Just 0.3% of Scientists agree Humanity is causing Climate Change; NOT 97% as falsely spread by the UN

  • Thread starter Thread starter YabbaDabbaDoo
  • Start date Start date
Krull said:
Enjoy your climate induced covaids 🤣
Click to expand...

IMG_4465.gif
 
Floyd Eye said:
Or known what you were actually talking about and said rock. Because it's literally rock. Sedimentary rock to be specific. And oil company geologists are not the people who do environmental impact studies.
Click to expand...
I’m not the geologist. Next time i will be sure to say, “I’m paraphrasing”. This particular client happens to do both.
 
I love how we have basically established that oil companies use geological core samples to find the best, most profitable areas to look for product, but many of you doubt the information ice cores provide. Morons. Lol
 
Beater said:
I love how we have basically established that oil companies use geological core samples to find the best, most profitable areas to look for product, but many of you doubt the information ice cores provide. Morons. Lol
Click to expand...

🤡thank you, Baiter, the ‘new member’ Trolling, Clown,
… making Rigtalk more Respectable, one post at a time. ‘Lol’ 🤡
 
@JackItInMyEar never learns. He’s a bit slow to go. But, we love him anyway. It’ll get clearer as time passes, moron. Lol
 
Beater said:
I love how we have basically established that oil companies use geological core samples to find the best, most profitable areas to look for product, but many of you doubt the information ice cores provide. Morons. Lol
Click to expand...
You really should stop dude. You clearly don't have a fucking clue what geologists do with regards to oil and gas companies. I'll give you a hint since you obviously don't know and didn't even do a cursory Google search. They really don't use core samples to determine likely places for wells. They use seismic surveys and ground infiltrating radar. Besides, I never said shit about core samples, though right about now I am definitely questioning your knowledge about them. Furthermore, there is a dramatic difference between an ice core and a rock core. There is also a dramatic difference between material in a rock core and determining if something is currently present in it and material in an ice core and determining A) how old it is with any accuracy and B) what material is in it and in what quantity considering degradation, etc.. And again I never said jack about ice cores or whether or not and/or how much credence I give to them or the people examining them.

Back on point, first off, your source is basically some dude you know and which you are paraphrasing. And which you claim is a geologist in the employ of Texas oil companies and also does EIS. Do you know how unlikely that actually is ? It's clearly a conflict of interest and I very seriously doubt this dude is both. One of you is full of shit.
 
Floyd Eye said:
You really should stop dude. You clearly don't have a fucking clue what geologists do with regards to oil and gas companies. I'll give you a hint since you obviously don't know and didn't even do a cursory Google search. They really don't use core samples to determine likely places for wells. They use seismic surveys and ground infiltrating radar. Besides, I never said shit about core samples, though right about now I am definitely questioning your knowledge about them. Furthermore, there is a dramatic difference between an ice core and a rock core. There is also a dramatic difference between material in a rock core and determining if something is currently present in it and material in an ice core and determining A) how old it is with any accuracy and B) what material is in it and in what quantity considering degradation, etc.. And again I never said jack about ice cores or whether or not and/or how much credence I give to them or the people examining them.

Back on point, first off, your source is basically some dude you know and which you are paraphrasing. And which you claim is a geologist in the employ of Texas oil companies and also does EIS. Do you know how unlikely that actually is ? It's clearly a conflict of interest and I very seriously doubt this dude is both. One of you is full of shit.
Click to expand...
Cursory search:

What are core samples in oil and gas?


images

“Oil and natural gas exist mostly in formations called reservoirs several thousand meters underground where they are prone to accumulate. To locate and extract oil/natural gas in reservoirs, we need to drill wells to that depth. A columnar rock sample taken from a well is called a ‘core.’”

Obviously it is a conflict of interest. That was my point. Not all scientists are honest people. Just as these dopes would say the left leaning scientists are liars and thieves, there would have to be right leaning scientists of similar character. Again, I don’t know shit about geology. I am letting you know that the man I know, does both. Not only that, he is a consultant on the business aspects of the oil and gas industry.

My original point was his unscrupulous character is what makes him so much money. And here you are saying, “that would be a conflict of interest!” No shit. Moron. Lol
 
Beater said:
Cursory search:

What are core samples in oil and gas?


images

“Oil and natural gas exist mostly in formations called reservoirs several thousand meters underground where they are prone to accumulate. To locate and extract oil/natural gas in reservoirs, we need to drill wells to that depth. A columnar rock sample taken from a well is called a ‘core.’”

Obviously it is a conflict of interest. That was my point. Not all scientists are honest people. Just as these dopes would say the left leaning scientists are liars and thieves, there would have to be right leaning scientists of similar character. Again, I don’t know shit about geology. I am letting you know that the man I know, does both. Not only that, he is a consultant on the business aspects of the oil and gas industry.

My original point was his unscrupulous character is what makes him so much money. And here you are saying, “that would be a conflict of interest!” No shit. Moron. Lol
Click to expand...
Wow. I don't recall resorting to name calling. I guess probably because I actually have a valid argument because I know what the fuck I'm talking about. You clearly do not.
 
