It's an annoying commercial, unless it's on mute. Are we a company of doers? Or are we a company locked into a culture of analysis paralysis, gridlocked by risk aversion, and plagued by piss-poor execution? />
65 replies (most recent on top)
The Democrat Climate Change fanboy would make a great Chevron PGPA manager. Do you also want to force a carbon tax on US companies and taxpayers that the biggest polluters: China, India, Venezuela and Mexico will not pay?
Do you also believe that LGBT employees deserve their Chevron jobs more than mothers and fathers? Are you so cunning that you would suggest handing out free pizza coupons to the town near the deadly explosion in PA? Yes, you should be a Chevron PGPA manager.
, Thanks for the continuous attempt at self-validation by belittlement of others. I would expect nothing else from a brainwashed self-important parasite liberal dependent on the government like yourself. Please proceed with the false argument that you are not a liberal and that your hypothesis is not politically motivated and give the readers the usual BS about how your denial of real science is required to save the world as we know it.
Climate models for 30 years? Are you serious? That's what you base your belief on? In geological time, 30 years is a blip on the clock. What has taken place in the last 30 years is a slow, yet calculated plot to cultivate and plant Manchurian candidates in key roles in governments all over the world, including the United States. Obama is a product of this conspiracy. Leftist theories like Climate Change is also part of the master plan.
- Sorry for the big words, I'll try to dumb it down so that you can understand.
The hypothesis (sorry if that's too big a word) that people riding around in cars and doing other things that produce carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases would cause the earth to get warmer has been predicted by climate models for 30 years. During that time, scientists have actually measured temperatures by various means and discovered that it is actually occurring in much the way that the climate models predict. Also, due to improvements in scientific algorithms (sorry, don't know how to dumb down the word algorithm) and computer technology, the models have been improved to be even more accurate. The process of hypothesis and confirmation is the way science works, and at this point it is no longer an hypothesis, but a well established theory.
I'm repeating this in the hopes that some readers of this site think that actual facts and reason make better arguments than name-calling, even though name-calling is easier and more fun for some. I know you're not one of them, of course.
I totally agree the propaganda peddling moron is a mindless obnoxious dork, like most Democrats.
, Would you please repeat that again and use some even BIGGER words that you copied and pasted from online to make yourself seem even MORE self-important? At least you will keep yourself entertained. All you accomplished to the readers of this site is to make yourself look like a mindless obnoxious dork.
No, it's not just because the climate is changing. Anthropogenic climate change has been shown because the climate models successfully reproduce past climate and also make have made predictions that have been verified by subsequent observations. That's how science works. For example see / . I have no idea what science you think I'm denying.
Oh my God. There are still idiots posting drivel that shows that we have a dynamic climate as proof for man being able to change it. Does any one else see holes in that argument? That's the equivalent of showing a piece of fried chicken as proof that the chicken came before the egg!!!
, No it is not clear what you post about promoting the left-wing extremist narrative on man-made global warming, but you seem to be brainwashed enough to ignore scientific evidence and only believe your leftist idols. Go ahead and deny science, that is your prerogative. That's your opinion, you are permitted to have one. Just don't expect everyone else to follow like lemmings to the sea.
Gee - 3zyqu you are good at plagiarism. No creative thought in your bird brain at all. Is that how you flunked your way through college.
Just like some oil company employees and Republican politicians will do anything to convince themselves and others that global warming isn't real in order to protect their livelihood. So let's just admit that lots of people have a financial motive to protect their side. So what? We need to look at what the science says, and it's pretty clearly saying that global warming is occurring and this time it is almost entirely the result of human activity.
, I agree with you 100%. But you have to treat the activists as anyone else who's livelihood depends on it. If your life and sustenance for your family consisted of government grants to study climate change and man's effects on the climate wouldn't you fight tooth and nail to keep everyone hoodwinked that it is necessary? I certainly would preach it like the gospel and like my life depended it. Because I would depend on your tax dollars through those grants to feed my children. In essence, I am begging YOU to feed my children and lying to you to get you to do it since I am a useless liberal POS and cannot support myself without a grant for producing nothing.
