Exxon knew of climate change but continued to fund deniers...

CREATIVE!11

CREATIVE!11

CREATIVE!11

Soldato
Joined
21 Apr 2007
Posts
6,633
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/jul/08/exxon-climate-change-1981-climate-denier-funding

SHOCK HORROR EVERYONE! corporations involved in a ton of shady **** as usual.

This reminds of the tobacco industry where Phillip Morris / British American tobacco knew smoking was bad for your health but covered it up for over a decade and also threatened / fired scientists who published any such information.

I saw a new shiny and friendly Barclays advert the other day tv with friendly music and nice pictures! Here... for you.... busy fixing Libor rates and committing fraud. But we do it with a smile!

Climate change is still obviously a bit of a contentious issue, but more and more research is being done and hopefully eventually we'll have a solution but for the time being it seems..... BRB HUMANITY IS DOOMED.
 
Last edited:
Climate change is a fact that has been known about for millennia, of course they knew about it. Man made climate change on the other hand is an unproven theory, so nobody can "know" it, just know of it.
 
ubersonic said:
Climate change is a fact that has been known about for millennia, of course they knew about it. Man made climate change on the other hand is an unproven theory, so nobody can "know" it, just know of it.
Click to expand...

Agreed.

In Roman times, Britain made quite a substantial quantity of wine - presumably, the temperatures were more suited back then?

While during the 17th or 18th century, the river Thames froze solid enough to have entire markets held on it.

So... yeah, climate 'change' happens! Just no-one actually can explain why yet
 
Earth's climate has always been fluctuating but that doesn't mean that we cant be directly influence it. The climate is warming up and there's is like a 95% consensus among scientists that its due to our actions.
 
95%? Try 99-100%. No independent scientist (as in, not being paid to say anything different) would deny basic fact.

Climate fluctuates sure, but if you know basic chemistry then you know exactly what a greenhouse gas does and its no surprise the amount we pump out yearly is having a serious effect. Those who like to mention to mini ice ages or other periods of extreme cold and point out that is proof of denial of global warming/climate change are completely ignorant of how the climate actually works.

Classic example: The reason why the UK has such a temperature climate whilst being on the same latitude as the Hudson Bay is due to the atlantic warming current, which gives us heat from the Equator. Unfortunately, climate change/warming causes the polar ice caps to melt, which releases freshwater into the ocean. This causes the warming current to be disrupted, and will eventually stop it from being able to work. The UK will become a winter iceland much like Canada at that point.

And yet people will still say: "Oh look, the UK is frozen now! So much for that global warming eh?"
 
Last edited:
matt_fsr said:
Agreed.

In Roman times, Britain made quite a substantial quantity of wine - presumably, the temperatures were more suited back then?
Click to expand...

Don't think so.

At the end of the 1st century, Tacitus declared that our climate was “objectionable” for vine growing.

Yet now, the british vine/wine industry is begining to boom. Thanks to climate change. Esp in the south, and esp in Sussex and Surrey where the soil is perfect for Champagne vines.
 
AlecR said:
Who in the year 2015 can deny that people are causing the accelerated greenhouse effect (global warming) and thus destroying the environment?
Click to expand...

People who have no understanding of some basic sciences and read/watch too much crap. :p
 
This isn't really surprising. I know that we like to personify companies and think that "the company" is shady, but it's ultimately a group of people with agendas. I work for a large multinational oil company and you may be surprised that many people who work here as engineers and scientists are environmentalists; we don't just dump oil in the sea to be cheap, but not everyone (or every contractor!) is as conscientious or pays as much attention to safety / the environment as others.

(we fund climate change research that is not climate change denial, you may be surprised :p)
 
Doohickey said:
So what you're saying is there is no proof of man-influenced climate change?

Are you sure about that?
Click to expand...

I accept the planet is warming and that man contributes to it.

What seems to be less clear to me (and happy to be educated on it) is the ratio of man's effect [compared to natural forces] and the actual consequences of it.

The planet has always and will always change. You can't keep the climate and geographical nuances as they are now exactly the same forever after all.

For example let's say climate change could decimate a current area of India used for fishing. Of course that is bad but the effects won't happen overnight and those people affected will eventually, through the generations it will require to take effect, move to another area. Just as their ancestors did due to purely natural phenomena.

Once you accept that given enough time, societies will move about and once fertile lands will become baron regardless of our presence, the question becomes at what rate can we adapt to change. I find a lot of environmentalist seem to be chasing the ideal that the planet must remain in exactly the same state as it is now, forever.
 
Last edited:
estebanrey said:
I accept the planet is warming and that man contributes to it.

What seems to be less clear to me (and happy to be educated on it) is the ratio of man's effect [compared to natural forces] and the actual consequences of it.

The planet has always and will always change. You can't keep the climate and geographical nuances as they are now exactly the same forever after all.

For example let's say climate change could decimate a current area of India used for fishing. Of course that is bad but the effects won't happen overnight and those people affected will eventually, through the generations it will require to take effect, move to another area. Just as their ancestors did due to purely natural phenomena.

Once you accept that given enough time, societies will move about and once fertile lands will become baron regardless of our presence, the question becomes at what rate can we adapt to change. I find a lot of environmentalist seem to be chasing the ideal that the planet must remain in exactly the same state as it is now, forever.
Click to expand...

The consensus seems to be we're causing it to accelerate vastly. This goes far back into the past by looking at ice core samples, which give us an indication of the climate in the past.

The results always indicate that while the Earth has been warmer before, it has never accelerated on a scale like this today, when you equate how greenhouses gasses work into the equation, then you quickly come to the conclusion that this is very bad and we're not exactly going out of our way to stop this process.

And as for your last two paragraphs, you seem to forget that the population of humanity is far more than it was in the past... Moving all of those people just isn't possible.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom