GOP, businesses torched AOC for doubting existence of smash-and-grab robberies

[oil&gas]

Here she is questioning an oil industry climate scientist…. She knows her shit.

She knew as much as the average bartender about the state of climate
science research. To say that Exxon's reports of carbon dioxide causing global
warming were dinky is an understatement. It is nothing significant compared
with climate science research conducted by major schools of environmental
science. Exxon would not have been able to come up with those reports
without collaboration of outsiders. AOC might as well rounded up colleagues of
that former Exxon-supported professor from Purdue, York, McGill and other
respected climate research institutes to question their silence on Exxon's
cover up of those dinky reports which were all disseminated in 1980s to the
science community. At least Exxon funded their own research and as
such have the right to not disseminate their discovery of warmig which
they did anyway. The colleagues of the Exxon scientist questioned by AOC were
funded by taxpayers. They had way greater obligation to bring the public's
attention to the peril of continuing to buy Exxon's product.

 

[Valcazar]

or you could search yourself

I could.
And I've found more than one study about antarctic ice melt.
But he clearly has a specific one in mind, so I am asking which one he is thinking of.

 

[JohnLarue]

Clearly she is talking about a very specific UN Climate report… and was not talking from a personal perspective.

if you state it as a matter of fact, you own it

Besides, the IPCC has never made such a ridiculous statement

“Millennials and people, you know, Gen Z and all these folks that will come after us are looking up and we’re like: ‘The world is gonna end in 12 years if we don’t address climate change and your biggest issue is how are we gonna pay for it?' " Ocasio-Cortez asked Coates.

Fear mongering plain and simple

Her comments are in reference to a United Nations-backed climate report, published late last year, that determined the effects of climate change to be irreversible and unavoidable if carbon emissions are not reined in over the next 12 years.

Where?
In the report by the scientist/ activists or in the Summary for policy makers section?

 

[JohnLarue]

She knew as much as the average bartender about the state of climate
science research. To say that Exxon's reports of carbon dioxide causing global
warming were dinky is an understatement. It is nothing significant compared
with climate science research conducted by major schools of environmental
science. Exxon would not have been able to come up with those reports
without collaboration of outsiders. AOC might as well rounded up colleagues of
that former Exxon-supported professor from Purdue, York, McGill and other
respected climate research institutes to question their silence on Exxon's
cover up of those dinky reports which were all disseminated in 1980s to the
science community. At least Exxon funded their own research and as
such have the right to not disseminate their discovery of warmig which
they did anyway. The colleagues of the Exxon scientist questioned by AOC were
funded by taxpayers. They had way greater obligation to bring the public's
attention to the peril of continuing to buy Exxon's product.

AGW has been a contentious issue ever since Arrhenius first postulated the theory in 1896
Anstrom showed the absorption to be saturated in 1900

it has been a contentious issue (it should not have been) ever since
It is a theory which have never been experimentally proven
Making it that, just a theory

So it likely Exxon had multiple scientists and reports with conflicting conclusions
To say "Exxon knew" is preposterous and not an accurate statement of the facts

 

[JohnLarue]

I could.
And I've found more than one study about antarctic ice melt.
But he clearly has a specific one in mind, so I am asking which one he is thinking of.

#1 He referred to a model projection which is quite different than a experimental study

A computer simulation study published around 2004 in some referred journal

Climate models are junk

#2. and what is the conclusion about the antarctic ice melt from these numerous studies?
Is the conclusion universal?

# 3 does the conclusion differ from this one by NASA in 2015 ?
NASA Study: Mass Gains of Antarctic Ice Sheet Greater than Losses | NASA
or this more recent study by Japan in sea ice
Japan Meteorological Agency|Sea ice in the Arctic and Antarctic areas (jma.go.jp)

The sea ice extent in the Arctic Ocean has shown a long-term trend of decrease since 1979. The change in the annual minimum sea ice extent is particularly notable, with a yearly reduction equivalent to the area of Japan's northern island of Hokkaido.

In the Antarctic Ocean, the annual maximum sea ice extent has shown a long-term trend of increase since 1979.

 

[Valcazar]

Climate models are junk

Then you shouldn't worry your pretty little head about them.

 

[oil&gas]

Sounds like an interesting study - got a link?

