Vanguard News Network
VNN Media
VNN Digital Library
VNN Reader Mail
VNN Broadcasts

Old February 22nd, 2015 #461
Hugo Böse
Jeunesse Dorée
 
Hugo Böse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Four Seasons Jalalabad
Posts: 8,585
Hugo Böse
Default

From the FT

Chairman of climate change panel accused of sexual harassment

The chairman of the Nobel Prize-winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Rajendra Pachauri, has pulled out of a four-day meeting of the body in Nairobi next week after being accused of sexually harassing a 29-year-old employee at the New Delhi research institute he heads.

The IPCC, the world’s leading authority on climate change, said in a statement on Saturday Mr Pachauri had informed the panel he had to cancel “because of issues demanding his attention in India”.

Mr Pachauri, an economist and industrial engineer by training, is director-general of The Energy and Resources Institute, Teri, an influential think-tank in New Delhi, and said he was fighting the allegations made against him.

“Dr Pachauri is committed to provide all assistance and co-operation to the authorities in their ongoing investigations,” a spokesman for the chairman told the FT on Saturday.

A 29-year-old researcher, who has worked at Teri since September 2013, filed a police complaint in Delhi last week, alleging Mr Pachauri had harassed her with inappropriate emails, text messages, and unwanted advances.

The Delhi Police have opened a preliminary file regarding the matter according to Indian media.

In a Delhi High Court petition seeking for an emergency injunction to stop any media reporting on the case, Mr Pachauri claimed he first learned of the accusations against him when he was contacted by an Indian newspaper, asking for his response to the sexual harassment complaint.

His lawyers said Mr Pachauri immediately realised that “his email accounts have been hacked and used to send the employee who has made the complaint objectionable communication,” according to the February 17 Delhi High Court order.

In his petition, Mr Pachauri says he was “never the author of such objectionable matter,” and has now filed his own police complaint that his computers were hacked.

His lawyers also described the emails sent to the Teri employee as a “conspiracy” by “vested interests” intended to “destroy the reputation standing goodwill and repute” of Mr Pachauri.

While the court did initially issue an injunction barring any media reporting on the sexual harassment complaint, the gag order has since been lifted, with the court permitting reporting on the ongoing proceedings.

Mr Pachauri has obtained a Delhi High Court stay on any arrest until February 23, which will allow him time to apply for so-called “anticipatory bail”.

He has served two terms as chairman of the IPCC since 2002 and is due to step down after the panel elects a new chair in October this year.

The IPCC’s meeting in Nairobi is one of the gatherings it holds regularly to discuss its operations and will now be run by a vice-chair.

The IPCC was jointly awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2007, along with former US vice-president, Al Gore, for its role in improving knowledge about climate change and the measures needed to counter it.

The panel’s latest weighty report, finalised in November last year, is playing an important role in UN negotiations on a new global climate agreement due to be signed in Paris in December.

Its findings on the amount of warming greenhouse gas emissions that can be safely released before the world risks tipping into potentially dangerous levels of climate change has been cited by some countries eager for the deal to include a deadline for phasing out emissions.

Other nations are wary of including firm dates for ending emissions and would prefer any agreement to include a more vague target, such as the goal countries have already set to limit future warming to 2 degrees Celsius from pre-industrial times.

Mr Pachauri’s tenure as chair of the IPCC has been marked by periods of controversy.

He faced calls to resign over a mistaken suggestion in an earlier IPCC assessment in 2007 that the Himalayan glaciers could disappear as early as 2035, a date it admitted had been “poorly substantiated”.
__________________
_______
Political correctness is an intellectual gulag.
 
Old April 7th, 2015 #462
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,373
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default



CatoTheYounger retweeted
Marc Morano ‏@ClimateDepot 20h20 hours ago
Climatologist Dr. Roy Spencer Answers Warmist Ron Bailey’s Q: “What Evidence Would Persuade You That AGW Is Real?” http://www.drroyspencer.com/2015/04/...-that-man-made
6 retweets 5 favorites
Reply Retweet6 Favorite5
More
CatoTheYounger retweeted
hockey schtick ‏@hockeyschtick1 18h18 hours ago
Renowned physicist Freeman Dyson: It would be crazy to try to reduce CO2 http://tomnelson.blogspot.com/2015/0...zy-to-try.html
20 retweets 6 favorites
Reply Retweet20 Favorite6
More
CatoTheYounger retweeted
Joe Bastardi ‏@BigJoeBastardi 18h18 hours ago
Joe Bastardi: Is There Anything in the Global Warming Debate That Would Convince Me I'm Wrong? — The Patriot Post http://patriotpost.us/opinion/34379
16 retweets 5 favorites
Reply Retweet16 Favorite5
More
 
Old April 22nd, 2015 #463
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,373
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default



 
Old November 2nd, 2015 #464
Robbie Key
Senior Member
 
Robbie Key's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 3,910
Robbie Key
Default

Russian Media Take Climate Cue From Skeptical Putin

By REUTERS
OCTOBER 29, 2015

MOSCOW — Wildfires crackled across Siberia this summer, turning skies ochre and sending up enough smoke from burning pines to blot out satellite views of the 400-mile-long Lake Baikal.

