Oil Companies Funding Anti-Global Warming Political Rhetoric

@N4life (851)
United States
August 21, 2008 10:02pm CST
A big issue with some right now seems to be the existence of man acclelerated global warming. There are some scientists who claim that there is no way man is changing the environment and that we have no worries for the future. When you look beyond the surface at these "researchers" you will find the vast majority are funded by oil companies. Here is a simple article about ExxonMobil apologizing for funding 9 groups which it says "misrepresented the science of climate change by outright denial of the evidence." http://www.guardin.co.uk/environment/2008/may/28/climatechange.fossilfuels In this article and ExxonMobil rep is also quoted as saying these groups "divert attention". My question is does this really surprise anyone to find out much of this "science" is being funded by oil companies? Another question is would you be satisfied to have a big corporation such as ExxonMobil being the leader in alternative energy for America, or does this need to happen at a more grass root level?
5 people like this
8 responses
• United States
22 Aug 08
"There are some scientists who claim that there is no way man is changing the environment and that we have no worries for the future." This is a false statement. Name one scientist who says this. I am familar with scientists who say we are not changing the temperature of the earth but an insignificant amount and that as of yet, there is not anything to worry concerning that. But man not changing the environment in other harmful ways? That's ridiculous. All scientists know man is polluting the planet and it has to stop or there is plenty to worry about.
2 people like this
@N4life (851)
• United States
22 Aug 08
OK,there are scientists who are saying that man can not cause harm to the evironment by releasing any form of Carbons into the air. Some even claim that it will only help the earth (like providing for more trees, which I am sure it could). My statement was poorly worded so I guess you get a point on that one.
2 people like this
@N4life (851)
• United States
22 Aug 08
I think at times the anti-global warming rhetoric at mylot gets so deep that I feel I must counteract it with a just a smidgen of exageration of my own. I have seen you discuss this with some sence at times, other times we all step in it. There are some that just simply make blanket statements like you have to be a complete idiot to believe in global warming, then of course can not back it up a lick. Anyone who makes these statements either does not know what they are tallking about or have an agenda of their own.
2 people like this
• United States
23 Aug 08
"My statement was poorly worded so I guess you get a point on that one." I'll accept that as the offering of an olive branch and return same to you. I'll try to word things better in the future. Thanks.
2 people like this
@ladyluna (7004)
• United States
22 Aug 08
And, who pray tell is funding the Global Warming movement???
2 people like this
• United States
22 Aug 08
All the man made global warming advocates are compassionate extrordinarily public service minded honest decent individuals whose government grants are only for humanitarian purposes that far out weigh the minimal cost compared to the immense benefit of saving the earth. Yes, it is true. There are a handful of conspiracy nuts who point out oil companies are making immense profits under the man made global warming scenario. These same kooks and lunatics point out that under the current status quo Exxon_Mobil would make even more money if the man made global warming scenario was widely accepted by the public. This would result in oil companies not being allowed to drill for more oil. If more oil was found and delievered to market, the price would go down, as would profits. In light of this, surely, only fruit cakes with jello for brains would insinuate the oil industry might covertly fund environmental groups without even those groups having knowledge of their true funding source. Surely oil companies would not do this in order to keep profits high while simuatanously pretending to 'out themselves' for funding evil man made global warming deniers. Surely oil companies would not do this as way to even further reinforce the notion that oil companies should not be allowed to drill for more oil. Thus keeping supplies tight, prices high, and profits even higher. Nah, none of this could ever happen and I feel truely sorry for the pathetic individuals who think oil company top executives might earn their immense annual salaries by pulling off these kinds of massive immensely profitable deceits. I thank God these oil company executives have had the conscience to confess to their sin of funding the man made global warming deniers and will pray for the sanity of the unbalanced conspiracy loons.
2 people like this
@N4life (851)
• United States
22 Aug 08
Very good point. I do not diagree with this possibility at all. My point is that all of this research that has been thrown about around here is supspect. Yes, research that supports global warming is suspect also. It is difficult eve nwhen examining "scholarly" journals to get to the bttom of potential motivations. This is why I am trying to stick with basics cience principals as much as possible. When I look at these principles it points me to thinking man can and does affect the temperature of our environment. I certainly do have more research that I plan on doing. Funding that is not politically motivated is difficult to come by. Not sure about top universities but the public institution I am at, researchers in this field get the funds where they can.
