RE: Little fact about global warming for you

RE: Little fact about global warming for you (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

DesideriScuri -> RE: Little fact about global warming for you (8/22/2013 11:23:25 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: njlauren Like I pointed out, Oil and gas have huge subsidies that keep the real cost from people, it is unfair to say they are competing when they are favored the way they are. Your turn. Please present your findings on the subsidies of Big Oil vs. those for renewable energy (in both gross $'s and %-ages of the sector). http://cleantechnica.com/2012/08/03/oil-gas-over-13-times-more-in-historical-subsidies-than-clean-energy/ Historical subsidies?!?!? LMMFAO!! That's about as disingenuous as you can get!! How is the subsidies of the old energy industry over its lifetime irrelevant? Without that century and a half of government subsidies would these companies be able to make the profit they do today? Would they be able to fund an effort that if successful could very well kill every human being on the planet? It's guaranteed to make the older sectors have much larger subsidization. That's not even close to being impartial. And, if tax exemptions are based on gross receipts, a huge sector is going to have much higher $$ exemptions than a small sector, if the exemption %-ages are the same. That's not apples to apples, either.

popeye1250 -> RE: Little fact about global warming for you (8/22/2013 12:44:57 PM)
What was the name of that college in England where they lied on some e-mails about some figures or something about "global warming" (or whatever they're calling it this week!) and someone intercepted them and outed them for lying so they started calling those e-mails, "stolen e-mails!" lolol Was it "Northumberland?

mnottertail -> RE: Little fact about global warming for you (8/22/2013 12:51:24 PM)
University of East Anglia, and the server was hacked and they were stolen, and the emails selectively and deceptively presented in the 'conservative' media. In other words, an Issa style job.

Phydeaux -> RE: Little fact about global warming for you (8/22/2013 12:51:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 What was the name of that college in England where they lied on some e-mails about some figures or something about "global warming" (or whatever they're calling it this week!) and someone intercepted them and outed them for lying so they started calling those e-mails, "stolen e-mails!" lolol Was it "Northumberland? You're talking about climate-gate. And the research is the East Anglia research center irrc. And by 'deceptively presented' mnotter means. "Damn we have no real good way to counter the facts presented." Which shows them a). Conspiring to prevent the publication of climate denial science in magazines. b). Admitting that climate warming hasn't occured since 1997. c). Admitting that their models are wrong. d). Admitting they would destroy the data rather than share it (they did). There were hundreds of other interesting little tidbits, too.

mnottertail -> RE: Little fact about global warming for you (8/22/2013 12:57:17 PM)
quote: Phydeaux And by 'deceptively presented' mnotter means. "Damn we have no real good way to counter the facts presented." Which shows them No, mnotter does not mean that you lying cretinous motherfucker. Just like Issa and the conservative targeting, once they were fully presented in order and in context, they showed no cover-up and no deception.

DomKen -> RE: Little fact about global warming for you (8/22/2013 12:57:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 What was the name of that college in England where they lied on some e-mails about some figures or something about "global warming" (or whatever they're calling it this week!) and someone intercepted them and outed them for lying so they started calling those e-mails, "stolen e-mails!" lolol Was it "Northumberland? You're talking about climate-gate. And the research is the East Anglia research center irrc. And by 'deceptively presented' mnotter means. "Damn we have no real good way to counter the facts presented." Which shows them a). Conspiring to prevent the publication of climate denial science in magazines. b). Admitting that climate warming hasn't occured since 1997. c). Admitting that their models are wrong. d). Admitting they would destroy the data rather than share it (they did). There were hundreds of other interesting little tidbits, too. Bullshit. I dare you to present any complete email that you think proves any of your claims.

popeye1250 -> RE: Little fact about global warming for you (8/22/2013 12:58:12 PM)
Tail, you could have stopped at U of East Anglia. Now (you're covering for them?) I guess if you say that your e-mails were "stolen" that makes things "O.K." Now, speak about "subsidies", did we ever recover that $80-$100 mil from "Solyndra?" And I believe there were a few other companies that were involved. Did our govt. get that money back yet? It's been what, 2 to 3 years now? I think that "Solyndra" was almost 90% subsidised by the government. Even then they couldn't make it!

