Even the Pope sides with Futurecurrents

[WeToddDid2]

Like the tobacco industry, ExxonMobil:

• Manufactured uncertainty by raising doubts about even the most indisputable scientific evidence.
• Adopted a strategy of information laundering by using seemingly independent front organizations to publicly further its desired message and thereby confuse the public.
• Promoted scientific spokespeople who misrepresent peer-reviewed scientific findings or cherry-pick facts in their attempts to persuade the media and the public that there is still serious debate among scientists that burning fossil fuels has contributed to global warming and that human-caused warming will have serious consequences.
• Attempted to shift the focus away from meaningful action on global warming with misleading charges about the need for “sound science.”
• Used its extraordinary access to the Bush administration to block federal policies and shape government communications on global warming.


The techniques used by contrarians and skeptics today include:

• Ad hominem attacks – in the absence of their own reputable evidence, they attempt to undermine those who oppose their views by trying to discredit the opposition, usually with unsubstantiated allegations.
• Fear – they float trial ballons about the supposedly outrageous cost of doing something in spite of the fact that it has been shown that the cost of doing nothing will drastically outweigh that of taking action.
• Sidestepping and deflection – like many politicians, they attempt to divert attention away from the real issue, raising “red herrings” and swamping commentary with irrelevant side issues.
• Appeal to authority – they refer to pseudo-experts who take contrarian positions with a gloss of believability which disappears upon deeper examination, claiming frequently fraudulent credentials.
• Deliberately confusing weather and climate, insisting that a recent change (natural variability) shows a long-term trend.
• Exaggerating uncertainty and demanding proof. That’s not how real science operates; scientists are cautious and invite real skepticism and there are never absolute proofs in science. They also confuse the scientific definition of “theory” with the popular definition – the former is a much stronger concept.
• Demands for a “balanced” view, akin to the outrage expressed by those arguing for “intelligent design” in discussions about the science of evolution.
• Outright denial – they repeat their disinformation derisively, saying that there is no proof and that there is a massive and corrupt conspiracy to steal money from us poor taxpayers and consumers

https://climateinsight.wordpress.com/editorial/merchant-of-doubt-s-fred-singer/

If the previous post didn't brighten your day, this one will.

http://www.businessinsider.com/afp-...ck-perry-as-energy-secretary-us-media-2016-12
REPORTS: Trump picks former Texas Governor Rick Perry as energy secretary

Are you going to move out of the country and renounce your citizenship?

 

[WeToddDid2]

IT IS THE SUN STUPID!

Below is an article about a new peer-reviewed study published by Nature.

Some excerpts below:

http://news.wisc.edu/from-rocks-in-colorado-evidence-of-a-chaotic-solar-system/

"Where and how much solar radiation a planet gets is a key driver of climate."

“The impact of astronomical cycles on climate can be quite large,” explains Meyers, noting as an example the pacing of the Earth’s ice ages, which have been reliably matched to periodic changes in the shape of Earth’s orbit, and the tilt of our planet on its axis. “Astronomical theory permits a very detailed evaluation of past climate events that may provide an analog for future climate.”

Here is the study:

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v542/n7642/full/nature21402.html

 

[jem]

thank you. more science showing that the climate change is driven by the sun.

Why is that so hard to believe for the science deniers who think man made co2 causes all the warming.

 

[WeToddDid2]

Cold extermination: One of greatest mass extinctions was due to an ice age and not to Earth's warming

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/03/170306091927.htm

The Earth has known several mass extinctions over the course of its history. One of the most important happened at the Permian-Triassic boundary 250 million years ago. Over 95% of marine species disappeared and, up until now, scientists have linked this extinction to a significant rise in Earth temperatures. But researchers have now discovered that this extinction took place during a short ice age which preceded the global climate warming. It's the first time that the various stages of a mass extinction have been accurately understood and that scientists have been able to assess the major role played by volcanic explosions in these climate processes.