The rants from climate change activists are just a proof of the desperation they find themselves in defending a dying cause and a dying argument. Their indignation has nothing to do with patriotism or general prosperity of the United States. All they want is that disruptive technologies should leave them untouched and do business as usual and lead entitled lives. But the end is near - technology and time stop for no one. The era of when we need to produce energy to exist is here and will never end. These are the death pangs of an advocacy in denial. Amen and God Bless.
The rants from climate change deniers are just a proof of the desperation they find themselves in defending a dying cause and a dying industry. Their indignation has nothing to do with patriotism or general prosperity of the United States. All they want is that disruptive technologies should leave them untouched and do business as usual and lead entitled lives. But the end is near - technology and tine stop for no one. The era of when we needed to burn to produce energy is coming to an end. These are the death pangs of an industry in denial. Amen.
Climate Change (previously debunked under Global Warming) is what the Leftists call their science, after all, they invented that scam. All the crap they say is fact-based science is not science. It's a New World Order scam that will be pushed until it goes away. Perhaps these enemies of Capitalism will someday come back trying to sell this garbage under a new name. Al Gore failed. Obama will also fail. We'll see who is the next enemy of the USA to try to resurrect this lie again.
and It's not a question of getting behind something. Science is not a spectator sport where you decide on a team and root for it. There is nothing leftist in anything that I've posted, it's just science, which does not care about politics. On the other hand, you haven't provide anything that remotely argues against the science, just a lot of tantrum throwing. As to finding open-minded people at Chevron, there are some, but I understand how hard it is for people to accept that something they've built their careers around could be causing such damage. I know, I've been there. And what would be the point of starting an argument with the people I work with? If you worked at a tobacco company would you discuss the dangers of smoking with your peers?
Look, if you think it's all propaganda you can look at / I've mentioned them before. These are scientists who were skeptical of the climate scientists methods and did their own completely separate analysis, which came to basically the same conclusion. The website has all the data, code, and everything else you need to critique their methods. You can run the analysis yourself and come to your own conclusions and let them know where they're wrong. But I understand that for some people "disagrees with me" implies that it's "leftist/right-wing propaganda" (depending on their political views), so I don't expect you to actually look at the data and methods critically.
, Yes, you are absolutely correct. Someone with any science or engineering background at all won't be easily convinced with your highly opinionated drivel, but you can perhaps get some sheep to follow your clueless abstractions. Why don't we just call your naive sheep that you think will bite your version of "others with a more open mind". You certainly can find enough of them up and down the halls at Chevron can't you? Don't they all agree with you? Didn't think so. Why would you have to peddle your liberal drivel on the internet. You should be praying that facts DO care about you. Choose wisely, my friend.
You are right, The spider graphics, animations and other leftist propaganda don't convince me or any reasonable person. I'm willing to be open on many unsettled scientific theories, but never on anything that clearly has the intention to weaken our economic dominance in the world. Climate Change is not a theory I will get behind.
- Asserting that there is data pointing in the other direction doesn't mean that there is no objective way to decide what is happening. You could say the same thing about evolution, heliocentric earth model, relativity, belief that the earth is < 10,000 years old, and on and on. At some point the overwhelming evidence points in one direction and you have to accept it. As to political bias, I think you're the one whose political and/or other biases are driving your reasoning. Look, I spent my career working as a scientist for Chevron. Do you think I want to believe that CO2 emissions are warming the planet? I'd feel a lot better if that weren't the case. But facts don't care about me, so I have to accept the scientific consensus. Look, one could cast doubt on just about any scientific consensus you name, especially if one is allowed to claim there's some elaborate hoax being perpetrated. It doesn't mean all science is wrong.
In any case here's a nice animation of the earth's temperature over last 160 years using one of the spider graphs that are so popular at Chevron. I know it won't convince you, but maybe some others who read this with a more open mind will think about it. />
, Trying not to be mean like the last poster, you and others like you need to learn the difference between your opinion and facts which are supported by solid evidence. You cannot be a true scientist if you take a politically motivated and biased narrative and claim that it is based on solid evidence when there is none and you have none. There is just as much data which points in either direction.
