Reply With Quote
Are they do enting the same bull the liars have been saying? Other things of this nature have been shown as lies.
Did Michael Moore-on do the do entary?
A Missing Report On Exxon Mobil And Climate Change
[do entary] "describes how Exxon conducted cutting-edge climate research decades ago and then, without revealing all that it had learned, worked at the forefront of climate denial, manufacturing doubt about the scientific consensus that its own scientists had confirmed."
http://www.npr.org/sections/ombudsma...climate-change
Pattern of behavior pretty much like what the tobacco companies did with cancer research. Shocker.
Are they do enting the same bull the liars have been saying? Other things of this nature have been shown as lies.
Did Michael Moore-on do the do entary?
Sup RG...
If I recall correctly, this is the source material used for the story:
https://www.ohio.edu/appliedethics/i...and-events.cfm
Exxon Mobil fights claims it hid early climate change science
http://fuelfix.com/blog/2015/10/23/e...ce/#33445101=0
================
“For nearly 40 years we have supported development of climate science in partnership with governments and academic ins utions, and did and continue to do that work in an open and transparent way,”
The allegations were contained in reports distributed by InsideClimate News, an anti-oil and gas activist organization,
“The facts are that we identified the potential risks of climate change and have taken the issue very seriously,”
“We will continue to advocate for policies that reduce emissions while enabling economic growth.”
http://news.exxonmobil.com/press-rel...ely-misleading
Exxon's Own Research Confirmed Fossil Fuels' Role in Global Warming Decades Ago
http://insideclimatenews.org/news/15...global-warming
OK, prove it. All you have is allegations.
no, the reporters have Exxon do ents, which Exxon doesn't deny, but says they were cherry picked.
working assumption: BigCorp is ALWAYS lying.
OK, produce the damning do ents.
I don't have them
"Do Your Own Research" -- WC
I did research this, when it came out on a different forum a few months ago.
There are no do ents other than the emails I linked.
The guardian is making up another story.
I understand you wish not to look for imaginary do ents. Too bad you never admit you are wrong.
ICN's reporters interviewed former Exxon employees, scientists, and federal officials, and consulted hundreds of pages of internal Exxon do ents, many of them written between 1977 and 1986, during the heyday of Exxon's innovative climate research program. ICN combed through thousands of do ents from archives including those held at the University of Texas-Austin, the Massachusetts Ins ute of Technology and the American Association for the Advancement of Science.
http://insideclimatenews.org/news/15092015/Exxons-own-research-confirmed-fossil-fuels-role-in-global-warming
What your link isn't telling you is the Exxon scientists didn't research global warming that lead to scary scenarios. Only that of other authors did.
ask ICN yourself for the do ents and/or links
If they exist, find them. I'm not looking for something that doesn't exist.
I am confident they have no internal do ents showing CO2 as a threat. They didn't hide anything. It doesn't exist, so I'm not looking for it.
If you are so confident the do ents exist, find them and prove me wrong.
Exxon Predicted Today's Cheap Solar Boom Back in the 1980s
For more than a generation, solar power was a environmentalist fantasy, an expensive and impractical artifact from the Jimmy Carter era. That was true right up until the moment it wasn't. Solar silicon prices dropped 94 percent from early 2008 to the end of 2011. Crystalline silicon has since fallen an additional 47 percent, to $15.20 a kilogram.
Many were caught off guard by the emergence of solar as a compe ive power source. The scientist who led Exxon's research arm back in the 1980s wasn't one of them.
Peter Eisenberger, now an environmental science professor at Columbia's Earth Ins ute, co-authored an internal report for Exxon projecting that solar wouldn't become viable until 2012 or 2013. The report, written before he left the company in 1989, suggested that Exxon would do best to sell its solar assets; not surprisingly, the company did just that. What is surprising is that Exxon's 25-year-old solar projections nailed the timing for the arrival of affordable solar power.
Why the oil giant now known as ExxonMobil was in the solar photovoltaic business in the 1980s is a longer story. The late 1970s traumatized the energy industry. The year 1979 alone brought the Iranian revolution, a consequent oil shock, and the Three Mile Island nuclear accident. Energy woe was the centerpiece of President Carter's "crisis of confidence" speech that July. Two weeks later, in a development remarked upon by virtually no one at the time, a committee of scientists met to produce the U.S.'s first major assessment of climate change science.