mnottertail -> RE: Little fact about global warming for you (8/22/2013 12:59:52 PM)
Nope, you guys are believing Rush fuckin Limbaugh has brains enough to pour piss out of a boot. that is the 'conservative' media that selectively and deceptively edited the emails. You are covering for you and your buddies rushfelching.

popeye1250 -> RE: Little fact about global warming for you (8/22/2013 1:05:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail Nope, you guys are believing Rush fuckin Limbaugh has brains enough to pour piss out of a boot. that is the 'conservative' media that selectively and deceptively edited the emails. You are covering for you and your buddies rushfelching. Tail, now that's odd, it was all over the media, NBC, CBS, ABC, the print media, Yahoo, AOL, the WSJ, The New York Times, even the nightly news on P.B.S. Do you watch T.V. at all?

mnottertail -> RE: Little fact about global warming for you (8/22/2013 1:08:02 PM)
Yeah, but I didn't quit there, I saw it when the emails were released in full, and the total difference and that was all in the media mentioned. Do you watch T.V. at all? It just didnt get as splashed when the journalists found out they had been had. Here is one quick overview: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/12/climategate-debunking-get_n_642980.html

Hillwilliam -> RE: Little fact about global warming for you (8/22/2013 1:09:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail Nope, you guys are believing Rush fuckin Limbaugh has brains enough to pour piss out of a boot. that is the 'conservative' media that selectively and deceptively edited the emails. You are covering for you and your buddies rushfelching. Tail, now that's odd, it was all over the media, NBC, CBS, ABC, the print media, Yahoo, AOL, the WSJ, The New York Times, even the nightly news on P.B.S. Do you watch T.V. at all? That kinda defeats your claims that most of those sources are part of some liberal conspiracy doesn't it?

popeye1250 -> RE: Little fact about global warming for you (8/22/2013 1:11:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail Yeah, but I didn't quit there, I saw it when the emails were released in full, and the total difference and that was all in the media mentioned. Do you watch T.V. at all? ? Are you saying that you saw those e-mails before the media saw them? Before they were destroyed at that college?

thompsonx -> RE: Little fact about global warming for you (8/22/2013 1:12:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx Obviously oil is not cost effective witness the giant subsidies to keep it propped up. What are the subsidy levels? What is Big Oil getting vs. Renewables (in $'s and %'s, please)? Edited to correct a formatting error. quote: Because I've done a bit of googling, there is a graph out there that shows $72B to Oil/Coal, roughly $17B to ethanol and roughly $12B to "Green" energy. That's the spending from 2002 to 2008. $12B/yr. to $4.8B/yr. Large disparity, right? My guess is that the Oil/Coal sector is more than 3x larger than that of renewable energy, making the %-age of of subsidy quite a bit smaller comparatively speaking. Now that you have educated yourself to the fact that the oil companies recieve subsidies please explain why in a capitalist economy they do. I can understand how in a capitalist economy the government might want to encourage a new technology as they did with oil, more than a hundred years ago, and are now doing with renewables. Oil is long past the position of an emerging technology. This was my point...if they are an effective technology then why do they need subsidies which ,it would appear,until now you were unaware existed.

mnottertail -> RE: Little fact about global warming for you (8/22/2013 1:13:10 PM)
http://www.factcheck.org/2009/12/climategate/ No, everybody who wanted to saw them, they were not destroyed and you can read the fuckin things still today. Might do you some good to brighten up on this, you are looking a little......well............typical at the mo. Where are you felching this horseshit from, Beck? Or Howie?

thompsonx -> RE: Little fact about global warming for you (8/22/2013 1:15:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 What was the name of that college in England where they lied on some e-mails about some figures or something about "global warming" (or whatever they're calling it this week!) and someone intercepted them and outed them for lying so they started calling those e-mails, "stolen e-mails!" lolol Was it "Northumberland? You're talking about climate-gate. And the research is the East Anglia research center irrc. And by 'deceptively presented' mnotter means. "Damn we have no real good way to counter the facts presented." Which shows them a). Conspiring to prevent the publication of climate denial science in magazines. b). Admitting that climate warming hasn't occured since 1997. c). Admitting that their models are wrong. d). Admitting they would destroy the data rather than share it (they did). There were hundreds of other interesting little tidbits, too. Such as?[8\|]