To many climate scientists, the worsening fires are a consequence of Siberia getting hotter, the carbon unleashed from its burning forests and tundra only adding to man-made fossil fuel emissions. Siberia's wildfire season has lengthened in recent years and the 2015 blazes were among the biggest yet, caking the lake, the "Pearl of Siberia", in ash and scorching the surrounding permafrost.

But the Russian public heard little mention of climate change, because media coverage across state-controlled television stations and print media all but ignored it. On national TV, the villains were locals who routinely but carelessly burn off tall grasses every year, and the sometimes incompetent crews struggling to put the fires out.

While Western media have examined the role of rising temperatures and drought in this year's record wildfires in North America, Russian media continue to pay little attention to an issue that animates so much of the world.

The indifference reflects widespread public doubt that human activities play a significant role in global warming, a tone set by President Vladimir Putin, who has offered only vague and modest pledges of emissions cuts ahead of December's U.N. climate summit in Paris.

Russia's official view appears to have changed little since 2003, when Putin told an international climate conference that warmer temperatures would mean Russians "spend less on fur coats" while "agricultural specialists say our grain production will increase, and thank God for that".

The president believes that "there is no global warming, that this is a fraud to restrain the industrial development of several countries including Russia," says Stanislav Belkovsky, a political analyst and critic of Putin. "That is why this subject is not topical for the majority of the Russian mass media and society in general."

And with Russian media focused on the economic squeeze at home and events in Ukraine and Syria abroad, the absence of a robust media conversation on climate change means his scepticism goes largely unchallenged.

"It is difficult to spend editorial resources on things that are now a low priority in the midst of the economic crisis," says Galina Timchenko, former editor-in-chief of the successful news site Lenta.ru. Timchenko now runs Meduza, a popular site that covers Russian news but devotes little space to climate issues.

"Unfortunately climate change is not very interesting to the public," she says.

"EXTENSIVE WORK"

Putin's scepticism dates from the early 2000s, when his staff "did very, very extensive work trying to understand all sides of the climate debate", said Andrey Illarionov, Putin's senior economic adviser at the time and now a senior fellow at the Cato Institute in Washington.

"We found that, while climate change does exist, it is cyclical, and the anthropogenic role is very limited," he said. "It became clear that the climate is a complicated system and that, so far, the evidence presented for the need to 'fight' global warming was rather unfounded."

That opinion endures. During a trip to the Arctic in 2010, Putin acknowledged that "the climate is changing", but restated his doubt that human activity was the cause.


His trip was to inspect the retreat of the polar ice cap, something that promises to make the Arctic ocean and northern Siberia more accessible to exploration and production of the oil that Russia, the world's leading producer, depends on for export earnings.

Marianna Poberezhskaya, author of the academic work "Communicating Climate Change in Russia", characterized media coverage in Russia as "climate silence", broken only by the airing of official doubts about any human impact on global temperatures.

"Russian mass media repeat the same mistake that Western journalists used to make: the false balance, where the idea of the human effect on climate change is presented along with skeptics' point of view," she said.

Russian school teaching also appears to lag behind the rapidly expanding science on climate change.

Randomly sampled geography textbooks make no mention of human impact on the climate, and one college-level text states that climate changes are caused mainly by solar activity, the movement of the planet's crust and volcanoes.

"I see what they have abroad on the problem of climate change," says Asya Korolkova, 15, who studies high school biology in Moscow. "People there talk about it a lot; you can feel it's a serious problem. We don't have that here."

DECREASE IS AN INCREASE

Environmentalists say that attitude is also reflected in Russia's pledge for December's global summit, one that received little media coverage at home.

In suggesting a reduction in its emissions to "70 to 75 percent" of 1990 levels by 2030, Moscow is actually proposing an increase from 2012 levels. Russian emissions are currently far below the levels produced by obsolescent ex-Soviet smokestack industries in 1990.

Even that offer is hedged. Russia has said reaching the target will require generous accounting for the role Russia's forests play in removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.

Some observers do see signs of a slight softening in Moscow's position in the face of a series of weather disasters, from drought and searing summer fires in 2010 to raging floods in Sochi on the Black Sea last year.

Natural resources minister Sergei Donskoy has said extreme weather could cut Russia's economic output by 1-2 percent every year for the next 15 years, adding that "this has to be taken into account when determining the policy and measures in the field of adaptation to climate change".

The business newspaper Kommersant, owned by wealthy businessman Alisher Usmanov, is, like some other Russian media, taking some interest in those economic consequences, though it also did not discuss the possibility that climate change might have contributed to the Siberian fires.

"I write about what needs to be done to change production and consumption practices - the human effect on the climate is a given for us," said Kommersant journalist Alexey Shapovalov.