It is actually Arctic sea ice melting not Anarctica. My memory failed me.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Johannessen OM, Bengtsson L, Miles MW, Kuzmina SI, Semenov VA, Alekseev GV, Nagurnyi AP, Zakharov VF, Bobylev LP, Pettersson LH, Hasselmann K. Arctic climate change: observed and modelled temperature and sea-ice variability. Tellus A: Dynamic Meteorology and Oceanography. 2004 Jan 1;56(4):328-41.

Abstract

Changes apparent in the arctic climate system in recent years require evaluation in a century-scale perspective in order to assess the Arctic’s response to increasing anthropogenic greenhouse-gas forcing. Here, a new set of centuryand multidecadal-scale observational data of surface air temperature (SAT) and sea ice is used in combination with ECHAM4 and HadCM3 coupled atmosphere’ice’ocean global model simulations in order to better determine and understand arctic climate variability. We show that two pronounced twentieth-century warming events, both amplified in the Arctic, were linked to sea-ice variability. SAT observations and model simulations indicate that the nature of the arctic warming in the last two decades is distinct from the early twentieth-century warm period. It is suggested strongly that the earlier warming was natural internal climate-system variability, whereas the recent SAT changes are a response to anthropogenic forcing. The area of arctic sea ice is furthermore observed to have decreased~8 · 105 km2 (7.4%) in the past quarter century, with record-low summer ice coverage in September 2002. A set of model predictions is used to quantify changes in the ice cover through the twenty-first century, with greater reductions expected in summer than winter. In summer, a predominantly sea-ice-free Arctic is predicted for the end of this century.

Arctic climate change: observed and modelled temperature and sea-ice variability

(2004). Arctic climate change: observed and modelled temperature and sea-ice variability. Tellus A: Dynamic Meteorology and Oceanography: Vol. 56, No. 4, pp. 328-341.

www.tandfonline.com

 

[poker]

A computer simulation study published around 2004 in some referred journal
predicted Antarctica ice will be completely melted away by 2100. I have to be
credulous if not stupid as a public figure telling people we will be living in a
water world by the end of the century.

#1 He referred to a model projection which is quite different than a experimental study

Climate models are junk

#2. and what is the conclusion about the antarctic ice melt from these numerous studies?
Is the conclusion universal?

# 3 does the conclusion differ from this one by NASA in 2015 ?
NASA Study: Mass Gains of Antarctic Ice Sheet Greater than Losses | NASA
or this more recent study by Japan in sea ice
Japan Meteorological Agency|Sea ice in the Arctic and Antarctic areas (jma.go.jp)

The sea ice extent in the Arctic Ocean has shown a long-term trend of decrease since 1979. The change in the annual minimum sea ice extent is particularly notable, with a yearly reduction equivalent to the area of Japan's northern island of Hokkaido.

#1 He referred to a model projection which is quite different than a experimental study

Climate models are junk

#2. and what is the conclusion about the antarctic ice melt from these numerous studies?
Is the conclusion universal?

# 3 does the conclusion differ from this one by NASA in 2015 ?
NASA Study: Mass Gains of Antarctic Ice Sheet Greater than Losses | NASA
or this more recent study by Japan in sea ice
Japan Meteorological Agency|Sea ice in the Arctic and Antarctic areas (jma.go.jp)

The sea ice extent in the Arctic Ocean has shown a long-term trend of decrease since 1979. The change in the annual minimum sea ice extent is particularly notable, with a yearly reduction equivalent to the area of Japan's northern island of Hokkaido.

It’s snowing hard in parts of Antarctica faster than it’s glaciers are melting…. And that’s not a concern to you? Weather vs climate.

 

[Valcazar]

It is actually Arctic sea ice melting not Anarctica. My memory failed me.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So no real change there - if anything it is a more conservative prediction than some recent ones.

 

[mandrill]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1466840113481019392

Third, do you see a pattern? Remember when the NYT recently reported a story based entirely on the false premise from a corporate PR department that Walgreens (wage theft criminal) closed stores because of shoplifting and not for business reasons?

As you read, ask yourself: who determined that this Walgreens press release blaming shoplifters for corporate consolidation should be a NYT story, and why did they chose to tell the story the way they did? "All the news that's fit to print."

Walgreens is not just closing in San Francisco. Walgreens will close another 150 stores & increase annual savings target to $3.3 billion. This appears to be a public relations ploy to cover up for massive layoffs.

