Global Warming and C02 fraud

@vivify said
This is false:

https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-atmospheric-carbon-dioxide

This is a record of the length and time period in history where CO2 has caused global temperatures to increase.

The rest of your article: none of the quotes in your link are backed up with any support; they're all just assertions with no reasons given by the people who said them.

Your link does not prove that. Your assertion is false.

@metal-brain said
Your link does not prove that. Your assertion is false.

"False" how? Do you have an actual argument why the record in the link is false, or are you just making unbacked claims like the people in your article? Don't respond, we already know the answer.

The guy you quoted said "there is no record" of C02 resulting in climate change. According this government website, there is. Whether you, agree with the government link or not is not my concern; the point is that the guy in your link said something false.

@metal-brain said
The global warming movement was started by big oil. Look up Maurice Strong.

Big Oil deliberately created the idea that it needs to stopped from endangering the planet? Okay, kiddo.

@vivify said
Big Oil deliberately created the idea that it needs to stopped from endangering the planet? Okay, kiddo.

Absolutely!
Look up "Maurice Strong".

@vivify said
"False" how? Do you have an actual argument why the record in the link is false, or are you just making unbacked claims like the people in your article? Don't respond, we already know the answer.

The guy you quoted said "there is no record" of C02 resulting in climate change. According this government website, there is. Whether you, agree with the government link or not is not my concern; the point is that the guy in your link said something false.

There is no evidence of that. Where is your evidence?

CO2 has always lagged behind temps until recently and so has methane.

@metal-brain said
Absolutely!
Look up "Maurice Strong".

https://www.greenpeace.org/usa/ending-the-climate-crisis/exxon-and-the-oil-industry-knew-about-climate-change/exxons-climate-denial-history-a-timeline/

@vivify said
"False" how? Do you have an actual argument why the record in the link is false, or are you just making unbacked claims like the people in your article? Don't respond, we already know the answer.

The guy you quoted said "there is no record" of C02 resulting in climate change. According this government website, there is. Whether you, agree with the government link or not is not my concern; the point is that the guy in your link said something false.

Here is an excerpt from your link:

Past and future carbon dioxide

"Natural increases in carbon dioxide concentrations have periodically warmed Earth’s temperature during ice age cycles over the past million years or more. The warm episodes (interglacials) began with a small increase in sunlight due to a tiny wobble in Earth’s axis of rotation or in the path of its orbit around the Sun."

That first sentence is a false statement. The second sentence is probably true and they even admit that is the cause. The CO2 increase was due to temperature rise. They have their cause and effect backwards. That is due to disinformation from Al Gore and others.

@metal-brain said
Here is an excerpt from your link:

Past and future carbon dioxide

"Natural increases in carbon dioxide concentrations have periodically warmed Earth’s temperature during ice age cycles over the past million years or more. The warm episodes (interglacials) began with a small increase in sunlight due to a tiny wobble in Earth’s axis of rotation or in the path of its o ...[text shortened]... . They have their cause and effect backwards. That is due to disinformation from Al Gore and others.

It's easy to understand how a CO2 increase would cause world temperatures to rise.

Explain what would cause world temperatures to rise AND then CO2 levels to rise.

@no1marauder said
https://www.greenpeace.org/usa/ending-the-climate-crisis/exxon-and-the-oil-industry-knew-about-climate-change/exxons-climate-denial-history-a-timeline/

Did you read your own link? Here is an excerpt:

"1957

Scientists working at Humble Oil (now ExxonMobil) publish a paper on the dilution of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and ocean. The paper notes: “Although appreciable amounts of carbon dioxide have undoubtedly been added from soils by tilling of land, apparently a much greater amount has resulted from the combustion of fossil fuels”–indicating company scientists understood the link between fossil fuel use and rising CO2. (Source: Center for International Environmental Law)"

Who started it? Who published that paper no1?

@metal-brain said
Did you read your own link? Here is an excerpt:

"1957

Scientists working at Humble Oil (now ExxonMobil) publish a paper on the dilution of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and ocean. The paper notes: “Although appreciable amounts of carbon dioxide have undoubtedly been added from soils by tilling of land, apparently a much greater amount has resulted from the combus ...[text shortened]... ource: Center for International Environmental Law)"

Who started it? Who published that paper no1?

Maybe you should read the whole link, for example:

"Exxon and other fossil fuel companies create the Global Climate Coalition (GCC). The GCC is created to oppose mandatory reductions in carbon emissions by obscuring the scientific understanding of fossil fuels’ impact on the climate. The GCC created a scientific “backgrounder” for lawmakers and journalists that claimed “The role of greenhouse gases in climate change is not well understood.”

The evidence is overwhelming that Big Oil has consistently downplayed climate change and Man's role in increased global CO2 levels and increasing temperatures.

@no1marauder said
It's easy to understand how a CO2 increase would cause world temperatures to rise.

Explain what would cause world temperatures to rise AND then CO2 levels to rise.

No, that is just a theory. Having a theory and proving it are two different things.

The second sentence of viv's link already answered your question. Here it is again:

"The warm episodes (interglacials) began with a small increase in sunlight due to a tiny wobble in Earth’s axis of rotation or in the path of its orbit around the Sun."

@no1marauder said
Maybe you should read the whole link, for example:

"Exxon and other fossil fuel companies create the Global Climate Coalition (GCC). The GCC is created to oppose mandatory reductions in carbon emissions by obscuring the scientific understanding of fossil fuels’ impact on the climate. The GCC created a scientific “backgrounder” for lawmakers and journalists that claimed ...[text shortened]... downplayed climate change and Man's role in increased global CO2 levels and increasing temperatures.

But they started the whole movement. Isn't it obvious they were merely pretending to oppose it? What is Exxon-Mobile's position on it now? Be honest.

@metal-brain said
No, that is just a theory. Having a theory and proving it are two different things.

The second sentence of viv's link already answered your question. Here it is again:

"The warm episodes (interglacials) began with a small increase in sunlight due to a tiny wobble in Earth’s axis of rotation or in the path of its orbit around the Sun."

Everything in science is a "theory", so that is hardly a refutation.

"The mechanics of the earth’s climate system are simple. When energy from the sun is reflected off the earth and back into space (mostly by clouds and ice), or when the earth’s atmosphere releases energy, the planet cools. When the earth absorbs the sun’s energy, or when atmospheric gases prevent heat released by the earth from radiating into space (the greenhouse effect), the planet warms. A variety of factors, both natural and human, can influence the earth’s climate system."

https://www.nrdc.org/stories/[WORD TOO LONG]

You haven't explained how a "small increase in sunlight" could lead to an increase in CO2 levels. Please be specific.

@no1marauder said
Everything in science is a "theory", so that is hardly a refutation.

"The mechanics of the earth’s climate system are simple. When energy from the sun is reflected off the earth and back into space (mostly by clouds and ice), or when the earth’s atmosphere releases energy, the planet cools. When the earth absorbs the sun’s energy, or when atmospheric gases prevent hea ...[text shortened]... ined how a "small increase in sunlight" could lead to an increase in CO2 levels. Please be specific.

"The mechanics of the earth’s climate system are simple."

No, it not at all. You are wrong.
You have no evidence that increased CO2 in the atmosphere increases warming. It lagged behind temps in the ice core samples. You have your cause and effect backwards.

An increase in sunlight increases temperatures and that increases CO2 in the atmosphere.

@metal-brain said
But they started the whole movement. Isn't it obvious they were merely pretending to oppose it? What is Exxon-Mobile's position on it now? Be honest.

That's ridiculous. Sure, some people working for oil companies did research that confirmed rising world temperatures, but so did many others. And Big Oil then consistently denied that human activities had any significant effect on climate change as the link I provided clearly shows.