Just 36 companies account for 50% of global CO2 emissions, report reveals

[monkeylove]

No young man, Globalists seek to bring down Nations, under one Global control of their Elitist agendas.

That is what DAVOS and globalists are all about^
THEY (the super-ultra-rich) want YOU to eat bugs because beef is a Co2 pollutant... while they fly around the world eating beef on planes..!

Wake up bruh..

Globalists gain power as part of financial institutions that control the global economy:

Revealed – the capitalist network that runs the world

The 1318 transnational corporations that form the core of the economy. Superconnected companies are red, very connected companies are yellow. The size of the dot represents revenue AS PROTESTS against financial power sweep the world this week, science may have confirmed the protesters' worst...

www.newscientist.com

In fact, that's how they came "super-ultra-rich" in the first place.

Much of their wealth consists of credit, whose value goes up only if there are more sales of goods and services worldwide. And when production of those goes up, so does CO2 ppm.

That means the last thing they want is to cut down on CO2 ppm.

The problem is that they are also aware of not only climate change but even environmental damage plus a resource crunch, and those don't allow for more sales of goods and services.

Thus, what they want is not a rapid increase in CO2 ppm or the opposite but something in between: a steady increase in not only CO2 ppm but also population, resource use, etc. That way, they have business as usual.

Wake up, "bruh".

 

[monkeylove]

That's ridiculous. Floods etc. have always existed. They didn't start the moment The New Ice Age (the previous climate scare) all of a sudden became Global Warming. "Eats up around a third of global economic growth" is ridiculous squared. Insurance rates are rising because of inflation. One of the reasons for inflation is the trillions wasted on 'climate change'.

Why these wasted trillions didn't fix the "problem", by the way? We are wasting money non-stop for decades, but the "problem" allegedly gets bigger. Apparently the sun will not cool off because we're wasting money, so maybe we should stop wasting them?

We're not talking about existence of natural disasters but increasing damage from such leading to higher premiums. According to insurers, those are rising not because of inflation or even trillions wasted on climate change but because of increasing damage.

https://www.chathamhouse.org/events/all/research-event/insuring-climate-action

 

[monkeylove]

All the pseudo-authorities you listed are people that work 'climate change'. What do you expect them to say?
Maybe "We don't want our well paid, zero responsibility jobs. We don't want to attend lavish climate conferences in luxurious resorts all around the world. We want real jobs, despite not having the necessary skills ... " Some do say that, but they are immediately replaced.

I completely agree that the denial of empirical, easily observable evidence is foolish. How foolish one should be to deny the Earth is getting greener and the crops better?

The problem is that your argument works against you. If they make conclusions about climage change, then decisions can be made and they're out of work. But if they argue that more studies are needed, then it's the opposite.

 

[monkeylove]

I was talking about direct accurate global measurements - these exist for ~50 years.
"Historical climate data" is neither direct, nor accurate nor global. It's assumption -based guesswork.
As for progress, I'm still waiting for you to reveal the big secret - in what units do you measure it?

It can never be direct throughout, which is why even deniers refer to proxies.

They set up Berkeley Earth to come up with an "independent" study of the matter. The problem is that the study confirmed what the NAS said.

(Koch-funded) scientist changes opinion, finds warming due to humans (including Kochs)

Richard Muller, a long-time climate-change denier, did a big study of his own and found the same thing everyone else has: Humans are causing climate change.

grist.org

 

[monkeylove]

No, they can't. If I send you an ice cube, can you tell me - not from the ice itself but from the air bubbles trapped IN the ice - what was the temperature around? No. Trapped bubbles give you a rough approximation for the amount of gases and other stuff in the vicinity. None of that has a direct, unambiguous link to temperatures. Everything in the bubbles - gases, isotopes and their ratios, ashes etc. depends on hundreds of interdependent variables. If the amount of something is X, there are a zillion possible states that may have that amount at X.

Besides, less than 10% of Earth's surface is permanently covered by ice, and the areas are concentrated around the poles. Ice cores miss 90%+ of the picture anyway.

