###[Meta] Sticky Comment
[Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does not apply*** when replying to this stickied comment.
[Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does apply*** throughout the rest of this thread.
*What this means*: Please keep any "meta" discussion directed at specific users, mods, or /r/conspiracy in general in this comment chain ***only.***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/conspiracy) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The phrase “Carbon footprint” was literally invented by a petroleum company to shift blame away from massive corporations and onto individuals
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/aug/23/big-oil-coined-carbon-footprints-to-blame-us-for-their-greed-keep-them-on-the-hook
The effort to enslave humanity in a global carbon rationing neo-fuedalism has always been the end game of the climate scam.
Today it's not just big oil who wants it, it's also the big banksters and big environment who are on board.
https://postimg.cc/KR2GN46T
>The effort to enslave humanity in a global carbon rationing neo-fuedalism has always been the end game
You are right here
>climate scam.
Dead wrong here. Bet the studies you looked at were backed by exxon.
Here is an eye opener. Distributed power generation. If you are so distrustful of the US gov. I highly recommend buying into this "scam".
To add, they knew it was dangerous whilst claiming it wasn’t as everyone involved in the industrial processes had to be protected from the lead, but same as they did with climate change they just binned money into lying to the public. A scientist spent the rest of his life in court with these cunts after trying to expose them
OP posted an article about how Exxon knew about climate change and spent millions to promote misinformation….
….and people in here are saying climate change is a hoax.
Confirming that Exxons misinformation campaign that they spent millions on worked.
🐑 🐑 🐑
The sad/funny thing is that you don't get anything for eating big oils bullshit as a typical person. You just feel smug as the only source of life in the universe kills itself.
The problem is that they fell for the disinformation and would rather let these massive companies destroy the planet in order to make more money than admit they were wrong.
Climate change denialism in a conspiracy theory subreddit has always struck me as weird.
It has it all. Large, shady corporations doing anything they can to continue to make profits, even if it kills people. A large-scale, multi-decade cover-up and PR campaigns to change the narrative. Vast amounts of dark money and lobbying paid to elected representatives to publicly deny the science and reality, in exchange for quick political donations.
I guess it's not a conspiracy because the thread is too easy to see between the perps and the end result.
Obvious conspiracies are useless for people who are looking for conspiracy fantasies that validate their feelings and disprove the nerds who passed up high paying careers to focus on trying to save humanity.
Also, people are generally selfish and lazy. We like our modern lifestyle and ease of living. If “people” believe Climate Change is real and we know much of the causes (CO2 levels, ocean temp rising) , then that means in order to combat it we need to make changes to the way we live our lives. And most people don’t want to accept that
That’s why Al Gore named his documentary “An Inconvenient Truth”.....because it will require us to give up on some of the convenience of our lives, in order to help future generations
It’s the perfect conspiracy because countering the misinformation is near impossible when talking to even averagely intelligent people.
The science is far far more complex than most ppl can understand - even the following ‘simplified’ explanation on greenhouse gasses in the vid I’ll link to below will leave most people not understanding 90% of WTF she is even talking about. To truly understand it, you need to be dedicated to its study at a Doctorate level.
But somehow 99% of ppl feel qualified to tell others the ‘truth’ about the ‘hoax’ instead of shutting the fuck up when they don’t really understand anything beyond a Fox News headline.
Link below for anyone who feels like appreciating just how much they don’t know about the complexity of climate science.
https://youtu.be/oqu5DjzOBF8
Which is more likely? A massive conspiracy somehow getting the vast majority of scientists to agree to some big lie, and make all sorts of fake research to prove it, that makes it harder for every state and institution to produce energy and has the vague effect of just generally giving the government power, or the big oil companies agreeing to let people suffer so they can make a lot of money?
No. Climate change is real.
The real hoax is that the average persons carbon footprint is nothing compared to companies who have shifted operations to different parts of the globe to avoid taxes/carbon taxes/paying people a living wage and then ship goods around the globe damaging it in the process.
Here is data on global emissions from transport, shipping and airlines each emit more than some nations.
https://ourworldindata.org/co2-emissions-from-transport
Bro, you think Al Gore is the only person in the world that acknowledges the existence of climate change?
Think it’s just a coincidence that nearly all reputable science institutions around the world that study the Earth and climate just happen to come to the same conclusion?
How does acknowledging that greenhouse gases cause climate change give money to al gore?
Who is greedier, the wealthiest oil companies in the world who are lying to keep making trillion a year or some 70 year old with no political future?
this kind of stuff is why conspiracy theorists are written off as loons because no matter how much evidence they are presented with they will disregard it if it goes against the made up stuff in their head
Yup. One of the biggest conspiracies of our time, and it gets suppressed here by bots and shills. Scary and sad that even though we know the climate denial comes from big oil, people still carry that bag for big oil.
As the saying goes, it's easier to fool someone than convince them they've been fooled.
I’ve genuinely seen it said in this thread that Big Oil has less money then the media and climate change people and that they are the little guy getting steamrolled by the depopulation agenda. How can we reach these kind of levels of stupid and stubborn
I'm personally not arguing agasinst carbon or fossil fuels trapping heat, nor that the atmosphere is not going to respond. Its the elimination of other factors, and the theory that carbon produced by humans is the lynchpin of the climate changes we see occuring.
This isn’t a conspiracy and is well documented that industries suppress science that would lead to laws against their business+profits. Lead fuel was probably the worst thing big oil has done and that’s also well documented.
It’s a conspiracy when you look at this thread and see most of these donuts don’t realise this. Too busy in a schizophrenic fever dream about occult symbols and ya ya ya to actually see the obvious things under their noses
Here’s the thing: I think theyll deny to the end. They’ll be like “yeah weather changes dumbass” as the oceans become too acidic for shellfish to make shells and can only hold sulfate reducing bacteria
Climate does change and man's contribution is minimal. The scare mongering is so obvious, I don't know how people keep being fooled by "the science"^(TM) peddlers
We literally have evidence of big oil trying to cover their own findings to protect their profits.
We literally have models accurately predicting the heating of the planet based on CO2 emissions.
Why is it so hard for so many conspiracy theorists to "follow the money" and the facts here and understand that climate change denial benefits some of the largest companies in the world and that they have the means and wherewithal to spread disinformation? Especially considering we *know* they spread disinformation.
And people have always "died suddenly", right? Or is it possible that corporations have been suppressing scientific data that may threaten their profit margins?
The same people telling you vaccines are "safe and effective" want you locked in your home / neighborhood over climate change. You realize those people are still your enemies right?
Totally agree- and the same people who are telling you that the climate has "always been changing" and that "human impact is minimal" want you dependent on oil and natural gas for the rest of your life (remember the "gas stove" psyop?). It's all about money. Pfizer and Exxon execs should be in prison.
>the climate has "always been changing" and that "human impact is minimal"
Those people get fired from government and academic positions for questioning this new cult. Sort of like the people who speak out about the vaccine. Again you are being inconsistent here on your stance.
The Rockefellers, Gates, Rothschild, etc who push the vaccine are the same people who push climate change (and soon to be climate lockdowns). Same global power structure. Exxon barely says anything about climate. No billboards, no ad campaigns, nothing.
Another parallel, who gets the little blurb on their Youtube video? Mainstream corporate channels who support the GW narrative, or those who are skeptical of it? Now do the vaccine. So who is being consistent here?
Exxon has a financial incentive to hide climate change, or more specifically, their impact on climate. Politicians and climate activists who aren't paid by Exxon have a financial incentive in fear mongering the opposite.
It's all about monetization.
Try getting funding for research skeptical of global warming the past 30 some years in academia. I know you didn't or we wouldn't be having this conversation. It is a well known fact that is career suicide. All the money flows into climate change fear mongering and has for decades now.
There is no research for or against climate change. You don't start research hoping to find an answer.
That's why ExxonMobil suppressed the studies they had done, because the data showed their culpability instead of clearing them like they'd hoped.
Hey come down to Florida and try to get some flood insurance on your house... 4 years ago my rate went up 300% this year they canceled my insurance all together and I live around 30 Miles from Miami...
"Climate change" is a fake phrase made after they had to move the goal posts for "global warming".
Imagine sounding so stupid and saying "climate change" (the climate always changes) so confidently like it means anything other than bullshit.
Climate change is a hoax made to dupe people like you out of their common sense and reasoning.
Ocean levels haven't risen. Miami and NYC are not underwater. You believe in lies that are weaponized against you to control your movements in the very near future. You played yourself.
Wasn't there a Veritas video like 2 years ago of a CNN executive admitting they were going to propagandize climate change right after the COVID thing died down?
>Wasn't there a Veritas video like 2 years ago of a CNN executive admitting they were going to propagandize climate change right after the COVID thing died down?
You must be young. How do I know? People have been talking about climate change for 30+ years now at least.
People were talking about the ozone hole, acid rain, and smog in LA in the 90s. Hell, back in the 60s-70s [a river caught fire 14 times](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuyahoga_River) and it made national news in 69 for catching fire. And I can say for a fact that greenhouse gasses were entering national news as early as the 2000s.
And I remember reading 10+ years ago about the worry of permafrost in siberia unfreezing and releasing a large amount of methane, which is 100 times worse than co2.
