Effect of human activity on climate change is insignificant

[henry quirk]

[henry quirk]

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/04/20/ ... nd-shared/

-----

https://wattsupwiththat.com/page/3/?s=exxon+knew

-----

The takeaway...

*Folks internal to Exxon, based on the science of the day, expressed concern about potential consequences of increased & increasing levels of atmospheric CO2.

*As models & measurements -- the science -- improved, folks internal & external to Exxon began revising estimates (they never made conclusions), and they masterminded no cover up (quite the opposite).

*The on-going attempt to hold Exxon (and, by extention, all oil companies 'responsible' for global warming/climate change) is not a good faith effort.

[Arising_uk]

Just clutch those straws they'll help you float and you can make a sunhat out of them. Trust the land of litigation to ignore the elephant.

[Belinda]

Just clutch those straws they'll help you float and you can make a sunhat out of them. Trust the land of litigation to ignore the elephant.

Truly that country is cause for concern, and our new PM has favoured it over Europe. What hope for the leaven in the loaf?

[henry quirk]

"Just clutch those straws they'll help you float and you can make a sunhat out of them. Trust the land of litigation to ignore the elephant."

Don't care about the litigation. Just showin' there was/is more to the story than 'Exxon knew, Exxon covered up'.

[Arising_uk]

Well given those reports were leaked and they've spent the last few decades actively on a public disinformation campaign whilst agreeing behind the scene that man- made emissions will effect the climate I think cover-up thee least of the case.

[henry quirk]

"Well given those reports were leaked and they've spent the last few decades actively on a public disinformation campaign whilst agreeing behind the scene that man- made emissions will effect the climate I think cover-up thee least of the case."

Yeah, mebbe you should read the material I linked to, cuz what you're describin' ain't the truth.

[Arising_uk]

Yeah, mebbe you should read the material I linked to, cuz what you're describin' ain't the truth.

I did and most of it appeared to be about avoiding possible litigation and none of it denied that the oil company knew the consequences of their actions.

Maybe you should have read my link to the study showing that the companies have deliberately said one thing in public and another in private or academia if you like which is pretty much the same thing. Also the link showing how much they have been spending on getting politicians to do nothing.

[henry quirk]

Okay: we each say we've read the other's materials and neither of us have moved, so I ain't gonna keep floggin' the horse on this. Any further and one of us gonna call the other a friggin' liar. Despite our differences I like you and I'm not lookin' to alienate you over a subject neither of have any real say-so on. Agreed?

[Arising_uk]

Fine with me HQ.

[Walker]

Why do climate change deniers exist as such ? Is social psychology the appropriate expertise wherein to find the answer?

denial is a response to something we fear, and we know from animal and human studies that fear induces freezing and passivity. But studies also demonstrate that giving a fearful animal or human a task that even symbolically addresses what is feared can minimize freezing and promote action. Thus, recommending tasks that we can perform in our daily lives may help us overcome our feeling that mitigating climate change is a hopeless enterprise and motivate us join the voices insisting on ending burning fossil fuels.

From 'Psychology Today'.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/gb/blog ... ezing-fear

It's true that when one leaves the lawn unmown all summer, plants an oak, takes car off the road , not eat meat for weeks, not drink milk, one feels better less depressed about climate change. One is a normal person and one's choices are a small small indication of how other normal persons will choose.

Mitigation implies adapting human behavior to changing conditions, so this is just another case of dishonestly twisting the language, much like calling challengers, deniers.

The purpose of Climate Change believers is control, not mitigation.

Obviously the political movement called climate change is a belief unethically cloaking itself under the auspices of science.

Since not even the early speculations can be falsified then it’s not surprising that these believers in an imaginative future, which changes from cold to hot to cold and back again*, cling to whatever computer model advances their political narrative, which is aimed at controlling the population through economics.

Mitigation is in fact the reason why man invented air conditioning.

* The label of Climate Change conveniently masks the uncertainty.

[Belinda]

Walker wrote:

The purpose of Climate Change believers is control, not mitigation.

I'd control climate change deniers if I could but I cannot. I can do nothing but my own little mitigation, and that I can control.

[Walker]

Walker wrote:

The purpose of Climate Change believers is control, not mitigation.

I'd control climate change deniers if I could but I cannot. I can do nothing but my own little mitigation, and that I can control.

There is no such thing as a climate denier.
The term “climate denier” is simply a bastardization of the language.
It’s a bumper sticker.

What’s actually going on with the believers is mitigation denial.

When climate alters coastlines, mitigators adapt by moving.
Mitigators don’t waste time in vain attempts to stop the coastline from changing.

When it gets hot, mitigators adapt to the heat.
Mitigators don’t waste time in vain attempts to stop the heat.

When it gets cold, mitigators adapt to the cold.
Mitigators don’t attempt to stop the cold.

One can mitigate the heat by cooling off or moving to a cooler place.
A method of cooling off is to buy an air conditioner.

One can mitigate the cold by warming up or moving to a warmer place.
A method of warming up is to buy a heater.

Windmills are not much help in mitigation of heat, cold, or coastlines.

Alligators are mitigators, not believers, and they've been around a lot longer than hoomans.

[Belinda]

The term “climate denier” is simply a bastardization of the language.
It’s a bumper sticker.

I suppose it is. What do people like you want to be called?

[Walker]

The term “climate denier” is simply a bastardization of the language.
It’s a bumper sticker.

I suppose it is. What do people like you want to be called?

One who doesn’t dishonestly, deliberately attempt to muddy the water with political bumper sticker slogans such as “Climate Change Denier,” and one who doesn’t shift the goal posts by bastardizing the language.

The issue is not whether or not the climate changes.

The issue is anthropogenic climate change.

Challenging and questioning the political movement of "Global Warming," or "Global Cooling," or "Climate Change," that makes the weather a political issue which hides behind science, is not denial.

It's a hard look at reality.

Drop your propaganda. It insults intelligence.