Fossil Fuel Industry Knew Of Climate Danger As Early As 1954

[Josheb]

Smoking Gun Proof

Newly uncovered documents reveal that the fossil fuel industry was aware of the potential climate implications of its products as early as 1954...................

What Is The Significance Of The Fossil Fuel Industry's Knowledge Of Climate Change

The significance of the fossil fuel industry's knowledge of climate change lies in its early awareness of the potential consequences of its products on the environment.

So what?

Aside from what has already been posted, why should we believe a biased source such as The Guardian? Why do you believe them?

Are you aware of the more recent evidence indicating CO2 increases may be due to normal centuries-long cycle of rising global temperatures and NOT the other way around? Warming causes increased CO2 and not CO2 causes warming?

 

[EarlyActs]

“gasly” machines solve climate change!

https://twitter.com/x/status/1767178314932748289

 

[EarlyActs]

Boycott Canada

https://twitter.com/x/status/1767257725631635800

 

[Frank Robert]

So what?

You fail to understand that your future is being shaped by others than yourself

Aside from what has already been posted, why should we believe a biased source such as The Guardian? Why do you believe them?

You don't need to believe what you can learn what the experts claim from government sites like NASA and learn what the government is says about climate change

NASA Science Evidence​

There is unequivocal evidence that Earth is warming at an unprecedented rate. Human activity is the principal cause.​

Are you aware of the more recent evidence indicating CO2 increases may be due to normal centuries-long cycle of rising global temperatures and NOT the other way around? Warming causes increased CO2 and not CO2 causes warming?

Maybe, could be provide zero information about climate change. It doesn't require much time to make your own inquiries and learn for yourself instead of resorting to maybe or could be.

 

[eclipseEventSigns]

You fail to understand that your future is being shaped by others than yourself

You don't need to believe what you can learn what the experts claim from government sites like NASA and learn what the government is says about climate change

NASA Science Evidence​

There is unequivocal evidence that Earth is warming at an unprecedented rate. Human activity is the principal cause.​

Maybe, could be provide zero information about climate change. It doesn't require much time to make your own inquiries and learn for yourself instead of resorting to maybe or could be.

There is no such evidence about "human" cause. None.

 

[CrowCross]

Boycott Canada

https://twitter.com/x/status/1767257725631635800

So, I fact checked the above....

Turns out she's right.

Canada is passing legislation that see people go to jail or fined up to $500,000 for talking out about the benefits of using oil & gas appliances including motor vehicles.

 

[Josheb]

So what?

You fail to understand that your future is being shaped by others than yourself

No, I do not fail to understand that, and that is not an answer to the questions asked, so stop making up stuff in an effort to avoid explaining yourself.

I ask, "So What?" and get attacked with a false accusation. That is not discussion. You can either explain the significance of your own words or you cannot. Attacking me does not do that. Ad hominem is a logical fallacy, and no one should bother with the views of a person unwilling and unable to explain his view, preferring to attack others instead.

 

[Frank Robert]

No, I do not fail to understand that, and that is not an answer to the questions asked, so stop making up stuff in an effort to avoid explaining yourself.

I ask, "So What?" and get attacked with a false accusation. That is not discussion. You can either explain the significance of your own words or you cannot. Attacking me does not do that. Ad hominem is a logical fallacy, and no one should bother with the views of a person unwilling and unable to explain his view, preferring to attack others instead.

Sorry I misinterpreted your response. I took your "so what?" as disregarding what I said in my post you were responding to.

So what?

Aside from what has already been posted, why should we believe a biased source such as The Guardian? Why do you believe them?

Why do I believe that The Guardian article was not biased? It had well over a dozen references from reliable sources regarding ‘Smoking gun proof' that the fossil fuel industry knew of climate danger as early as 1954.

Are you aware of the more recent evidence indicating CO2 increases may be due to normal centuries-long cycle of rising global temperatures and NOT the other way around? Warming causes increased CO2 and not CO2 causes warming?

No, I am not aware of any such evidence. Do you have a link to a reliable source?

Is there a point at which adding more CO2 will not cause further warming?​

No. Adding more CO2 to the atmosphere will cause surface temperatures to continue to increase. As the atmospheric concentrations of CO2 increase, the addition of extra CO2 becomes progressively less effective at trapping Earth’s energy, but surface temperature will still rise.​

 

[Josheb]

Why do I believe that The Guardian article was not biased? It had well over a dozen references from reliable sources regarding ‘Smoking gun proof' that the fossil fuel industry knew of climate danger as early as 1954.

Fail.

They're knowing is not the question. The veracity of catastrophic global climate change is the question. Boiled down to its essence that article is simply a polemic asserting because the fossil fuel industry knew something they are liars and cannot be trusted. Given it is the Guardian making the argument that is the pot calling the kettle black. The Guardian is a left-wing source who knows what they're doing beforehand. If their own argument were applied to them then the logically necessary conclusion would be to never listen to the Guardian!