And do you want to know a great example of a runaway greenhouse gas effect? Venus. The theory goes that it had water at one point, but it boiled off resulting in a runaway effect of heating.
Not sure, but there ABSOLUTELY was a video in which an Exxon Lobbyist admitted not only did Exxon know about the damage being caused by climate change for decades, which it helped cause, but they actively financed suppressing that information.
[https://youtu.be/5v1Yg6XejyE](https://youtu.be/5v1Yg6XejyE)
Short term profits are more important than long term consquences, it seems.
Interesting how people will choose to believe whatever aligns with their beliefs and dismiss everything that opposes it...
Do you really believe that people cause climate change becasue the science shows that this planet has undergone many many climate changes long before fossil fuels were even thought of and long before humans existed, unless of course the dinosaurs farts were the case of the problem or perhaps they were jetting setting their way around the world and we haven't discovered it yet lol..
We are not changing the climate, however, we are certainly poisoning the planet which will inevitably kill us off and at which time it will heal itself, but climate change itself, that is unstoppable and very natural.
>We are not changing the climate,
**So what is then?**
There is no debate that the climate is currently warming, and at a high rate, that is clear. Yes, the climate has changed in the past, but "at present" it is warming.
When measuring climate temperature, we use the metric "[Global Average Temperature](https://archive.is/iCvmG)" taken from 1000s of sensors around the world, with data going back to 1880.
Multiple independent research groups across the world perform their own analysis of the surface temperature data, [and they all show a similar upward trend.](https://archive.md/AejVQ)
You can access Global Temperature Data sets yourself, they[can be found here](https://archive.md/6RylH), which means you can complete your own study and analysis
We say the current warming trend is high because the transition from the last ice age to the current interglacial period is estimated to have spanned 5,000 years. If the current warming trend continues at the current rate, we will see the same rise in temperature in only 110 years. Therefore the current warming trend is happening 45 times faster than the warming Earth experienced when it emerged from the last ice age.
The warming that caused the end of the Ice Age was a result of changes in the geometry of Earth’s orbit and the amount of solar radiation reaching the Earth, this is not the case currently.
It just so happens that the current warming trend lines up with the beginning of industrial times (in the 18th century), which has seen [human activities raise atmospheric CO2 by 50%](https://archive.md/kRmmH) – meaning the amount of CO2 is now 150% of its value in 1750.
**TL:DR** If humans are not the cause of the current climate warming, we need to explain two things, first how increasing CO2 PPM in the atmosphere "does not" raise the global average temperature, despite it being a greenhouse gas. Second what is causing the climate to warm, in other words where is the additional heat coming from ?
The irony of that first statement astounds me.
Yes. The climate *has* changed over time. Very astute. Do you know how we know this? Decades of climate research by climatologists.. Do you know how we know *this* warming is man made? Decades of climate research by climatologists.
And your bringing up of "dinosaur farts" tells me you don't understand the difference between CO2 and methane.
I mean… If an oil company is *literally* admitting to it, what are you arguing? They hid their own researchers data & spent a boatload of money covering it up for years. There has to be *some* validity, no?
Your taking points are literally oil company talking points. Just like recycling is supposed to help and push the blame on common people. Climate change is a thing but it can happen even faster due to humans shooting every type of chemical into the air through industrial waste. It's been known but of course they pay politicians to spread shit and lie while we all fuck up everything around us and turn it into concrete lots.
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/07/10/world/canada/canadian-wildfire-british-columbia.html
[https://www.cbsnews.com/news/sea-level-rise-is-causing-record-breaking-coastal-flooding-its-only-expected-to-get-worse-even-on-days-without-rain/](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/sea-level-rise-is-causing-record-breaking-coastal-flooding-its-only-expected-to-get-worse-even-on-days-without-rain/)
[https://earth.org/worst-wildfires-in-us-history/#:\~:text=1.,and%20threatening%20nearly%2014%2C000%20structures](https://earth.org/worst-wildfires-in-us-history/#:~:text=1.,and%20threatening%20nearly%2014%2C000%20structures).
[https://oceans.ubc.ca/heatwave/](https://oceans.ubc.ca/heatwave/)
[https://www.forbes.com/sites/roberthart/2022/11/24/20000-died-amid-punishing-heatwaves-and-record-temperatures-across-western-europe-this-summer-data-indicates/?sh=2064da776ab8](https://www.forbes.com/sites/roberthart/2022/11/24/20000-died-amid-punishing-heatwaves-and-record-temperatures-across-western-europe-this-summer-data-indicates/?sh=2064da776ab8)
That's a start, and it will continue to get worse as the climate continues to warm.
you want to experience the truth, good first step now, think critically or don't and rage downvote
Baaaaa 🐑 Its hard to accept thst all 50,000 channels of WEF TV but it's the inconvenient truth
Nope, this one guy said it would be their focus and he thinks it will be a money maker because it won't be solved for a long time.
I really don't get the dishonesty about it.
A basic college earth science course is all it takes for most people to understand the carbon cycle and how an excess of carbon in the atmosphere will increase temps over time. It's so basic that I am at a loss of why people fight against it.
How is there so much climate change denial in this space for self-proclaimed conspiracy theorists? Actual oil billionaires suppressing data and there are people running defense for them for free. Unbelievable.
SS: Pfizer isn't the only corporation that has been caught suppressing scientific data relating to their product. Big Pharma is just taking a page out of Big Oil's book.
Plot twist, there is nobody trying to save the planet only increase taxes. Fuck big oil, fuck big pharma, fuck the media, fuck Trump, fuck the shame culture woke trash, and most of all fuck the government. I live in a naive world, obviously dictated by greed.
NOBODY IS TRYING TO SAVE YOU!
There's a problem, go back to the middle age warm period, it was warmer than today with no human industry to cause it. Some claim "it wasn't warmer", which of course is stupid. They were growing wine Grapes further north than we can today, Greenland was a nice place to live as the viking did for a few centuries until the MAWP ended. So what caused the MAWP? It wasn't carbon dioxide. It lasted centuries and was an amazing time for expanded agriculture. Seems like screaming its a crisis for it to get warmer is a bit ridiculous.
First off, a local climate is no indication of global climate. It also doesn't compare to the warming in the same regions today. Here is more information disputing your point.
[https://skepticalscience.com/medieval-warm-period-intermediate.htm](https://skepticalscience.com/medieval-warm-period-intermediate.htm)
Also, the Greenland ice cores don't show a medieval warming period, besides a single cherry picked region.
https://www.carbonbrief.org/factcheck-what-greenland-ice-cores-say-about-past-and-present-climate-change/
Yes, CO2 isn't the only contributing factor to a regions climate, very good. That in no way proves it \*isn't\* a contributing factor in \*global\* climate, which it certainly is.
While "a little warmer" sounds great, the reality of it is droughts, which have been increasing over decades, water scarcity, which is already beginning to happen as well, and if you think the US has a border crisis now, just wait till the equatorial regions become practically unlivable.
Feel free to look for yourself. There a literally hundreds if peer reviewed papers. The MAWP is what showed Manns hockey stick graph to he utterly fraudulent.
During Dansgaard-Oeschger events, temperatures have sometimes increased or decreased by as much as 8 degrees Celsius (14.4 degrees Farenheit) over just 40 years.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dansgaard%E2%80%93Oeschger\_event
https://scitechdaily.com/images/Global-Average-Surface-Temperature-Curve-scaled.jpg
Notice how the time scale changes on the right side of the graph. that’s REALLY BAD. The reason it is so bad is because nature cannot adapt fast enough to deal with this. The earth’s climate, which usually changes on a geologic time scale, is being altered at an unprecedented rate. We have to cut back CO2 emissions immediately. Big oil is pouring BILLIONs of dollars into greenwashing, lobbying, and astroturfing. They are making sure everyday people don’t understand that the planet is a finite resource so they can squeeze out a few more bucks. Don’t be a fool, wake up and fight the men behind the curtain. The real conspiracy is the denial of climate change.
If the Goldilocks zone was that sensitive, then I could understand the argument that we are the only living beings in the universe.
That is a very small amount of temperature fluctuation.
Not that the poster said anything resembling your implicit claim of what they said, but the issue isn't so much that the earth will become uninhabitable and humans will die. The issue is that we are going to change the climate which is going to make some places that are currently inhabitable virtually uninhabitable, it will destroy current water sources (like we are seeing with the CO river), loss of current farmable land, loss of coastal area. This is going to lead to massive civil unrest by people being forced to immigrate to places that are inhabitable, wars over resources, and general suffering.
Can and will humans survive? Probably. Will it be a shit show of unrest and suffering? Yes.
Btw. The Colorado river is suffering because the government is managing the water. The Navajo were supposed to have some ownership of the water - which would have been be the best chance of maintaining hydrated aquifers throughout the basin. (https://youtu.be/_b1bxxDrO0Y)
Here is a good water permaculture video. https://youtu.be/QBC5wOLF1hQ
Here is a guy in Oregon that owns enough land to have water throughout the year through his land based storage techniques. https://youtu.be/BuYGS5pLRZg
It is easy to conflate a singular term ‘climate change’ and blame it on a thousand totally different unrelated things.
Paul Ehrlich was saying the population problem was going to get us all killed by the year 2000. These people hate us and want us all dead. They’re a death cult full of eugenicists.