But for all that, there is no sign of public pressure on authorities to do more, let alone of Putin relaxing Russia's hard line ahead of the Paris talks.

"This subject has failed to become a priority," says Konstantin Simonov, the founder of a non-governmental oil and gas research fund who often appears on Russian media.

"Russia's attitude will most likely be something like this: Guys, you put economic pressure on us, introduced sanctions. Do you expect us to be holier than the Pope about the issue you're pushing through and take a load of responsibilities?"

The answer, he says, will be: "No."

http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2015/...dgereport.com/
 
Old December 3rd, 2015 #465
Hugo Böse
Jeunesse Dorée
 
Hugo Böse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Four Seasons Jalalabad
Posts: 8,585
Hugo Böse
Default

__________________
_______
Political correctness is an intellectual gulag.
 
Old December 13th, 2015 #467
Hugo Böse
Jeunesse Dorée
 
Hugo Böse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Four Seasons Jalalabad
Posts: 8,585
Hugo Böse
Default

Quote:
From the FT

COP21: Paris agreement formally adopted

Envoys in Paris have agreed an international accord to limit greenhouse gas emissions that marks a turning point in more than 20 years of efforts to prevent dangerous levels of global warming.

Delegates from nearly 200 nations cheered and embraced each other on the floor of the convention centre hall at Le Bourget airport, north of the city centre, as Laurent Fabius, French foreign minister, declared the new pact had been formally adopted just before 7.30pm in Paris.

John Kerry, US secretary of state, said: “This is a tremendous victory for all of our citizens . . . It is a victory for all of the planet and for future generations . . . I know that all of us will be better off for the agreement we have finalised here today.”

Xie Zhenhua, China’s chief climate negotiator, hailed the agreement as a “milestone in the global efforts to respond to climate change”, even if it was not perfect and contained “some areas in need of improvement”.

The new pact, to be known as the Paris agreement, for the first time requires virtually every country in the world to set out its plans to avert climate change every five years.

It includes an objective to limit global warming to “well below 2C above pre-industrial levels” and “pursue efforts” to limit the temperature increase to 1.5C.

To meet these temperature targets, the draft says countries should aim to reach a “global peaking of greenhouse gas emissions” as soon as possible and “achieve a balance between anthropogenic emissions by sources and removals by sinks of greenhouse gases in the second half of this century”.

The text does not define precisely what this means but scientists said it suggested that after 2050, countries could not emit more carbon dioxide — the greenhouse gas produced by burning fossil fuels — than could be absorbed by forests and other carbon “sinks”.

President François Hollande became the first leader to act on the new agreement, committing France to a revision of its national climate targets before 2020. He said the country would “work with all parties who want to scale up ambition pre-2020’’, and that he would also form a coalition of countries on carbon pricing. $$$$$

Other delegates

“It is like going to a good restaurant,” he said. “You may not like all the dishes but in the end it leaves a nice taste in your mouth.”

Prakash Javadekar, Indian environment minister, also hailed the accord. “Today is a historic day,” he said. “It is not only an agreement, but we have written a new chapter of hope in the lives of 7bn people on the planet.”

However, others were not so satisfied. Nur Masripatin, lead negotiator for Indonesia, said Jakarta was disappointed with the finance.

“It’s very weak,” he said. “The deal is not fair . . . But we don’t have more time, we have to agree on what we have now.”

Edna Molewa, South African environmental minister and chair of the G77 and China group of emerging market nations, gave the agreement a cautious welcome: “The deal is not perfect . . . but the best we can get at this historic moment”

Business reaction

The accord was hailed as a significant step by many businesses.

“We welcome the Paris outcome as a historic milestone on the road to a more sustainable global economy,” said Stuart Gulliver, chief executive of the HSBC banking group.

Paul Polman, chief executive of Unilever, praised the agreement as “an unequivocal signal to the business and financial communities” that would drive real economic change.

“The billions of dollars pledged by developed countries will be matched with the trillions of dollars that will flow to low-carbon investment,” he said, predicting the move by hundreds of businesses to shift to 100 per cent renewable energy would “become the norm for hundreds of thousands”. $$$$$

Environmental groups

While dozens of environmental groups welcomed the pact, some expressed reservations.

“This climate deal falls far short of the soaring rhetoric from world leaders less than two weeks ago,” said Craig Bennett, chief executive of UK campaign group Friends of the Earth, referring to the heads of state who opened the two-week Paris meeting on November 30.

“An ambition to keep global temperature rises below 1.5C is all very well but we still don’t have an adequate global plan to make this a reality. However, this is still a historic moment. This summit clearly shows that fossil fuels have had their day.”
Will be eager to hear what Monckton and co have to say about this, how bad this is. Just sickening how much the internationalist left are getting their way these days, there practically is no opposition anymore.
__________________
_______
Political correctness is an intellectual gulag.
 
