[clif]

There are 193 sovereign countries in the world give or take all with their own leadership and many in direct opposition to anything American. Many have scientists as capable as any in the US and governments that spend far less of their GDP on defense so should have more to devote to R&D.

Many have scientists as capable as any in the US

Not back in the late 70's or early 80's .......

back then the US R&D budget still dwarfed most of the rest of the planet

PS; what does the US do to scientists and countries that they disagree with about what they investigate and where they spend their money?

North Korea, Cuba, Iran, Venezula, North Vietnam 1954-1975, Iraq, Syria, Libya, etc

Wanna bet if somebody really tried stepping on the oil-banking cliquish toes the USA in the form of the CIA would do to then what it did to Mohammad Mosaddegh circa 1953;

He became enormously popular in Iran, after he nationalized Iran's petroleum industry and oil reserves. He was deposed in the 1953 Iranian coup d'état, an Anglo-American covert operation that marked the first time the US had overthrown a foreign government during the Cold War

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iran ... 7%C3%A9tat

President Jacobo Árbenz in Guatemala circa 1954;

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1954_Guat ... 7%C3%A9tat

Or Salvador Allende in Chile circa 1973;

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1973_Chil ... 7%C3%A9tat

Like they tried but failed to do to Castro;

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bay_of_Pigs

But did do to Saddam; (PS: every one even George W Bush now admits he had no weapons of mass destruction)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003_invasion_of_Iraq

We just recently intervened in both Syria and Lybia,

wanna bet we'd have ignored them

like we ignored the genocide in

Rwanda April to July 1994,

Darfur 2003-2004, yes Colin Powell said some words but did NOTHING to stop it.

IF THEY HAD NO OIL.

You had a nice rant, but in the real world only one option is allowed by the oil/banking controlled powers that be.

Too bad one of the major oil players decided to lie way back in the late 70's early 80's for profit, and the oil money soaked politicos decided to go along.

[Satori]

apparently this douche bag didn't get served with that there subpoena thingy of silence !
LMAO !!!

was his "opinion piece" bought and paid for by the Koch brothers?
and typed up on EXXON/MOBIL stationary ?


Another Survey Of Meteorologists Undercuts Climate Alarmism
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor ... a9113b627f

[Tanada]

apparently this douche bag didn't get served with that there subpoena thingy of silence !
LMAO !!!

was his "opinion piece" bought and paid for by the Koch brothers?
and typed up on EXXON/MOBIL stationary ?


Another Survey Of Meteorologists Undercuts Climate Alarmism
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor ... a9113b627f

What a wonderful example of the art of cherry picking data to support a viewpoint not supported by the full data set.

Obviously Meteorologists are not Climatologists any more than a Ear/Nose/Throat specialist is a Dentist. Sure both work with the atmosphere, on in the analogy both work on your head, but cross specialization is not common, to say the least. Meteorologists are concerned with the next 2-10 days, Climatologists the next 30-50 YEARS.

Even at that, fully two thirds, 67 percent, of the meteorologists consider human caused global warming to be a major concern.

For scientists to overwhelmingly agree that humans are causing a global warming crisis, one of the prerequisites is that humans are responsible for most of our recent warming. Nevertheless, according to the new survey, only 67% of American Meteorological Society members believe humans are responsible for most of our recent warming.

I don't know where this author lives, but in any contest in the USA a majority of 67 percent is considered overwhelming. I don't care if you are talking about a basketball score where one team scored 67 and the other team scored 33, or you are talking about an election where one candidate got 67 percent of the vote and the other got 33 percent. In all cases, a two to one difference is certainly overwhelming.

[vtsnowedin]

There are 193 sovereign countries in the world give or take all with their own leadership and many in direct opposition to anything American. Many have scientists as capable as any in the US and governments that spend far less of their GDP on defense so should have more to devote to R&D.

Many have scientists as capable as any in the US

Not back in the late 70's or early 80's .......

back then the US R&D budget still dwarfed most of the rest of the planet

PS; what does the US do to scientists and countries that they disagree with about what they investigate and where they spend their money?

