TOM TOMORROW: "Science Stuff" w/ Your Host, Right-Wing Science Dude!

[Hissyspit]

DAILY KOS LINK: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/04/07/1289373/-Cartoon-Science-Stuff

Support independent cartooning: join Sparky's List—and be sure to visit TT's Emporium of Shopping Fun!

[IDemo]

1. Dan Perkins (aka Tom Tomorrow) has joined The Onion

His toons can be enjoyed for their sarcastic humor or viewed as informational pieces on the RW mindset.

[Beach Rat]

2. A problem ignored is a problem solved!

Not that there is any problem

[modrepub]

3. So how does this argument jive with

Exxon admitting burning fossil fuels is contributing to climate change? I think most energy companies recognize that their activities are contributing to the problem; it's especially hard since most of them funded the climate model studies that eventually concluded that increasing CO2 levels resulted in a warmer earth back in the 1980s and 90s. It's only recently that most energy companies have felt safe enough to admit this because they have convinced most people that it would be harder to change than to "adapt". Oh, and if you haven't noticed, adaption to climate change is now the approach EPA is using. This whole argument presented here is really falling further and further behind what's actually occurring on the ground.

[jeff47]

4. Pay attention to who they are talking to.

The Exxon report you mentioned is for their investors.

The denial is pointed at the general public.

Investors are the right kind of people, so they get the truth. The general public is used to keep the politics tied up so that Exxon can keep polluting.

[nxylas]

5. The investors probably see it as a business opportunity

I've not read this book yet, but it's on my must-read list:

http://www.amazon.com/Windfall-Booming-Business-Global-Warming/dp/1594204012/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1396883847&sr=1-1&keywords=windfall

[modrepub]

6. Investors/Public, it's the same admission

They feel safe to say this because they feel that it doesn't matter. No one is going to make them stop in the near future. See EPA's "adaption" policy. We're no longer talking about switching our economy to a carbon neutral scheme, we're just trying to "somewhat reduce" our CO2 emissions and live with the consequences. It's a subtle change that makes the whole denial thing outdated and in a larger sense distracting.

[xocet]

8. "...makes the whole denial thing outdated and in a larger sense distracting."

No, it is all still relevant, since the Republicans in Congress are still trying to kill this country's ability to use science to measure the effects of Climate Change:

http://www.legislative.noaa.gov/viewsletters/HR%202413%20110513.pdf

Voters need to have this information brought up, so that they can at least attempt to hold their representatives accountable.

[modrepub]

14. If you can get a Republican to come down one way or another

on this issue then you're doing better than me. Have emailed point blank questions to my Republican representatives and the question usually makes them head for the door. At least some of them are uncomfortable going into full denial mode on this issue. The funding issue is decades old; Congress has perpetually cut funding to climate studies even going so far as to try and shut down the CO2 monitors on Mauna Loa some years ago. If you only knew how many scientists work on shoestring budgets it would make your head spin. What's that saying, "A lie has speed, but truth has endurance". I think that's true in this case, but unfortunately I think we have or are about to go beyond a point of no return with regards to our climate.

[paleotn]

15. Oh, really.....

If you can get a Republican to come down one way or another on this issue then you're doing better than me.

In their own words.....

http://thinkprogress.org/climate-denier-caucus/

Of course the dodge now is it's not anthropogenic. Thus ExxonMobil, Peabody Energy and the Koch brothers can still cash in on their proven reserves and maintain their current valuations, climate be damned.

[cheapdate]

7. Svante Arrhenius calculated

how changes in the levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere could alter the surface temperature through the greenhouse effect back in 1896. Guy Callendar compiled empirical evidence that this effect was already discernible in the 1930s. Gilbert Plass began using electronic computations to produce more accurate warming estimates in the 1950s. The U.S. National Academy of Sciences began warning the government about the effects of global warming in the 1960s.

[pragmatic_dem]

16. This whole argument presented here? Huh?

When Fox News, Hannity, and 1,000 right wing funded media outlets, and dozens of Congressional, Senate leaders stop spewing bullshit about global warming, evolution, women's health, etc, then you can come back and tell us about the huge population of forward thinking conservatives.

Maybe Exxon could set a good example by campaigning against keystone as soon as the CEO frees up some time from suing an oil company who's is fracking near his palatial Texas retreat.

[nikto]

18. I just don't trust some people...

And oil companies are some of the people I trust less.

Especially that lying bitch, Exxon.

(I happen to know she's a female).

[pokerfan]

9. "Skeptical freethinkers just want to have a debate."

"Zip it!"

[eppur_se_muova]

10. "Take it from a guy in a lab coat, ... "

That's up there with "I'm not a doctor, but I play one on TV".

[Enthusiast]

11. K&R! This post should have hundreds of recommendations!

Wonderful toon!

[Octafish]

12. Dude

Tax cuts for our friends the Koch brothers.

[RainDog]

13. k&r n/t

[Hissyspit]

17. Kick nt

[Overseas]

19. K&R. Well said.