Old December 29th, 2015 #468
Pamela Ross
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 4,317
Pamela Ross
Default

From The Irish Savant

Quote:
Sunday, 13 December 2015

Unnerving report from the Washington Post

Just read this report from the Washington Post on global warning. It's bad. Seems the polar ice caps are shrinking and will be gone within a decade, as will polar bears, and.......actually, just read this summary for yourself.:


"The Arctic Ocean is warming up, icebergs are growing scarcer and in some places the seals are finding the water too hot, according to a report to the Commerce Department yesterday from Consulate, at Bergen , Norway. Reports from fishermen, seal hunters and explorers all point to a radical change in climate conditions and hitherto unheard-of temperatures in the Arctic zone. Exploration expeditions report that scarcely any ice has been met as far north as 81 degrees 29 minutes.

Soundings to a depth of 3,100 meters showed the gulf stream still very warm. Great masses of ice have been replaced by moraines of earth and stones, while at many points well known glaciers have entirely disappeared. Very few seals and no white fish are found in the eastern Arctic, while vast shoals of herring and smelts which have never before ventured so far north, are being encountered in the old seal fishing grounds."

Er, did I mention that the report dates from November 2, 1922?





Yes, nearly 100 years ago they were making the very same apocalypse-around-the-corner predictions that they're peddling today. The Climate Change Project is a scam from start to finish. Great money stands to be made by corporations in on the racket, universities and think-tanks churning out bogus research, and by an army of crooks in the Third World.

But there are darker (!) forces driving this agenda, which is a classical representation of the Hegelian Dialectic. Problem: We're all doomed! (thanks Al). Reaction: Please Government, UN - anyone - help us to avoid this fate. Solution: Well good news people. We have all ready to go a series of measures that will eliminate the risk. But, em, this will require a vast transfer of funds from White wage slaves to the Third World and the trans-national bodies engaged in the project. And more important it requires many significant powers to be devolved from nation states to these same trans-national institutions.

Perfect.

Doesn't everything click into place once you've taken the red pill?
http://irishsavant.blogspot.co.za/20...gton-post.html
 
Old March 15th, 2016 #469
Robbie Key
Senior Member
 
Robbie Key's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 3,910
Robbie Key
Default

Climate Change Censorship: The War on Free Speech Continues

March 13, 2016 Civil Liberties, Ron Paul's Writings

by Ron Paul

During her appearance before the Senate Judiciary Committee last week, Attorney General Loretta Lynch admitted that she asked the FBI to examine whether the federal government should take legal action against so-called climate change deniers. Attorney General Lynch is not responding to any criminal acts committed by climate change skeptics. Instead, she is responding to requests from those frustrated that dissenters from the alleged climate change consensuses have successfully blocked attempts to create new government programs to fight climate change.

These climate change censors claim that the argument over climate change is settled and the deniers’ success in blocking congressional action is harming the public. Therefore, the government must disregard the First Amendment and silence anyone who dares question the reigning climate change dogma. This argument ignores the many reputable scientists who have questioned the magnitude, effects, and role of human action in causing climate change.

If successful, the climate change censors could set a precedent that could silence numerous other views. For example, many people believe the argument over whether we should audit, and then end, the Federal Reserve is settled. Therefore, the deniers of Austrian economics are harming the public by making it more difficult for Congress to restore a free-market monetary policy. So why shouldn’t the government silence Paul Krugman?

The climate change censorship movement is part of a larger effort to silence political speech. Other recent examples include the IRS’s harassment of tea party groups as well as that agency’s (fortunately thwarted) attempt to impose new rules on advocacy organizations that would have limited their ability to criticize a politician’s record in the months before an election.

The IRS and many state legislators and officials are also trying to force public policy groups to hand over the names of their donors. This type of disclosure can make individuals fearful that, if they support a pro-liberty group, they will face retaliation from the government.

Efforts to silence government critics may have increased in recent years; however, the sad fact is the US Government has a long and shameful history of censoring speech. It is not surprising that war and national security have served as convenient excuses to limit political speech. So-called liberal presidents Woodrow Wilson and Franklin Roosevelt both supported wartime crackdowns on free speech.

Today, many neoconservatives are using the war on terror to justify crackdowns on free speech, increased surveillance of unpopular religious groups like Muslims, and increased government control of social media platforms like Facebook and Twitter. Some critics of US foreign policy have even been forbidden to enter the country.

Many opponents of government restrictions on the First Amendment and other rights of Muslims support government actions targeting so-called “right-wing extremists.” These fair-weather civil liberties defenders are the mirror image of conservatives who support restricting the free speech rights of Muslims in the name of national security, yet clam to oppose authoritarian government. Defending speech we do not agree with is necessary to effectively protect the speech we support.

A government that believes it can run our lives, run the economy, and run the world will inevitably come to believe it can, and should, have the power to silence its critics. Eliminating the welfare-warfare state is the key to protecting our free speech, and other liberties, from an authoritarian government.

http://www.ronpaul.com/2016-03-13/cl...ech-continues/
 
Old March 15th, 2016 #470
Joe_Smith
Senior Member
 
Joe_Smith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,778
Joe_Smith
Default

Both sides of the global warming debate have political agendas, which means neither can be believed.

