The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change
Comments
-
Yes the same parameters don't apply to the industries that are negatively impacted by changing how we do things now.greenblood said:
ExactlyPurpleThrobber said:Ax yourself:
Your very existence is dependent on grant-funding and corporate or gubmint support to put food on the table. You have no appreciable job skills or other means of making money than 'research'. Take any topic - climate, agriculture, drug research....who cares? Same concept.
It is not logical to assume benevolence and truthiness uber alles. You gots to eat. Are you going to bite the hand that feeds you? Or your family? Remember - you can't do shit other than sit in a lab or interpret data. You can't swing a hammer, you can't close a deal, you can't produce a product.....
That 3% that aren't in your 97% consensus....maybe THAT'S the group that says "Fuck all" and isn't beholden to the Money Grab and are pure scientists for the science of it.
But that's not in the interest of the Money Grabbers....so you're considered a heretic.
And the crazy part is - the Money Grabbers sit on both the left and the right. They just have a comfort in either direction on who they want to whore out their 'science'.
It gets really hot. It gets really cold. Same as it ever was.
These scientist not only rely on funding for research, but also for wages as well. The climate change hysteria has to continue or a lot of these scientist are out of a job. -
The 97% is a lie. When you need to lie to make your point maybe you don't have a point. US CO2 production down Germany and the chicoms up. And yet we are the problem?
-
This might amaze you but most big energy companies are super diversified at this point. Further, they have more capital than any of the small "green energy" outfits. If there's money to be had in switching over, rest assured, they would be doing so. As much as it fits your narrative to have some sort of "cabal" secretly controlling the energy market it's a huge uphill battle to manage to manipulate such a large, international, and diverse market.Gwad said:
Yes the same parameters don't apply to the industries that are negatively impacted by changing how we do things now.greenblood said:
ExactlyPurpleThrobber said:Ax yourself:
Your very existence is dependent on grant-funding and corporate or gubmint support to put food on the table. You have no appreciable job skills or other means of making money than 'research'. Take any topic - climate, agriculture, drug research....who cares? Same concept.
It is not logical to assume benevolence and truthiness uber alles. You gots to eat. Are you going to bite the hand that feeds you? Or your family? Remember - you can't do shit other than sit in a lab or interpret data. You can't swing a hammer, you can't close a deal, you can't produce a product.....
That 3% that aren't in your 97% consensus....maybe THAT'S the group that says "Fuck all" and isn't beholden to the Money Grab and are pure scientists for the science of it.
But that's not in the interest of the Money Grabbers....so you're considered a heretic.
And the crazy part is - the Money Grabbers sit on both the left and the right. They just have a comfort in either direction on who they want to whore out their 'science'.
It gets really hot. It gets really cold. Same as it ever was.
These scientist not only rely on funding for research, but also for wages as well. The climate change hysteria has to continue or a lot of these scientist are out of a job. -
We??? Dude are you taking a scientific consensus personally? JFCWestlinnDuck said:The 97% is a lie. When you need to lie to make your point maybe you don't have a point. US CO2 production down Germany and the chicoms up. And yet we are the problem?
-
Can you point me to a denying scientist that's getting paid by these industries?Gwad said:
Yes the same parameters don't apply to the industries that are negatively impacted by changing how we do things now.greenblood said:
ExactlyPurpleThrobber said:Ax yourself:
Your very existence is dependent on grant-funding and corporate or gubmint support to put food on the table. You have no appreciable job skills or other means of making money than 'research'. Take any topic - climate, agriculture, drug research....who cares? Same concept.
It is not logical to assume benevolence and truthiness uber alles. You gots to eat. Are you going to bite the hand that feeds you? Or your family? Remember - you can't do shit other than sit in a lab or interpret data. You can't swing a hammer, you can't close a deal, you can't produce a product.....
That 3% that aren't in your 97% consensus....maybe THAT'S the group that says "Fuck all" and isn't beholden to the Money Grab and are pure scientists for the science of it.
But that's not in the interest of the Money Grabbers....so you're considered a heretic.
And the crazy part is - the Money Grabbers sit on both the left and the right. They just have a comfort in either direction on who they want to whore out their 'science'.
It gets really hot. It gets really cold. Same as it ever was.