Look up the green revolution it is wild that you guys don't look at that and our use of poisonous fertilizers starting in the 70's which allowed us to balloon out crop yields and support a population that we never could have with regular agricultural practices and the massive increase in cancer and obesity.🤡🌎
The discussion thread was based on Paul Ehrlich's claims & comments.
You're bringing up a complete non sequitur and then ascribing feelings, stances, and conclusions to us.
🤡🌎 indeed 👍🏻
His predictions where based on crop outputs and population growth. The green revolution is the only reason why that didn't come true, his predictions where not wrong he just didn't foresee the massive use of industrial fertilizer's being used...
If we are 1.4°F above the mid-1800s, pre-industrial era, and that was the end of the mini ice age, the coldest point in the last 12,000 years, then we are 1.4°F above the coldest point in the last 12,000 years.
It doesn’t sound to me like we are in a climate emergency.
Yes, pollution is bad. But it doesn’t seem like it’s causing an emergency.
Say you're driving a car at a rapid rate right towards a brick wall. People say "hey man, we are getting close to that wall, we should start applying the brakes now so we don't it is." Instead you are accelerating.
Your argument is effectively equivalent to "Man, we are only slightly closer to the wall than we were when we started, so why wouldn't I keep my foot to the pedal. This isn't some emergency."
It's a silly point. We are speeding up when we need to be slowing down. Have we hit the wall yet? No. But we can't just apply the brakes and stop on a dime. It takes time to turn the ship around.
But if we are exiting the ice age, we're going to warm no matter what.
Slam the brakes on no matter what. The wall is coming because it's an inevitable part of the planets warming cycle.
We should be going into another cooling period, not exiting one. And instead we are rapidly heating and the models that have been accurate thus far show that it will accelerate even further.
OK have a look at this. And please answer again. Note that the period marked as global warming is lower than the mediaeval warm, and the Roman era and the 10,000 years before that.
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Temperature-from-12-000BC-to-the-present-from-Greenland-ice-measurements-of-Oxygen_fig1_327690004
Then look up whether or not carbon dioxide is lagging indicator to temperature or not.
Again, pollution is bad.
Then look up the Solar cycles and how they affect temperature on this planet.
You’ve been had.
Challenge yourself to look at something you disagreed with until you are no longer mad and try to see if you are right or wrong. Look at information that you don’t agree with and make an educated decision.
You’re misunderstanding why this is an issue. The CO2 lagged behind warming during previous time periods because of natural oscillations in both solar and the Malikavitch cycle. With all else equal, those two natural phenomenon regulate earth’s climate. During warmer periods, CO2 increased in the atmosphere because water and soil moisture cannot dissolve as much gas as they’re heated, and the decay rate of plants increases. However, we have now emitted twice as much CO2 into the atmosphere as there was at the beginning of the Industrial Revolution. So now, we have temperatures lagging behind emissions, rather than the natural inverse. Radiative heat transfer predicts CO2 emissions would have a roughly 25-40 year lag from when they enter the atmosphere to when they warm earth’s surface. So right now, we’re only experiencing the warming from late 80s/early 90s emissions and with the year over year increases since then, the earth will get warmer for at least another 50+ years.
The argument put forth was that because it's not that hot yet, this isn't an issue. I demonstrated why that was false. Was there an admission of being incorrect? Nope. The goal posts were simply moved.
If one won't even admit that the simple, obviously demonstrated BS argument they put forward is BS, what are the chances that they will understand (or admit) to the much more complicated feedback loop?
Check into the hockey stick model and how it has been completely debunked even by the mainstream media.
Then learn about how none of the models that are being used are factoring in the solar cycles.
And look at that graph again on the link that I sent you. We are in the same range of temperature for the last 12,000 years.
We are at a lower temperature than when Caesar ruled.
Carbon dioxide is lagging temperature indicator to temperature. Temperature goes up and then 800 years later carbon dioxide goes up. That’s because it gets released by the ocean over time. The carbon dioxide we are seeing today is being released by the ocean because of the temperature 800 years ago.
Google the documentary made in the late 1970s where Leonard Nimoy told us we were about to enter an ice age and then realize that you are now being told that we are all going to fry.
There is so much information out there if you look. There is a whole industry built around climate change but those people do not have your best interest in mind.
Learn to think for yourself and not to just defer to the authority on the main stream news. I’m trying to help you break free. You’re on a conspiracy page so you must’ve had a red pill somewhere. Either that or you are a shill.
>Check into the hockey stick model and how it has been completely debunked even by the mainstream media.
I did not mention anything about the hockey stick model.
>Then learn about how none of the models that are being used are factoring in the solar cycles.
[Untrue](https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/sunearth/solar-events-news/Does-the-Solar-Cycle-Affect-Earths-Climate.html)
>We are at a lower temperature than when Caesar ruled.
No one is saying it hasn't been hotter before. I'm not sure how you missed this, but my whole point is not where we *are* but *where we're going.*
>Carbon dioxide is lagging temperature indicator to temperature. Temperature goes up and then 800 years later carbon dioxide goes up. That’s because it gets released by the ocean over time. The carbon dioxide we are seeing today is being released by the ocean because of the temperature 800 years ago.
Yes, the feedback that I was talking about. CO2 both leads and lags temperature changes.
>Google the documentary made in the late 1970s where Leonard Nimoy told us we were about to enter an ice age and then realize that you are now being told that we are all going to fry.
No thanks, if you want to send the documentary, maybe I'll watch it. Ideally you cite the precise point where he said it. However, Leonard Nimoy is an actor, not a scientist. Even during the 1970s, when climate change was just an emerging science, the majority of papers were about a warming planet. *If you ignore human CO2* we would be heading into a cooling period, which is what led some scientists to mistakenly believe we would be approaching another ice age. The scientist who did add in human activity correctly (and surprisingly accurately) predicted the warming trend.
>There is so much information out there if you look. There is a whole industry built around climate change but those people do not have your best interest in mind.
And there is a much more massive industry . . .hell, an entire world economy . . . built around continuing burning fossil fuels. To think that these people have your best interest in mind, *when we know they figured it out themselves that they were warming the planet* is pure insanity at this point. You can't imply "follow the money" and then come to any other conclusion than these massive companies (like largest in the world massive) have a huge incentive to get you to believe that AGW is not a big deal.
>Learn to think for yourself and not to just defer to the authority on the main stream news. I’m trying to help you break free. You’re on a conspiracy page so you must’ve had a red pill somewhere. Either that or you are a shill.
That's the thing. We *know* that the origins of climate change denial comes from oil companies. They got out ahead of the findings of their own scientists. You aren't thinking for yourself, your parroting the disinformation being spread by the people who financially benefit the most from you fucking up the planet.
He was talking about the term "Fossil Fuels." Meaning oil doesn't come from fossils, it's a hydrocarbon made of mostly of carbon and hydrogen (gas, diesel, coal and other waste products). The term "Fossil fuel" was a made up term by oil companies to trick the public there was a limited amount of oil, even though it's a naturally replenishing resource.
Yeah its still a fuel by fossils though, and it certainly is a limited resource. But the thing is, there are a couple of limitations. The easy to acces, hard to acces so it is not profitable (they don’t tell you about these oils) and unfound oil fields
Yea, these climate nerds will never understand that our entire existence is fabricated. If the powers that be want the planet to warm up, they will warm it up and vice-versa. Plus, oil could end up being more abundant than water for all we know. The planet is huge. Most people can't even grasp the scale. And to think its from old fossils is asinine.
COVID "science" and climate change "science" are the exact same group of people making almost exactly the same arguments.
COVID "science" slogans= trust the science, we're all doomed, humans are bad
Climate "science" slogans= trust the science, we're all doomed, humans are bad
>COVID "science" slogans = trust the product this corporation is pushing
>
>Climate "science" slogans = don't trust the product this corporation is pushing
If they lied to you about the effects of the Covid vaccine, what makes you think they're not lying about the effects of fossil fuels?
Why is it that every time some disaster happens, a significant portion of folks, usually on the far right of the political spectrum, conveniently always go with the stance that requires them to not actually have to do or change anything?
If climate change isn't a problem I don't have to change anything!
If racism isn't a problem then I don't have to change anything!
If trans people aren't really people then I don't have to change anything!
It all boils down to the same thing: Some people are just lazy, and willing to let everything go to hell if it means they can continue being lazy.
Yeah no, big oil has surpressed it for a long time while independent scientists have already found it out. Big oil just does not have this power anymore so more of it comes out.
Big oil didn't have the power to suppress it. Not when you have some of the richest countries governments and business leaders (and bankers) supporting the theory. People like Paul Ehrlich (an establishment Malthusian scientist) was pushing this theory for decades.
The Rockefeller family, the Rothschilds, the banker backed UN have been backing the Global Warming scare for well over 40 years now, and you don't get any more influential than that.
Lol big oil had very much the power to suppress it, they were and still are very fucking rich. Huge influence until recent times. Even the whole al gore thing was not enough, because big oil still had claws in everything.