4 Major Plot Holes in the “Organized Crime Rings Are Closing Walgreens!” Narrative

There are key questions mainstream journalists have yet to ask. They probably should before Prop 47 is repealed and more faceless Black and Brown kids are thrown in prison.

thecolumn.substack.com

AOC was totally 100% correct. Walgreen's did try and bullshit about "closing stores due to shoplifting", when it was all pre planned months ahead to increase profits!

AOC is FUCKING BRILLIANT. While Fox floundered and couldn't even fathom what she was talking about, AOC had everything down. Smartest woman in DC!

 

[oil&gas]

So no real change there - if anything it is a more conservative prediction than some recent ones.

I have no idea if similar study of Antarctica has been reported. If Arctic
Sea is going to be free of ice it seems probable Antarctica will be affected
as well.

 

[JohnLarue]

Then you shouldn't worry your pretty little head about them.

just you never mind my head and its kinda creepy you thinking its pretty

The models are what all the catastrophic dooms day predictions are based on
Specifically RCP 8.5 which predicts tremendous economic growth for developing countries while simultaneously predicting these same become uninhabitable wastelands
Thus the models have inconsistent logic
The models are what all the catastrophic dooms day predictions are based on
The models are the sorce of predictions that are purposely and intentional scaring the living shit out of children ( this is going to be one messed up generation) -despicable !
And the models are reason for the climate change hysteria and unbelievably foolish climate change policies

and the models have been constantly wrong
Recently the modelers indicated the models were running too hot and they did not know why.

So like I said the models are shit
and yeah I worry about them as the models are causing a lot of damage

 

[JohnLarue]

It’s snowing hard in parts of Antarctica faster than it’s glaciers are melting…. And that’s not a concern to you? Weather vs climate.

Oh Boy
90% of the planets ice is in the Antarctic, 70% of the freshwater
The Antarctic is below freezing 99% of the time
The Antarctic just had the coldest season since since climate scientists began tracking temperatures on the continent in 1957
That is odd considering CO2 has increased by 1/3 to 400+ ppm since then

so

And that’s not a concern to you?

NO!

Here is an annual mean temperature map of Antarctica
The scale starts below the freezing point of water

ttps://www.researchgate.net/publication/228865184/figure/fig3/AS:267788967215108@1440857273073/A-map-of-annual-mean-surface-temperature-for-Antarctica.png

 

[JohnLarue]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1466840113481019392

Third, do you see a pattern? Remember when the NYT recently reported a story based entirely on the false premise from a corporate PR department that Walgreens (wage theft criminal) closed stores because of shoplifting and not for business reasons?

As you read, ask yourself: who determined that this Walgreens press release blaming shoplifters for corporate consolidation should be a NYT story, and why did they chose to tell the story the way they did? "All the news that's fit to print."

Walgreens is not just closing in San Francisco. Walgreens will close another 150 stores & increase annual savings target to $3.3 billion. This appears to be a public relations ploy to cover up for massive layoffs.

4 Major Plot Holes in the “Organized Crime Rings Are Closing Walgreens!” Narrative

There are key questions mainstream journalists have yet to ask. They probably should before Prop 47 is repealed and more faceless Black and Brown kids are thrown in prison.

thecolumn.substack.com

AOC was totally 100% correct. Walgreen's did try and bullshit about "closing stores due to shoplifting", when it was all pre planned months ahead to increase profits!

AOC is FUCKING BRILLIANT. While Fox floundered and couldn't even fathom what she was talking about, AOC had everything down. Smartest woman in DC!

quoting a Founder and Executive Director of Home - Civil Rights Corps does not add any credibility

We work to shift power to community-led movements, particularly those led by Black, Brown and poor people who are most affected by this legal system, so they can build sufficient power to create structural change.
We work with individuals accused and convicted of crimes, their families and communities, people currently or formerly incarcerated, activists, organizers, judges and government officials to challenge mass human caging, to create a legal system that promotes equality and freedom, and to dismantle white supremacy.
Civil Rights Corps engages in advocacy and public education and specializes in innovative, systemic civil rights litigation with the goal of re-sensitizing the legal system and our culture to the injustice and brutality that characterizes the contemporary U.S. legal system.

