NEWS FLASH ~



Jan. 1st. CNN ~
Exxon spends $ 17.4 Million to debunk global warming as un-scientific and untrue in 2006 . Rumor has it they paid unscrouplous scientist to claim that most environmentalist are alarmest claiming ~ ( the sky is falling ).

 

http://www.junkscience.com/

 

Ok Shackleford, we all know you work for Exxon/Mobile.
And you call yourself a Christian ?

 

Global warming is providing for a very nice winter here in Chicago.....high 40s/low 50s here in January. It's nice. Years back it'd be about 15*F and snowing right about now.

 

thats el nino..not global warming..

 

 

Climates have been changing on this planet since the beginning of time. They will keep changing not matter if we like it or not.

I do find it ironic that a guy that was vice president for previous 8 years blames the current administration for "global warning".

 

LOL. i seriously dont know how the scientists that claim global warming come up with their theories, with all the variables there are. Hell, we might have moved a mile closer to the sun in the last century. and i laughed my *** off when I saw a hippie on TV saying that cars cause ozone depletion. yeah, sure. The only ozone "hole" is above a huge volcano that spewed out more fluorocarbons in a week than we have ever produced. Its sad that most people dont know that the only ozone trapping material in our cars is the Refrigerant in the A/C systems. What other things have HUGE a/c systems? hmmm. how about almost every building in the civilized world? All cars do is cause smog, and with todays technology, its not even a big deal..

 

[QUOTE=67RSCamaroVette]LOL. i seriously dont know how the scientists that claim global warming come up with their theories, with all the variables there are. Hell, we might have moved a mile closer to the sun in the last century. and i laughed my *** off when I saw a hippie on TV saying that cars cause ozone depletion. yeah, sure. The only ozone "hole" is above a huge volcano that spewed out more fluorocarbons in a week than we have ever produced. Its sad that most people dont know that the only ozone trapping material in our cars is the Refrigerant in the A/C systems. What other things have HUGE a/c systems? hmmm. how about almost every building in the civilized world? All cars do is cause smog, and with todays technology, its not even a big deal..


But of course. You must be right,I mean after all what could possibly be Exxon's motive for spending over 17 million dollars to attempt to de-bunk global warming ? BINGO !

 

Haha. I might in the future as an engineer but not now.

 

If there was a theory (and I stress the word theory) out there that could potentially harm your business, what extremes would you go to in order to debunk it?

 

Thank you!

Look, these are the same people that back in the 60s and 70s said "prepare for the ice age".

Fact is...geologically, there was a really warm period (called the paliazoic era, the time of the dinosauours [I suck at spelling]) and there have been ice ages, little ice ages, and the mid-evil warm period.

CYCLES! They come and they go. The sun grows hotter and cold in an 11 year cycle too, and I'm sure that those cycles are more active, more intense, ect in certain times than in others.

Note, these are also the same people that said we'd run out of oil by the 21st century (haven't yet).

I hate conspiracy theories, and don't really subscribe to many of them, but these crack pot things have to happen because somewhere, somehow, someone is controlling the market to minipulate THEIR wallet and fatten it up.

 

Exxonmobil is entitled to pursue whatever research they want.
Global warming is a theory. Unless you are a few million years old, no one really can tell what the trends are in geologic time from first hand experience. Exxon has just as much right to conduct research as Al Gore or anyone else.

Mount Pinatubo. Check it out.

In the end, it doesn't matter because people will still bitch about energy prices while not wanting to pay the extra percentages for decreased environmental impact. This will result in government intervention, which will mandate costs (like ethanol) and simultaneously place "blame" for added costs or inconvenience onto the energy industry. It's neat how that works.

The bottom line is, global warming is not provable, but everyone can agree spewing more junk into the atmosphere cannot have any positive effects. So what are you going to do about it? I suspect you will continue to run catless on 93 octane and bitch about energy companies. Fine. But just remember the energy companies only give consumers what they want. You keep burning it, they keep selling it.

So what if XOM wants to help make you feel a bit better about doing it. Is that any better or worse than BP telling you global warming is real and they are going to help whilst simultaneously blowing up people at refineries and leaking oil in Alaska? BP makes you feel good about it, so you buy it without negative comment, but they are funtionally identical to Exxonmobil as far as you the end consumer knows, except for marketing. It is no different than McDonald's switching off trans fat or Hershey telling you chocolate contains antioxidants. You are still going to be a fatass, you are just going to feel better about it. Are you going to get mad at them for researching the possible side effects of trans fat or antioxidants, or telling you they are doing it? I think not.

 

^^^^ This is an excellent post ^^^^. Honest, correct, and I agree 100%.

 

An inconvenient truth: SOS from Al Gore. - Car and Driver Magazine

BY PATRICK BEDARD, September 2006


He’s baack! Just when you thought the scolding was over and it was safe to pull your ear plugs out, Al Gore has a brand-new harangue going.

Actually, it’s the same old doomsday prediction he’s been peddling since he was a senator bucking to be President back in the ’90s, only this time it’s packaged as a 94-minute film. An Inconvenient Truth previewed at the Sundance Film Festival last January. “This is activist cinema at its very best,” said the official festival guide.

You can guess what activated him; his long-playing paranoia about global warming. He and the mainstream media say it’s a done deal. We’re toast.

“Be Worried. Be Very Worried,” blared the cover of Time in April. “Climate change isn’t some vague future problem — it’s already damaging the planet at an alarming pace. Here’s how it affects you, your kids, and their kids as well.”