1 person likes this
@N4life (851)
• United States
22 Aug 08
While I say this is a possibility, i still think it unlikely. The point that research can be suspect is ilustrated well in your conspiracy theory.
1 person likes this
• Indonesia
23 Aug 08
I think I have only one word for that... Nah..!! I don't believe them, as they the one who ruin the earth with a such unlimited explorations, yet they keep blaming others, and denying their part in it...
@N4life (851)
• United States
23 Aug 08
Thank you for your response. I think this is really the most logical way to see it.
@snowy22315 (33038)
• United States
22 Aug 08
I dont think Exxon mobil needs to be in charge of alternative energy programs. That is like putting the fox in charge of the henhouse. It is fundamentally against their interests to put them in charge of alternative energy. I think that there needs to be more accoutability from the government and maybe a sepertate agency created to explore alternative energy.
1 person likes this
@N4life (851)
• United States
22 Aug 08
Thanks snowy: I agree Exxonmobil should not be in charge of alternative energy programs. I fear this is what will happen though. A government agency to keep tabs on how much the consumer is being charged and to oversee other aspects of alternative energy use is a decent idea, if it is run with good intentions. The people of the U.S. need to be innovative and motivated to take responsibility for their own energy. I am attempting to, I think with government backing it will be even more practicle in the near future (eg. more tax incentives, rebates, etc..) I do not like being at the whims of these corporations.
1 person likes this
• United States
22 Aug 08
It doesn't surprise. Science isn't as unbiased as we would like today, and there is a lot of academic dishonesty across disciplines that has been brought to national attention lately. Special interest is not limited to just politics, but the science used behind these politics. In my opinion, whether climate change is happening is not a question. On the other hand, if some big company wanted to step in and help to fund change, that would be great... but I don't know if I would be able to trust them completely unless economic incentives were offered that made it viable for them to adopt different policies concerning our energy future. This does bring up one more question though. With science funding being cut across the nation is it really a surprise that big oil has been able to step in and provide funding, which allows it to direct research towards a certain aim? This issue is one of our own making, through funding cuts over the past years.
1 person likes this
@clrumfelt (5427)
• United States
22 Aug 08
The global warming gurus are in fact rejecting straight talk from other scientists whose findings don't support their own. There are many such scientists and somehow I just don't believe that ExxonMobil is funding them all. Al Gore's book sent the whole world into a tizzy believing that man made global warming is going to destroy our planet and the fears the book has generated are influencing them to try and save the earth from a non-existent emeny. Everyone knows that playing on people's fears is a way to produce best sellers, so I thing Al produced the book with the purpose of doing that and getting a lot of attention in the news. It's too bad the whole world beleived him, even the Nobel Committee, because in truth the book is not based on sound scientific evidence. Everyone hates weather extremes that are more common than they used to be, but the truth is cycles of the sun can also cause them. They shouldn't be playing on people's fears and causing them to pour thousands of dollars that could be better used, into fighting a non-existent enemy.
@ngaspero (851)
• Italy
22 Aug 08
It's a fact that cysles of sun influence the weather but instead of to try to fight them we are helping them to become stronger!! Like is a fact that cycles are normal so is fact that this cycles in our time comes faster then ever..and for that we're all guilty...at least we that leave in the part of the world that is called industrialize..we're less then 20% of the world people but we use 90% of his energy..this numbers schould make reflecting everyone who care for the future..and to close, yes is fact that the sun-cyles play a rule but is fact also the big oil company have all interest to minimize the problem, and reason is not difficult to understand Nun
1 person likes this
@N4life (851)
• United States
22 Aug 08
Thank you clrumfelt: I dont't believe everything Al Gore has to say either. I certainly do not think that there is enough evidence (may be in future) to say that weather extremes are being caused by man accelerated global warming. There is however overwhelming evidence and simply basic logic that points to the fact that man can and has altered his environment in negative ways and that we need to have the foresite to do something about this now. Some scientists such as Stephen Hawking believe we are going to have to branch out into space because it is too late. ExxonMobil is not funding all of these "researchers" just many of them. Virtually all the rest are being funded by other oil companies. Almost anytime you read an "expert" article on the internet that is blatantly anti-global warming you can trace the funding back to oil. The anti-global warming "researchers" are just as good at using scare tactics to support their agenda. Oh no we are all being duped into thinking we should be carefull with the environment and not just be complete earth gluttons!