I respect your opinion. You are entitled to that. But please don't masquerade it as factual simply because you believe in it strongly. You, as a professional (if you are one), should respect the opposing views of other scientists as well.
You call yourself a scientist You should know that it will take more than a thousand years of unbiased and untainted scientific research to reach any shred of positive evidence that this so-called Climate Change exists. The evidence you peddle is only based on 1 second on the geological clock, and that evidence is more than false. It's a clever ploy by the New World Order to redistribute wealth and bring down the United States' power in the world. But don't worry, Obama's reign is ending very soon and so will leftist and subversive plots like Climate Change.
- Glad you think it's only a problem if 100% of the warming is caused by humans. If even 1% has another cause I guess you think that absolves us from worrying anything about it. I'm a scientist too, and I know enough to know that unless you're an expert in a scientific discipline or take the time to try to understand the details, you're not qualified to think you know better. Anyway, it's pointless to argue with most climate deniers as there is no amount of evidence that will ever make them reconsider. It's just sad that our great-grandchildren will have to suffer because of the deniers inability to face reality.
,, you're not going to find many who disagree that climate change is real. And has been occurring throughout geologic time. And was in play well before the presence of humans. And will be there when we are gone. It's a good thing that the quack that the koch brothers juiced used the term "almost" . Almost doesn't count in most instances. But thanks for your own ridiculous exaggerations and the parody. I happen to be a scientist myself. Just Not a rich one. Maybe I should try climatology and get on the gravy train!
Yeah, all the rich people in my neighborhood are climate scientists making millions off of selling climate change. Seriously, they're scientists who chose to work on climate. They could still do research even if the data and their models showed that temperatures were going down or staying the same. Their data and their papers are all publicly available so anyone can try to reproduce or discredit their results.
Maybe some rich skeptics should help fund some pre-eminent scientist from another field who is a climate skeptic and have him do his own analysis and see what happens. Oh wait, that already happened several years ago. The Koch brothers funded a Berkeley physicist name Richard Muller and he spent a couple years analyzing the data using his own tools. And guess, what, in 2012 he concluded that "[G]lobal warming [is] real .... Humans are almost entirely the cause." See / Of course, he also found that some claims by alarmists were exaggerated, but in general the IPCC got it right. Now he's no longer a climate change skeptic.
Correct If the agenda was to disprove Climate Change, and the government doled out millions in taxpayer funded grants were to that end, you'd read and hear nothing else. Follow the money, stupid!
Climate change scientists, who study climate change, all agree on climate change. That it's real. They also agree with the national narrative that it is directly linked to man-made emissions/greenhouse gasses, etc., which can be taxed, and in one way of another, can be turned into revenue.
Climate scientists, for the most part, are funded by government grants, supported by your tax dollars. Without a tax incentive, climate scientists would not have a job.
Without the climate change narrative, climate change scientists, would therefore not be required, funded, or have any reason to exist.
That being said, I challenge anyone to find a climate change scientist who doesn't state that climate change is directly affected by mankind, greedy corporations, negligence, etc., and in a negative way. You won't, and they will declare that forever, like their job and entire livelihood depends on it. Because it does.
Climate Change is a wealth redistribution scheme invented for the New World Order. That's all. Those links you elude to are filled with the false science that is pushed continually. Our environment is a whole lot cleaner today than it's ever been. Go complain to China and India about the pollution they dump into the air and water.
- The climate doesn't care what liberals or conservatives think. It's gonna do what it's gonna due based on the physical parameters involved. The overwhelming consensus of climate scientists, who have spent their careers studying this, is that it's happening and that human greenhouse gas emissions are either the cause or are making it much worse. If you want to disagree, you should be prepared to argue against the science. Just screaming about liberal close-mindedness and blaming liberals for all the country's problems won't change reality.
Maybe the poster who talked about the stages was being a bit too condescending, but responding with a diatribe against liberals is no better. At least he included some rational discussion and a link to some other information. and seemed willing to entertain a discussion. You included only insults so you could cut off all discussion without having to defend your position.