Teams of researchers led by Professor Urs Schaltegger from the Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences at the Faculty of Science of the UNIGE and by Hugo Bucher, from the University of Zürich, have been working on absolute dating for many years. They work on determining the age of minerals in volcanic ash, which establishes a precise and detailed chronology of Earth's climate evolution.

"We therefore have proof that the species disappeared during an ice age caused by the activity of the first volcanism in the Siberian Traps," added Urs Schaltegger. This ice age was followed by the formation of limestone deposits through bacteria, marking the return of life on Earth at more moderate temperatures. The period of intense climate warming, related to the emplacement of large amounts of basalt of the Siberian Traps and which we previously thought was responsible for the extinction of marine species, in fact happened 500,000 years after the Permian-Triassic boundary.

 

[WeToddDid2]

..

 

[WeToddDid2]

Even the climate scientist are starting to figure out IT IS THE SUN STUPID!

This research blows holes in many of Fraudcurrents religions beliefs such as solar fluctuations have little to no impact on climate and that volcanic eruptions somehow caused a mini ice age Northern Europe. So stupid. That is completely illogical. A huge win for so called climate skeptics.

Some excerpts below:

http://www.snf.ch/en/researchinFocu...climate-change-quantified-for-first-time.aspx

For the first time, model calculations show a plausible way that fluctuations in solar activity could have a tangible impact on the climate. Studies funded by the Swiss National Science Foundation expect human-induced global warming to tail off slightly over the next few decades. A weaker sun could reduce temperatures by half a degree.

Researchers from the Physical Meteorological Observatory Davos (PMOD), the Swiss Federal Institute of Aquatic Science and Technology (EAWAG), ETH Zurich and the University of Bern are now qualifying this assumption. Their elaborate model calculations are supplying a robust estimate of the contribution that the sun is expected to make to temperature change in the next 100 years. For the first time, a significant effect is apparent. They expect the Earth's temperature to fall by half a degree when solar activity reaches its next minimum.

The Swiss researchers assumed a greater fluctuation in the radiation striking the Earth than previous models had done. Schmutz is convinced that "this is the only way that we can understand the natural fluctuations in our climate over the last few millennia." He says that other hypotheses, such as the effect of major volcanic eruptions, are less conclusive.

But since we have been observing a consistently strong phase since 1950, it is highly likely that we will experience another low point in 50 to 100 years' time. It could be every bit as intense as the Maunder Minimum, which brought particularly cold weather during the 17th century.

 

[Cuddles]

This is the same Vatican that put Galileo on trial for stating the earth revolved around the sun. What a stunning endorsement for the scientific ability of the pope and his fellow religious zealots.

To be fair, it's also the same Vatican that trained Galileo in science, along with Georges Lemaître, and Gregor Mendel.


As for global warming; everyone knows Nuclear is the fastest and cleanest alternative to get us carbon neutral yet the left vehemently opposes it. Which begs the question, are they really in a hurry to fix the issue, or only if it makes them warm and fuzzy on the inside?

 

[futurecurrents]

It's not the sun.

 

[MoneyMatthew]

As for global warming; everyone knows Nuclear is the fastest and cleanest alternative to get us carbon neutral yet the left vehemently opposes it. Which begs the question, are they really in a hurry to fix the issue, or only if it makes them warm and fuzzy on the inside?

I thought you were a Democrat Here4money? This is why a 3rd party candidate will win in 2020. People are tired of do-nothing Republicans as well as Democrats who just want to feel warm and fuzzy with virtue signaling.

 

[Cuddles]

I thought you were a Democrat Here4money? This is why a 3rd party candidate will win in 2020. People are tired of do-nothing Republicans as well as Democrats who just want to feel warm and fuzzy with virtue signaling.

Nah, I lean left on a lot of social issues. Mostly fiscal conservative and trained in science so I can't go against logic/empirical fact on many things.