This is, by the way, the same Time that was telling us as late as 1983 to be worried, very worried, that temperatures were descending into another era of “glaciation.”

Gore’s “inconvenient truth” is that — there’s no tactful way to say this — we gas-guzzling, SUV-flaunting, comfort-addicted humans, wallowing in our own self-indulgences, have screwed up the planet. We’ve hauled prodigious quantities of fossil fuels out of the ground where they belong, combusted them to release carbon dioxide (CO2) into the sky where it shouldn’t be, and now we’re going to burn for our sins.

This feverish sort of should-and-shouldn’t evangelism plays particularly well these days among those who are looking for something to believe that carries no obligation to sit in a church pew. Nature has left us no scripture, so Gore can preach it as he feels it. Faith, brother. Don’t even pretend to understand. Anyway, humans, except for the rare enlightened ones like Al Gore, are alien trespassers in nature.

Let’s not dispute the earth’s temperature. It’s warmer than it used to be. As an Iowa farm boy, I learned about the soil we tilled. Most of Iowa is flat, graded smooth by glaciers. The rocks we plowed up in the fields, or plowed around if they were big, were rounded in shape. The glacier tumbled them as it scraped along, and it ground their corners off.

The North American ice sheets reached their largest expanse about 18,000 years ago and then began to recede. Within 5000 years they had pulled back considerably but still reached south as far as central Ohio. After another thousand years, however, the U.S. was largely ice-free.

Needless to say, there have been no glaciers reported in Iowa as long as anyone can remember. It’s warmer now. And if it would just warm up a bit more, fewer Iowans would need to trot off to Florida, Texas, and Arizona during deepest winter.

The long absence of farm-belt glaciers confirms an inconvenient truth that Gore chooses to ignore. The warming of our planet started thousands of years before SUVs began adding their spew to the greenhouse. Indeed, the whole greenhouse theory of global warming goes wobbly if you just change one small assumption.

Logic and chemistry say all CO2 is the same, whether it blows out of a Porsche tailpipe or is exhaled from Al Gore’s lungs or wafts off my compost pile or the rotting of dead plants in the Atchafalaya swamp.

“Wrong,” say the greenhouse theorists. They maintain that man’s contribution to the greenhouse is different from nature’s, and that only man’s exhaustings count.

Let’s review the greenhouse theory of global warming. Our planet would be one more icy rock hurtling through space at an intolerable temperature were it not for our atmosphere. This thin layer of gases — about 95 percent of the molecules live within the lowest 15 miles — readily allows the sun’s heat in but resists its reradiation into space. Result: The earth is warmed.
The atmosphere is primarily composed of nitrogen (78 percent), oxygen (21 percent), argon (0.93 percent), and CO2 (0.04 percent). Many other gases are present in trace amounts. The lower atmosphere also contains varying amounts of water vapor, up to four percent by volume.

Nitrogen and oxygen are not greenhouse gases and have no warming influence. The greenhouse gases included in the Kyoto Protocol are each rated for warming potency. CO2, the warming gas that has activated Al Gore, has low warming potency, but its relatively high concentration makes it responsible for 72 percent of Kyoto warming. Methane (CH4, a.k.a. natural gas) is 21 times more potent than CO2, but because of its low concentration, it contributes only seven percent of that warming. Nitrous oxide (N2O), mostly of nature’s creation, is 310 times more potent than CO2. Again, low concentration keeps its warming effect down to 19 percent.

Now for an inconvenient truth about CO2 sources — nature generates about 30 times as much of it as does man. Yet the warming worriers are unconcerned about nature’s outpouring. They — and Al Gore — are alarmed only about anthropogenic CO2, that 3.2 percent caused by humans.

They like to point fingers at the U.S., which generated about 23 percent of the world’s anthropogenic CO2 in 2003, the latest figures from the Energy Information Administration. But this finger-pointing ignores yet another inconvenient truth about CO2. In fact, it’s a minor contributor to the greenhouse effect when water vapor is taken into consideration. All the greenhouse gases together, including CO2 and methane, produce less than two percent of the greenhouse effect, according to Richard S. Lindzen of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Lindzen, by the way, is described by one source as “the most renowned climatologist in all the world.”

When water vapor is put in that perspective, then anthropogenic CO2 produces less than 0.1 of one percent of the greenhouse effect.

If everyone knows that water vapor is the dominant greenhouse gas, why do Al Gore and so many others focus on CO2? Call it the politics of the possible. Water vapor is almost entirely natural. It’s beyond the reach of man’s screwdriver. But when the delegates of 189 countries met at Kyoto in December 1997 to discuss global climate change, they could hardly vote to do nothing. So instead, they agreed that the developed countries of the world would reduce emissions of six man-made greenhouse gases. At the top of the list is CO2, a trivial influence on global warming compared with water vapor, but unquestionably man’s largest contribution.

In deciding that it couldn’t reduce water vapor, Kyoto really decided that it couldn’t reduce global warning. But that’s an inconvenient truth that wouldn’t make much of a movie.

 

So,~~~~whats your point ?

 

Ban Water Vapors!!!!!!!!

 

Ban cow farts! Where's the Prius forum? Global warming is a political, not scientific issue.

 

Yeah, that just about proves it up right there.

Bravo, average consumer. Hold up that status quo and do what is expected of you. It's easier that way.

 

Yeah, looks like hydrogen cars are a BAD idea. They expel water vapor. Someone should tell Al Gore.

I'll stick with my fossil fuel.