To be honest, some of those people know so little they certainly CAN'T be industry folks. So now you have to argue that industry hired people who don't know much about the oil and gas business to be oil and gas plants?
You have that exactly inverted. Genuine experts are never recruited to operate as propagandists. The bribed experts may write a puff piece for fossil fuels ridiculing the mere thought of any other energy source having such a high energy density but it is the propagandists that carry the ball multiple times to the public in such web sites as TOD in the form of talking points, emotional hot buttons and wedge issue divide and conquer tactics.
I never said TOD was about serious scientific inquiry. I said it was a propaganda front. Of course they PRETENDED to be a source of serious scientific inquiry. That didn't make it so. and most of the reading public could never tell the difference anyway.
Most people just don't have the reading comprehension skills or the ability to keep from getting glazed over eyes wading though real scientific papers with reams of data comparisons. And their ARE plenty of free abstracts out there of dull, deep scientific, peer reviewed papers that make mincemeat out every bit of mendacity the fossil fuel industry has ever put out. It just takes patience. Most people are too lazy so the term 'Popular Science' means, in our society, Mendacious Pie in the Sky.
How did TOD deal with people that knew what they were talking about? Censorship. You don't need to be an oil expert to know some pain in the ass is countering your 100 times repeated propaganda point about the number of holy high energy density joules per cubic centimeter of enthalpy refined gasoline has.
The George C. Marshal Institute NEVER attacked the science directly or peer reviewed climate science. Oh NO! They used the Wall Street journal, The new York times, Popular Mechanics, Popular Science, ETC. to brainwash the public with the idea that a DEBATE was going on in the science so the public would be seeded with doubt.
No, it's not ONE BIG CONSPIRACY but it is one big money flowing spigot for a lot of propagandists going to bat for big oil in order to preserve big oil profits. It's not personal, just business that the fossil fuel industry is the main driving force behind climate change denial.
They will lose their ASS and POWER over governments if fossil fuels go the way of the dinosaurs.
Since when was objective scientific inquiry deemed "groupthink"? Sure, I'm sure Big Oil wants this climate change science to go away (it's bad for business
) so naturally it is expected that the climate change science will be presented as a difference of opinion. That's why propagandists prefer public forums like TOD to discussing with scientists the merits of climate science global climate change predictions.
Your argument about choice of cigars makes this whole thing out to be a matter of taste, not human survival.
I beg to differ. Tough luck for the fossil fuel industry that they don't have a viable business model. I understand their reticence to face reality but they are just shooting themselves in the foot by using mendacious propaganda to keep the public confused.
As to the dyson sphere energy harvesting technology comparison with the aviation advances from the 18th century pre-aviation days to the Wright Brothers to the present, do the math on the percentage of the sun's energy that reaches us now as compared to the total output. Thinking BIG is just fine but escape velocity of seven miles per second with chemical rocketry in comparison with the Wright brothers is a difference of 40 mph versus 25,200 mph (630 multiples of the velocity).
All the energy that has ever arrived on earth from the sun for the last 4.5 billion years, and probably for several million years into the future, does not remotely approach one 630th of the total energy output of the sun. But it's a fun thought experiment. The distance from my eye to my finger is less than the distance to Alpha Centauri but I don't think we'll get there any time soon.
Think big Agelbert, it is what some humans still do! I have said it already, I'm right with ya, crude oil is obsolete, it just doesn't know it yet!
Believe me, I do.
And I'm glad you agree about big oil.
Those darn dinosaurs get bitten in the tail and it takes them a while to figure out something is eating them alive!
600 million is not meaningless. 600 million through the present is important to the configuration of our continents, the explanation for how more powerful biologics than use altered the planet in far more drastic ways, the configuration of the plates gives us clues as to the obvious change we are facing as one day San Francisco arrives in Alaska to glorious fanfare and celebration!
Sure, from the point of view of plate tectonics, a 600 million year old time scale is important. But I'm talking about atmospheric green house gas dynamics.
But that's just the point.
If people wish to get all worked up over change, of any type, I say it is a free country, let them. I only object when they want to use it as just another mechanism (like peak oil) to scare people around to their point of view not just to agree with them, oh no, but to force compliance to their demands. I demand you pay taxes on this! I demand you stop that behavior! Such fear schemes just smack of fascism, hard core religious fundamentalism, the raging desire of humans to control others.
Big oil DEMANDS that we continue paying their subsidy swag which is nothing but a giant tax on the commons for corporate profit. And that doesn't simply "smack" of fascism, it IS fascism.
If you don't feel in any hurry to ban fossil fuels, you should at least side with the logical view that they shouldn't receive a nickel in subsidies. Yeah, I know you don't dig giving all that green to renewables.
But the past 50 million years, sure, I like that time as well. Iceball Earth! Interspersed with warm earth. And humans would be hysterical no matter which side of those temperature changes our current civilization sat on, because becoming hysterical over change is what humans do, the direction of the change doesn't matter, only that it exists. I think it has something to do with our view of mortality, change implies we die one day, and people are inherently unhappy with that concept.
The reason I jumped up and down about the 600 million year time frame is that just about everything here, including 99% of the life forms, had nothing to do with present earthlings prior to the Permian extinction, which was 125 million years ago. The fantastic variations in oxygen and nitrogen percentages as well as the not fully developed ozone layer made any climate temperature averages not relevant to our present day climate.
Iceball to hothouse earth has been accurately modeled by Russell and we know it is orbital changes and axis tilt, not atmospheric gas composition, that triggers glaciation with a stable atmosphere.
As to the ferns, did you ever do the math on the energy required for the pressures and temperatures it took to make coal and oil out of ferns and other living matter?
The laws of thermodynamics cannot be gotten around. The amount of energy that was packaged in these high energy density fuels took millions of years to get the job done. Entropy took some of it out but the job got done. To release it in a couple of centuries is the PETM triggers all over again.
It may be "scary" but, just like a large Near Earth Object hitting us or some other frightening scientific reality, it behooves us to take it seriously. It wasn't until after dinosaurs exited that this planet started to have climate dynamics we can point at and say, okay, if this much CO2
is there, this much methane is going to cut loose and these are the positive and negative feedback loops as observed in the PETM. The problem is the CO2
gigatons being pumped out in the PETM took over a 1000 years at a slower rate than we are presently pumping. This is hard boiled scientific data, not scaremongering.
You will see a REAL drama queen performance by the Oil Pigs when the subject of using ALL the fossil fuel subsidy money for Renewable Energy devices and infrastructure gets serious discussion. THEN you'll here some BIG TIME "WE ARE ALL GONNA DIE"
hysterics from the fossil fuel industry which is quick to scream SOCIALISM, PINKO COMMIE EVIL, or FORCED FASCISM when it's for bioremediation or Renewable Energy subsidies but are quiet as a mouse about their HUNDRED YEARS OF FASCIST FORCED TAXATION on we-the-people.
Once upon a time there was a scientist named Hansen. He postulated a given temperature increase even if all humans stopped emitting CO2 that afternoon. Humans instead choose to continue to pump out CO2 at higher and higher rates than ever before. And the temperature result? It stayed lower over the following two decades than what Hansen claimed would happen with no emissions.
FALSE STATEMENT! Shame on you. The anomaly observed up to 1975 has not been explained BUT the models are QUITE accurate since then. If you want to wallow in that brief period after WWII until 1975, go for it. But those generalizations you are using are defamatory. And as to climate science models, let's talk Russell and tell me about data discrepancies or algorithm problems, not INNUENDO.
That was a fun rant! Do I get my drama queen trophy now?
Food fight smiley 1