Oh, I see, so there's a self-important liberal dipchit dork-wad on here who's idea of expressing his own opinion is to pretend to evaluate someone else then give him an adolescent label of rude criticism, such as you are at stage 1, stage 2, etc. Remember, a liberal's idea of a discussion is - I'm right and everyone else is wrong. And a liberal is always right - If you don't believe me, JUST ASK ONE! LOL
Word of advice - don't argue with an idiot liberal dipchit. After all, they brought you Obama. -
Lowest % of people in the US labor force since the 70's, Record levels of poverty, Foodstamp, Medicaid and other types of entitlement use and abuse. Highest health care and health care insurance costs in history.
Thank's liberals! You voted for it, you got it!
, I don't have to publish anything to refute what I know is a scam. Try #1 as "Global Warming" didn't work, so the perpetuators of the debacle reached back into history and pulled "Climate Change" out of the bag of other junk science. Human intervention has at best, a minuscule impact on the earth's climate, but not enough to worry about. I'm not going to concede to human greed by way of this scam science to control world economies, starting with the destuction of our own economic dominance. Obama and company only has the rest of this year to continue to hood wink the uninformed Americans. After that, Climate Change will need another name if that junk science is to be continued to be pushed.
- "They" didn't change the name to "climate change". The term "climate change" dates back to 1956 while the term "global warming" dates to 1975. See / What the news media or politicians call it is, of course, irrelevant. In any case, science doesn't care whether you "buy" it or not, since I doubt you are a climate scientist. If you disagree with the scientific literature you should do some research and publish your own peer reviewed papers. But it looks like you're still stuck at stage 1 of climate denial.
No need to study junk science, That's a waste a time. I didn't buy the Global Warming crap spewed by Al Gore for years. And when it was disproven so completely that they had to try peddling the same junk science as "Climate Change", that was it for most intelligent people. Don't try to hood wink me.
I'm glad we agree, It's actually a bit more profound than that, but we can agree on what you said too.
- Yeah, it's all a conspiracy by our reptilian overlords who run the government. And Obama is the lizard king.
Let me chime in to the topic of Climate Change.
I think it's nothing but a hoax perpetuated by a number of powerful people and foreign governments hell bent on destroying the U.S. economy. Climate Change (aka Global Warming) is a complete farce.
- Well, you've made it to stage 2 of climate change denial (1. Deny the problem exists 2. Deny we're the cause 3. Deny it's a problem 4. Deny we can solve it 5. It's too late) I'm old enough to remember when climate scientists first started warning about global warming in the 1980s because that's what their models were predicting. At that time people responded, "how do you know your models are any good, you need to measure global temperatures over many years so we know the the models aren't giving bogus results" (actually a reasonable request at the time). Well, we've been measuring for 30 years and it sure looks like the models were correct. Now some people want to move the goalposts again.
In any case, here's a pretty good summary of what previous periods of climate change can tell us about what's happening now. / Basically previous periods of abrupt climate change (as opposed to change over millions of years) have been shown to be the result of large changes in CO2 in the atmosphere, like we are experiencing now due to human activities.
But you do have an interesting wrinkle, basically that unfettered population growth is going to be just as bad. Assuming you really believe that, it's not clear why we shouldn't work on both problems.
Climate Change is real. Mankind's impact on it is questionable at best. It has already been established that periods of extreme climatic conditions much greater than those occurring during the minuscule duration that humans have been on Earth have occurred throughout geologic history.
If Climate change advocates are so intent on pushing an agenda which would have an effect on the detrimental effect of humanity on their environment why not skip to the chase? The predominate issue which effects quality of life for all of mankind is unfettered population growth. That affects everything in the consumption and use of all resources both renewable and non-renewable. The Earths' population has been doubling recently approximately every 40 years. Of course that's a varying data point but very little has been done intentionally by humans to affect that worldwide to benefit sustaining the quality of life for future generations. Barring a natural catastrophe or drastic changes otherwise, in a few hundred years the Earth is going to be a very uncomfortable place to live and it has very little to do with the perceived effects of mankind on Earth's meteorological climate.
The Chevron "story about doers" commercial is one of the most annoying of all times. I have to bring my volume all the way down and I turn the phone screen away so I don't see it and I get irritated. I am so irritated that I will avoid using Chevron services. I am not sure people realize how these commercials can backfire on them.