There's obviously something going on with the climate, I've seen a dramatic change just in my life time alone. If you're going to insist nothing is going on at all, when it's undeniable that carbon traps heat, then you're just another conservative rube.

The GOP has money from special interests and big business as an incentive to make dishonest arguments like that "cooling" shit from the 70's, what do WN's get out of it?

Until there's an objective scientific debate on this, better not to take a side. It surprises me how so many WN's will attack 'cuckservatives' incessantly, yet pull straight National Review on every non-racial topic. Think for yourself.
__________________
"The favorite slogan of the reds is: 'No Pasarán!: Yes we have passed! And we tell them...and we tell them, we will pass again!'"
― Benito Mussolini after the Communist capitulation in Barcelona
 
Old April 2nd, 2016 #471
Robbie Key
Senior Member
 
Robbie Key's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 3,910
Robbie Key
Default

Democratic attorneys general to police climate change dissent

By Valerie Richardson - The Washington Times - Tuesday, March 29, 2016

A coalition of Democratic attorneys general in 16 states announced Tuesday an unprecedented campaign to pursue companies that challenge the catastrophic climate change narrative, raising concerns over free speech and the use of state authority to punish political foes.

Standing beside former Vice President Al Gore, New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman said the state officials are committed to “working together on key climate-related initiatives,” including queries into whether fossil fuel companies like ExxonMobil have committed fraud by deceiving the public and shareholders about the impact of man-made carbon dioxide emissions.

Two states — California and New York — already have launched probes into ExxonMobil, while attorneys general from Massachusetts and the Virgin Islands indicated Tuesday that they would follow suit. Virgin Islands Attorney General Claude Walker, an independent, is the only non-Democrat involved in the campaign, called AGs United for Clean Power.

“The bottom line is simple: Climate change is real; it is a threat to all the people we represent,” Mr. Schneiderman said. “If there are companies, whether they’re utilities, whether they’re fossil fuel companies, committing fraud in an effort to maximize their short-term profits at the expense of the people we represent, we want to find out about it. We want to expose it and want to pursue them to the fullest extent of the law.”

Mr. Schneiderman also announced that 20 attorneys general representing 18 states, the District of Columbia and the Virgin Islands filed a brief Tuesday in support of the Environmental Protection Agency’s Clean Power Plan rule, which has been challenged by attorneys general in 25 mostly red states.

The campaign was spurred by articles last year alleging Exxon hid research conducted by its own scientists linking fossil fuel emissions and global warming. Exxon officials have denied the claims and countered that the investigation was conducted by journalism entities that receive funding from foundations known for their climate change activism.

Suzanne McCarron, Exxon’s vice president for public and government affairs, said Tuesday in a statement that the accusations are meritless.

“The allegations are based on the false premise that ExxonMobil reached definitive conclusions about anthropogenic climate change before the world’s experts and before the science itself had matured, and then withheld it from the broader scientific community,” Ms. McCarron said. “Such a claim is preposterous.”

Marc Morano, who heads the pro-industry website Climate Depot, warned that the state officials’ legal campaign against the oil-and-gas industry would “have a chilling effect on free speech and scientific dissent.”

“Gore joined with attention-seeking attorneys general to essentially try to shut down any ‘global warming’ views that differ from the United Nations’ or Gore‘s,” said Mr. Morano in an email. “Agree or face investigations is the new normal for the climate debate.”

Mr. Gore, who narrated the 2006 climate change documentary “An Inconvenient Truth,” said rising levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere are fueling natural disasters ranging from flooding to snowstorms to the recent outbreak of the Zika virus.

“Every night on the news now it’s like a nature hike through the Book of Revelation,” Mr. Gore said at the New York press conference, which was live streamed.

Mr. Morano, whose 2015 documentary “Climate Hustle” disputes the disastrous climate change scenarios, called Mr. Gore “frustrated that his message is still not resonating 10 years after his movie came out.”

“So he apparently has decided that anyone who disagrees with him on ‘global warming’ should face investigations, fines and penalties and be silenced,” Mr. Morano said.

A chill on free speech?

At the press conference Mr. Schneiderman headed off queries about whether the state investigations would chill free speech by freezing legitimate debate over climate change. While many scientists support the catastrophic climate change narrative, others have criticized what the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Richard Lindzen describes as “climate alarmism.”

“There have been those who have raised the question, ‘Aren’t you interfering with people’s First Amendment rights?’” said Mr. Schneiderman. “The First Amendment, ladies and gentlemen, does not give you the right to commit fraud.”

Climate change groups launched the social media campaign #ExxonKnew last year in response to articles by InsideClimate News and the Columbia School of Journalism’s Energy and Environmental Reporting Project that cited internal ExxonMobil documents warning of global warming.

The news reports touched off a brouhaha over journalistic independence after ExxonMobil pointed out that both outlets receive funding from the liberal Rockefeller Family Fund, which has backed advocacy groups that oppose fossil fuels, including 350.org.

