Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

The Husband

Exxon Mobil P.r. Machine

Recommended Posts

A recent post to the news blog has yet again highlighted the importance of checking sources of information.

The post is from rotten tomatos and is headed

For anyone - except the fanatical tree-hugging religionists

It links to the article below.

Global Warming Skeptical Site: Historic parallels in our time: the killing of cattle -vs- carbon

This story may be true but it is necessary to see who wrote the article - a certain professor of the university of oklahoma called David Deming.

This gentleman is also part of an organisation called the National Center for Policy Analysis (NCPA). Part so called research group, part governmental lobby group, this organisation has recieved at least $540,900 from ExxonMobil since 1998.

The NCPA is part of the State Policy Network (SPN) and the Cooler Heads Coalition (CHC). These two networks consist of numerous organisations like the NCPA and all of the ones i have thus far checked have very dubious sources of income. ExxonMobil being one of the primary sources for most of them.

I have done a fair amount of reading on the so called Public Relations industry, and the creation of small lobby organisations (such as the ones described above) that recieve their funding from self interested parties is a classic example of how large corporations create uncertainty amongst the masses. Their aim is not to disproove anything - only to cause uncertainty. It is clear that if people are uncertain they will not commit to action and thus ExxonMobil (in this case) can carry on business as usual.

The well documented way the cigarrette industry used these very tactics can be read about in many books and is established as fact. It makes great reading!!

My point is this - if you are going to quote stuff debunking global warming make sure you are getting it from a neutral source. If you quote from any source that has its origins in an organisation such as the NCPA you are falling into the hands of ExxonMobil public relations propaganda.

Now i know i'm going to get some response like "the IPCC is governmental propaganda" designed to allow the governments of the world to impose energy restrictions on the likes of you and me. Personally i don't see any government jumping at the idea. They are positively resisting it!

What i am in no doubt of is that our current way of doing things is unsustainable. We need to invest in the future of humanity and not continue, business as usual, down a path to resource depletion.

Like the so-called 'printy printy', we are taking our childrens future from them to feed the short term goals of the greedy and it has to stop somehow.

I leave you with a speech that cuts to the heart of environmetalisim as i see it...

This is a video... its a bit stop and starty at the beginning but it does get better

http://multimedia2.up.edu/Media_Relations/...009_medium.html

and the transcript is here...

http://www.up.edu/commencement/default.asp...56&pid=3144

it rocks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, you are telling me that Big Oil are funding 'research' that 'shows' that Global Warming is a myth?

What a surprise... NOT! :lol: (and half my family work for Big Oil).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And Fat Al has personally made circa $100 million as the advocate in chief for Climate Change and Carbon Trading.

And this is OK, 'cos he's a White Hat.

Surely, the ONLY basis for critique of ANY scientific research is the research per se?

NOT the source of funding: let's face it, any climatologist seeking to cast doubt is hardly likely to gain a research grant from, say Greenpeace of Friends of the Earth, now are they!

And any business of significant size, spends money on promoting its image: and the image of its industry.

Unless what you are saying is that the key scientist created deliberate falsehoods in order to promote Big Oil's case?

As do governments all the time; the Four Minute WMD dossier being just one example: can't argue with it, can we, 'cos it came from the leading "Experts".....................

:rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest X-QUORK
And Fat Al has personally made circa $100 million as the advocate in chief for Climate Change and Carbon Trading.

Can you point me to the evidence for this claim?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Unless what you are saying is that the key scientist created deliberate falsehoods in order to promote Big Oil's case?

One doesn't need to create deliberate falsehoods.

Simply produce selective research and data to try and obfuscate, mislead and delay any action by governments.

As they say, follow the money $$$.

Even if Mr Gore has made $100 million, that would be a miniscule drop in the Pacific Ocean compared to what Big Oil is making from delaying action.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
One doesn't need to create deliberate falsehoods.

Simply produce selective research and data to try and obfuscate, mislead and delay any action by governments.

As they say, follow the money $$$.

Even if Mr Gore has made $100 million, that would be a miniscule drop in the Pacific Ocean compared to what Big Oil is making from delaying action.

exactly! i refer to this article..

http://scienceblogs.com/illconsidered/2006...k-is-broken.php

and this which puts it all into a bigger picture

http://scienceblogs.com/illconsidered/2008...o_a_sceptic.php

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you make dubious accusations, the least you can do is try and provide some sort of credible evidence to back it up. I'm not going to wade through terrabytes of Exxon sponsored propaganda to try and disprove your claim.

So such as Reuters are in the pay of Exxon-Mobil?

Interesting perspective!

Carry on in your miasma.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
One doesn't need to create deliberate falsehoods.

Simply produce selective research and data to try and obfuscate, mislead and delay any action by governments.

As they say, follow the money $$$.

Even if Mr Gore has made $100 million, that would be a miniscule drop in the Pacific Ocean compared to what Big Oil is making from delaying action.

Science is absolute: a reality ignored by the Baco-Brigade.

What you suggest is precisely the same end result for a true scientist.

No true died-in-the-wool scientist would lend their name and academic reputation to such.

Whereas it seems numbers of "Climatologists" are doing precisely this!

:rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest X-QUORK
So such as Reuters are in the pay of Exxon-Mobil?

Interesting perspective!

Carry on in your miasma.

Are you being deliberately obtuse for a reason? Just post a link for godsake. :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Its just part of the Hegel philosophy being played out here. Those that did history will know it later went on to influence many people through out history including Marx and Hitler for example.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hegel#Left_an...ght_Hegelianism

Antithesis + Thesis = Synthesis

Hi there. i'm interested in what you are saying however the wiki article goes above my philosophical understanding. If what you are saying is between two extremes lays the truth then i get it... it's the basis of philosophical debate - if this wasn't your point then please enlighten.

However my point is that one of those extremes is getting their so called data in very dubious ways and i don't mean the pro AGW's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Are you being deliberately obtuse for a reason? Just post a link for godsake. :rolleyes:

I am teasing you actually: so you will work up a monster appetite for some of that excellent wine once you reach the Dordogne!

:lol:

http://www.foxnews.com/search-results/m/22...-cow.htm#q=gore

http://www.capitalresearch.org/pubs/pdf/v1185475433.pdf

http://www.rightsidenews.com/200905034640/...illionaire.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The US Congress investigation and examination of Gore not "Credible"?

So what is it you need?

A text from the Arch Angel Gabriel?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest X-QUORK
The US Congress investigation and examination of Gore not "Credible"?

So what is it you need?

A text from the Arch Angel Gabriel?

You haven't provided a link to a US Congress investigation! Just links to Fox News, Capital Research and Rightside News, every one of whom are firmly in the anti-GW lobby...hardly credible.

Kindly point me to the actual Congress report which concludes that Al Gore has personally made $100 million from his environmental campaigning.

I'm really not asking for anything unreasonable here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You haven't provided a link to a US Congress investigation! Just links to Fox News, Capital Research and Rightside News, every one of whom are firmly in the anti-GW lobby...hardly credible.

Kindly point me to the actual Congress report which concludes that Al Gore has personally made $100 million from his environmental campaigning.

I'm really not asking for anything unreasonable here.

Fox 'News' LOL :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   295 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.