How much is Exxon paying this guy?

[speedy 0]

From National Post

Will the sun cool us?

LAWRENCE SOLOMON
Financial Post


Friday, January 12, 2007



The science is settled" on climate change, say most scientists in the field. They believe that man-made emissions of greenhouse gases are heating the globe to dangerous levels and that, in the coming decades, steadily increasing temperatures will melt the polar ice caps and flood the world's low-lying coastal areas.

Don't tell that to Nigel Weiss, Professor Emeritus at the Department of Applied Mathematics and Theoretical Physics at the University of Cambridge, past President of the Royal Astronomical Society, and a scientist as honoured as they come. The science is anything but settled, he observes, except for one virtual certainty: The world is about to enter a cooling period.

Dr. Weiss believes that man-made greenhouse gases have recently had a role in warming the earth, although the extent of that role, he says, cannot yet be known. What is known, however, is that throughout earth's history climate change has been driven by factors other than man: "Variable behaviour of the sun is an obvious explanation," says Dr. Weiss, "and there is increasing evidence that Earth's climate responds to changing patterns of solar magnetic activity."

The sun's most obvious magnetic features are sunspots, formed as magnetic fields rip through the sun's surface. A magnetically active sun boosts the number of sunspots, indicating that vast amounts of energy are being released from deep within.

Typically, sunspots flare up and settle down in cycles of about 11 years. In the last 50 years, we haven't been living in typical times: "If you look back into the sun's past, you find that we live in a period of abnormally high solar activity," Dr. Weiss states.

These hyperactive periods do not last long, "perhaps 50 to 100 years, then you get a crash," says Dr. Weiss. 'It's a boom-bust system, and I would expect a crash soon."

In addition to the 11-year cycle, sunspots almost entirely "crash," or die out, every 200 years or so as solar activity diminishes. When the crash occurs, the Earth can cool dramatically. Dr. Weiss knows because these phenomenon, known as "Grand minima," have recurred over the past 10,000 years, if not longer.

"The deeper the crash, the longer it will last," Dr. Weiss explains. In the 17th century, sunspots almost completely disappeared for 70 years. That was the coldest interval of the Little Ice Age, when New York Harbour froze, allowing walkers to journey from Manhattan to Staten Island, and when Viking colonies abandoned Greenland, a once verdant land that became tundra. Also in the Little Ice Age, Finland lost one-third of its population, Iceland half.

The previous cooling period lasted 150 years while a minor crash at the beginning of the 19th century was accompanied by a cooling period that lasted only 30 years.

In contrast, when the sun is very active, such as the period we're now in, the Earth can warm dramatically. This was the case during the Medieval Warm Period, when the Vikings first colonized Greenland and when Britain was wine-growing country.

No one knows precisely when a crash will occur but some expect it soon, because the sun's polar field is now at its weakest since measurements began in the early 1950s. Some predict the crash within five years, and many speculate about its effect on global warming. A mild crash could be beneficial, in giving us Earthlings the decades needed to reverse our greenhouse gas producing ways. Others speculate that the recent global warming may be a blessing in disguise, big-time, by moderating the negative consequences of what might otherwise be a deep chill following a deep crash. During the Little Ice Age, scientists estimate, global temperatures on average may have dropped by less than 1 degree Celsius, showing the potential consequences of even an apparently small decline.

Dr. Weiss prefers not to speculate. He sees the coming crash as an opportunity to obtain the knowledge necessary to make informed decisions on climate change, and the extent to which man-made emissions have been a factor.

"Having a crash would certainly allow us to pin down the sun's true level of influence on the Earth's climate," concludes Dr. Weiss. Then we will be able to act on fact, rather than from fear.

Lawrence Solomon is executive director of Urban Renaissance Institute and Consumer Policy Institute, divisions of Energy Probe Research Foundation.

CV OF A DENIER:

Nigel Weiss, professor emeritus of mathematical astrophysics in the University of Cambridge, discovered the process of "flux expulsion" by which a conducting fluid undergoing rotating motion acts to expel the magnetic flux from the region of motion, a process now known to occur in the photosphere of the sun and other stars. He is also distinguished for his work on the theory of convection, and for precise numerical experiments on the behaviour of complicated non-linear differential equations. Nigel Weiss is a recipient of a Royal Society Citation, he is a past President of the Royal Astronomical Society, and a past Chairman of Cambridge's School of Physical Sciences. He was educated at Clare College, University of Cambridge.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Obviously Exxon must have paid Weiss big bucks to slot in that paragraph I marked in red.!!!
Everyone who is not paid off already knows exactly how much CO2 affects the climate and that global warming has nothing to do with the sun.