North Korea, Cuba, Iran, Venezula, North Vietnam 1954-1975, Iraq, Syria, Libya, etc

Wanna bet if somebody really tried stepping on the oil-banking cliquish toes the USA in the form of the CIA would do to then what it did to Mohammad Mosaddegh circa 1953;

He became enormously popular in Iran, after he nationalized Iran's petroleum industry and oil reserves. He was deposed in the 1953 Iranian coup d'état, an Anglo-American covert operation that marked the first time the US had overthrown a foreign government during the Cold War

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iran ... 7%C3%A9tat

President Jacobo Árbenz in Guatemala circa 1954;

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1954_Guat ... 7%C3%A9tat

Or Salvador Allende in Chile circa 1973;

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1973_Chil ... 7%C3%A9tat

Like they tried but failed to do to Castro;

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bay_of_Pigs

But did do to Saddam; (PS: every one even George W Bush now admits he had no weapons of mass destruction)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003_invasion_of_Iraq

We just recently intervened in both Syria and Lybia,

wanna bet we'd have ignored them

like we ignored the genocide in

Rwanda April to July 1994,

Darfur 2003-2004, yes Colin Powell said some words but did NOTHING to stop it.

IF THEY HAD NO OIL.

You had a nice rant, but in the real world only one option is allowed by the oil/banking controlled powers that be.

Too bad one of the major oil players decided to lie way back in the late 70's early 80's for profit, and the oil money soaked politicos decided to go along.

If I counted right you list twenty countries that the USA has interfered with in the last sixty five years or so. No one thinks that over that time span the USA's foreign policy has not been ham handed more often then not but that leaves 173 countries that have been and still are free to think for themselves. Some of course are close allies and more then a few are very small and have limited scientific resources but you would think that some of those larger countries that don't like us very much and are not dependent on us would have gone totally green by now.
I didn't realize we had such complete control over world events.

[dohboi]

+1, T!

[dohboi]

This kinda says it all:

http://grist.org/politics/conservatives ... hemselves/

Conservatives love subpoenas about climate change —

until they get hit with one themselves

It’s become a go-to strategy for climate change deniers to demand subpoenas and documents from scientists whenever they get a whiff of a potential controversy. But they like it less when the same tactic is used on them.

Attorney general of the U.S. Virgin Islands Claude Walker served the conservative think tank Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) with a subpoena last Thursday, demanding several decades’ worth of communications, emails, and other documents pertaining to CEI’s work on climate change policy and donor information. By subpoenaing CEI, Walker is broadening “a multifaceted legal inquiry into whether fossil fuel companies broke any laws as they sought for decades to undermine the scientific consensus and head off forceful action to address the climate crisis,” reports InsideClimateNews.

Libertarian and conservative writers at at The Blaze, American Thinker, The Washington Times, Bloomberg View, and Cato Institute have criticized the subpoena, calling it the product of “hysterics,” part of an “absurd climate inquisition,” and a chapter in “Al Gore’s climate witch hunt.” CEI itself called the move “an affront” to its First Amendment rights, adding that if Walker succeeds, “the real victims will be all Americans, whose access to affordable energy will be hit by one costly regulation after another.”


Where was this outrage when right-wing politicians were doing the same, but to scientists?

Republicans in Congress have given CEI and its allies plenty of opportunities to call out their own antics. For example:

1. House Science Committee Chairman Lamar Smith (R-Tex.) issued subpoenas to administrators and scientists at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) in late 2015. Smith wanted their communications after the journal Science published a NOAA’s report debunking the deniers’ favorite excuse that global warming is on “pause.”

2. Smith has been on a tear lately. Last fall, he delivered a notice to Jagdish Shukla, a climate scientist at George Mason University in Virginia, which requested that Shukla “preserve all e-mail, electronic documents, and data (‘electronic records’) created since January 1, 2009,” pending an investigation. Shukla had signed a letter urging federal investigation of whether fossil fuel companies knowingly deceived the public on climate.

3. Joe Barton (R-Tex), a former chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee from 2004 to 2007, sought the personal emails of climate scientist Michael E. Mann in 2005, director of the Earth System Science Center at Pennsylvania State University, after Mann’s study showed a rapid increase in global temperatures.

4. In perhaps the most famous incident of its kind, a hacker got a hold of more than 1,000 emails and 3,000 other documents from climate scientists who were authoring a United Nations report on climate change consensus — deniers likened it to a major scandal, calling it “climategate.” They tried to find a smoking gun in climate science that didn’t exist. Ex-Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli demanded Michael Mann’s files from his former university as a result.

CEI is caught in the crossfire aimed at ExxonMobil of late, given CEI’s long history promoting inaccurate science and policies to discredit climate change action. Nineteen state attorneys general are already investigating ExxonMobil to determine whether the company broke the law in reportedly misleading its investors and the public about climate change. And it just so happens that Exxon happens to have contributed at least $1.6 million to CEI since 1985.

No matter what comes of CEI’s subpoena, it won’t stop the think tank’s allies from doing the same to target climate scientists.

It's really beyond hypocrisy. Simply disgusting.

