It’s all somewhat confusing

The whole climate change/global warming issue is clearly, in some senses, very confusing. As a form of light relief I thought I would post the following video by somegreybloke which illustrates why it is so confusing to many. In fact, somegreybloke has interesting advice with regards to many complex topics such as Twitter, Facebook, and Physical Fitness, to name but a few.

This entry was posted in Climate change, Comedy, Global warming and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to It’s all somewhat confusing

  1. cartoonmick says:

    In regard to climate change scientists and governments, the problem is, those with expertise have no power, and those with power have no expertise.

    Greed will always blind, and governments are easily swayed by blind power.

    Governments are voted in by the people to govern “for” the people, not “for” big business.

    This cartoon refers;



  2. Steve Case says:

    Around time mark 1:25 we get this: “A lot of those people work for the the big oil companies …”

    At that point I pretty much stopped paying attention.

  3. It was only meant to be an amusing interlude. I wasn’t implying that people should really take it seriously.

  4. Steve Case says:

    Whenever the claim is made that people who don’t buy into Catastrophic Global Warming are being funded by big oil to say so, I am not amused.

    Personally, I’d be pleased to find out that large corporations are funding the opposing view point. As it currently stands, since 1988 billions of government dollars have gone into funding one side of the story

    Click to access FY12_USGCRP.pdf

    US Climate Change Science Program,
    Suite 250,
    1717 Pennsylvania Ave, NW,
    Washington, DC 20006.

  5. You, of course, don’t have to be amused. Plus, the video actually said, “work indirectly for…” rather than actually claiming that large corporations were directly funding the opposing view. I, however, make no claims as to the veracity of this. It was just meant to be an interlude which people are quite entitled to not be amused by.

    As far as government funding is concerned, there is an alternative to what you seem to be implying. The funding you refer to actually goes to scientists who typically apply for funding from those organisations. It’s possible (and being a scientists, this is my view) that these scientists have reached their conclusions because that’s what the evidence suggests, rather than because they’re being paid to reach that conclusion by the UN or by governments. The alternative would seem to imply some kind of conspiracy.

  6. BBD says:

    Steve Case

    Denying that the fossil fuel industry funds pseudoscience and high-level lobbying by a network of “think tanks” and shills (primarily in the US) is pointless as it is an established and widely acknowledged fact. However, nobody is suggesting that every private citizen “sceptical” of the standard scientific position is *personally* funded by Big Oil.

    The fossil fuel industry simply enables and promotes “scepticism” by creating a grossly misleading impression that there is disagreement within the expert community about the fundamentals. It has very definite goals (no regulation; ongoing profitability) but in general “sceptics” rejecting the scientific evidence and scientific consensus arising from that evidence are united by conservative/libertarian politics and/or fear-based denial. The profit motive is neither required nor imputed.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.