“I think the two big headlines coming out of this are that this entire issue continues to be based on a horrendously reported series of stories that rely on cherry-picked statements at every turn,” said Katie Brown of Energy in Depth, a project of the Independent Petroleum Association of America, in a Tuesday statement.

She added that “the vast majority of attorneys general that stood up on stage today have no interest at all in wasting their own state’s resources the way that New York has.”

Lew Wasserman, director of the Rockefeller Family Fund, told Reuters last week that “no specific company” was targeted by the grants, but that the fund supports “public interest journalism to better understand how the fossil fuel industry was dealing with the reality of climate science internally and publicly.”

InsideClimate News and Columbia have maintained that donors have no influence over their reporting. The Los Angeles Times, which ran the Columbia report in October, later added a note listing the project’s funders, including the Rockefeller Family Fund and Rockefeller Brothers Fund, as well as the pro-wind-and-solar Energy Foundation, according to Energy in Depth.

Mr. Gore compared the campaign to the state-led prosecution of tobacco companies that led to a multistate $206 billion settlement in 1998.

“[T]he Congress has been sharply constraining [the] ability of [the] executive branch to fully perform its obligations under the Constitution to protect the American people against the kind of fraud that the evidence suggests is being committed by several of the fossil fuel companies, electric utilities burning coal and the like,” Mr. Gore said. “So what these attorneys general are doing is exceptionally important.”

That comparison led Mr. Morano to suggest that the attorneys general may be seeking another payday, accusing them of targeting the oil-and-gas industry in pursuit of “huge financial settlements.”

Mr. Schneiderman also denied that the attorneys general have already made up their minds about the guilt of companies in committing fraud.

“We’re in [the] early stages of the case. We’re not prejudging the evidence. We’ve seen some things that have been published by you and others,” Mr. Schneiderman told reporters. “But it is our obligation to take a look at the underlying documentation and to get at all the evidence.”

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...ags-cr/?page=2
 
Old April 2nd, 2016 #472
Robbie Key
Senior Member
 
Robbie Key's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 3,910
Robbie Key
Default

By ALAIN SHERTER MONEYWATCH March 24, 2016, 2:06 PM

After 146 years, Rockefeller family is exiting the oil business

Heirs to the oil fortune created by John D. Rockefeller, who founded Standard Oil in 1870, are exiting the family business.

The Rockefeller Family Fund, a charity that supports causes related to the environment, economic justice and other issues, is liquidating its investments in fossil fuel companies, including Exxon Mobil (XOM).

"While the global community works to eliminate the use of fossil fuels, it makes little sense -- financially or ethically -- to continue holding investments in these companies," the fund said on Wednesday in a statement. "There is no sane rationale for companies to continue to explore for new sources of hydrocarbons."

The fund, which manages roughly $130 million, said it would immediately divest holdings of Exxon, as well as sell its investments in coal companies and tar sands-based oil producers.

Exxon, the world's second-biggest company, is a descendant of Standard Oil, which was famously broken up in 1911 as part of President Theodore Roosevelt's "trustbusting" campaign.

In announcing its decision, the Rockefeller fund attacked Exxon for what it called the company's "morally reprehensible conduct," alluding to allegations that the company has hidden evidence that fossil fuels contribute to climate change.

"Evidence appears to suggest that the company worked since the 1980s to confuse the public about climate change's march, while simultaneously spending millions to fortify its own infrastructure against climate change's destructive consequences and track new exploration opportunities as the Arctic's ice receded," the fund said.

Rockefeller family members have long accused Exxon of working to deny the existence of global warming. Former Virginia Senator Jay Rockefeller, a great-grandson of John D. Rockefeller, in 2006 urged Exxon CEO Rex Tillerson to stop funding groups that denied climate change.

In a February op-ed in the Los Angeles Times, Neva Rockefeller Goodwin, an economist and great-grandaughter of John D. Rockefeller, said that in the 1980s the company "began to finance think tanks and researchers who cast doubt on the reliability of climate science."

Exxon denies that it misrepresented the dangers of climate change.

"It's not surprising that they're divesting from the company since they're already funding a conspiracy against us," Alan Jeffers, a spokesman for Exxon, said in an emailed statement to CBS MoneyWatch about the Rockfeller fund's announcement.

New York State Attorney General Eric Schneiderman is said to have launched an investigation last fall into whether Exxon misled the public and investors about its internal research regarding climate risks. California Attorney General Kamala Harris is also reportedly looking into whether Exxon lied about climate change.

The probes followed a report by InsideClimate News, a non-profit news organization, claiming that Exxon sought to undermine scientific evidence that pointed to the growing threat of climate change.

Jeffers said the Rockefeller Family Fund provided financial support to InsideClimate News, which he said "produced inaccurate and deliberately misleading stories" about the company's climate research.

"The stories wrongly suggested that we had reached definitive conclusions about the risks of climate change decades before the world's experts and while climate science was in an early stage of development," he said. "ExxonMobil believes the risk of climate change is clear and warrants action."

Exxon critics praised the Rockefeller Family Fund's move to divest its fossil fuel holdings.

"Just like with Big Tobacco before it, the turning point in the movement to end the fossil fuel industry's abuses has come: Influential institutions and people are withholding their investments, and there is a burgeoning movement of attorneys general launching investigations into Exxon to expose the truth and hold it accountable for its lies," said Katherine Sawyer of watchdog group Corporate Accountability International.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/rockefel...-oil-business/
 
Old April 2nd, 2016 #474
Squarehead Chris
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Crawlin' from the wreckage
Posts: 1,951
Squarehead Chris
Default

It's all because of bovine flatulence I tell ya'.... bovine flatulence.
 
Old June 28th, 2016 #475
Dawn Cannon
Senior Member
 
Dawn Cannon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Waiting for the solar micronova
Posts: 4,282
Dawn Cannon
Default Brexit throws spanner into EU climate policy

Britain's exit from the European Union may erode the bloc's leadership role in fighting climate change and stymie crucial efforts to set more ambitious targets for cutting greenhouse gases, officials and experts said Tuesday.

http://phys.org/news/2016-06-brexit-...te-policy.html
 
Old November 7th, 2016 #477
laowai
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 452
Default

The article from the 1920s shows the elites tried to push this lie back then, but got sidetracked by the economic collapse.

Today we had a one nation senator come out and deny climate change.

Quote:
One nation senator takes aim at CSIRO over climate change ‘lies’


He has labelled climate change as “ridiculous lies” and a “NASA conspiracy” and now One Nation Senator Malcolm Roberts is throwing the book – or, at least, a 42-page report – at Australia’s CSIRO for lacking “empirical proof”.

The report, titled On Climate, CSIRO Lacks Empirical Proof, has a tagline: “We have a choice: the tyranny of controlling opinions versus the freedom or objective scientific evidence”.

Read more at http://www.9news.com.au/national/201...7tgXQtAcl1R.99

I saw an interview with this senator on Sky news and a commentator mentioned that 80% of the worlds volcanoes are under the ocean, and that it was impossible to gauge the impact of their emissions on world climate because of their inaccessibility, and the fact that we don't know much about them or how many there are. In fact the worlds tallest volcano, an undersea one, was found 5 years ago the commentator mentioned.

http://www.withinthesea.com/oceans/9...occurs-oceans/


I'm all for slowly introducing green technology( once it has matured to be viable), but I don't understand subscribing to climate agreements when we dont know enough about the effect of undersea volcanoes on climate, and the fact that doing anything now will increase electricity prices to ridiculous levels, and not do anything to stop climate change, because countries like China and India make anything we do in the West meaningless with their billions. And the banks motives at pursuing the climate agenda just makes me angry about how people take it seriously and not see it's just all about money.

The One nation senator also says their is no left or right anymore- and that the only thing that differentiates political parties anymore is whether they want to control people via authoritarian governments and legislation, or if they want small government and to allow people freedom.

Quote:
The most productive volcanic systems on Earth are hidden under an average of 8,500 feet (2,600 m) of water. Beneath the oceans a global system of mid-ocean ridges produces an estimated 75% of the annual output of magma. An estimated 0.7 cubic miles (3 cubic kilometers) of lava is erupted. The magma and lava create the edges of new oceanic plates and supply heat and chemicals to some of the Earth's most unusual and rare ecosystems.

If an estimate of 4,000 volcanoes per million square kilometers on the floor of the Pacific Ocean is extrapolated for all the oceans than there are more than a million submarine (underwater) volcanoes. Perhaps as many as 75,000 of these volcanoes rise over half a mile (1 kilometer) above the ocean floor. Technology and hard work by a group of tenacious explorers/geologists have allowed us our first detailed glimpses of submarine volcanoes. The following pages outline some of the basic characteristics and features of submarine volcanoes.
http://volcano.oregonstate.edu/submarine

Quote:
In 1993, marine geophysicists aboard the research vessel Melville discovered 1,133 previously unmapped underwater volcanoes off the coast of Easter Island. Though some of the newly discovered volcanoes rose as much as one-and-a-half miles above the seafloor, their summits still remained half a mile below the water’s surface- all this in a comparatively small area of only 55,000 square miles, about the size of New York State. The geophysicists had increased the known supply of underwater volcanoes by more than ten percent just in a matter of months. That was 1993. Today, scientists estimate that there are more than three million underwater volcanoes. That’s a three followed by six zeroes! In 2007, oceanographers Hillier and Watts surveyed 201,055 submarine volcanoes. “From this they concluded an astounding total of 3,477,403 submarine volcanoes must reasonably exist worldwide,” said this article by John O’Sullivan. Hillier and Watts “based this finding on the earlier and well-respected observations of Earth and Planetary Sciences specialist, Batiza (1982) who found that at least 4 per cent of seamounts are active volcanoes.” According to Batiza’s survey, the Pacific mid-plate alone contains an incredible 22,000 to 55,000 underwater volcanoes, with at least 2,000 of them considered active. Thinking that anyone could know exactly how many volcanoes lurk beneath the surface of the ocean is ludicrous, of course. But that 3,477,403 number, coming from two well-respected oceanographers, does reinforce my point rather nicely, namely, that underwater volcanoes are heating the seas. To go from 10,000 underwater volcanoes to more than three million in less than 20 years shows how little we knew – and how little we still know – about this incredible force of nature. We know more about the moon.