This is not an unbiased rational source
Half a step away form the lunatic left asylum as far as I can see

your theory is pretty lame as it describes a very unsound retail strategy
Walgreens is a fortune 500 company which did not grow to become Americas largest drug store chain by closing profitable stores
If it is forced to close stores it is because theft has rendered theses stores unprofitable

Walgreens has shareholders and a board of directors, none of whom would sign off on such a ridiculous plan.
The Board members would ask the independent auditors to verify inventory shrinkage.
Walgreens also has a number of vested partners resulting from its merger with Europe's boots alliance , including manufacturing and distributions. Each of these parties will have an interest in any Walgreens store closings
Unless you think the Board of directors in is on this "grow by closing profitable store conspiracy theory- to stick it to the black man" story

So
AOC is still a moron
and apparently even dumber than previously though if she buys into this conspiracy theory bullshit

 

[poker]

quoting a Founder and Executive Director of Home - Civil Rights Corps does not add any credibility



This is not an unbiased rational source
Half a step away form the lunatic left asylum as far as I can see

your theory is pretty lame as it describes a very unsound retail strategy
Walgreens is a fortune 500 company which did not grow to become Americas largest drug store chain by closing profitable stores
If it is forced to close stores it is because theft has rendered theses stores unprofitable

Walgreens has shareholders and a board of directors, none of whom would sign off on such a ridiculous plan.
The Board members would ask the independent auditors to verify inventory shrinkage.
Walgreens also has a number of vested partners resulting from its merger with Europe's boots alliance , including manufacturing and distributions. Each of these parties will have an interest in any Walgreens store closings
Unless you think the Board of directors in is on this "grow by closing profitable store conspiracy theory- to stick it to the black man" story

So
AOC is still a moron
and apparently even dumber than previously though if she buys into this conspiracy theory bullshit

Its funny when you talk Scientific credibility when I have already shown you the court cases where the Oil industry admitted they Agree the climate science the UN uses is correct. Any reasonable person at that point would pause and consider…. I applaud your conviction though. In for a penny, in for a pound.

 

[JohnLarue]

Its funny when you talk Scientific credibility when I have already shown you the court cases where the Oil industry admitted they Agree the climate science the UN uses is correct. Any reasonable person at that point would pause and consider…. I applaud your conviction though. In for a penny, in for a pound.

The oil Industry executives legal team likely advised them this is the path of least resistance
Its not like the oil companies have not been vilified before.
are they angels? No certainly not

But you are likely to find out the hard way how difficult life will be without affordable reliable energy
and do not lose sight of the fact that your net zero plan will keep hundreds of millions in abject poverty and push hundreds of millions back below that poverty line


What an oil executive, our incredibly stupid PM , AOC or a Greenpeace nutter says does not matter
The physics just does not support the catastrophic alarmist's view

 

[poker]

The oil Industry executives legal team likely advised them this is the path of least resistance
Its not like the oil companies have not been vilified before.
are they angels? No certainly not

But you are likely to find out the hard way how difficult life will be without affordable reliable energy
and do not lose sight of the fact that your net zero plan will keep hundreds of millions in abject poverty and push hundreds of millions back below that poverty line


What an oil executive, our incredibly stupid PM , AOC or a Greenpeace nutter says does not matter
The physics just does not support the catastrophic alarmist's view

They admitted, in court, the science was correct.

 

[JohnLarue]

They admitted, in court, the science was correct.

A court does not determine science
Just like an opinion poll does not determine science
Scientific theory is determined by experimental observation.

Taught to you in your first high school science class

 

[mandrill]

A court does not determine science
Just like an opinion poll does not determine science
Scientific theory is determined by experimental observation.
Taught to you in your first high school science class

But a court does listen to days - or even weeks - of competing scientific testimony and then determine which is truth and which is bullshit.

That's a court's job.

In a murder case, a judge might hear two totally different scientific theories about ballistics and bullet trajectories and then make the correct call.

 

[oil&gas]

They admitted, in court, the science was correct.

Modelling could be as much an art as science. The science part
of climate modelling could indeed be correct. The art of it is to figure
out the relevance of the model to the real world. If I were put in charge
of creating a model to predict the effect of injection of carbon dioxide to
a tank containing water and air 1/one-million the volume of Earth I too
would very likely come up with one that predicts increase of temperature
if the tank is subject to the effect of radiation from the Sun. In fact I cannot
see how a model can predict decrease of temperature since carbon dioxide
is a greenhouse gas.