.....

vt, we have over 60 military bases in about 40 countries, which puts us in easy military reach of every pretty much any other country, especially given that our military budget is bigger than the next ten largest military budgets combined. http://reason.com/blog/2014/02/26/the-u ... er-than-th

But this discussion is getting pretty far afield from the titular subject of the thread, so as the originator of the thread, it is apparently my duty to steer us back somewhat more on track. From CoC:

2.1.5 ...You are responsible for monitoring and keeping the topic you posted on topic.

[clif]

+1

[ralfy]

Another point to consider is that businesses in general want continuous economic growth, i.e., given competition, the need for returns on investment, needs and wants of a growing global population, etc.

Governments support these businesses because they also want continuous expansion of government services, infrastructure development, etc.

The same goes for the military, which wants better weapons, more personnel, etc., in competition with other forces; more public revenues and production from arms industries will ensure such.

Households which elect officials and earn from businesses also want growth, which means they will generally support governments that can ensure economic growth.

[dohboi]

"households"

That means families and communities.

Generally they want basic necessities and fundamental services. Most of these can be supplied with relatively small investments (small compared say to what the financial sector or military sector regularly sucks out of the economy).

I don't think 'households' give a flying f about 'growth' as long as these basic needs and services can be supplied.

[Satori]

as I was saying

"Oil companies’ coordinated cover-up of climate risks stretches back decades and rivals that of big tobacco companies."

hmm
the cover up,corruption and deceit go back as far as 1946



New Documents Show Oil Industry Even More Evil Than We Thought

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/oil ... a5937df6ce

[onlooker]

It seems to me the greater misdeed is not the omission of some important piece of information but the intentional voicing of information that one knows is patently false. That is what is alleged about Exxon. So if corporations want to be considered humans when it is convenient for them then so they should be under scrutiny for lying or perjuring themselves in the case of cigarette companies. So they want the benefits of being treated like people but also then should accept drawbacks.

[careinke]

apparently this douche bag didn't get served with that there subpoena thingy of silence !
LMAO !!!

was his "opinion piece" bought and paid for by the Koch brothers?
and typed up on EXXON/MOBIL stationary ?


Another Survey Of Meteorologists Undercuts Climate Alarmism
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor ... a9113b627f

Do you not watch NOVA because it is bought and paid for by the Koch brothers? Does Soros fund a better more popular science show?

[Satori]

ummm
i kinda think ya missed the point

[Lore]

It's obvious, corporations keep saying; go to the trough and pig out! While the scientists keep saying gluttony has its consequences. People like to be kept fat and stupid. In fact here in the U.S, we have learned to admire ignorance as a beneficial trait, while we're suspicious of anyone having a high IQ and is doing something useful with it.

[dohboi]

+1

[Satori]

New documents reveal oil industry knew of climate risks decades earlier than suspected and launched coordinated efforts to foster skepticism

http://www.desdemonadespair.net/2016/04 ... -knew.html

"Smoke and Fumes"

what did they know?
when did they know it?
and what did they do about it?

we now have the answers to those questions

[Satori]

boy am I in the wrong business

The $500 million per year climate change obstruction industry

http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2016/4/ ... n-industry

and would someone issue an emergency subpoena o' silence to Caribou Barbie?

Sarah Palin mocks Bill Nye over climate change: He's 'as much as scientist as I am'

http://www.cnn.com/2016/04/15/politics/ ... index.html

seriously???

give a girl from the trailer park a GED and suddenly she thinks she's a freakin' rocket scientist

[Satori]

50 Years Ago Big Oil Bragged About Being Able To Melt Glaciers, While They Knew About Climate Change

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2016/0 ... -glaciers/

[onlooker]

give a girl from the trailer park a GED and suddenly she thinks she's a freakin' rocket scientist

[Tanada]

boy am I in the wrong business

The $500 million per year climate change obstruction industry

http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2016/4/ ... n-industry

and would someone issue an emergency subpoena o' silence to Caribou Barbie?

Sarah Palin mocks Bill Nye over climate change: He's 'as much as scientist as I am'

http://www.cnn.com/2016/04/15/politics/ ... index.html

seriously???

give a girl from the trailer park a GED and suddenly she thinks she's a freakin' rocket scientist

Before you get too carried away in your outrage Palin has a degree in Journalism and Bill Nye is a mechanical engineer who got as job as an actor on a kids show. Neither one of them is a climate scientist so in fairness Palin is just as much of a climate scientist as Bill Nye, which is to say, not at all.

If she were making those kind of statements about Dr. Michael Mann or Dr. Richard Alley your outrage would be properly placed, but that isn't what she did. Actor/Engineer Bill Nye doesn't even hold a PhD, let alone specialize in climate science research.