be true at the end that Soon was paid by oil companies it doesn't mean the research is wrong. It just means he was paid by oil companies to do the research, not to lie.
It's possible that Soon could lose his job is this proves to be how the source claims, but it doesn't prove the research was false.

It seems that the op is of the mind that any research being paid by progressive sources must all be true, and any other sources paying for research must be a lie... It doesn't work that way. You prove your point by actually arguing the research itself and showing any evidence that proves your argument. Yet the op is silent, I wonder why.

I have yet to see any of these floods that are supposed to have started hammering us 15 years ago

Then you're illiterate or blind. In the last few decades we've had unprecedented, massive flooding all over the world- Thailand, Eastern Europe, China, Bangladesh, Texas, New England, Washington State. The Texas one was just this year.

a reply to: CB328

And the Earth's magnetic field is much weaker than it has been for hundreds of thousands of years... And worldwide earthquakes have been increasing. Is it possible that whatever is causing the increase in worldwide earthquakes, including underwater volcanic activity, and the weakening of Earth's magnetic field is the same cause that has been changing the climate not only on Earth but other planets as well? *wink, wink*

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

And the Earth's magnetic field is much weaker than it has been for hundreds of thousands of years

False. The field strength is currently stronger than many periods in the past 200,000 years, as a matter of fact and significantly stronger than it was 50,000 years ago.

The past 800,000 years.

www.windows2universe.org...

And worldwide earthquakes have been increasing.

Also false. The past 70 years.

including underwater volcanic activity,

Please provide evidence of an increase in underwater volcanic activity. Surface activity doesn't seem to show any statistically significant increase.

www.volcano.si.edu...

that has been changing the climate not only on Earth but other planets as well?

What other planets are showing changing climates? You know that the outer planets have very long "years", right? That means they also have very long "seasons." Do you equate seasonal changes with climate change?

a reply to: Phage

Blasphemy!

Magnetic Shield Loss Denier! LOL

THE ELECTRON SCIENCE is indisputable!

The science is settled! Electromagnetic energy traveling across power lines is disrupting Earth's magnetic field!

Your messing with my scam! (joke)

www.abovetopsecret.com...