The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > ExxonMobil: suppressing science and climate change > Comments

ExxonMobil: suppressing science and climate change : Comments

By Binoy Kampmark, published 18/1/2023

The scientists in the employ of Exxon between 1977 and 2003 correctly predicted the rate of temperature rises as a result of carbon emissions.

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. All
The Australian government's belief that climate change is an existential crisis and, at the same, time having a huge immigration fuelled population growth policy must surely be contradictory. It is no wonder people remain skeptical
Posted by watersnake, Wednesday, 18 January 2023 8:42:52 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Irrelevant!
Posted by diver dan, Wednesday, 18 January 2023 8:51:52 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dead right, watersnake. Not only do they bring in more unnecessary people while dole bludgers make up a number similar to the job vacancies, some wack job has come up with an idea to have more public holidays in the name of non-Christian immigrants who want to live here, but who want to keep up the mumbo jumbo of countries that couldn't support them, and get a holiday to do it.
Posted by ttbn, Wednesday, 18 January 2023 9:13:19 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
WTF?

Here are some of the OLO comments from climate change deniers that were posted on one of my threads.

All climate predictions have been rubbish

At the time it was made it was a stab in the dark.

Look how Covid turned out to be a minor inconvenience

In the early 70s I remember a book in the school library saying that by 2000 the world would be out of oil (used to devalue scientific predictions)

Predictions are much easier when you go backwards.

Clearly you have little experience in reading forecasts, like prospectuses for projects like Sun Cable

My take on the Exxon Mobil attack is that it reflects the desperation of the renewable energy industry

Because Elliot wave theory is a poor tool for stock market investment the Exxon scientists just got lucky (summary not a direct quote).

Either they knew about the cycle and pretended they forecast it, or they just presumed they knew why the temperature rose, and struck it lucky.

how can we ascertain that these journalists were neutral or that these documents were not forged and recently planted there for them to find?

any post-Thatcher research or measurements on this topic are inadmissible.

Margaret Thatcher (by no means a "Lefty") needed scientists to "discover" global-warming so she could break the coal-miners unions (and introduce nuclear-power instead).

It will be interesting to see what further illogical nonsense the deniers can come up with.
Posted by WTF? - Not Again, Wednesday, 18 January 2023 10:21:35 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
When all this 'ExxonKnew' rubbish was first touted, various US states saw some easy money to be made by suing Exxon for knowingly causing environmental damage even though they were aware their product would cause AGW.

Suffice to saw all those law suits failed dramatically. Why? Well when you get past the hype upon which this thread's article is based, you find that Exxon didn't know. All the quotes that the hype is based on weren't Exxon saying these things would happen, just that these things (ie warming) were one of several possibilities.

They didn't make these supposedly suppressed predictions. They covered all angles as any good analysis should. But the alarmists have no understanding of covering all possibilities, since the 'settled science' permits only one viewpoint.
Posted by mhaze, Wednesday, 18 January 2023 11:03:02 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
WTF?

mhaze states: "They didn't make these supposedly suppressed predictions. "

This of course is a nonsense :

analysis shows that, in private and academic circles since the late 1970s and early 1980s, ExxonMobil scientists

(i) accurately projected and skillfully modeled global warming due to fossil fuel burning;

(ii) correctly dismissed the possibility of a coming ice age;

(iii) accurately predicted when human-caused global warming would first be detected; and

(iv) reasonably estimated how much CO2 would lead to dangerous warming. Yet, whereas academic and government scientists worked to communicate what they knew to the public, ExxonMobil worked to deny it.

Exxon scientists did make the predictions and that information is now out in the public domain.

It is up to you now mhaze (as you have made the claim) to indicate which Exxon evaluated documentation shows otherwise.
Posted by WTF? - Not Again, Wednesday, 18 January 2023 11:17:50 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy