I have not really seen conclusive evidence to made up my mind on climate change.
There is a lot of disinformation out there, so I don't know what is true here.
For example how is it possible to determine the temperature 5000 years ago? You can't even determine the temperature for tomorrow weather. The error margin grows exponentially per unit.
But let's say climate change is fake. Who benefits from it?
who benifits from the "carbon credits' market?
The oil guys. But then they also legitimize the green energy markets, which is a direct enemy of them. So that makes no sense. Why the hell you legitimize your enemy, which then leftist countries will eventually use. (Germany windplants, solar panels, electric bus system, etc.. And even the EU is starting to push for it on continental level)
They will lose a lot of market share, I guess that is why oil prices were plunging recenty.
However pollution is actually real, and of course it's dishonest to conflate pollution with climate change, which they do often. But lung cancer due to pollution is very real, and a lot of it is due to the oil and carbon.
So there is at least that truth in it. If climate change is false, then you dont need to invent a fantasy story to just emphasize on lung diseases. However it could be a disinfo to discredit those that point out that the air is getting toxic, which it is.
However if climate change is true, there there is a lot more at stake here than just a few companies.
"the oil guys'...knee jerk reaction...much?
the 'oil guys'...have got nothing to do with it..
ft.com/lexicon
Lexicon
Definition of carbon market
A market that is created from the trading of carbon emission allowances to encourage or help countries and companies to limit their carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. This is also known as emissions or carbon trading.
Carbon emissions trading is a way of reducing greenhouse gases produced by polluters. E.g., in the EU, it operates on a cap and trade system where a limit (cap) is set on C02 emissions and permits are given to emitters to release a certain amount of CO2. If a company exceeds its allowance, it has to purchase additional permits to cover the excess. If a company does not exceed its limit, then it can sell their unused allowances. [1]
Please note that this system does not take account of the wider market in carbon under the Kyoto protocol, which operates differently. [2]
created by whom?
But they gain monopoly through this. We already know about the "regulatory capture" phenomena. And how big businesses eliminate competition through regulation.
There is a term for it: Crony Capitalism.
So in this situation, the oil guys would benefit from it, if you regulate out the other competition. Like blocking Russian oil (which the USA is already in conflict with), it could be a political move.
But I don't know, since then you legitimize the green energy, which they have no interest doing, neither the US nor Russia.
If there is truth in it, then why don't they just tell it. If it's not then why do they invent such elaborate hoax (with many plot holes) to further their agenda?
well...I've worked in the oil industry...my brother was a petroleum engineer and my other brother was a geophysicist...reckon they have any idea what they are talking about...
or is it a SEEECRET 'oil guy' plot?
I used to invest into oil until 2008. After that just nothing made sense anymore. There was just too much deception, and that is not profitable. The geo-politics, which is the main indicator of oil was just totally confusing to me. So I didn't even cared to do it afterwards. The profits weren't even that great and the difficulty was too high. It's like trading the EUR/USD, good luck figuring out what the hell is going on there behind the scenes.