That's why even skeptics and deniers have to look at reconstructions, and the NAS has analyzed them:

Surface Temperature Reconstructions for the Last 2,000 Years | The National Academies Press

Read online, download a free PDF, or order a copy in print or as an eBook.

nap.nationalacademies.org

 

[scavengerspc]

No, they can't. If I send you an ice cube, can you tell me - not from the ice itself but from the air bubbles trapped IN the ice - what was the temperature around? No. Trapped bubbles give you a rough approximation for the amount of gases and other stuff in the vicinity. None of that has a direct, unambiguous link to temperatures. Everything in the bubbles - gases, isotopes and their ratios, ashes etc. depends on hundreds of interdependent variables. If the amount of something is X, there are a zillion possible states that may have that amount at X

Again. If you can read, check the links I gave. It explains how trapped air is used to find numerous climate data.

Besides, less than 10% of Earth's surface is permanently covered by ice, and the areas are concentrated around the poles. Ice cores miss 90%+ of the picture anyway.

Wait. Are you saying that the air and water on Earth is stationary? No cycling?
Well ok. It's all here:

Climate at the core: how scientists study ice cores to reveal Earth's climate history

Like a prehistoric fly trapped in amber during dinosaurs' days, airborne relics of Earth's earlier climate can end up trapped in glacial ice for eons. How do climate scientists turn those tiny relics into a story about Earth's ancient climate?

www.climate.gov

And to further the education you have taken so much advantage of:

Investigating Past Climates | Center for Science Education

To understand how and why the climate has changed in the past scientists study evidence such as ice cores, coral reefs, and more. Learn about different types of paleoclimate proxies and how they tell the story of Earth's past climate.

scied.ucar.edu

 

[pnntmp]

Again. If you can read, check the links I gave. It explains how trapped air is used to find numerous climate data.

What you actually get from trapped air is ... air.
There's no way to extract any actual climate data such as precipitation, wind speed, humidity, pressure, cloud coverage and especially the central point of climate hysteria - temperatures.
Your links, and all the identical ones I've checked, explain how to guess what climate parameters may have been, based on a pile of uncalibrated assumptions.
It may look sciency, but in reality it's guesswork.

Wait. Are you saying that the air and water on Earth is stationary? No cycling?

Wait. Are you saying that you can measure the temperatures at the poles and tell me the temperature in New York? Because, you know ... cycling?

 

[scavengerspc]

Wait. Are you saying that you can measure the temperatures at the poles and tell me the temperature in New York? Because, you know

It's called climate change. It's not a localized past of local weather.
It's like a kindergarten class.

What you actually get from trapped air is ... air.
There's no way to extract any actual climate data such as precipitation, wind speed, humidity, pressure, cloud coverage and especially the central point of climate hysteria - temperatures.
Your links, and all the identical ones I've checked, explain how to guess what climate parameters may have been, based on a pile of uncalibrated assumptions.
It may look sciency, but in reality it's guesswork.

Again. If you can read, check the links I gave. It explains how trapped air is used to find numerous climate data.

 

[hahahanoobs]

Is that a joke? When you go to tertiary education or complete sciences and mathematics do you source link everything you do. I'm simply passing on information I've read about over time. For me to provide a source, it would be many links and not necessarily from the same manufacturer. Even then I'd be skeptical about the exact numbers if a business provided the complete life cycle of costings. It also might be privileged information kept within a company. I'm giving a generalized view and process.

You had to have gotten this data from somewhere.
I'd like to see. Simple request.

 

[scavengerspc]

You had to have gotten this data from somewhere.
I'd like to see. Simple request.

Good luck with that.
Look at @pnntmp. The outright laughable things he has said and not even one link.

 

[jeffbert]

And with Trump in office it will only get worse as he is obviously proud that we keep producing more dangerous gasses instead of embracing a much cleaner and sustainable alternatives.

But once again what can we expect of Trump and his supporters that are willing to sell the world out just to make an extra dollar.

Looking at the graph above, China has ~3,000, while the three U.S. companies listed, ~1,400 collectively. So why must the U.S. bear the most burden in the reduction of C02? Why must we in the U.S. injure our economy, while other nations bear little to no burden at all. Why did the Paris Accord or whatever it is/was called, place so much burden on the USA?

 

[jeffbert]

China is the fastest adopter of sustainable energy in the world and has made huge strides the last years and has a net zero plan to cut all coal plants.

China, as the biggest industry country in the world and with a population 5 times that of the USA will always be among the highest just due to share size - but travel to the major cities of China and you'll see that they're adopting green technology faster than any other country out of pure necessity if nothing else.