The Arctic Ocean contains far more underwater volcanoes, and displays more hydrothermal activity than scientists had suspected. Look at the Gakkel ridge. The Gakkel ridge is a gigantic underwater volcanic mountain chain stretching some 1,100 miles (1,800 km) beneath the Arctic Ocean from north of Greenland to Siberia. With its 3-mile-high summits, the Gakkel ridge, the northernmost portion of the mid-ocean ridge system, is far mightier than the Alps. If a single volcano can heat a high-mountain lake to 108 degrees in New Zealand, imagine what an eleven-hundred-mile-long chain of underwater volcanoes could do to the Arctic Ocean. –The Moral Liberal

Asphalt volcanoes are ocean floor vents that erupt asphalt instead of lava. They were discovered in the Gulf of Mexico during an expedition of the research vessel SONNE, led by Gerhard Bohrmann of the DFG Research Center Ocean Margins in 2003. In 2007, seven more such structures were discovered off the coast of Santa Barbara, California. The largest of these domes lies at a depth of 700 ft (213 m). The structures were larger than a football field and about as tall as a six-story building, all made completely out of asphalt. You needn’t wonder why so many dead fish are washing up on the coast of California. Most of these asphalt volcanoes emit huge amounts of methane and, along with other submarine hydrothermal volcanic vents, they are the leading causes of hypoxia (dead-zones) in oceans, rising temperatures, ocean acidity and worsening oscillation weather patterns (El Niño/La Niña) as I mentioned in my book. –The Extinction Protocol
https://theextinctionprotocol.wordpr...worlds-oceans/
 
Old November 23rd, 2016 #478
Hugo Böse
Jeunesse Dorée
 
Hugo Böse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Four Seasons Jalalabad
Posts: 8,585
Hugo Böse
Default

Quote:
From the FT

Trump reverses course on core campaign pledges

Donald Trump has reversed course on several campaign pledges including suggesting he will reconsider his view on withdrawing from the Paris climate accord,...
....
https://www.ft.com/content/cb79b0be-...c-f4a01f1b0fa1
Hopefully this is just a some kind tactic, that perhaps they deem it easier to destroy this costly fairy tale from the inside or to render it impotent in some way.
__________________
_______
Political correctness is an intellectual gulag.

Last edited by Hugo Böse; November 23rd, 2016 at 03:23 AM.
 
Old February 5th, 2017 #479
Hugo Böse
Jeunesse Dorée
 
Hugo Böse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Four Seasons Jalalabad
Posts: 8,585
Hugo Böse
Default

Exposed: How world leaders were duped into investing billions over manipulated global warming data

*The Mail on Sunday can reveal a landmark paper exaggerated global warming

*It was rushed through and timed to influence the Paris agreement on climate change

*America’s National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration broke its own rules

*The report claimed the pause in global warming never existed, but it was based on misleading, ‘unverified’ data


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencete...#ixzz4XqhbBPnW
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
__________________
_______
Political correctness is an intellectual gulag.
 
Old March 28th, 2017 #480
Robbie Key
Senior Member
 
Robbie Key's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 3,910
Robbie Key
Default

Trump signs order rolling back Obama climate change policies
Tue Mar 28, 2017 9:32PM
HomeUSPolitics

Quote:
US President Donald Trump has signed and executive order aimed at rolling back most of his predecessor’s climate change policies, promising that the measure would create jobs in the fossil fuel industry.

Trump signed the document titled the ‘Energy Independence Executive Order’ at the headquarters of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on Tuesday, suspending more than half a dozen measures enacted by former President Barack Obama.

The order intends to reverse a ban on coal leasing on federal lands, and overturns rules to curb methane emissions from oil and gas production, with critics slamming Trump's measure, as dangerous and against the global trend toward cleaner energy technologies. ​

Flanked by a group of coal miners, the new US president said this is “the start of a new era” in energy production, praising the move as a way to promote energy independence and to restore thousands of lost coal industry jobs.

"My administration is putting an end to the war on coal,” Trump said. "With today's executive action I am taking historic steps to lift the restrictions on American energy, to reverse government intrusion and to cancel job-killing regulations."

This comes as the US coal industry is suffering an economic downturn due to declining demand for its product, and therefore being replaced by cheaper and more plentiful natural gas.
http://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2017/03...ngBarack-Obama
 
Reply

Tags
global warming hoax, global warming scam, hoax of the 21st century

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:32 PM.
Page generated in 0.12986 seconds.