Climate Change skeptics? [ot]

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
This thread has been locked
Messages 19861 - 19880 of total 20264 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Stevee B

Trad climber
Oakland, CA
Mar 3, 2015 - 12:57pm PT
What I want to know is, are there hats?
EdwardT

Trad climber
Retired
Mar 3, 2015 - 01:42pm PT
^^^^ Nice dodge.

Whoosh!


Heartland frequently gets labelled as a leading supporter of denial efforts. And they spend a whopping 1 million dollars/year on the cause.

Where did that $1M number come from EdwardT? Sounds very low, considering this that I posted earlier:

Heartland receives money from approximately 5,000 individuals and organizations, and no single corporate entity donates more than 5% of the operating budget,[62] although the figure for individual donors can be much higher, with a single anonymous donor providing $4.6 million in 2008, and $979,000 in 2011, accounting for 20% of Heartland's overall budget, according to reports of a leaked fundraising plan.[63]

Admittedly, this doesn't identify the total they spend on their climate change position, which is difficult to guage when it comes to the private think tank.

My $1M number was a ballpark estimate, based on the other figures you posted. You know... money Heartland distributed.

The numbers you posted above prove nothing.
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Mar 3, 2015 - 06:39pm PT
http://www.natureworldnews.com/articles/12918/20150223/solar-farm-set-hundreds-birds-ablaze.htm
apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Mar 3, 2015 - 07:00pm PT
^^^^
That does it!

I'm buying a Hummer.

Wait...from that same link...

"However, it's important to note that unlike the California and Nevada plants, earlier, smaller versions of these power towers tested in Europe did not regularly see these kinds of incidents. And when the Crescent Dunes plant ran a second test using less mirrors, no more birds burst into flames."


Back to your dialup modem, TGT...or check your email....
EdwardT

Trad climber
Retired
Mar 4, 2015 - 06:50am PT
monolith

Mar 3, 2015 - 12:52pm PT

In all, 140 foundations funneled $558 million to almost 100 climate denial organizations from 2003 to 2010.

$558 million to almost 100 climate denial organizations?

Let's see the top three recipients and the documentation supporting the funds they spent on denier efforts.

BTW I did my own research and found little. I think there's much about your claim that's unsupported conjecture.
k-man

Gym climber
SCruz
Topic Author's Reply - Mar 4, 2015 - 07:19am PT
I think there's much about your claim that's unsupported conjecture.

That is funny, coming from you Edward.


Especially considering that you just posted a figure that you pulled directly out of the aether:


My $1M number was a ballpark estimate, ...


But what does it matter anyway. We're talking about amounts that are unknown because there are no laws that require anybody to detail the amounts given to the groups that support denial efforts.
Bob D'A

Trad climber
Taos, NM
Mar 4, 2015 - 07:25am PT
EdwardT...http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/dark-money-funds-climate-change-denial-effort/
EdwardT

Trad climber
Retired
Mar 4, 2015 - 08:33am PT
That is funny, coming from you Edward.

Especially considering that you just posted a figure that you pulled directly out of the aether:

My $1M number was a ballpark estimate, ...

Why is that? I made it clear that my number was just a guess. And in your mind, this somehow prohibits me from questioning statements of fact???

But what does it matter anyway. We're talking about amounts that are unknown because there are no laws that require anybody to detail the amounts given to the groups that support denial efforts.

Yeah. Let's not worry about whether or not figures like Monolith's $550 million are complete BS. What matters is the impact of these stories.

Of course. Now that it's all "dark money", the myth of the denier boogieman can grow without being bogged down by pesky little facts.
Wade Icey

Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
Mar 4, 2015 - 09:03am PT
since when are you worried about complete BS?

or pesky little facts...
EdwardT

Trad climber
Retired
Mar 4, 2015 - 09:13am PT
Hey Wade -

How about some more snowy beach pictures.

Wade Icey

Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
Mar 4, 2015 - 11:08am PT
that's okay Sketch just do your usual google, cut and paste.
k-man

Gym climber
SCruz
Topic Author's Reply - Mar 4, 2015 - 01:02pm PT
Why is that? I made it clear that my number was just a guess. And in your mind, this somehow prohibits me from questioning statements of fact???

Was that a slip?


But my beef with your post, Edward, is that you ask for specific numbers, and when we post things such as leaked budgets from the Heartland Institute and articles from Scientific American, you respond by saying they are just conjecture (or even worse, "complete BS").

Then, almost on cue, you post a number you most certainly made up on the spot.


While I find it entertaining to trade banter with you here, I sometimes find it's like toying with a child who hasn't yet taken the class that teaches 2+2=4.
Dingus Milktoast

Gym climber
Maestro, Ecosystem Ministry, Fatcrackistan
Mar 4, 2015 - 01:26pm PT
So for future sea level rise, causes notwitthstanding, how do we mitigate long term cost (of building too much on the floodplain)? Progressivey restrictive zoning laws? Let nature enforce her own policy? Withdraw public subsidy of mortgage insurance on the floodplain

Ultimately nature decides it seems? We can only try to avoid the potholes...