That people in the USA thinks there are "two political views" in Total shows how much you fall for stupid propaganda. The world is full of shades of grey. You may not like China and communism - which is totally OK - but they get **** done instead of blaming it on "the other political side" everything something is up for discussion.

Elementary Marxist/communist dogma is that there can be no (read that as zero) peaceful coexistence between communist and capitalist nations.

China etc. seek to spread communism worldwide; they regard capitalist nations as threats to their existence.

Looking at China as an example to be followed, does that make any sense?

 

[m3tavision]

Globalists gain power as part of financial institutions that control the global economy:

Revealed – the capitalist network that runs the world

The 1318 transnational corporations that form the core of the economy. Superconnected companies are red, very connected companies are yellow. The size of the dot represents revenue AS PROTESTS against financial power sweep the world this week, science may have confirmed the protesters' worst...

www.newscientist.com

In fact, that's how they came "super-ultra-rich" in the first place.

Much of their wealth consists of credit, whose value goes up only if there are more sales of goods and services worldwide. And when production of those goes up, so does CO2 ppm.

That means the last thing they want is to cut down on CO2 ppm.

The problem is that they are also aware of not only climate change but even environmental damage plus a resource crunch, and those don't allow for more sales of goods and services.

Thus, what they want is not a rapid increase in CO2 ppm or the opposite but something in between: a steady increase in not only CO2 ppm but also population, resource use, etc. That way, they have business as usual.

Wake up, "bruh".

I am literally laughing my azz off^

No, Globalist gain power through mandating/forcing restrictive laws on a populace, to limit their ability to freely speak. They use their positions within Governments to minimize the Populace & work on kickback schemes to benefit themselves, NOT THE POPULACE these Politicians are entrusted to serve.

Ursula is not a banker, she a Globalists who thinks she knows better what is good for Poland/Hungary and demanding that they succumb to her Queenship and comply with her Globalists policies on ‘Pact on Migration and Asylum’.


The EU is going to fold, bcz no sane person in Europe wants unfettered mass migration. Otherwise, those Countries would reciprocate & would allow westerners to move their and build their Churches and Dojos. Or even allow Citizen's of another Country to wave around the EU or US flags and party in their streets at night, doing donuts...!

 

[Xelions]

You had to have gotten this data from somewhere.
I'd like to see. Simple request.

It's not 1 link, and 1 source, like I mentioned before it's information I've read/heard sporadically over many, many years, from articles from various news sources, tech sites, study, books, people, etc

This was an easy search and confirms to a degree what I've said so far holds solid like the Mayor of Warsaw

https://imgur.com/a/UT6k4IQ

 

[Xelions]

And since I'm posting regularly from a smart phone, posting many links from different sites isn't feasible. Phones have their limitations. Trying typing in Google solar panel cost life cycle. You'll find even more in depth details than I'm giving - getting far too technical has its downside unless you work/hobby in the field.

 

[Northy]

There's no financial incentive for people to stop adding harmful gasses to our atmosphere. It's not new science or hysteria or anything like this, it's been known since the 1950's what it is and how it works.

We'll stop when we're all dead, and not before. Enjoy the ride to the bottom folks.

 

[hahahanoobs]

It's not 1 link, and 1 source, like I mentioned before it's information I've read/heard sporadically over many, many years, from articles from various news sources, tech sites, study, books, people, etc

This was an easy search and confirms to a degree what I've said so far holds solid like the Mayor of Warsaw

https://imgur.com/a/UT6k4IQ

Cool. But where is your argument that it's worse than fossil fuels?

 

[pnntmp]

It's called climate change. It's not a localized past of local weather.
It's like a kindergarten class.

Again. If you can read, check the links I gave. It explains how trapped air is used to find numerous climate data.

Have you read what these links of yours point to? Nothing there explains how to "find numerous climate data" from trapped air bubbles. And that complete absence is easy to explain, because it's not possible to obtain data about precipitation, wind, pressure, humidity, cloud coverage or whatever from tiny bubbles trapped in ice.

 

[scavengerspc]

Have you read what these links of yours point to? Nothing there explains how to "find numerous climate data" from trapped air bubbles.

Have I read it? I quoted them.
Here are just a few where they explain how for each. YOU are the one that hasn't read them.