Energy-sector tumult led Exxon to boost research and development efforts. Eisenberger recalled that the internal thinking went like this: If oil ever runs out, Exxon would have to become an energy company, not just an oil company. Today, a spokesman said, the oil giant thinks of itself as just that—an energy company.
Probing the basic science of energy and materials drove Eisenberger's research in the 1980s. Initiatives included research into climate change, which both the journalism nonprofit InsideClimateNews and the Los Angeles Times recently chronicled at length. Democratic politicians are piling on to their conclusions. ExxonMobil rejects the notion that it "knew" about climate change, stopped funding research, and started denying the whole thing. The news media have started refereeing the disputed history.
Eisenberger said he helped hire many scientists to investigate energy options and conduct basic research at the company. After oil prices crashed in the mid-1980s, Exxon started looking hard at its assets. That's around the time Eisenberger co-wrote, along with a physicist in strategic planning, Exxon's internal assessment regarding the cost of solar power. The duo concluded that solar wouldn't become worth the investment until about 2012.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articl...k-in-the-1980s
So your working assumption will get you zero in court.
Thanks for nothing if this allegation is acted upon by some party of interest.
Do you not see your slanted views are actually counterproductive to your cause? You don't want the truth, you want to screw your perceived enemy by any means possible. The people who wish to illustrate an obvious climate problem truthfully to the people thank you.
This is the worst kind of activism. So utterly counterproductive...
Last edited by pgardn; 11-05-2015 at 08:14 AM.
BigCorp fellator, GFY
Report: New York’s Attorney General Is Investigating Exxon
New York’s attorney general Eric Schneiderman has issued a subpoena to the oil giant, demanding “extensive financial records, emails, and other do ents” relating to its climate change research, according to a report in the New York Times. The Times cited anonymous “people with knowledge of the investigation” to back up its claim.
If the subpoena was indeed issued, the investigation would seek to answer questions about whether ExxonMobil engaged in a cover-up to mislead the public about the risks of human-caused climate change. Those questions were raised publicly by recent investigations from Inside Climate News and the Los Angeles Times, which found that the company knew as far back as 1977 that its product was contributing to climate change.
Instead of acknowledging this, however, the investigations found that Exxon gave millions of dollars to politicians and groups that deny climate science, and downplayed the scientific certainty. According to the Times, Schneiderman’s investigation began in secret a year ago, but the reporting from Inside Climate and The Los Angeles Times added “impetus” to their effort.
In the last month, all three of the Democratic presidential candidates have called for an federal investigation of Exxon. And some environmentalists see a state investigation as just one step closer toward that goal.
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/201...orney-general/
Exxon screwed over Exxon Valdez victims with lawyering for 20 years until 1/3 of them were dead and the award was reduced by 75%, I expect Exxon to lawyer fiendishly against Schneiderman.
How could anyone on the fence possibly believe in evidence for climate change due to YOUR posting? Rants...
Exxon's going spank those losers.
Embarrassed by Climate Investigations, Exxon Accuses Journalists of Ethics Violations
ExxonMobil is hurling ethics accusations against a team of Columbia University journalists whose reporting helped stoke calls for probes into whether the company deliberately misled the public about climate change.
The oil giant went on the offensive in a Nov. 20 letter, a copy of which was obtained by Politico. It comes as investigations by the Columbia journalists in theLos Angeles Times and a separate report by the nonprofit website InsideClimate News continue to stoke Democratic calls for a federal probe into whether the company concealed its internal understanding of the global warming threat posed by burning fossil fuels. Exxon, which through its foundation gave more than $200,000 to the university last year, addressed the letter to Columbia President Lee Bollinger and sent a copy to university trustees.
http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/embarrassed-Exxon-makes-ethics-claims?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_c ampaign=Feed%3A+GreentechMedia+%28Greentech+Media% 29
WC, have you noted that Exxon isn't saying that their suppressed, LIED-ABOUT AGW findings by Exxon scientists weren't true?
Only that they attack, "spanking" the messengers for truthful reporting?
Last edited by boutons_deux; 12-02-2015 at 07:29 AM.
I see you believe what the lying activists say, instead of actually reading the letter yourself.
Typical dumb Boutons...
So, what is it, exactly, that you guys think they are hiding?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