Floyd Eye said:
Wow. I don't recall resorting to name calling. I guess probably because I actually have a valid argument because I know what the fuck I'm talking about. You clearly do not.
Click to expand...
What makes you say that? Lol
 

The history of the Global Warming Fraud​


The current global warming scam isn’t a new one of course. Like most good scams this one has been around for a long time.

By Dr Vernon Coleman

In 1817, the President of the Royal Society in London warned that there had been ‘a considerable change of climate, inexplicable at present to us’ and said that this would lead to changes in the accessibility of the Arctic Seas. It was nonsense, of course.

A century later, in 1922, the Washington Post warned that the Arctic was warming up, that icebergs were getting scarcer and in some places the seals were finding the water too hot.

In 1947, The West Australian, quoted a Dr Ahlmann, a Swedish geophysicist who was warning about a mysterious warming of the climate. And in 1958, the Sunday Telegraph in London warned that the climate is getting warmer.

Then the scaremongers suddenly went into reverse, and in the 1970s the experts warned that a new ice age could grip the world within the lifetime of present generations. Nigel Calder, a science writer, warned in a major television documentary on the BBC that the threat of a new ice age must stand alongside nuclear war as a source of wholesale death and misery. Calder claimed that the northern hemisphere had been cooling since 1950s and that the droughts in Africa and India were due to the ‘little ice age’.

In 1975, Newsweek magazine ran a story called, ‘The Cooling World’ and predicted the beginning of dramatic global cooling which might well lead to a drastic decline in food production. They talked about economic and social adjustments on a global scale. (In 2006, over 30 years later, Newsweek published a correction.)

The bottom line is that politicians, journalists and experts are forever warning us of terrible things that are about to happen. The invariable rider is that they might well be able to save us from the terrible future which they predict, if we give them vast amounts of money, enormous prestige and a full page profile in the Guardian newspaper.

The BBC and other corrupt and blatantly dishonest news organizations now claim that global warming is accepted and need not be debated or discussed. This is a lie of course. (The BBC makes the same bizarre claim about almost all contentious scientific issues.)

Global warming is simply a pseudoscientific cult for self-important hypocrites and the people who promote the global warming myth are richly rewarded for their obedience while those who dare to question it are severely punished.

Governments, big industries (with a vested interest in the changes being forced upon us), ruthless lobbyists and, of course, the United Nations keep up the daily terror through a constant bombardment of lies, deceits and pseudoscience. It is, to use a felicitous phrase devised by my friend Dr Colin Barron, a seemingly unending example of ‘death porn fear’.

The UK Government says that tackling global warming will require a host of new incentives, laws, rules, bans, taxes, appliance standards and institutional innovations. In November 2020, as the UK’s economy fell apart, the Government announced another package of £12 billion worth of investment in green infrastructure such as cycle lanes. At the same time there was huge pressure for ‘climate denial’ to be criminalized and for those questioning the new cultish dogma to be prosecuted instead of merely being persecuted. (It is worth remembering that in 2015, former US vice-president Al Gore said that ‘deniers deserve to be punished’. Gore was, of course, the presenter of an infamous video which has been proven to contain misleading pseudoscience.

Much the same is happening everywhere.

In the US, President Joe Biden wants to spend $2 trillion ‘decarbonizing the US economy’. The European Union has earmarked 30% of its $880 billion recovery fund for climate measures.

Today, it is estimated that 85% of all our energy comes from fossil fuels and the plan is to replace all this with solar and wind power. Both the EU and China have committed to achieving net-zero carbon emissions though this will, inevitably, involve a good deal of cheating, chicanery and lying.
Click to expand...
 
Dr. Coleman. Looks exactly as I imagine @BallBag Man .

1683063472061.jpeg
Lol
 
CrazyNutz said:
Hilarious how people that claim to be "Free thinkers", are fully dug into big oil propaganda, and don't even realize it. Clever for these companies to spend so much money lining the pockets of talking heads convincing their audience to distrust Science.

This same thing happened with the Tobacco companies, I have old news papers from the 60's about this debate. Tobacco companies hired their own "Experts", and "Doctors" to claim there's no evidence Tobacco causes harm :hys:

It does not really matter though, fossil fuel will be fully replaced, and die out just like tobacco. They are only prolonging the inevitable.

Attacks from the morons in, 3....2....1....
Click to expand...
You should walk everywhere from now on.

That damn plastic computer...toss it.

Party like it's 1799!!!
 
Krull said:
If you have enough money you can fly to Antarctica for a vacation
Click to expand...
If you have enough money you can live where climate change isn't very bad...for now. If you are and DGAF about others then you're a real POS. The kicker is your descendants will be fkt whether or not you acknowledge the facts. I hope they appreciate your ignorance. Luckily for me I wasn't stupid enough to reproduce yet I still care more about this place more than you and your stupid fkn ILK.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top