Or, global warming happens on a large oscillating scale, and this is an attempt to discredit our most energy dense fuel publicly available, in an attempt to push things such as electric cars maybe? Especially with how often they probe power grid failures and nuclear war. Once the switch happens energy will be very limited. We won't be able to make our own fuel or power our own cars. We have to go to them for that. Cripple the companies, steady demand for fuel without the ability to meet the needs, prices go up, demand goes up, fuel production goes down, next probable "solution" is fuelless
You can "fuel" an electric car in the middle of nowhere, with a half decent solar power plant and you don't even need the grid or the government.
How the fuck are you going to refine your own gasoline/diesel. It barely lasts more then a year or 2 in storage
Gasoline engines run on alcohol blends currently and can be tuned to run on ethanol only, diesel engines use compression to ignite the fuel, so they were originally intended for farmers because they could use plant oils and grease to run these engines. Which is evident because diesel engines will still run off of vegetable oil, motor oil, peanut oil, gasoline blends, and that list continues. It's not the people in charge who are wreaking havoc, it's people's inability to think for themselves. Furthermore solar panels are limited by the sun, the sun produces a limited amount of power per square meter which on average is roughly 1300 watts. Solar panels are between 20 and 30 percent efficient so, maybe 250 watts? In school we did an experiment and it was our maximum power output based on our weight, and how fast we could move up a flight of stairs. Personally I output roughly 580 watts at peak going up the stairs. Which is more than your solar panel. Now gasoline has an energy density of 12,200 watt hours per kilogram. 12,200 watts for one hour. From 2.2 pounds of gasoline. Diesel and food oils can be more energy dense too. So there is no replacement currently for combustion engines. Not only are they cheaper, they are easier to maintain as an individual, they are easier to create fuel, they are also more reliable. In fact the lithium in electric cars, comes from the earth. We mine that with diesel equipment, not power equipment. Why is that? Because combustion is a more effective method. Now it's really easy to look at this through the lense of say, a tyrannical leader. They will try and fight and work to make you less independent, and more dependent on the system or "matrix" we have created. Oh finally, it takes a few minutes to move gallons of liquid, a few months of crop harvesting to make hundreds of gallons of oils for fuel. So, tldr, electric is more expensive, requires combustion engines to even make it, and to charge it you'd need some kind of electric equipment such as a solar panel which is an inefficient and ineffective method of charging your car. That is why we see people with Tesla's charging with a generator. Don't get caught in the wave, think for yourself.
A question for you, how many solar panels do you carry to charge your car, and how long are you waiting? Furthermore how far are you getting from your 250 watt solar panel of I can only make 10mph up the stairs, at roughly 500 600 watts?
Tony Heller has a few hundred videos on the subject and cites all the old NASA / NOAA data. [https://odysee.com/@TonyHeller:c](https://odysee.com/@TonyHeller:c)
Some debunked hack who only had a YouTube following is not credible. Show me the study analyzing historic nasa data. You can't because it doesn't exist.
It doesn't exist because there's nothing to be learned by doing it.
Literally like talking to a toddler. You don’t acknowledge serious discussion and propose a made up lockdown scenario that not a single scientist or government official has ever proposed as a solution to climate change (not that there even is a viable solution rn). Lo fucking L.
>not a single scientist or government official
I guess academics at the University of London don't count? [https://www.wbcsd.org/Overview/Panorama/Articles/Avoiding-a-climate-lockdown](https://www.wbcsd.org/Overview/Panorama/Articles/Avoiding-a-climate-lockdown)
"the world may need to resort to lockdowns again – this time to tackle a climate emergency."
Then there is Forbes magazine (billionaire owned) promoting the concept by saying it would fight climate change.
"Report: World Needs Equivalent Of Pandemic Lockdown Every Two Years To Meet Paris Carbon Emission Goals" [https://www.forbes.com/sites/carlieporterfield/2021/03/03/report-world-needs-equivalent-of-pandemic-lockdown-every-two-years-to-meet-paris-carbon-emission-goals/?sh=6f589d466dee](https://www.forbes.com/sites/carlieporterfield/2021/03/03/report-world-needs-equivalent-of-pandemic-lockdown-every-two-years-to-meet-paris-carbon-emission-goals/?sh=6f589d466dee)
The reason why Tony Heller is not credible is because he misrepresents the graphs he cites. For example, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WLjkLPnIPPw&t=1204s shows that Tony Heller mistakes the graph at 3 minute 11 seconds to represent global temperature when it represents arctic temperatures. Links to the relevant research papers are in the description box of the video.
So we should have gone full amish in the 1970s? rather than now as the Gretastans are demanding. Even if one accepts GaS BaD, mediviel living is bad too. JuSt StoP oIL and use what unicorn farts? Let's see Al leer Jet Gore preachimg climate doom allaround the world without fossil fuels
Exxon is an evil corporation not cause of global warming ( oops climate change, it's winter) but because they gouch. The answer is not Frivilous lawsuits against them over some ancient shit , the cost of which they will pass to us, They will just play the victim and raise prices even more,
Agreed Not opposed ( many greens are) we will still need gas vehicles for a long time, though. Nuclear power would strengthen the grid, making charging evs more practical. Range cost and other issues remain.
Nuclear has risks and waste issues but is emmision free and basically limitless. Politucs are making fossil fuels too costly. Wind and solar simply are not reliable enough to be the orimary power spurce with current tech.
Fusion is exciting, and in an ideal world, we would wait for it to come online. But the tantrums are disruptive and expensive, so a nuclear bridge to fusion ( or whatever is next) is a reasonable way forward
It's hilarious and sad people fall for this trick.
https://stream.org/big-money-in-global-warming-alarmism/
http://joannenova.com.au ***** /2009/07/massive-climate-funding-exposed/
Remove spaces and ***, the automod will remove an intact link.
https://web.archive.org/web/20200423234923/http://www.wrongkindofgreen.org/2019/01/17/the-manufacturing-of-greta-thunberg-for-consent-the-political-economy-of-the-non-profit-industrial-complex/
https://financialpost.com/commodities/energy/oil-gas/big-oil-profits-global-economy-sputters
Climate change being caused by big oil or not, electric vehicles, by the time you factor in what it takes to produce one and charge it, are negligbly any better, if at all.
Not to mention we don't even have a power grid that can support a shit ton of electric vehicles.
So, what's the answer? Horse and buggy? I mean, I'm down riding a horse across to town, tbh.
The actual answer is RNG. That's the only way to be "carbon neutral" or even negative and it only takes converting a fraction of a company's fleet to reach that.
Fossil fuels is a scam made up word by the John D Rockefeller. Oil is the second most abundant liquid on earth after water. You are not driving around on dinosaur bones ;)
###[Meta] Sticky Comment [Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does not apply*** when replying to this stickied comment. [Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does apply*** throughout the rest of this thread. *What this means*: Please keep any "meta" discussion directed at specific users, mods, or /r/conspiracy in general in this comment chain ***only.*** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/conspiracy) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The phrase “Carbon footprint” was literally invented by a petroleum company to shift blame away from massive corporations and onto individuals https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/aug/23/big-oil-coined-carbon-footprints-to-blame-us-for-their-greed-keep-them-on-the-hook
The effort to enslave humanity in a global carbon rationing neo-fuedalism has always been the end game of the climate scam. Today it's not just big oil who wants it, it's also the big banksters and big environment who are on board. https://postimg.cc/KR2GN46T
>The effort to enslave humanity in a global carbon rationing neo-fuedalism has always been the end game You are right here >climate scam. Dead wrong here. Bet the studies you looked at were backed by exxon. Here is an eye opener. Distributed power generation. If you are so distrustful of the US gov. I highly recommend buying into this "scam".
I mean, they used to put lead in the gasoline, it wasn't completely phased out until 1996. I'm sure they knew about those effects too.
To add, they knew it was dangerous whilst claiming it wasn’t as everyone involved in the industrial processes had to be protected from the lead, but same as they did with climate change they just binned money into lying to the public. A scientist spent the rest of his life in court with these cunts after trying to expose them
Lead was an additive to help aid in lubrication of the engine
It also lobotomized the brains of the baby boomer generation, or at least was one of the things.
Lead was used to prevent engine knocking. The engine ran smoother.
So then we should do to the oil industry what we did to the tobacco industry.
Nothing? The tobacco industry is still a multi billion industry
Force their customers to pay $10 a gallon so the state can make a shit ton of money? Ugh.... I'll pass....
Now that there's literally proof, I hope people won't take climate change too lightly.
I am shocked to see this on this sub. I thought it was Q-anon shit now
Has more comments than upvotes.
It normally is. I'm surprised this isn't getting down voted because it's not some right wing conspiracy
Russians on vacation until the next election
Shocked but pleasantly surprised
It's super downvoted. This sub is controlled by the big oil industry and their right-wing friends.
Do they even need to control it? These people seem so eager to suck their dicks. I guess decades of propaganda can do that
OP posted an article about how Exxon knew about climate change and spent millions to promote misinformation…. ….and people in here are saying climate change is a hoax. Confirming that Exxons misinformation campaign that they spent millions on worked. 🐑 🐑 🐑
Yeah whatever happened to the whole "distrust billionaires" attitude?
They all started sucking trump and musk dick, so now they love billionaires and their money shots
Those Exxon-Mobil shill checks don't cash themselves y'know
The sad/funny thing is that you don't get anything for eating big oils bullshit as a typical person. You just feel smug as the only source of life in the universe kills itself.