Dave

Fallschirmsport Marl

[GQ_jumper 4]

Everyone who is not paid off already knows exactly how much CO2 affects the climate and that global warming has nothing to do with the sun.

Quote

I agree with you completely, that giant flaming ball of gas far larger than our planet has nothing to do with the temperature here on Earth. Like when I step out of the shade and into the sun, that's not the sun that I feel, I have stepped into a pocket of global warming, coincidentally all pockets of global warming are located in direct sight of the sun.

I'm not arguing for or against global warming due to burning fossil fuels, but just because someone offers a different theory does that automatically mean said person has been paid off to say that. The last time I checked the sun is primarily responsible for creating that phenomenon known as heat on this wonderful little planet, so wouldn't it be understandable if changes in the output of the sun affected us here on Earth? Ro am I talkin crazy talk here, sun warming the Earth, maybe I should go back on my meds.

History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid.
--Dwight D. Eisenhower

• Quote

[dorbie 0]

Wait a second, in the red highlighted test he said:

Quote

Dr. Weiss believes that man-made greenhouse gases have recently had a role in warming the earth,

Duh what part of that did you miss?

He goes on:

Quote

...although the extent of that role, he says, cannot yet be known. What is known, however, is that throughout earth's history climate change has been driven by factors other than man.

There's not an educated scientist who wouldn't agree with that, the first part is still a research topic and the second part is self evident since man was not even around during those fluctuations.

And you said:

Quote

global warming has nothing to do with the sun.

Which is absolutely incorrect and there's not a scientist who would agree with you.

How dare you accuse this guy of being on the take, he's made very measured remarks, that are actually irrefutable if you stop for a second and think.

Your response exemplifies the knee jerk lynch mob attitude towards scientists who don't agree with your political agenda (and individuals treated even worse in public discourse through this groupthink). Take a breath and digest what the guy is saying for goodness sake.

[Gawain 0]

Quote

Obviously Exxon must have paid Weiss big bucks to slot in that paragraph I marked in red.!!!

Dude, the paragraph you marked in red notes that Dr. Weiss said that man-made greenhouse gasses have played a role in warming the earth.

His CV seems to indicate that he knows more than most about the process of heat, energy, the catalysts and reactions, etc.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[Gawain 0]

Quote

Obviously Exxon must have paid Weiss big bucks to slot in that paragraph I marked in red.!!!

Dr. Weiss clearly stated that man-made greenhouse gasses have played a role in warming the earth.

Now, this is where I stand against most of the "alarmist-enviro-crowd". While most people can point at a global-warmth period, the dynamics behind how and why it's happening is not known 100%. As a non-scientist, I can understand that the sun is the source of our warmth here on earth. It is obviously the major player here and Dr. Weiss may have some significant input on the matter. He has still not speculated as to potential affects.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[jakee 1,596]

Quote

How dare you accuse this guy of being on the take, he's made very measured remarks, that are actually irrefutable if you stop for a second and think.

Your response exemplifies the knee jerk lynch mob attitude towards scientists who don't agree with your political agenda (and individuals treated even worse in public discourse through this groupthink). Take a breath and digest what the guy is saying for goodness sake.

Pssst, Speedy's being sarcastic.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[speedy 0]

Quote

Wait a second, in the red highlighted test he said:

Quote

Dr. Weiss believes that man-made greenhouse gases have recently had a role in warming the earth,

Duh what part of that did you miss?

Quote

He has to say the above otherwise it would never have reached the print stage. The first part is to be PC and get published

He goes on:

Quote

...although the extent of that role, he says, cannot yet be known. What is known, however, is that throughout earth's history climate change has been driven by factors other than man.

Quote

the second part is the Exxon buy off. Sold his soul to big oil if you ask me

Dave

Fallschirmsport Marl

[Butters 0]

Quote

the second part is the Exxon buy off. Sold his soul to big oil if you ask me

And you come to this conclusion based on ... (are you a scientist studying global warming who has scientific proof that mankind is the cause of global warming?)

"That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

[jakee 1,596]

Quote

Quote

the second part is the Exxon buy off. Sold his soul to big oil if you ask me

And you come to this conclusion based on ... (are you a scientist studying global warming who has scientific proof that mankind is the cause of global warming?)

