I wonder if anyone who bemoans how some of us dare demonize mega-corporations because, after all, they are run by “decent” people
who have their own families and share the same existential concerns as the rest of us peons of the world.
Riddle me this, why would a Board Of Directors and the Operating Officers (supposedly decent intelligent people) that had clearly recognized the reality that increasing our atmosphere’s greenhouse gas concentrations would lead to increasing atmospheric insulation,
which would inevitably lead to warming our global climate engine,
which would inevitably take our weather patterns out of it’s current regime, the regime that our complex society evolved within,
into a realm of destructive extremes along with sea level rise that will destroy coastal cities and infrastructure - spend millions and millions and millions of dollars on denying the science and the evidence
using every devious dirty trick and ruthlessly attacking serious qualified and honorable scientists?
What am I talking about you may ask?
Exxon knew of climate change in 1981, email says – but it funded deniers for 27 more years
Suzanne Goldenberg - July 6, 2015
ExxonMobil, the world’s biggest oil company, knew as early as 1981 of climate change – seven years before it became a public issue,
according to a newly discovered email from one of the firm’s own scientists.
Despite this the firm spent millions over the next 27 years to promote climate denial.
…
“Exxon first got interested in climate change in 1981 because it was seeking to develop the Natuna gas field off Indonesia," Lenny Bernstein,
a 30-year industry veteran and Exxon’s former in-house climate expert, wrote in the email. “This is an immense reserve of natural gas,
but it is 70% CO2," or carbon dioxide, the main driver of climate change.
However, Exxon’s public position was marked by continued refusal to acknowledge the dangers of climate change,
even in response to appeals from the Rockefellers, its founding family, and its continued financial support for climate denial.
Over the years, Exxon spent more than $30m on thinktanks and researchers that promoted climate denial, according to Greenpeace.
…
“The science in 1981 on this subject was in the very, very early days and there was considerable division of opinion,"
Richard Keil, an Exxon spokesman, said. “There was nobody you could have gone to in 1981 or 1984 who would have said whether it was real or not.
Nobody could provide a definitive answer."
…
(check out the entire article)
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/mar/27/rockefeller-family-tried-and-failed-exxonmobil-accept-climate-change
http://www.exxonsecrets.org/maps.php
Richard Keil: "No one could provide a definitive answer"
The fundamentals were well understood, the direction of unavoidable and irreversible changes was clear!
The details of how it would play out had plenty of questions.
But would a sane person send someone out on a 50 mile track across a desert with a quart of water
simply because "No one could provide a definitive" regarding the sequence and pace of the challenges and dangers that person would face >:-(
Not just that but then to fabricate every imaginable bullshit to minimize and ignore the dangers that person would be facing
while ignoring an MDs advice and information about the dangers.
Is my anger showing :blank: Well why not get angry about people who have and are willfully destroying the foundations of our society for short term profits,
such as the healthy landscapes, oceans and the biosphere humanity is utterly dependent on.
So tell me besides being bad form, why shouldn't one consider Richard Keil (and his ilk) as unhinged pricks and a danger (nay traitor) to society???
PS. unfortunately Exxon Secrets hasn’t been updated in years, but you can still get the idea by reviewing their site http://www.exxonsecrets.org/maps.php
click on Load The Map for some interesting insights
Evil exists citizen. Google ‘banality of evil’. Many times it comes in the form of “Im just doing my job”. To me it’s similar to sociopaths. You hear about one and you think, how is that even possible? How could Gacy, at one instant a happy clown making kids laugh, turn around another instant and kill those same kids (so to speak). Evil exists at the bottom (Gacy) and the top (Cheney, Exxon BOD, etc).
Evil exists citizen. Google 'banality of evil'. Many times it comes in the form of "Im just doing my job". To me it's similar to sociopaths. You hear about one and you think, how is that even possible? How could Gacy, at one instant a happy clown making kids laugh, turn around another instant and kill those same kids (so to speak). Evil exists at the bottom (Gacy) and the top (Cheney, Exxon BOD, etc).
Oh dear that was interesting and quite distracting, but worth it and though it seems Hannah Arendt and the phrase seems to have come under attack over the years,
I can definitely see the truth within the concept.
Specially considering that I'm a German immigrant (even if still suckling on mama's bosom) who grew up being aware of and pondering that grand question:
"How could those good German people allow Hitler to happen"
Which in turn gave me a historical perspective as I watched America rally around those Cheney/Bush sociopaths and their war of convenience and profit.
Global Warming: What We Knew in 82
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OmpiuuBy-4s
Published at Greenman3610 on Mar 26, 2012
In 1982, Mike MacCracken, then a senior researcher at Livermore Laboratory, gave a lecture at Sandia Labs on the subject of global climate change.