These scientist not only rely on funding for research, but also for wages as well. The climate change hysteria has to continue or a lot of these scientist are out of a job. -
How can you behold the truth if you cannot seek for yourself?greenblood said:
Can you point me to a denying scientist that's getting paid by these industries?Gwad said:
Yes the same parameters don't apply to the industries that are negatively impacted by changing how we do things now.greenblood said:
ExactlyPurpleThrobber said:Ax yourself:
Your very existence is dependent on grant-funding and corporate or gubmint support to put food on the table. You have no appreciable job skills or other means of making money than 'research'. Take any topic - climate, agriculture, drug research....who cares? Same concept.
It is not logical to assume benevolence and truthiness uber alles. You gots to eat. Are you going to bite the hand that feeds you? Or your family? Remember - you can't do shit other than sit in a lab or interpret data. You can't swing a hammer, you can't close a deal, you can't produce a product.....
That 3% that aren't in your 97% consensus....maybe THAT'S the group that says "Fuck all" and isn't beholden to the Money Grab and are pure scientists for the science of it.
But that's not in the interest of the Money Grabbers....so you're considered a heretic.
And the crazy part is - the Money Grabbers sit on both the left and the right. They just have a comfort in either direction on who they want to whore out their 'science'.
It gets really hot. It gets really cold. Same as it ever was.
These scientist not only rely on funding for research, but also for wages as well. The climate change hysteria has to continue or a lot of these scientist are out of a job. -
The author of that drivel and you can't even read. Its claim is "97% of published papers agree". Which means literally nothing, especially since they are published in journals focusing on that. Add to that most of the papers aren't even related to global warming but because they somehow have a identifying term and don't explicitly say they think there is a bunch of bad science in it then they are grouped into the 97%.
https://friendsofscience.org/assets/documents/97_Consensus_Myth.pdf
Keep lying...
-
Why try at all with this dipshit?PurpleThrobber said:Ax yourself:
Your very existence is dependent on grant-funding and corporate or gubmint support to put food on the table. You have no appreciable job skills or other means of making money than 'research'. Take any topic - climate, agriculture, drug research....who cares? Same concept.
It is not logical to assume benevolence and truthiness uber alles. You gots to eat. Are you going to bite the hand that feeds you? Or your family? Remember - you can't do shit other than sit in a lab or interpret data. You can't swing a hammer, you can't close a deal, you can't produce a product.....
That 3% that aren't in your 97% consensus....maybe THAT'S the group that says "Fuck all" and isn't beholden to the Money Grab and are pure scientists for the science of it.
But that's not in the interest of the Money Grabbers....so you're considered a heretic.
And the crazy part is - the Money Grabbers sit on both the left and the right. They just have a comfort in either direction on who they want to whore out their 'science'.
It gets really hot. It gets really cold. Same as it ever was. -
Friends of Science (FoS) is a non-profit advocacy organization based in Calgary, Alberta, Canada. The organization rejects the established scientific conclusion that humans are largely responsible for the currently observed global warming. Rather, they propose that "the Sun is the main direct and indirect driver of climate change," not human activity. They argued against the Kyoto Protocol.[1] The society was founded in 2002 and launched its website in October of that year.[2][3] They are largely funded by the fossil fuel industry.[4][5]
-
There is no consensus. The 97% lie you keep blathering about has been debunked over and over. Even the two nitwits who started and then propagated 97% lie had to come clean. So why do you keep on lying?Gwad said:
We??? Dude are you taking a scientific consensus personally? JFCWestlinnDuck said:The 97% is a lie. When you need to lie to make your point maybe you don't have a point. US CO2 production down Germany and the chicoms up. And yet we are the problem?
Those experts that disagreed with the globalists that it was all man made were shouted down, some lost their jobs. You had lib "scientists" even suggesting that those that disagree with MMGW should be thrown in jail FFS. Many on the left were condemning those that refused to confirm faulty data and research that was used to attempt to globalize our country while at the same time fraudulently wasting (while getting rich) billions in tax payer dollars on grant research. You and yours effectively made the process and ideal of science itself ineffectual, worthless. Science is the constant search, you libs stopped that search thus rendering all liberal conclusions suspect.