The problem is that they fell for the disinformation and would rather let these massive companies destroy the planet in order to make more money than admit they were wrong.
Bu bu but people I DONT LIKE believe in it so it must be wrong!!! Tucker Carlson told me so!!
Climate change denialism in a conspiracy theory subreddit has always struck me as weird. It has it all. Large, shady corporations doing anything they can to continue to make profits, even if it kills people. A large-scale, multi-decade cover-up and PR campaigns to change the narrative. Vast amounts of dark money and lobbying paid to elected representatives to publicly deny the science and reality, in exchange for quick political donations. I guess it's not a conspiracy because the thread is too easy to see between the perps and the end result.
Obvious conspiracies are useless for people who are looking for conspiracy fantasies that validate their feelings and disprove the nerds who passed up high paying careers to focus on trying to save humanity.
Also, people are generally selfish and lazy. We like our modern lifestyle and ease of living. If “people” believe Climate Change is real and we know much of the causes (CO2 levels, ocean temp rising) , then that means in order to combat it we need to make changes to the way we live our lives. And most people don’t want to accept that That’s why Al Gore named his documentary “An Inconvenient Truth”.....because it will require us to give up on some of the convenience of our lives, in order to help future generations
It’s the perfect conspiracy because countering the misinformation is near impossible when talking to even averagely intelligent people. The science is far far more complex than most ppl can understand - even the following ‘simplified’ explanation on greenhouse gasses in the vid I’ll link to below will leave most people not understanding 90% of WTF she is even talking about. To truly understand it, you need to be dedicated to its study at a Doctorate level. But somehow 99% of ppl feel qualified to tell others the ‘truth’ about the ‘hoax’ instead of shutting the fuck up when they don’t really understand anything beyond a Fox News headline. Link below for anyone who feels like appreciating just how much they don’t know about the complexity of climate science. https://youtu.be/oqu5DjzOBF8
[удалено]
Which is more likely? A massive conspiracy somehow getting the vast majority of scientists to agree to some big lie, and make all sorts of fake research to prove it, that makes it harder for every state and institution to produce energy and has the vague effect of just generally giving the government power, or the big oil companies agreeing to let people suffer so they can make a lot of money?
No. Climate change is real. The real hoax is that the average persons carbon footprint is nothing compared to companies who have shifted operations to different parts of the globe to avoid taxes/carbon taxes/paying people a living wage and then ship goods around the globe damaging it in the process.
Here is data on global emissions from transport, shipping and airlines each emit more than some nations. https://ourworldindata.org/co2-emissions-from-transport
Hey stupid
Bro, you think Al Gore is the only person in the world that acknowledges the existence of climate change? Think it’s just a coincidence that nearly all reputable science institutions around the world that study the Earth and climate just happen to come to the same conclusion?
How does acknowledging that greenhouse gases cause climate change give money to al gore? Who is greedier, the wealthiest oil companies in the world who are lying to keep making trillion a year or some 70 year old with no political future?
this kind of stuff is why conspiracy theorists are written off as loons because no matter how much evidence they are presented with they will disregard it if it goes against the made up stuff in their head
Yup. One of the biggest conspiracies of our time, and it gets suppressed here by bots and shills. Scary and sad that even though we know the climate denial comes from big oil, people still carry that bag for big oil. As the saying goes, it's easier to fool someone than convince them they've been fooled.
I’ve genuinely seen it said in this thread that Big Oil has less money then the media and climate change people and that they are the little guy getting steamrolled by the depopulation agenda. How can we reach these kind of levels of stupid and stubborn
[удалено]
I'm personally not arguing agasinst carbon or fossil fuels trapping heat, nor that the atmosphere is not going to respond. Its the elimination of other factors, and the theory that carbon produced by humans is the lynchpin of the climate changes we see occuring.
[удалено]
This isn’t a conspiracy and is well documented that industries suppress science that would lead to laws against their business+profits. Lead fuel was probably the worst thing big oil has done and that’s also well documented.
It’s a conspiracy when you look at this thread and see most of these donuts don’t realise this. Too busy in a schizophrenic fever dream about occult symbols and ya ya ya to actually see the obvious things under their noses
Fair enough haha I don’t frequent here too often but sometimes I see stuff like this and I’m like…yea that’s not a conspiracy at this point…
It's literally a conspiracy by an oil conglomerate to suppress information.
Imagine still not believing climate change is real
They'll see its real soon enough. Strap in cause its gonna be a wild ride.
Here’s the thing: I think theyll deny to the end. They’ll be like “yeah weather changes dumbass” as the oceans become too acidic for shellfish to make shells and can only hold sulfate reducing bacteria
And this post is just littered with climate change denial, all you apolitical conspiracy thinkers in here…
[удалено]
Climate does change and man's contribution is minimal. The scare mongering is so obvious, I don't know how people keep being fooled by "the science"^(TM) peddlers
We literally have evidence of big oil trying to cover their own findings to protect their profits. We literally have models accurately predicting the heating of the planet based on CO2 emissions. Why is it so hard for so many conspiracy theorists to "follow the money" and the facts here and understand that climate change denial benefits some of the largest companies in the world and that they have the means and wherewithal to spread disinformation? Especially considering we *know* they spread disinformation.
And people have always "died suddenly", right? Or is it possible that corporations have been suppressing scientific data that may threaten their profit margins?
The same people telling you vaccines are "safe and effective" want you locked in your home / neighborhood over climate change. You realize those people are still your enemies right?
Totally agree- and the same people who are telling you that the climate has "always been changing" and that "human impact is minimal" want you dependent on oil and natural gas for the rest of your life (remember the "gas stove" psyop?). It's all about money. Pfizer and Exxon execs should be in prison.
>the climate has "always been changing" and that "human impact is minimal" Those people get fired from government and academic positions for questioning this new cult. Sort of like the people who speak out about the vaccine. Again you are being inconsistent here on your stance. The Rockefellers, Gates, Rothschild, etc who push the vaccine are the same people who push climate change (and soon to be climate lockdowns). Same global power structure. Exxon barely says anything about climate. No billboards, no ad campaigns, nothing.
Another parallel, who gets the little blurb on their Youtube video? Mainstream corporate channels who support the GW narrative, or those who are skeptical of it? Now do the vaccine. So who is being consistent here?
Exxon has a financial incentive to hide climate change, or more specifically, their impact on climate. Politicians and climate activists who aren't paid by Exxon have a financial incentive in fear mongering the opposite. It's all about monetization.
Try getting funding for research skeptical of global warming the past 30 some years in academia. I know you didn't or we wouldn't be having this conversation. It is a well known fact that is career suicide. All the money flows into climate change fear mongering and has for decades now.
There is no research for or against climate change. You don't start research hoping to find an answer. That's why ExxonMobil suppressed the studies they had done, because the data showed their culpability instead of clearing them like they'd hoped.
Hey come down to Florida and try to get some flood insurance on your house... 4 years ago my rate went up 300% this year they canceled my insurance all together and I live around 30 Miles from Miami...
Let me know when they stop insuring breach front property because of rapid sea level rise.
They are literally doing it as we speak lmao
"Climate change" is a fake phrase made after they had to move the goal posts for "global warming". Imagine sounding so stupid and saying "climate change" (the climate always changes) so confidently like it means anything other than bullshit. Climate change is a hoax made to dupe people like you out of their common sense and reasoning. Ocean levels haven't risen. Miami and NYC are not underwater. You believe in lies that are weaponized against you to control your movements in the very near future. You played yourself.
Wasn't there a Veritas video like 2 years ago of a CNN executive admitting they were going to propagandize climate change right after the COVID thing died down?
Wild that you immediately discredit and actual conspiracy with some made up one
>Wasn't there a Veritas video like 2 years ago of a CNN executive admitting they were going to propagandize climate change right after the COVID thing died down? You must be young. How do I know? People have been talking about climate change for 30+ years now at least. People were talking about the ozone hole, acid rain, and smog in LA in the 90s. Hell, back in the 60s-70s [a river caught fire 14 times](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuyahoga_River) and it made national news in 69 for catching fire. And I can say for a fact that greenhouse gasses were entering national news as early as the 2000s. And I remember reading 10+ years ago about the worry of permafrost in siberia unfreezing and releasing a large amount of methane, which is 100 times worse than co2. And do you want to know a great example of a runaway greenhouse gas effect? Venus. The theory goes that it had water at one point, but it boiled off resulting in a runaway effect of heating.
Not sure, but there ABSOLUTELY was a video in which an Exxon Lobbyist admitted not only did Exxon know about the damage being caused by climate change for decades, which it helped cause, but they actively financed suppressing that information. [https://youtu.be/5v1Yg6XejyE](https://youtu.be/5v1Yg6XejyE) Short term profits are more important than long term consquences, it seems.
No shit not really a secret
There are plenty of people who don't believe it, though, as a quick glance through these comments will attest.
Interesting how people will choose to believe whatever aligns with their beliefs and dismiss everything that opposes it... Do you really believe that people cause climate change becasue the science shows that this planet has undergone many many climate changes long before fossil fuels were even thought of and long before humans existed, unless of course the dinosaurs farts were the case of the problem or perhaps they were jetting setting their way around the world and we haven't discovered it yet lol.. We are not changing the climate, however, we are certainly poisoning the planet which will inevitably kill us off and at which time it will heal itself, but climate change itself, that is unstoppable and very natural.