Pssst, Speedy's being sarcastic.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[Butters 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

the second part is the Exxon buy off. Sold his soul to big oil if you ask me

And you come to this conclusion based on ... (are you a scientist studying global warming who has scientific proof that mankind is the cause of global warming?)

Pssst, Speedy's being sarcastic.

Oops!

"That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

[speedy 0]

me! sarcastic ?

I long for the day when I ask my kids, "what would you like for your birthday?"
and they answer "Carbon credits Daddy, Carbon credits please".

Dave

Fallschirmsport Marl

[billvon 3,119]

>While most people can point at a global-warmth period, the dynamics
> behind how and why it's happening is not known 100%.

Quite true. We understand about 70% of where the extra heat is coming from.

> As a non-scientist, I can understand that the sun is the source of our
>warmth here on earth. It is obviously the major player here . . .

Major player when it comes to energy input? Yes.

Major reason things are changing? No.

[billvon 3,119]

Some good news from Exxon. They're finally starting to 'see the light' so to speak. It's a small step, but everyone has to start somewhere.

-----------------
Exxon Softens Climate-Change Stance
Wall Street Journal
January 11, 2007
Jeffrey Ball

In one of the strongest signs yet that U.S. industry anticipates government curbs on global-warming emissions, Exxon Mobil Corp., long a leading opponent of such rules, is starting to talk about how it would like them to be structured.

Exxon, the world's largest publicly traded oil company by market value, long has been a lightning rod in the global-warming debate. Its top executives have openly questioned the scientific validity of claims that fossil-fuel emissions are warming the planet, and it has funded outside groups that have challenged such claims in language sometimes stronger than the company itself has used. Those actions have prompted criticism of the company by environmentalists and by Democrats in the U.S., who now control the Congress.

Now, Exxon has cut off funding to a handful of those outside groups. It says climate-science models that link greenhouse-gas concentrations to global warming are getting more reliable. And it is meeting in Washington with officials of other large corporations to discuss what form the companies would prefer a possible U.S. carbon regulation to take.

The changes in Exxon's words and actions are nuanced. The oil giant continues to note uncertainties in climate science. It continues to oppose the Kyoto Protocol, the international global-warming treaty that limits emissions from industrialized countries that have ratified it. It also stresses that any future carbon policy should include developing countries, where emissions are rising fastest. (See related article.)

Still, the company's subtle softening is significant and reflects a gathering trend among much of U.S. industry, from utilities to auto makers. While many continue to oppose caps, these companies expect the country will impose mandatory global-warming-emission constraints at some point, so they are lining up to try to shape any mandate so they escape with minimum economic pain.
--------------------------------------

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Some good news from Exxon. They're finally starting to 'see the light' so to speak. It's a small step, but everyone has to start somewhere.

Perhaps they are seeing the end of having their buddies in charge of the government in early 2009.
With the loss of so many Exxon Friendly members of this Administration... perhaps they see the writing on the corporate wall.

[billvon 3,119]

>Perhaps they are seeing the end of having their buddies in charge of
>the government in early 2009.

Well, they are also noting the money that BP is making on its solar division, and (I think) realizing that they need another option when the cheap oil starts running out.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

>While most people can point at a global-warmth period, the dynamics
> behind how and why it's happening is not known 100%.

Quite true. We understand about 70% of where the extra heat is coming from.

Quote

You have data that says we know 70% of what is causing GW and we don't yet know all the factors?? That is an interesting leap.......

> As a non-scientist, I can understand that the sun is the source of our
>warmth here on earth. It is obviously the major player here . . .

Major player when it comes to energy input? Yes.

Major reason things are changing? No.

Again, a very interesting leap.......

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

• Quote

[rushmc 23]

Quote

>Perhaps they are seeing the end of having their buddies in charge of
>the government in early 2009.

Well, they are also noting the money that BP is making on its solar division, and (I think) realizing that they need another option when the cheap oil starts running out.

Since subjectivity seems to be running rampant in this thread how about this one.

I think the major oil comanies are voicing things differently because of the constant drum beat of the GW alarmists, their compainion Dems and media. They want at all costs to not become targets of the political correctness attack dogs.

Once again I will say I believe the biggest danger to free speach today is the PC crowd. Simply a tactic to silence those with differing opinions. The PC crowd, along with the Dems and the media are trying to define debates in a way that used labling to shut others up.

