In a social media exchange, Daniel Fitzgerald, senior product sustainability director at Stanley Black & Decker, did an AI search on me. He wrote:
… Continue ReadingLet’s see what our AI overlord (Chat GPT) thinks:
Q: Looking at Rob Bradley, CEO of the institute for energy research, and his positions on oil and gas verses renewable, should I trust his facts and opinions? Please keep the response to no more than a paragraph.
A: Rob Bradley, CEO of the Institute for Energy Research, promotes a strong free-market, pro-fossil fuel perspective and is known for opposing many renewable energy policies. His work often reflects ideological bias, and while he cites data to support his views, his conclusions frequently conflict with mainstream scientific and economic consensus on climate change and energy transitions. As such, his facts and opinions should be cross-checked with peer-reviewed and more balanced sources before being trusted.
The headline reads: “DeSmog has been tracking the efforts of fossil fuel trade associations, policymakers, and industry backed-groups out to demolish U.S. climate policy for years.” Yes, and add to that list the hundreds if not thousands of climate and energy realists who challenge climate alarmism and forced energy transformation every hour on different social media platforms, such as on Facebook and LinkedIn (I being one of them).
Author Geoff Dembicki lists the American Petroleum Institute, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Project 2025, Heartland Institute, the “Koch Network,” and “Trump’s Climate Working Group.” That’s a start, but what about the nearly 1,000 “climate deniers” listed in DeSmog’s Climate Disinformation Database?
Perhaps it would be more efficient and better to instead list all of the climate alarmist organizations and magical thinking energy groups.…
Continue Reading“Good thing that Jimmy Carter’s Administration did not act on this to join their other sins, from price control to conservationism to creating the Department of Energy to synthetic fuel.”
Do the math with the 1977 climate memo to Jimmy Carter (below). In the next 60 years (to 2037), the memo predicted that increasing CO2 emissions would increase global average temperatures between 0.5 and 5.0 C (midpoint is 2.75 C).
Warming nearing the 50-year market is about 0.8C. Assume the total warming in the next 12 years brings the total to 1C anthropogenic. That makes a mockery of the high end of the estimate, which is the basis of “the possibility of a Catastrophic Climate Change.” And it is around one-third of the midrange of 2.75C.
It gets worse. Some of the warming in the 60-year period is undoubtedly natural, not anthropogenic.…
Continue Reading