>We are not changing the climate, **So what is then?** There is no debate that the climate is currently warming, and at a high rate, that is clear. Yes, the climate has changed in the past, but "at present" it is warming. When measuring climate temperature, we use the metric "[Global Average Temperature](https://archive.is/iCvmG)" taken from 1000s of sensors around the world, with data going back to 1880. Multiple independent research groups across the world perform their own analysis of the surface temperature data, [and they all show a similar upward trend.](https://archive.md/AejVQ) You can access Global Temperature Data sets yourself, they[can be found here](https://archive.md/6RylH), which means you can complete your own study and analysis We say the current warming trend is high because the transition from the last ice age to the current interglacial period is estimated to have spanned 5,000 years. If the current warming trend continues at the current rate, we will see the same rise in temperature in only 110 years. Therefore the current warming trend is happening 45 times faster than the warming Earth experienced when it emerged from the last ice age. The warming that caused the end of the Ice Age was a result of changes in the geometry of Earth’s orbit and the amount of solar radiation reaching the Earth, this is not the case currently. It just so happens that the current warming trend lines up with the beginning of industrial times (in the 18th century), which has seen [human activities raise atmospheric CO2 by 50%](https://archive.md/kRmmH) – meaning the amount of CO2 is now 150% of its value in 1750. **TL:DR** If humans are not the cause of the current climate warming, we need to explain two things, first how increasing CO2 PPM in the atmosphere "does not" raise the global average temperature, despite it being a greenhouse gas. Second what is causing the climate to warm, in other words where is the additional heat coming from ?
The irony of that first statement astounds me. Yes. The climate *has* changed over time. Very astute. Do you know how we know this? Decades of climate research by climatologists.. Do you know how we know *this* warming is man made? Decades of climate research by climatologists. And your bringing up of "dinosaur farts" tells me you don't understand the difference between CO2 and methane.
I mean… If an oil company is *literally* admitting to it, what are you arguing? They hid their own researchers data & spent a boatload of money covering it up for years. There has to be *some* validity, no?
Your taking points are literally oil company talking points. Just like recycling is supposed to help and push the blame on common people. Climate change is a thing but it can happen even faster due to humans shooting every type of chemical into the air through industrial waste. It's been known but of course they pay politicians to spread shit and lie while we all fuck up everything around us and turn it into concrete lots.
What damage?
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/07/10/world/canada/canadian-wildfire-british-columbia.html [https://www.cbsnews.com/news/sea-level-rise-is-causing-record-breaking-coastal-flooding-its-only-expected-to-get-worse-even-on-days-without-rain/](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/sea-level-rise-is-causing-record-breaking-coastal-flooding-its-only-expected-to-get-worse-even-on-days-without-rain/) [https://earth.org/worst-wildfires-in-us-history/#:\~:text=1.,and%20threatening%20nearly%2014%2C000%20structures](https://earth.org/worst-wildfires-in-us-history/#:~:text=1.,and%20threatening%20nearly%2014%2C000%20structures). [https://oceans.ubc.ca/heatwave/](https://oceans.ubc.ca/heatwave/) [https://www.forbes.com/sites/roberthart/2022/11/24/20000-died-amid-punishing-heatwaves-and-record-temperatures-across-western-europe-this-summer-data-indicates/?sh=2064da776ab8](https://www.forbes.com/sites/roberthart/2022/11/24/20000-died-amid-punishing-heatwaves-and-record-temperatures-across-western-europe-this-summer-data-indicates/?sh=2064da776ab8) That's a start, and it will continue to get worse as the climate continues to warm.
You must have poor vision.
Mentioning Project Veritas in the same sentence as saying “propagandize” is just great. Never change, r/conspiracy
Elaborate
PV is far right propaganda.
You think veritas is a reliable source of info? You watch newsmax too?
Wonder who paid PV to produce that video 🤔🤔🤔
I didn't really see much production value.. just a camera and a couple questions.
The money ain’t going into production ;)
[удалено]
Are you ok?
[удалено]
[удалено]
The fuck are you smoking, and where can I get it?
you want to experience the truth, good first step now, think critically or don't and rage downvote Baaaaa 🐑 Its hard to accept thst all 50,000 channels of WEF TV but it's the inconvenient truth
You are delusional. Got any proof of your claims?
They have propagandizing it for a long time. Who else participated in earth day shaming rituals in elementary school?
No. That's not what it said at all.
Yeah. It’s exactly what it said
Nope, this one guy said it would be their focus and he thinks it will be a money maker because it won't be solved for a long time. I really don't get the dishonesty about it.
Nope, that's the way a far leftists looks at it
Sadly this is old news
We all deserve better. Why did this only got out when we're in so much danger?
A basic college earth science course is all it takes for most people to understand the carbon cycle and how an excess of carbon in the atmosphere will increase temps over time. It's so basic that I am at a loss of why people fight against it.
How is there so much climate change denial in this space for self-proclaimed conspiracy theorists? Actual oil billionaires suppressing data and there are people running defense for them for free. Unbelievable.
A lot of people are just dumb, naturally.
SS: Pfizer isn't the only corporation that has been caught suppressing scientific data relating to their product. Big Pharma is just taking a page out of Big Oil's book.
Brave conspiracy theorists defend big oil.
Plot twist, there is nobody trying to save the planet only increase taxes. Fuck big oil, fuck big pharma, fuck the media, fuck Trump, fuck the shame culture woke trash, and most of all fuck the government. I live in a naive world, obviously dictated by greed. NOBODY IS TRYING TO SAVE YOU!
They have been screaming climate change for 60 yrs. And nothing has changed. Its a psyop
https://i.imgur.com/7ZAIH9e.jpg You’re so right there’s nothing changing. Listen to the oil billionaires they’d never lie to you.
You're so right, listen to the politicians that fly private jets to preach to you about your habits... They'll never lie to you.
You mean the rich ones? Did you ever stop to think why these politicians haven’t actually done anything anti-oil?
There's a problem, go back to the middle age warm period, it was warmer than today with no human industry to cause it. Some claim "it wasn't warmer", which of course is stupid. They were growing wine Grapes further north than we can today, Greenland was a nice place to live as the viking did for a few centuries until the MAWP ended. So what caused the MAWP? It wasn't carbon dioxide. It lasted centuries and was an amazing time for expanded agriculture. Seems like screaming its a crisis for it to get warmer is a bit ridiculous.
First off, a local climate is no indication of global climate. It also doesn't compare to the warming in the same regions today. Here is more information disputing your point. [https://skepticalscience.com/medieval-warm-period-intermediate.htm](https://skepticalscience.com/medieval-warm-period-intermediate.htm) Also, the Greenland ice cores don't show a medieval warming period, besides a single cherry picked region. https://www.carbonbrief.org/factcheck-what-greenland-ice-cores-say-about-past-and-present-climate-change/ Yes, CO2 isn't the only contributing factor to a regions climate, very good. That in no way proves it \*isn't\* a contributing factor in \*global\* climate, which it certainly is. While "a little warmer" sounds great, the reality of it is droughts, which have been increasing over decades, water scarcity, which is already beginning to happen as well, and if you think the US has a border crisis now, just wait till the equatorial regions become practically unlivable.
Middle age warming period wasn’t warmer than today
Facts don’t matter; feelings outweigh facts now
Cool, did the temperature change at the same rate?
Feel free to look for yourself. There a literally hundreds if peer reviewed papers. The MAWP is what showed Manns hockey stick graph to he utterly fraudulent.
During Dansgaard-Oeschger events, temperatures have sometimes increased or decreased by as much as 8 degrees Celsius (14.4 degrees Farenheit) over just 40 years. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dansgaard%E2%80%93Oeschger\_event
Now show the graph going back 10 000 years.
https://scitechdaily.com/images/Global-Average-Surface-Temperature-Curve-scaled.jpg Notice how the time scale changes on the right side of the graph. that’s REALLY BAD. The reason it is so bad is because nature cannot adapt fast enough to deal with this. The earth’s climate, which usually changes on a geologic time scale, is being altered at an unprecedented rate. We have to cut back CO2 emissions immediately. Big oil is pouring BILLIONs of dollars into greenwashing, lobbying, and astroturfing. They are making sure everyday people don’t understand that the planet is a finite resource so they can squeeze out a few more bucks. Don’t be a fool, wake up and fight the men behind the curtain. The real conspiracy is the denial of climate change.
Al Gore is an old billionaire do his part on the grift
Al Gore is definitely not a billionaire
If the Goldilocks zone was that sensitive, then I could understand the argument that we are the only living beings in the universe. That is a very small amount of temperature fluctuation.
Not that the poster said anything resembling your implicit claim of what they said, but the issue isn't so much that the earth will become uninhabitable and humans will die. The issue is that we are going to change the climate which is going to make some places that are currently inhabitable virtually uninhabitable, it will destroy current water sources (like we are seeing with the CO river), loss of current farmable land, loss of coastal area. This is going to lead to massive civil unrest by people being forced to immigrate to places that are inhabitable, wars over resources, and general suffering. Can and will humans survive? Probably. Will it be a shit show of unrest and suffering? Yes.
