Global Warming agw "debate" : Follow the Money?

This video addresses the stupid arguments that

"Because somebody benefits and profits, it must not be true"
(This is not far from the old arguments that if somebody had nothing you can think of to gain, they must be telling the truth)

Using this standard, one must ask :
How much money do these people/groups need to make in order to be discredited and discounted?
-Whole Foods (and organic foods)
-Alex Jones (& 9/11 truth, globalist NWO conspiracy)
-Big Oil (funding GCMI, climate change deniers)
-Ron Paul, Peter Schiff (goldbugs)
-Elie Wiesel, Herman Rosenblat (Holocaust)
-Bottled water companies
-Tax evasion seminars
-......and so on

A related argument is "group A has more funding, so it's not fair for group B"
Under this standard, should we believe criminals over law enforcement just because law enforcement has more money?
Global warming is NOT equally likely to begin with, we have lots of scientific support for one side, and wouldn't it be MORE conspiratorial if we funded the LESS scientific side of the argument?

Lastly, "carbon tax" "cap & trade" are not scientific arguments. I don't want to pay any of it either. But since WHEN was "I don't want to pay this" an argument for "therefore it's untrue"?

Nobody would say that just because he doesn't want to pay income tax, therefore income is a scam or doesn't exist.

Background info & recommended
==================
The definition of a denier is a person who :
- doesn't know what will ever convince him
- never holds himself to standards he expects of others
- never holds the same standard to other aspects of related issues (special pleading)

Global Warming deniers are of 3 kinds :
- deny GW
- deny it's AGW
- deny it's fixable, or morally justified to force it
(only the last one can't be settled scientifically, and is subject to political and economic discourse, science is done on the first 2)

Politically, AGW deniers are of 2 camps
-(a) libertarians, Ron Paul supporters
-(b) mainstream Republicans and oil industry sympathizers
Camp (a) is against corporatism and has sympathy for localized farming,...etc, but they don't see the oil industry's involvement in the discourse, nor would they say that profit motives discredit localization or organic farming
Camp (b), hardly argues by profit motive, because they understand that the oil industry cannot prosper with people believe AGW or support carbon taxation. This group generally just argues against taxation and regulation altogether (and would most likely want to discredit Whole Foods, 9/11 truth, gold standard based on profit motives)

Global warming deniers, climate change deniers, are a lot like creationists and Holocaust deniers. They would not hold the same amount of doubt in other aspects of history, science, they believe it all. They cite respected authorities when it fits their view, but will cry "Appeal to Authority" when somebody else does the same. They say "the experts and scholars are biased, paid off and dishonest" unless they support THEIR own beliefs.

There's nothing wrong with healthy skepticism, but denial, dishonesty and hypocrisy as shown here, is not one of them.


If you're really interested in learning about the science of anthropogenic global warming, I recommend greenman3610
http://youtube.com/greenman3610 (please try to watch all of his videos, from oldest to latest)

Category:

Education

Tags:

• global warming
• climategate
• corbett
• alex jones
• cool it
• ron paul
• al gore
• hypocrisy
• bjorn lomborg
• bjork lomburg
• agw
• greenman3610

[mphello]

Here are the words and phrases that EVERY AGW-denier MUST use in EVERY single comment they post. Literally, it does NOT matter in WHAT order. ALL that matters is that they get them into their post - all the while refusing to actually read the IPCC reports:

Al Gore, zombie, brainwashed, Israel, Jews, Mossad, elite, NWO, control the world, kool-aid, Al Gore, scam, fraud, Ron Paul (as the cure-all), Al Gore, Illuminati, 911, HAARP, Al Gore, corrupt educational system.

Did I mention Al Gore?

[spiritualbully]

@mphello dont forget climategate, 30,000 scientists, ipcc, hal lewis, lord monckton

[mphello]

@spiritualbully Thanks. I forgot they throw those words in, too. Except for "hal lewis". I never heard HIM mentioned by any deniers.

[teddybruscie]

Simple fact is the Green Economy is far superior to the Gas Economy. It just is. I mean I dont even have to go into deep details. Just think about it. Is it better to reuse and recycle? Or throw away and find new stuff. Eventually your gonna run out of new stuff so you will aways end up having to reuse and recycle what you have.

Stop Resisting the future. We are already gonna have to drive Electric and rely more on Public Transit in the Cities and recycle plastic and what not so why wait?

[spiritualbully]

@TheDrunkenCabDriver I didnt even want to mention them, thanks.

[spiritualbully]

@Atom299 please support the claim that big oil is leading the charge of AGW, I bet all you have is a quote that Exxon Mobil chief Rex Tillerson supports carbon tax as the way to curb carbon emissions (when compared to cap and trade).

Am I wrong?

[Atom299]

@IfWordsCouldSpeak

Scientific institutions are funded according to the gravity of the problem they are assigned to investigate. The greater the problem the more the funding.

They obviously have an interest in creating or exaggerating the problem.

Also remember Big Oil were leading the charge for AGW.

[AbusiveAntitheist]

churchs make money therefore religion is false. I only believe in climate change on a micro scale hyuck hycuk....I believe that only god has the power to control the climate. Just like the old days when we used to believe god threw lightning bolts. Global warming deniers tend to confirm that they're anti science.

[spiritualbully]

@IfWordsCouldSpeak thanks. i will fix that then. stupid me.

[spiritualbully]

@marquedesade if you think climategate is the bloody knife, you lose!

I even already told you why. so until you have better evidence, you can leave this video alone.

feel free to PM me if you have info that can't fit in a comment box.