Peter Sinclair talked to Dr. MacCracken not long ago at the University of Michigan,
and asked him, if he were to give the lecture today, what would be changed, and what would be the same.
A scientist summaries where we're at today because all efforts to moderate our impact on our climate controlling atmosphere have been stonewalled.
Charting Irreversible Climate Change with Jason-3
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BqHbkkt_iL8
Streamed live on Feb 12, 2015
As humans drive Earth's climate into a new regime, it is critical to keep our fingers on the pulse of the planet. Sea level rise is both a stark reminder of our impact on the climate and its impact on us. The oceans capture over 90 percent of the heat trapped by greenhouse gases, expanding as they warm. They also collect water from melting glaciers and ice sheets, making sea level rise a doubly important indicator of global warming. Without adaptation, a 2-meter rise would displace 187 million people worldwide. Sea level will continue to rise, but how fast? Like its predecessors, Jason-3 will serve as our eyes on sea level rise. Measuring global sea level once every 10 days, it will chart out the global rise of the oceans--a rise that is unlikely to subside or reverse for generations. But Jason-3 will be more than a sentinel of climate change. It will also measure the tilt of the ocean surface providing oceanographers with information about ocean currents, measure wind and waves helping forecasters predict marine weather, and even find local warm spots that can intensify hurricanes.
Speaker:
Dr. Joshua Willis – Jason-3 Project Scientist
I learned about global warming from Carl Sagan in the 70’s and the science of it in college in 1978. That’s why gas mileage has always been one of the most things I considered when buying a car, and many other daily decisions I make. I still can’t figure what you are suggesting. If “corporations” is the problem, how do we fix it? Do we remove the concept of corporation from US law in the hopes that will change how people act?
I learned about global warming from Carl Sagan in the 70's and the science of it in college in 1978. That's why gas mileage has always been one of the most things I considered when buying a car, and many other daily decisions I make. I still can't figure what you are suggesting. If "corporations" is the problem, how do we fix it? Do we remove the concept of corporation from US law in the hopes that will change how people act?
I'll try responding to that if you can explain why this is so casually accepted as the price of doing business as usual.
The Climate Deception Dossiers
Internal fossil fuel industry memos reveal decades of disinformation—a deliberate campaign to deceive the public that continues even today.
http://www.ucsusa.org/global-warming/fight-misinformation/climate-deception-dossiers-fossil-fuel-industry-memos#.VaCHKSRyHwy
________________
The Climate Deception Dossiers
Internal Fossil Fuel Industry Memos Reveal Decades of Corporate Disinformation
http://www.ucsusa.org/sites/default/files/attach/2015/07/The-Climate-Deception-Dossiers.pdf
[ contents ]
iv Figures
v Acknowledgments
1 The Real Climate Hoax Deception Dossier #1
6 Dr. Wei-Hock Soon’s Smithsonian Contracts Deception Dossier #2
9 American Petroleum Institute’s “Roadmap" Memo Deception Dossier #3
13 Western States Petroleum Association’s Deception Campaign Deception Dossier #4
16 Forged Letters from the Coal Industry to Members of Congress Deception Dossier #5
19 Coal’s “Information Council on the Environment" Sham Deception Dossier #6
22 Deception by the American Legislative Exchange Council Deception Dossier #7
25 The Global Climate Coalition’s 1995 Primer on Climate Change Science
28 Conclusion: Holding the Fossil Fuel Industry Accountable
30 References 36 Appendices
To answer your question, Exxon became a demonic entity when it realized it could make obscene profits by doing so. Exxon is far from alone in the profit-driven demonic entity department.
Lois
I learned about global warming from Carl Sagan in the 70's and the science of it in college in 1978. That's why gas mileage has always been one of the most things I considered when buying a car, and many other daily decisions I make. I still can't figure what you are suggesting. If "corporations" is the problem, how do we fix it? Do we remove the concept of corporation from US law in the hopes that will change how people act?
I'll try responding to that if you can explain why this is so casually accepted as the price of doing business as usual.
Do you think you are some voice in the wilderness? Do you think you are some lone ranger who has figured this out and now must go on a vigilante crusade to save the world?
Have you noticed a lot of people are unhappy with the 5-4 decision of Citizens United? Have you heard of Bernie Sanders?
I'm not going to try to explain something that isn't true.
Oh dear getting testy are we.
Or just at a loss of how to justify those practices?
Going after me is a diversion to allow you to avoid responding to the challenge.
Oh dear getting testy are we.
Or just at a loss of how to justify those practices?
Going after me is a diversion to allow you to avoid responding to the challenge.
I don't think we casually accept business as usual. That is my answer. Why do you think Obama won, Hillary is in the lead and Bernie Sanders is getting so many people at his rallies? What do you not understand about a 5-4 decision in the Supreme Court? That is not "casual".