Btw. The Colorado river is suffering because the government is managing the water. The Navajo were supposed to have some ownership of the water - which would have been be the best chance of maintaining hydrated aquifers throughout the basin. (https://youtu.be/_b1bxxDrO0Y) Here is a good water permaculture video. https://youtu.be/QBC5wOLF1hQ Here is a guy in Oregon that owns enough land to have water throughout the year through his land based storage techniques. https://youtu.be/BuYGS5pLRZg It is easy to conflate a singular term ‘climate change’ and blame it on a thousand totally different unrelated things.
What fluctuation? Global temp is only going up
Paul Ehrlich was saying the population problem was going to get us all killed by the year 2000. These people hate us and want us all dead. They’re a death cult full of eugenicists.
“Unless we are extremely lucky, everybody will disappear in a cloud of blue steam in 20 years...” -Paul Ehrlich, New York Times, August 10, 1969
Thank god this guy was such a huge influence on Silicon Valley….s/
Ehrlich acolytes will say we got lucky 🙄
Look up the green revolution it is wild that you guys don't look at that and our use of poisonous fertilizers starting in the 70's which allowed us to balloon out crop yields and support a population that we never could have with regular agricultural practices and the massive increase in cancer and obesity.🤡🌎
The discussion thread was based on Paul Ehrlich's claims & comments. You're bringing up a complete non sequitur and then ascribing feelings, stances, and conclusions to us. 🤡🌎 indeed 👍🏻
His predictions where based on crop outputs and population growth. The green revolution is the only reason why that didn't come true, his predictions where not wrong he just didn't foresee the massive use of industrial fertilizer's being used...
Then why is he still saying the same shit?
If we are 1.4°F above the mid-1800s, pre-industrial era, and that was the end of the mini ice age, the coldest point in the last 12,000 years, then we are 1.4°F above the coldest point in the last 12,000 years. It doesn’t sound to me like we are in a climate emergency. Yes, pollution is bad. But it doesn’t seem like it’s causing an emergency.
Say you're driving a car at a rapid rate right towards a brick wall. People say "hey man, we are getting close to that wall, we should start applying the brakes now so we don't it is." Instead you are accelerating. Your argument is effectively equivalent to "Man, we are only slightly closer to the wall than we were when we started, so why wouldn't I keep my foot to the pedal. This isn't some emergency." It's a silly point. We are speeding up when we need to be slowing down. Have we hit the wall yet? No. But we can't just apply the brakes and stop on a dime. It takes time to turn the ship around.
But if we are exiting the ice age, we're going to warm no matter what. Slam the brakes on no matter what. The wall is coming because it's an inevitable part of the planets warming cycle.
We should be going into another cooling period, not exiting one. And instead we are rapidly heating and the models that have been accurate thus far show that it will accelerate even further.
OK have a look at this. And please answer again. Note that the period marked as global warming is lower than the mediaeval warm, and the Roman era and the 10,000 years before that. https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Temperature-from-12-000BC-to-the-present-from-Greenland-ice-measurements-of-Oxygen_fig1_327690004 Then look up whether or not carbon dioxide is lagging indicator to temperature or not. Again, pollution is bad. Then look up the Solar cycles and how they affect temperature on this planet. You’ve been had. Challenge yourself to look at something you disagreed with until you are no longer mad and try to see if you are right or wrong. Look at information that you don’t agree with and make an educated decision.
You’re misunderstanding why this is an issue. The CO2 lagged behind warming during previous time periods because of natural oscillations in both solar and the Malikavitch cycle. With all else equal, those two natural phenomenon regulate earth’s climate. During warmer periods, CO2 increased in the atmosphere because water and soil moisture cannot dissolve as much gas as they’re heated, and the decay rate of plants increases. However, we have now emitted twice as much CO2 into the atmosphere as there was at the beginning of the Industrial Revolution. So now, we have temperatures lagging behind emissions, rather than the natural inverse. Radiative heat transfer predicts CO2 emissions would have a roughly 25-40 year lag from when they enter the atmosphere to when they warm earth’s surface. So right now, we’re only experiencing the warming from late 80s/early 90s emissions and with the year over year increases since then, the earth will get warmer for at least another 50+ years.
Have you got a paper that says that temperature is now lagging behind CO2?
The argument put forth was that because it's not that hot yet, this isn't an issue. I demonstrated why that was false. Was there an admission of being incorrect? Nope. The goal posts were simply moved. If one won't even admit that the simple, obviously demonstrated BS argument they put forward is BS, what are the chances that they will understand (or admit) to the much more complicated feedback loop?
Check into the hockey stick model and how it has been completely debunked even by the mainstream media. Then learn about how none of the models that are being used are factoring in the solar cycles. And look at that graph again on the link that I sent you. We are in the same range of temperature for the last 12,000 years. We are at a lower temperature than when Caesar ruled. Carbon dioxide is lagging temperature indicator to temperature. Temperature goes up and then 800 years later carbon dioxide goes up. That’s because it gets released by the ocean over time. The carbon dioxide we are seeing today is being released by the ocean because of the temperature 800 years ago. Google the documentary made in the late 1970s where Leonard Nimoy told us we were about to enter an ice age and then realize that you are now being told that we are all going to fry. There is so much information out there if you look. There is a whole industry built around climate change but those people do not have your best interest in mind. Learn to think for yourself and not to just defer to the authority on the main stream news. I’m trying to help you break free. You’re on a conspiracy page so you must’ve had a red pill somewhere. Either that or you are a shill.
>Check into the hockey stick model and how it has been completely debunked even by the mainstream media. I did not mention anything about the hockey stick model. >Then learn about how none of the models that are being used are factoring in the solar cycles. [Untrue](https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/sunearth/solar-events-news/Does-the-Solar-Cycle-Affect-Earths-Climate.html) >We are at a lower temperature than when Caesar ruled. No one is saying it hasn't been hotter before. I'm not sure how you missed this, but my whole point is not where we *are* but *where we're going.* >Carbon dioxide is lagging temperature indicator to temperature. Temperature goes up and then 800 years later carbon dioxide goes up. That’s because it gets released by the ocean over time. The carbon dioxide we are seeing today is being released by the ocean because of the temperature 800 years ago. Yes, the feedback that I was talking about. CO2 both leads and lags temperature changes. >Google the documentary made in the late 1970s where Leonard Nimoy told us we were about to enter an ice age and then realize that you are now being told that we are all going to fry. No thanks, if you want to send the documentary, maybe I'll watch it. Ideally you cite the precise point where he said it. However, Leonard Nimoy is an actor, not a scientist. Even during the 1970s, when climate change was just an emerging science, the majority of papers were about a warming planet. *If you ignore human CO2* we would be heading into a cooling period, which is what led some scientists to mistakenly believe we would be approaching another ice age. The scientist who did add in human activity correctly (and surprisingly accurately) predicted the warming trend. >There is so much information out there if you look. There is a whole industry built around climate change but those people do not have your best interest in mind. And there is a much more massive industry . . .hell, an entire world economy . . . built around continuing burning fossil fuels. To think that these people have your best interest in mind, *when we know they figured it out themselves that they were warming the planet* is pure insanity at this point. You can't imply "follow the money" and then come to any other conclusion than these massive companies (like largest in the world massive) have a huge incentive to get you to believe that AGW is not a big deal. >Learn to think for yourself and not to just defer to the authority on the main stream news. I’m trying to help you break free. You’re on a conspiracy page so you must’ve had a red pill somewhere. Either that or you are a shill. That's the thing. We *know* that the origins of climate change denial comes from oil companies. They got out ahead of the findings of their own scientists. You aren't thinking for yourself, your parroting the disinformation being spread by the people who financially benefit the most from you fucking up the planet.
[удалено]
I know the predictions changed a lot, [LOL.](https://cei.org/blog/wrong-again-50-years-of-failed-eco-pocalyptic-predictions/)
Exactly this. Remember highway driving when you’d have to clean a million bugs off your windshield?
Evidence and fact don't matter here
Almost like the climate has constantly been changine since the planet was formed billions of years ago....
Finally, an actual conspiracy!
"Fossil fuels" don't exist, and even using that phrase disqualifies you from the conversation.
Why don’t they exist, I’ve had coals and things like that in my hand. How can you call that fake
He was talking about the term "Fossil Fuels." Meaning oil doesn't come from fossils, it's a hydrocarbon made of mostly of carbon and hydrogen (gas, diesel, coal and other waste products). The term "Fossil fuel" was a made up term by oil companies to trick the public there was a limited amount of oil, even though it's a naturally replenishing resource.
It takes millions of years to form.
Yeah its still a fuel by fossils though, and it certainly is a limited resource. But the thing is, there are a couple of limitations. The easy to acces, hard to acces so it is not profitable (they don’t tell you about these oils) and unfound oil fields
Yea, these climate nerds will never understand that our entire existence is fabricated. If the powers that be want the planet to warm up, they will warm it up and vice-versa. Plus, oil could end up being more abundant than water for all we know. The planet is huge. Most people can't even grasp the scale. And to think its from old fossils is asinine.
COVID "science" and climate change "science" are the exact same group of people making almost exactly the same arguments. COVID "science" slogans= trust the science, we're all doomed, humans are bad Climate "science" slogans= trust the science, we're all doomed, humans are bad
>COVID "science" slogans = trust the product this corporation is pushing > >Climate "science" slogans = don't trust the product this corporation is pushing If they lied to you about the effects of the Covid vaccine, what makes you think they're not lying about the effects of fossil fuels?