1 person likes this
@N4life (851)
• United States
22 Aug 08
Ngaspero: Sun cycles are certainly big players in our climate though there are virutally an endless amount of other players. Environmental feedbacks are extremely complex. There is no way someone could absolutely rule out the possibility we are increasing global warming. Even if we are not there are countless other reasons we need to reduce emssions of Nitrogen Oxides and take care of out environment.
1 person likes this
• United States
22 Aug 08
Great discussion N4life. I do question anything that big oil does, and I wouldn't believe one word that comes out of their mouths. I know that big oil has no desire to move alternative energy into the forefront of the American people. When you see small companies that are producing more bio-diesel than the plants owned by big oil, you know something is wrong. I feel that big oil is only going to do things that make them money, and alternative fuels won't make them as much money as fosel fuels.
@N4life (851)
• United States
22 Aug 08
This is of course the most likely reason of why big oil would fund these projects. The "massive deciet" senario detailed by rbyd above is possible, though it sounds a little loony.Like conspiracy theories that liberals are supposed to be famous for. Oil wants oil, it would be extremely high risk for them to be getting everyone fired up about alternative energies and then reveal they orignated the fraud. If this were the case I think the story I referenced would have been all over the main stream media. What is really frustrating is how many peopl e refuseto go along with anything that could potentially protect the environment because they completely believe global warming is a hoax, even if they freely admit there are other concerns of pollution. People just do not want to change their lifestyles. They say we will live as a tird world country. I say we will if we do not act now and change our excessive ways.
2 people like this
• United States
23 Aug 08
I have a customer that makes bio-diesel, they started out with a few million dollars of start up money, and a plan. Today they make about 1,600 gallons of bio-diesel a day, and they are growing more and more everyday. Now British Petroleum has a bio-diesel plant just north east of my territory that according to BP they have invested tens of millions of dollars into this plant. This plant has been up and running for three years, and has yet to produce one usable gallon of bio-diesel. Now, tell me how it is that a corporation with tens of millions of dollars invested can't do what two guys that had less than 3 million. This is another example of why I believe that these companies are not interested in moving this technology.
@N4life (851)
• United States
23 Aug 08
That is fantastic. This is exactly why I think we need to try to get things going ourselves at a smaller level. While I do not think bio-diesel is going to be our long term answer it is certainly better than purchasing oil from foriegn countries or just drilling more here while other countries pass us by. Big oil is doing things like this for a better image. I think all electric vehicles are the future. The first electric vehicles were made back some time around the 1830's. Since the gas powered combustible engine became more practical advancement in electric vehicles just stopped. Right now all electric cars are not moving to fast (around 35mph or so) but about the beginning of 20th century eectric cars were known to go double the speed. Granted for very short periods. If we could do this then,there is no reason to believewe can not improve on this now.
@suspenseful (40326)
• Canada
23 Aug 08
I always believe that God is in control and HE has a sense of humor. When the Goreans say global warming is caused by man, God will make an unusually cold winter. When someone claims global cooling, HR will make it the warmest winter on record. So HE scoffs on man's attempt at saying man increases global warming. And God made the sun with the sun spots. From what I heard about the global warmer caused by man sayers, if any scientists disagree with them, they blacklist them. Fear? My opinion, they the Al Goreans want to shift the economic power from the West to the poorer countries of Asia and Africa. If we have to pay more for our gas and fuel, that will happen.
@N4life (851)
• United States
23 Aug 08
Thanks for the response suspensefl. Global warming could be happening even if we had several abnormal winters. These are natural cycles, it all depends on scale. Oh, and if there is a god that is good that made earth I would think he would want man to treat nature with respect, not just pollute and cross our fingers. Urban heat islands are a fact. You can stand in a parking lot and know this. So for those who say there is no way man can cause the earth to warm, maye you can work on mor parking lots to test it all for us.