Remember me
▼ Content

Richard Lindzen paid by ExxonMobil for his lies


Richard Lindzen paid by ExxonMobil for his lies15-02-2011 03:00
DesertphileProfile picture☆☆☆☆☆
(33)
http://climateprogress.org/2010/01/11/science-lindzen-debunked-again-positive-negative-feedbacks-clouds-tropics/
http://climateprogress.org/2010/04/24/re-discredited-climate-denialists-in-denial/
http://climateprogress.org/2009/07/24/science-deniers-lindzen-clouds-amplifying-positive-feedback-not-negative/
http://arthur.shumwaysmith.com/life/content/is_richard_s_lindzen_deliberately_lying_or_just_deluded
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/hotpolitics/reports/skeptics.html
19-08-2014 13:50
just sayin
☆☆☆☆☆
(23)
this man never asked for or received money from any oil company
10-08-2017 20:51
litesong
★★★★★
(2297)
just sayin wrote: this man never asked for or received money from any oil company

Oh, an old thread here. Of course, Lindzen was downwind of Exxon money spread around to denounce AGW. From Sourcewatch:
Lindzen was a member of the Science, Health, and Economic Advisory Council of the Annapolis Center[1], a Maryland-based think tank which had been funded by corporations including ExxonMobil[20], but does not appear to have filed a tax return with the IRS since 2007.
///////
In addition, in bankruptcy proceedings filed when Peabody Coal Company (big AGW denier) checked out, papers show payments were also received by Lindzen.
23-10-2018 01:58
Wake
★★★★★
(3903)
Desertphile wrote:
http://climateprogress.org/2010/01/11/science-lindzen-debunked-again-positive-negative-feedbacks-clouds-tropics/
http://climateprogress.org/2010/04/24/re-discredited-climate-denialists-in-denial/
http://climateprogress.org/2009/07/24/science-deniers-lindzen-clouds-amplifying-positive-feedback-not-negative/
http://arthur.shumwaysmith.com/life/content/is_richard_s_lindzen_deliberately_lying_or_just_deluded
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/hotpolitics/reports/skeptics.html


Most of the climate research from 2008 onwards was financed by Obama. So if you're saying that research grants cause people to lie then you have a perfect example of the development of the IPCC lie.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming#/media/File:Global_Temperature_Anomaly.svg

That is the report demanded of NASA by Obama. Between 1979 and present and it shows an increase in Mean Global Temperature of 1 degree C. Between approximately 1979 and present.

It was quite easy to manufacture since all you had to do was use weather station reports that included those that had the expected gigantic increases from Urban Heat Island Effect from the massive growth of cities. If they had only used temperature readings from the rural areas surrounding cities it would not have shown any temperature gains save for the very slight adjustment from the end of the Little Ice Age.

But during this same period of time from 1979 to Present the NASA weather satellite program was also measuring MGT in the only accurate manner. This program was run by Dr. Roy Spencer and the results are:
http://www.drroyspencer.com/wp-content/uploads/UAH_LT_1979_thru_September_2018_v6.jpg

For those who can read the results you can see that there in fact was NO temperature changes over that period of time when Obama's chart showed 1 degree C.

So you are foisted by your own petard. If you proclaim that grants destroy research honesty you have both sides twisting studies for their own good. The trouble is that NASA's own research shows that they counterfeited their own studies while maintaining the proper data whereas Lindzen's claims are backed up by NASA's satellite program.

To tell you the truth the absolute lies of the phony enviromentalists are disgusting. They demand that we stop generating energy despite the fact that we know well what it would cause - millions upon millions of lives lost in the third world from starvation without the viable use of energy. Solar panels do not cause any less polution in energy production because of the extreme inefficiency and the maintenance and low viable lifespan of the cells. If you include the immense battery array that would be necessary for saving energy if you had to reduce fossil fuel energy production the actual advantage falls to below zero - and if you include the cost of the inverters necessary to convert the battery voltage from DC battery voltage to the high-voltage AC so that it can be sent long distances if becomes far less.

The newest HUGE windmills have a tip speed of 200 mph in operating winds. This not only kills just as many birds as the older smaller diameter blades that appeared to turn faster, but the sound off of the blade tips now kills insect eating bats with super sensitive hearing for echo-location of their food. This in turn has totally changed the environmental insect groups.

So desertphile - why do you believe that you can get away with your half-assed claims without enough real knowledge to back anything up?




Join the debate Richard Lindzen paid by ExxonMobil for his lies:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
After 100 years with ExxonMobil... 20 African countries no better off today1123-06-2018 20:08
Climate Change is Nothing More than Leftist Lies.1905-01-2018 20:30
Edinburgh University - Dr Richard Milne - Final Nail For Climate Change Disinformation505-12-2017 18:02
Environmental lies1231-08-2017 03:33
Lies on Top of Lies4810-08-2017 20:33
▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Who is leading the renewable energy race?

US

EU

China

Japan

India

Brazil

Other

Don't know


Thanks for supporting Climate-Debate.com.
Copyright © 2009-2019 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact