oh dear ant, this is becoming embarrassing. Please read the full documents, if not to learn more, then at least to avoid looking like an utter dill.

The part of the quote from Cohen which you either dishonestly decided to leave out or, more likely, ICN didn't mention and therefore left you ignorant, goes as follows...

"Whereas I can agree with the statement that our best guess is that observable effects in the year 2030 are likely to be well short of catastrophic, it is distinctly possible that the CPD scenario will later produce effects which will indeed be catastrophic (at least for a substantial fraction of the earth's population). " etc

He goes on to say that the effects after 2030 will take decades to manifest themselves and that, either way, it will all be better understood by 2000 when we see more and better data.

So all in all, someone saying it could be this or it could be that but we don't know and will know more later. Also someone trying to ensure that the data put out reflects the uncertainty.

ant, please don't read these links - they'll confuse you with the truth...

http://insideclimatenews.org/documents/catastrophic-effects-letter-1981

http://www.exxonmobilperspectives.com/2015/10/15/exxonmobils-commitment-to-climate-science/

http://cdn.exxonmobil.com/~/media/global/files/energy-and-environment/climate_peer_reviewed_publications_1980s_forward.pdf

mhaze, what you have referred is all well and good;but, ExxonMobil and Koch brothers have been funding denier groups.

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/jul/15/exxon-mobil-gave-millions-climate-denying-lawmakers

Quote:

"Exxon channeled about $30m to researchers and activist groups promoting disinformation about global warming over the years, according to a tally kept by the campaign group Greenpeace. But the oil company pledged to stop such funding in 2007, in response to pressure from shareholder activists."
Exxon would not have needed to pledge to stop funding a disinformation campaign if they had not been involved in such funding.

http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/solutions/fight-misinformation/global-warming-skeptic.html#.VlZhOISO5sM

A number of groups have received funding to create doubt; Koch brothers mainly, but ExxonMobil also involved.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/dark-money-funds-climate-change-denial-effort/

But, this pulls the rug from under you, mhaze.

https://ecowatch.com/2015/11/23/exxon-still-fund-climate-deniers/

Quote:

"“Has Exxon been funding these organizations?” she asked.

“Well, the answer is yes,” Cohen replied. “And I will let those organisations respond for themselves.”"

So we have ExxonMobil scientists giving credence to climate science; and management funding denier groups. The two trends are mutually exclusive.

"what you have referred is all well and good"

Well I'll take that as your acceptance that either you or ICN had totally misrepresented what Cohen had said. Would've be nice if you had actually admitted it though.

But I guess you were too busy trying to change the subject, eh?

So now Exxon is accused of funding people you don't like. Is that illegal? Probably not yet but if the alarmists have their way it will be soon.

They are accused of funding denier and misinformation scientists and organisations. No pejoratives there!

Or to put i another way, they funded research. Bastards!

mhaze, we have gone in a circle; ExxonMobil are being investigated for misleading shareholders and the public in relation to the science of climate change. Senior management has admitted the deception.

The Guardian gives a good account of what has been going on; scientists working for ExxonMobil were praised in the article, ExxonMobil management sought to undermine the work of their scientists and funded denier agencies.

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2015/nov/25/two-faced-exxon-the-misinformation-campaign-against-its-own-scientists

Yale research which sifts through 20 years of ExxonMobil material:

http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2015/11/18/1509433112.abstract

mhaze, you try to play down ExxonMobil's actions; yet, they are being investigated by New York authorities for criminal actions. Anthropogenic climate change is deadly for many people, it destroys property and businesses; it is more than just disliking particular groups as you suggest.

What ExxonMobil has been peddling has been characterised as the crime of the geological epoch.

The flea has commented that he technically did not lie. He extracted some words from a tweet of Judith Curry, and presented them without context to mislead us into believing that Judith had debunked Goddard, when in fact, as I showed in the extract from her article in my post above, she did the opposite. What she concluded was:” As far as I can tell, NOAA has not responded to Goddard’s allegations. Now, with Homewood’s explanation/clarification, NOAA really needs to respond.”
http://judithcurry.com/2014/06/28/skeptical-of-skeptics-is-steve-goddard-right/

The flea’s dishonest action was at least as bad as lying. Just another demonstration of his complete lack of fitness for the company of decent people. He has the unprincipled temerity to use the term “deniers” again, when he can put up no science to deny. Where is the science to show that human emissions have any measurable effect on climate, flea? Without any science, you are promoting a baseless fraud.
The human contribution of CO2 is 3% as against Nature’s 97%. The human effect on climate is trivial, and not measurable.

Leo
It is ExxonMobil that is being investigated in relation to criminal matters. Their scientists were in accord with anthropogenic climate change; management sought the aid of Heartlands and other denier groups to create doubt.

John Tyndall about 150 years ago began to experiment with various gases, and the process has continued since. Climate science has a long history; whereas, spreading doubt is a very new phenomenon.

The same old myths keep getting regurgitated. The myth about a hiatus has been well and truly been debunked just lately.

You keep stating that climate scientists and anybody who believes the science are committing fraud: Leo, yet do not produce a shred of evidence. Meanwhile ExxonMobil is being investigated, and Cohen an executive has admitted to funding denier groups.

Personal attacks keep being made; but no substantial up to date science is provided. Leo you are the master of personal attack; but, you get an F for science.