I believe this is all related.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Once again I will say I believe the biggest danger to free speach today is the PC crowd. Simply a tactic to silence those with differing opinions. The PC crowd, along with the Dems and the media are trying to define debates in a way that used labling to shut others up.

I believe this is all related.

WAHH WWAHH WAHHH

Fuck man you will not even talk to people with differing opinons from you... kinda like your Master in the Whitehouse.. if he does not want to hear it.. he LABELS people as UNPATRIOTIC... since they are not WITH HIM and his GOONS.. they are against him.... Fucking paranoia at its best.

See what happens when your guys learn their politics from NIXON

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Quote

Once again I will say I believe the biggest danger to free speach today is the PC crowd. Simply a tactic to silence those with differing opinions. The PC crowd, along with the Dems and the media are trying to define debates in a way that used labling to shut others up.

I believe this is all related.

WAHH WWAHH WAHHH

Fuck man you will not even talk to people with differing opinons from you... kinda like your Master in the Whiteshouse.. if he does not want to hear it.. he LABELS people as UNPATRIOTIC... since they are not WITH HIM and his GOONS.. they are against him.... Fucking paranoia at its best.

Exactly, they do it just like that

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[Amazon 7]

I do love it when the biggest pots in the kitchen... call all the kettles black...

• Quote

[billvon 3,119]

>I think the major oil comanies are voicing things differently because
> of the constant drum beat of the GW alarmists, their compainion
> Dems and media. They want at all costs to not become targets of
> the political correctness attack dogs.

Actually they want to make money. (Kind of like all companies in that way.) And it's looking more and more like BP has the right idea as to how to make money into the future. People emulate success.

>Simply a tactic to silence those with differing opinions.

Hmm. So you are claiming that people who disagree with climate science have been "silenced?" Who's been "silencing" you? Or do the jackbooted PC correctness thugs simply not found you yet?

Any conspiracy theory involves an effort by "them" to "stop the truth from coming out." It's a good way to explain a dearth of evidence. "Well, yeah, I could prove that the government blew up the WTC, but THEY hauled all the metal away to be recycled! THEY wouldn't allow investigators in! THEY pressured investigators to lie! THEY destroyed records! That's why I don't have more proof. It's not that it doesn't exist, it's that it's being supressed."

So there are two possible reasons that very few scientists disagree with the basic facts concerning climate change:

1) there is a worldwide conspiracy financed by shady liberals with a secret stash of money who discredit scientists, destroy evidence, manufacture statistics and try to cause worldwide panic to advance their nefarious ends.

2) the data doesn't support their conclusions.

At some point I think you have to go with Occam's Razor.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

I do love it when the biggest pots in the kitchen... call all the kettles black...

It's a good point, but maybe Exxon is moving on to some better long term business planning. BV's likely right. These "oil and gas" companies need to redefined themselves as "Energy" companies and diversify how they provide that product.

Not because it's Politically Correct.
Not because they have intermittant and sporadic Political Connections.
Not in order to kiss up to the left wing brainwashed public.
Not in order to kiss up to the right wing brainwashed public.

But because it's good business practice (long term). If they are interested in surviving, they back up their primary business, and also cover the specialized demand markets. Those specialized markets sometimes grow to very profitable and very high demands.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[willard 0]

Interesting article. It would be hard to disagree with very much in it.

Are man's activities contributing to global warming? Absolutely.
Are they the only factor? Absolutely not. They are only a small but very preventable part.

Alternative energy sources are out there, we just need to make them feasable. Our oil, gas, and coal won't last forever and neither will our environments tolerence of their emmisions. As challenging as it is to develope these alternative sources, it will be even more challenging without the benefit of the energy sources we have now.

The climate on this planet has been through more changes then we could ever imagine and it will continue to change regardless of what we do. We need not fear of harming the planet, she's been here for a few billion years and she'll get along just fine after mankind is long forgotten. But while we are here we are stewards of our environment and as such have the responsibilty to not harm it for ourselves or other forms of life that we share it with.

[rushmc 23]

Actully I mean what I said. Not what you say I said.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[billvon 3,119]

>Actully I mean what I said. Not what you say I said.

Sorry, I'll use your words.

"the constant drum beat of the GW alarmists"
"targets of the political correctness attack dogs" who "silence those with differing opinions", trying to "shut others up."

So either there really is such a conspiracy of wealthy liberals, GW alarmists (with their "political correctness attack dogs" trying to "silence" people) - or they want to make money in the same way BP is. Hmmm. So hard to say which is the more reasonable explanation.