• Atmospheric Gases: Ice cores contain trapped air bubbles, which contain a record of the Earth’s atmospheric composition. By analyzing these gases, scientists can learn about changes in atmospheric composition, such as the rise and fall of greenhouse gases.
  
  
• Volcanic Eruptions: Sulfate particles from volcanic eruptions are trapped in ice cores, allowing scientists to reconstruct volcanic histories and understand the impact of these events on the global climate.
  
• Greenhouse Gases: The concentration of methane (CH4), a potent greenhouse gas, in ice cores reveals information about the Earth’s atmospheric chemistry and potential climate oscillations.

 

[pnntmp]

Have I read it? I quoted them.
Here are just a few where they explain how for each. YOU are the one that hasn't read them.

• Atmospheric Gases: Ice cores contain trapped air bubbles, which contain a record of the Earth’s atmospheric composition. By analyzing these gases, scientists can learn about changes in atmospheric composition, such as the rise and fall of greenhouse gases.
  
• Volcanic Eruptions: Sulfate particles from volcanic eruptions are trapped in ice cores, allowing scientists to reconstruct volcanic histories and understand the impact of these events on the global climate.
• Greenhouse Gases: The concentration of methane (CH4), a potent greenhouse gas, in ice cores reveals information about the Earth’s atmospheric chemistry and potential climate oscillations.

Neither atmospheric composition (which is more or less consistent) nor sporadic eruptions have any significant impact on the climate parameters.

 

[scavengerspc]

Neither atmospheric composition (which is more or less consistent) nor sporadic eruptions have any significant impact on the climate parameters.

Prove it. I have certainly proven myself.
I can prove you are wrong. I have MANY times.
ONE TIME, show us where your information comes from.

 

[monkeylove]

I am literally laughing my azz off^

No, Globalist gain power through mandating/forcing restrictive laws on a populace, to limit their ability to freely speak. They use their positions within Governments to minimize the Populace & work on kickback schemes to benefit themselves, NOT THE POPULACE these Politicians are entrusted to serve.

Ursula is not a banker, she a Globalists who thinks she knows better what is good for Poland/Hungary and demanding that they succumb to her Queenship and comply with her Globalists policies on ‘Pact on Migration and Asylum’.


The EU is going to fold, bcz no sane person in Europe wants unfettered mass migration. Otherwise, those Countries would reciprocate & would allow westerners to move their and build their Churches and Dojos. Or even allow Citizen's of another Country to wave around the EU or US flags and party in their streets at night, doing donuts...!

Of course, not. The main funders of government are the financial industry, and those are controlled by rich investors.

The only reason why you're laughing your "azz" off is that you live in some fantasy world where you think governments are in charge.

Who do you think's funding those politicians, even at the campaigning stage?

 

[monkeylove]

What you actually get from trapped air is ... air.
There's no way to extract any actual climate data such as precipitation, wind speed, humidity, pressure, cloud coverage and especially the central point of climate hysteria - temperatures.
Your links, and all the identical ones I've checked, explain how to guess what climate parameters may have been, based on a pile of uncalibrated assumptions.
It may look sciency, but in reality it's guesswork.


Wait. Are you saying that you can measure the temperatures at the poles and tell me the temperature in New York? Because, you know ... cycling?

That's weather, not climate.

 

[Xelions]

Cool. But where is your argument that it's worse than fossil fuels?

Did I say that? I implied that renewables have a foot print too. And it may not always be as clean and green as you perceive it to be.

Here is something I watched recently, and to me it was disturbing -

Our approach to problems and the solutions we develop always seem to have capitalism at it's heart, with no real oversight to sustainability, environmental impact, job security and safety, human displacement, and cost to life. I think we choose material sciences poorly and often invest in options for the long term and ignore the better choices.

For example the electric vehicle, may not have been as good as a fuel cell but the investment went to electric with lithium based batteries. We have such an array of transportation solutions and we invest in whatever gives us the greater dividend, when we should be looking at a combination of factors that play a much bigger part than the dividend

 

[scavengerspc]

For example the electric vehicle, may not have been as good as a fuel cell but the investment went to electric with lithium based batteries.

A fuel cell vehicle is an electric vehicle. They have an electric motor and a battery.
Hydrogen keeps the batteries charged. And the e:FCEV can also be plugged in.

https://www.irena.org/-/media/Files/IRENA/Agency/Publication/2016/IRENA_REmap_externality_methodology_2016.pdf