Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.

How many skeptics here are paid for by "Big Oil"?

I keep hearing how skeptics are paid for by big oil. Just wondering if any skeptics here are paid for by big oil. And, if you work for big oil, e-mail me and we can set up some payment options.

Also, if taking funding from big oil negates the study, does this mean any money from government agencies like the IPCC must also be negated? It would seem so since the IPCC ONLY exists to prove AGW. If it was disproved today, the IPCC would be disbanded tomorrow. Mean while, big oil at least provides us with gas, oil, and an actual product which we all need.

Update:

For those who say the IPCC only collects scientific data, how does it feel to have your eyes, nose, and ears full of sand. Exactly who produces the Summary of the actual technical data. How many scientist have come out and said the politicians changed the meaning of their scientific work? And agani, if AGW was disproved today, what would happen to the IPCC? It would be disbanned, and all those paid people would be unemployed. There only concern is to show man causes global warming, even though, no scientific study has supported the theory. Maybe if the AGW crazies understood the scientific process, they to would realize that man has made no significant contribution to climate change.

9 Answers

Relevance
  • David
    Lv 7
    1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    When people say skeptics are funded by fossil fuel companies, they are not talking about the "skeptics" here on Yahoo Answers. They're talking about the big name skeptics, like Richard Lindzen who it has been shown charges a hefty sum to Big Oil for his consulting services.

    http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Richard...

    And you obviously haven't the faintest clue what the IPCC does. It merely collects and analyzes the peer reviewed scientific literature. It does not do any kind of research and it does not try to "prove" anything. (If it were under some elaborate government pressure, why would they say there is only a 90% certainty? Why wouldn't they just say 100%?)

    Source(s): EDIT: In response to your additional details, the IPCC collects peer reviewed scientific literature. It does not consider the disinformation being spouted off on blogs and radio shows. There are very few peer reviewed scientific papers that strongly go against AGW theory. I do not know of any. Here is a survey of 928 papers discussing climate change, none of them disagreed with AGW. http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/306/570... A massive disagreement among scientists in regards to the causes of the warming is just not there. A lot of cancer institutes would be shut down if it were immediately cured tomorrow. Does that make you think there is some massive government cover up? What about AIDS? Heck, the government pays a lot out to firemen, do you think that they intentionally start fires just so they don't lose their jobs? I mean why stop at the IPCC? Maybe everyone on earth is actually an alien in disguise and we all watch you at night on closed circuit TV. Of course we wouldn't tell you about it, then we'd lose our research funding from the Galactic Confederation. You know, if you open your mind too much it just folds right back around and closes again. Conspiracy theorists such as yourself would do well to realize that.
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Actually it is the environmental groups like greenpeace and others of the type that have prevented the move to alternative energy that have and are funded by the big energy companies. They first began this program back in the 50s as they realized the threat first nuclear and then solar would be to their profits. This is why the same groups that protest nuclear plants also protest high capacity solar plants and wind farms. They are also the central groups calling for co2 reductions while at the same time preventing functional alternatives to coal and oil for power generation. These energy company funded eco terrorists are also working hard to get hydro electric power plants and their dams shut down and removed to create more demand for coal, natural gas and oil fueled power plants.

    So it AGW and all of its eco terrorist comrades that are secretly funded by big oil. Hansen and his GISS organization are indirectly funded by Exxon-mobile through the university he is located at because the university is funded by them and has been since the 20s when it was taken over by the founder of Standard Oil.

  • 1 decade ago

    All the global warming skeptics don't understand that there are thousands of scientists at universities around the world who are sending their children through expensive colleges on the many, many billions invested in proving that global warming is true (easily 10x what big energy is spending to debunk it).

    Ironically, as the story goes, Margarete Thatcher started the GW scam to push the move toward more nuclear power plants. And it is true that if GW were a real threat, the only rational and scalable replacement (non-CO2) power source would be nuclear.

    But alas, the GW industry was, over time, hijacked by the "progressive" greens as a means to an end: scaring people into giving up wealth, progress, and personal liberty in the name of their fruit-loops Mother Earth religion (See: misanthropic).

    And most of the scientists are just prostitutes along for the gravy train.

  • 1 decade ago

    Two thousand years of history, people learning and studying a book for at least 1600 years, years and years of experience and knowledge. People spend their whole life learning and studying the subject.