Phydeaux -> RE: Little fact about global warming for you (8/22/2013 1:25:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: njlauren Like I pointed out, Oil and gas have huge subsidies that keep the real cost from people, it is unfair to say they are competing when they are favored the way they are. Your turn. Please present your findings on the subsidies of Big Oil vs. those for renewable energy (in both gross $'s and %-ages of the sector). http://cleantechnica.com/2012/08/03/oil-gas-over-13-times-more-in-historical-subsidies-than-clean-energy/ Historical subsidies?!?!? LMMFAO!! That's about as disingenuous as you can get!! How is the subsidies of the old energy industry over its lifetime irrelevant? Without that century and a half of government subsidies would these companies be able to make the profit they do today? Would they be able to fund an effort that if successful could very well kill every human being on the planet? I don't have time to answer all this lunacy, however here is a mainstream article (money magazine) that shows subsidies for renewable energy vastly exceed fossil fuels: http://money.cnn.com/2012/03/07/news/economy/energy-subsidies/index.htm Here is a link showing where the US imports it oil from:http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/pet_move_impcus_a2_nus_ep00_im0_mbbl_m.htm Here is a link showing that the US is predicted to surpass Saudia arabia in oil production around 2020: http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials-perspective/040513-650864-private-sector-boom-responsible-for-us-energy-surge.htm another: http://www.indexmundi.com/energy.aspx?country=us&graph=production http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=PET&s=MCRFPUS2&f=A Here is a link that shows that the accumulated taxes paid by Oil compared to the subsidies received: http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&cad=rja&ved=0CDgQFjAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Ftaxfoundation.org%2Ffiles%2Fsr183.pdf&ei=bXEWUrewJeXn2wXml4HYDA&usg=AFQjCNH1nMDx0zmmb5LcEy77KKpwFseUPw&bvm=bv.51156542,d.b2I It also has the profits, and taxes paid per year. It pretty much demolishes your arguments about Big oil being a net subsidy. In fact pretty much over the lifetime of the industry big oil has paid almost 2 trillion in taxes and received about 1.2 trillion in profits.

Phydeaux -> RE: Little fact about global warming for you (8/22/2013 1:28:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux We will "free ourselves from dependence on opec" sometime around 2017. Not from "green" energy, however, but from fracking. We will surpass saudi arabia as the biggest producer sometime around 2020. Any validation for this puerile, insipid, moronic horse shit? [qiote]The technologies that exist now cannot be cost effective. Obviously oil is not cost effective witness the giant subsidies to keep it propped up. quote: Snicker. Yeah. Exxon is going out of business real soon. I posted an answer to this drive above. The only companies going out of business are "renewable" energy companies. Because they can't compete.

thompsonx -> RE: Little fact about global warming for you (8/22/2013 1:36:59 PM)
quote: I don't have time to answer all this lunacy, however here is a mainstream article (money magazine) that shows subsidies for renewable energy vastly exceed fossil fuels: In a capitalist economy why does an established business like the oil companies recieve any subsidy at all? If they can't make it without a government handout, then why should the taxpayers subsidize them?

popeye1250 -> RE: Little fact about global warming for you (8/22/2013 1:44:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx quote: I don't have time to answer all this lunacy, however here is a mainstream article (money magazine) that shows subsidies for renewable energy vastly exceed fossil fuels: In a capitalist economy why does an established business like the oil companies recieve any subsidy at all? If they can't make it without a government handout, then why should the taxpayers subsidize them? I agree. If they're going to get subsidies then (I) want subsidies too!

Hillwilliam -> RE: Little fact about global warming for you (8/22/2013 1:46:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx quote: I don't have time to answer all this lunacy, however here is a mainstream article (money magazine) that shows subsidies for renewable energy vastly exceed fossil fuels: In a capitalist economy why does an established business like the oil companies recieve any subsidy at all? If they can't make it without a government handout, then why should the taxpayers subsidize them? I agree. If they're going to get subsidies then (I) want subsidies too! You don't get a subsidy. you're a taxpayer like the rest of us and can't afford to buy a congressman.

Page: << < prev 3 4 [5] 6 7 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625