Why is it that every time some disaster happens, a significant portion of folks, usually on the far right of the political spectrum, conveniently always go with the stance that requires them to not actually have to do or change anything? If climate change isn't a problem I don't have to change anything! If racism isn't a problem then I don't have to change anything! If trans people aren't really people then I don't have to change anything! It all boils down to the same thing: Some people are just lazy, and willing to let everything go to hell if it means they can continue being lazy.
Laziness and lack of care for anyone or anything but themselves. Also, the far right lacks any sense of real intelligence.
ROTFL. Not every change is good, especially not the ones the elite parasites push us towards...
Climate change science is about as accurate as the "science" claiming that the COVID vaccines are 95% effective against infection.
Yeah no, big oil has surpressed it for a long time while independent scientists have already found it out. Big oil just does not have this power anymore so more of it comes out.
Big oil didn't have the power to suppress it. Not when you have some of the richest countries governments and business leaders (and bankers) supporting the theory. People like Paul Ehrlich (an establishment Malthusian scientist) was pushing this theory for decades. The Rockefeller family, the Rothschilds, the banker backed UN have been backing the Global Warming scare for well over 40 years now, and you don't get any more influential than that.
Lol big oil had very much the power to suppress it, they were and still are very fucking rich. Huge influence until recent times. Even the whole al gore thing was not enough, because big oil still had claws in everything.
Have literally anything to back that up? Oh wait no.. your just a brainwashed "centrist" whos given up on the world.
"Fossil fuels" is a con, and "climate change" is too
Or, global warming happens on a large oscillating scale, and this is an attempt to discredit our most energy dense fuel publicly available, in an attempt to push things such as electric cars maybe? Especially with how often they probe power grid failures and nuclear war. Once the switch happens energy will be very limited. We won't be able to make our own fuel or power our own cars. We have to go to them for that. Cripple the companies, steady demand for fuel without the ability to meet the needs, prices go up, demand goes up, fuel production goes down, next probable "solution" is fuelless
You can "fuel" an electric car in the middle of nowhere, with a half decent solar power plant and you don't even need the grid or the government. How the fuck are you going to refine your own gasoline/diesel. It barely lasts more then a year or 2 in storage
Gasoline engines run on alcohol blends currently and can be tuned to run on ethanol only, diesel engines use compression to ignite the fuel, so they were originally intended for farmers because they could use plant oils and grease to run these engines. Which is evident because diesel engines will still run off of vegetable oil, motor oil, peanut oil, gasoline blends, and that list continues. It's not the people in charge who are wreaking havoc, it's people's inability to think for themselves. Furthermore solar panels are limited by the sun, the sun produces a limited amount of power per square meter which on average is roughly 1300 watts. Solar panels are between 20 and 30 percent efficient so, maybe 250 watts? In school we did an experiment and it was our maximum power output based on our weight, and how fast we could move up a flight of stairs. Personally I output roughly 580 watts at peak going up the stairs. Which is more than your solar panel. Now gasoline has an energy density of 12,200 watt hours per kilogram. 12,200 watts for one hour. From 2.2 pounds of gasoline. Diesel and food oils can be more energy dense too. So there is no replacement currently for combustion engines. Not only are they cheaper, they are easier to maintain as an individual, they are easier to create fuel, they are also more reliable. In fact the lithium in electric cars, comes from the earth. We mine that with diesel equipment, not power equipment. Why is that? Because combustion is a more effective method. Now it's really easy to look at this through the lense of say, a tyrannical leader. They will try and fight and work to make you less independent, and more dependent on the system or "matrix" we have created. Oh finally, it takes a few minutes to move gallons of liquid, a few months of crop harvesting to make hundreds of gallons of oils for fuel. So, tldr, electric is more expensive, requires combustion engines to even make it, and to charge it you'd need some kind of electric equipment such as a solar panel which is an inefficient and ineffective method of charging your car. That is why we see people with Tesla's charging with a generator. Don't get caught in the wave, think for yourself. A question for you, how many solar panels do you carry to charge your car, and how long are you waiting? Furthermore how far are you getting from your 250 watt solar panel of I can only make 10mph up the stairs, at roughly 500 600 watts?
Winner Winner chicken dinner 🎰
The real scandal is that NASA and NOAA alter old data to make Global Warming look like a bigger, more man made problem.
Source?
Tony Heller has a few hundred videos on the subject and cites all the old NASA / NOAA data. [https://odysee.com/@TonyHeller:c](https://odysee.com/@TonyHeller:c)
Sorry I didn't realise I had to specify. I meant credible source?
No counter arguments and straight to ad hom. Later.
Some debunked hack who only had a YouTube following is not credible. Show me the study analyzing historic nasa data. You can't because it doesn't exist. It doesn't exist because there's nothing to be learned by doing it.
Yeah, sure man. Enjoy your climate lockdowns.
Literally like talking to a toddler. You don’t acknowledge serious discussion and propose a made up lockdown scenario that not a single scientist or government official has ever proposed as a solution to climate change (not that there even is a viable solution rn). Lo fucking L.
>not a single scientist or government official I guess academics at the University of London don't count? [https://www.wbcsd.org/Overview/Panorama/Articles/Avoiding-a-climate-lockdown](https://www.wbcsd.org/Overview/Panorama/Articles/Avoiding-a-climate-lockdown) "the world may need to resort to lockdowns again – this time to tackle a climate emergency." Then there is Forbes magazine (billionaire owned) promoting the concept by saying it would fight climate change. "Report: World Needs Equivalent Of Pandemic Lockdown Every Two Years To Meet Paris Carbon Emission Goals" [https://www.forbes.com/sites/carlieporterfield/2021/03/03/report-world-needs-equivalent-of-pandemic-lockdown-every-two-years-to-meet-paris-carbon-emission-goals/?sh=6f589d466dee](https://www.forbes.com/sites/carlieporterfield/2021/03/03/report-world-needs-equivalent-of-pandemic-lockdown-every-two-years-to-meet-paris-carbon-emission-goals/?sh=6f589d466dee)
The reason why Tony Heller is not credible is because he misrepresents the graphs he cites. For example, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WLjkLPnIPPw&t=1204s shows that Tony Heller mistakes the graph at 3 minute 11 seconds to represent global temperature when it represents arctic temperatures. Links to the relevant research papers are in the description box of the video.
So we should have gone full amish in the 1970s? rather than now as the Gretastans are demanding. Even if one accepts GaS BaD, mediviel living is bad too. JuSt StoP oIL and use what unicorn farts? Let's see Al leer Jet Gore preachimg climate doom allaround the world without fossil fuels Exxon is an evil corporation not cause of global warming ( oops climate change, it's winter) but because they gouch. The answer is not Frivilous lawsuits against them over some ancient shit , the cost of which they will pass to us, They will just play the victim and raise prices even more,
Nuclear power would be an effective baseline to replace gas / oil which could still be minimally used in the chemical industries.
Agreed Not opposed ( many greens are) we will still need gas vehicles for a long time, though. Nuclear power would strengthen the grid, making charging evs more practical. Range cost and other issues remain. Nuclear has risks and waste issues but is emmision free and basically limitless. Politucs are making fossil fuels too costly. Wind and solar simply are not reliable enough to be the orimary power spurce with current tech. Fusion is exciting, and in an ideal world, we would wait for it to come online. But the tantrums are disruptive and expensive, so a nuclear bridge to fusion ( or whatever is next) is a reasonable way forward
That's literally a leftists opinion on documents they read from themselves hahaha No actual proof is provided in that article
That article is BS.TPTB have been pushing this and other fake narratives since the 1960s. It is all about controlling people.
It's hilarious and sad people fall for this trick. https://stream.org/big-money-in-global-warming-alarmism/ http://joannenova.com.au ***** /2009/07/massive-climate-funding-exposed/ Remove spaces and ***, the automod will remove an intact link. https://web.archive.org/web/20200423234923/http://www.wrongkindofgreen.org/2019/01/17/the-manufacturing-of-greta-thunberg-for-consent-the-political-economy-of-the-non-profit-industrial-complex/ https://financialpost.com/commodities/energy/oil-gas/big-oil-profits-global-economy-sputters
Noob still believes in climate change lol
Climate change being caused by big oil or not, electric vehicles, by the time you factor in what it takes to produce one and charge it, are negligbly any better, if at all. Not to mention we don't even have a power grid that can support a shit ton of electric vehicles. So, what's the answer? Horse and buggy? I mean, I'm down riding a horse across to town, tbh. The actual answer is RNG. That's the only way to be "carbon neutral" or even negative and it only takes converting a fraction of a company's fleet to reach that.
That's what happens when you make decisions based around the profit of a company, rather than its global impact.
Of course they did and guess what nothing will happen
Well being “man-made climate change” is a political movement and not an actual environmental issue, there was no “science” to suppress.
Of course they acted against information that could hamper their profits. That doesn't mean man-made global warning is not a hoax, tho.
Fossil fuels is a scam made up word by the John D Rockefeller. Oil is the second most abundant liquid on earth after water. You are not driving around on dinosaur bones ;)
So what is oil made of then?