DMT
Chiloe

Trad climber
Lee, NH
Mar 4, 2015 - 01:56pm PT
Flood insurance subsidies certainly matter, as do insurance issues more broadly. Heard a talk by someone from Swiss Re a while back, the big reinsurance companies know they face a huge challenge on many fronts at once, and they're going to have to pull back.

Or from another corner, the Union of Concerned Scientists:

Overwhelming Risk: Rethinking Flood Insurance in a World of Rising Seas (2013)

Sea level is rising and increasing the risk of destructive flooding events during powerful coastal storms. At the same time, increasing coastal development and a growing population are putting more people and more property in harm's way.

This risky pattern of development is being reinforced by the taxpayer-subsidized National Flood Insurance Program, which sets artificially low insurance rates that do not reflect the true risks to coastal properties. When major disasters strike, taxpayers nationwide are left liable for billions of dollars in insurance claims and disaster relief.

Rising sea levels represent a significant risk. Nearly three million people live less than three feet above today's average high tide.

The taxpayer-subsidized National Flood Insurance Program is practically the sole provider of coastal flood insurance

Multiple factors challenge the success and very survival of the National Flood Insurance Program

We can reform the coastal insurance system to reduce our risks
Jim Brennan

Trad climber
Canada
Mar 4, 2015 - 01:57pm PT
EdwardT

Trad climber
Retired
Mar 4, 2015 - 02:16pm PT
It's hard to tell if you're trolling or you honestly don't get it.

The numbers you posted for Heartland add up to:

2011 - $388,000
2012 - $290,000

I offered the million dollar figure to just move the conversation forward. I admit it was a huge exaggeration. You said it sounded low, considering what you posted earlier. Those are income numbers. They say nothing about how the money was spent. From now on, we'll just say "under $400K per year". Would that be okay?

It's chump change compared to the unsubstantiated $588 million posted by monolith. And just so you don't get confused on this one, how about we agree to break it down to "$60 million per year"?

Would you post where I said the leaked budgets from the Heartland Institute were just conjecture (or even worse, "complete BS")?

It's unfortunate that you have such difficulty with context. Then again, a few weeks back, when I referred to you as my "newest, bestest buddy", you said:

I certainly hope that is not a threat, but I can't figure out what else it could mean.
son of stan

Boulder climber
San Jose CA
Mar 4, 2015 - 04:27pm PT
Nevada has no animal cruelty laws? Burning birds and letting them
flop around on the ground suffering till they die to
keep CO2 out of the air?
Credit: son of stan

Credit: son of stan


Dingus Milktoast

Gym climber
Maestro, Ecosystem Ministry, Fatcrackistan
Mar 4, 2015 - 05:16pm PT
^^^ I flew over one of those installations recently. Maybe that one, I dunno. Definitely over Nevada, though.







DMT
Splater

climber
Grey Matter
Mar 4, 2015 - 05:37pm PT
"When major disasters strike, taxpayers nationwide are left liable for billions of dollars in insurance claims and disaster relief."

If you total up the disasters, "billions" is likely too low by a factor of 1000.
Sandy alone (a very small amount of flooded land) cost about $50 billion in extra government money alone. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disaster_Relief_Appropriations_Act,_2013 Not counting regular insurance claims.
Now multiply that by having numerous Sandy events every year, involving orders of magnitude more coastal land area.

Hurricanes Katrina and Sandy left about $220 billion in total property damages in their wake. http://blogs.reuters.com/muniland/2013/10/01/the-unintended-consequences-of-flood-insurance-reform/

The cost to the Federal taxpayers of these two storms alone will exceed $200 billion. Floods are the leading cause of natural disaster losses in the United States, http://www.floods.org/ace-files/documentlibrary/2012_NFIP_Reform/Flood_Mapping_for_the_Nation_ASFPM_Report_3-1-2013.pdf
Chiloe

Trad climber
Lee, NH
Mar 4, 2015 - 05:44pm PT
There is a small but measurable fraction -- about 3 percent -- among climate scientists who deny that anthropogenic climate change is a problem.

It's been said that the corresponding fraction among biological scientists, those who deny the problems of anthropogenic ecological change, is even smaller, perhaps nonexistent. That's because the symptoms of ecological deterioration are just too ubiquitous and overwhelming for even an ideologue among scientists to ignore.

I was reminded of that observation today in a long conversation about lionfish, an invasive species (transported by humans) that seems poised to obliterate reef ecosystems and much more as it multiplies and spreads through the Caribbean. Until today I'd been aware of the issue but not given it much thought; now I see that it's some people's looming apocalypse, with no solution in sight. One of many.
Messages 19861 - 19880 of total 20264 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Return to Forum List
 
Our Guidebooks
Check 'em out!
SuperTopo Guidebooks


Try a free sample topo!

 
SuperTopo on the Web

Review Categories
Recent Trip Report and Articles
Recent Route Beta
Recent Gear Reviews