    Yet they can't explain anything, yet everything is conflicting...

    This is called a religious organization, where so called experts can convince low brain species like AWG but the rebels stand asking questions.

    Just because people go to college doesn't make them smart, before newton there were colleges and people use to go to these colleges, newton never even went to a school, yet he was able to do what these people couldn't.

    Edison didn't go to a college to learn about electricity.

    Many great people in history of the world didn't go to even school to be great, they were great because they had a logical mind, they had power to think differently, they weren't following some guy who said so and so, they thought about what they were told and when they felt it was wrong they stood up and said so.

    Galileo was put in home prison for years because he said something that wasn't same as what "experts" during his days said.

    People were put to death because they didn't agree with 1300 years book and experts of that book and that science.

    Its not a problem claiming that someone is being paid by "Big Oil", its not even a problem producing such fake proof to tell people skeptics are liars, you think if "Big Oil" wants to pay Al Gore he wouldn't accept money? You think he's so clean? If he was so clean and truthful he wouldn't be in politics.

    IPCC might be a non profit organization but doesn't mean it doesn't need money to run its operations, it takes money from around the world, it pays scientist who supports its cause of "Global warming" when they read the reports, comment on those reports, travel expenses, fees and everything else.

    Secondly Big Oil is not stupid and they are not poor, if they want they can buy every damn scientist that support global warming and change them into skeptics, but as this isn't IPCC agenda but US government agenda Big Oil are silent about it and they don't really care till there is a technology that could really hurt their business, as of today oil consumption is still on way up and if Europe and America wouldn't buy it doesn't matter to them because they have 3 new markets coming up, China, India and Africa.

    The personal interest of "Big Oil" is very little compared to US government interest in this matter, then again most of the big oil companies have so much money that they can convert their business to any kind of power generation within months notice, you'll find shell solar stations and wind field everywhere if they really ban oil.

    People call me skeptic but fact of the matter is I would love to be on other side making money, because there is no money to be made on this side of AWG. I would love to start a company making wind mills and I would too, being AWG skeptic isn't going to stop me from doing that. But I'm just asking for clear answers, why is IPCC not releasing real models they are using for public tests? How many models are they using? What's the ratio of CO2 to Deg in temperature rise so it can be tested.

    Why do they only release reports? Why they say that "Global warming" would lead to more hurricanes and when there are no hurricanes this year they say its due to global warming?

    I feel its like a string theory, where calculations only work if you think they work, there is no practical use of it and when they predict something its always wrong.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 1 decade ago

    I worked part time at a small privately owned gas station for about 6 months. Does that count?

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Doubt if many skeptics are paid by big oil, I'm certainly not.

    Government agencies only produce reports positive to what they are set up to report to justify their existence, not to report on or investigate the real and correct facts.

  • 1 decade ago

    Well Dawei beat me to it, but he's exactly right. Deniers on random websites like this aren't paid for by the oil companies. They're suckers, doing the oil industry's bidding for free. Plus the oil industry would be stupid to pay good money for such scientifically ignorant and frankly stupid arguments as the deniers on this website make.

    Also, the IPCC doesn't take any money from government agencies. All they do is get some of the world's best scientist to summarize the state of climate science research (for free) every 5-10 years. They don't prove anything, they just summarize the science.

    But thank you for providing yet another example of denier lies and misinformation. This is exactly what I'm talking about.

    http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Av3K9...

    *edit* your ignorance is showing. The IPCC can't be "disbanded" because nobody works for the IPCC! Like I said, they just gather the best scientists together every 5-10 years, and don't pay them. You're talking out of your butt.

  • 1 decade ago

    I'm not sure why big oil is brought up so often in this issue. If we reduce fossil fuel use, they will simply raise the price. They won't lose anything at all, we will. Read about supply and demand and stuff like keeping homes warm during the winter.

    The only threat to big oil is if we make it illegal. Even then, the underground prices would be outrageous.

    And now for my final soapbox testament. When oil becomes outrageously expensive, guess who is going to keep on truckin' and who is going to be hurt and hit hard?

    Really, just think about it......

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Dana really needs to get a hobby.

    I wish big oil paid me. I would get a bigger car.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.