This is eerily reminiscent of the cigarette companies, who knew precisely the devastation and death caused by nicotine, as well as its highly addictive nature...and lied to the country for years. There were class action suits and massive government fines. Is there a reason why the same question average can't be brought against Exxon?
They actually hired the tobacco industry PR companies to help design the cover up and used the same tactics like fake science. See the excellent "Drilled" podcast for the full filthy story.
Naomi Oreskes has a book out called “Merchants of Doubt” that highlights the parallels between the tobacco industry’s campaign to deny cigarettes caused cancer and the oil industry’s campaign to deny burning fossil fuels was heating the climate snd causing irreparable harm. Highly recommend the book.
Such an ironic title for a book coming from a person like Oreskes on the subject of anything energy/environmental that it sailed right over her own head and that of her readers.
The fundamental problem in this country, whether we're in D.C., your local doctor's office, or the offices of Exxon, is our worship of the almighty dollar. More than any other nation, America's citizens equate wealth with virtue - this filters down from the Calvinist doctrine that says we're wealthy because God ordained it. Rich people are virtuous and hard working; poor people are lazy and immoral. Logic dictates then, that anything that stands in the way of greater and greater wealth goes against God's will.
Consequently, many in this nation loathe any restrictions on the accumulation of wealth or the exercise of that wealth to obtain even greater riches. Such restrictions fall into the category of "anti-Christian" behavior, it seems. And so I'm fairly certain that the executives of Exxon considered it virtuous to choose deception over honesty regarding climate change simply on the basis that honesty would have curtailed profits while the dishonesty that they chose facilitated even greater wealth.
Either that, or they didn't have the slightest concern for virtue, honesty, or anything other than increasing profit. And as I recall, Milton Friedman himself said that the highest ethical goal of a corporate manager was to increase profit - so maybe they thought themselves virtuous after all.
Bottom line is Americans desperately need to let go of this worship of money. We're killing ourselves over it.
When we the people elect governments that actually have teeth, and serve the people not the corporations. What most countries have now are hollowed out governments, and corporate executives calling the shots from behind the curtain.
This confirms everything that was shown in a three part series called Big Oil on Frontline awhile back. The lies we were told, the paid actors that were used to protest legislators do they would fold snd give these oil companies what they wanted. It’s horrible.
Thank you for all these stories....We were arrested with Bill and many others in Washington years ago....and it began the biggest change of our lives. We already had solar panels, but have added more since, drive an EV for the last 3 years, have given up our electric range for an induction stove....plus put induction into both our kids homes....for the good of our grandchildren.
We need more factual information, more truth telling and more action. Exxon could have led that charge with Hanson years ago.........but capitalist greed being what it is, they chose criminal behavior instead.
I dream of the day they will face jail time for it.
I saw the video of the rather short-lived protest by Dr. Abramoff and Peter Kalmus at the recent AGU conference. It was a fairly innocuous ask for scientists to take action beyond the walls of the academic ivory tower. (And it was likely THE most stimulating minute of the whole conference!) How can that alone possibly be grounds for termination?
More evidence that a strategy of leaving people who are getting rich perpetuating the climate problem in charge of solving that problem is not going to bring us to a resolution of the problem.
Decades of experience are teaching us that the Markets are not going to take action on climate, and Governments cannot. In truth, the Markets won’t because they can’t. They are not made for reckoning with the future in the way we need to be reckoning on the connections between our choices of energy technologies and the longevity of human-friendly habitats on earth. Neither is government.
We need to innovate a new way, a third way that will be a fiduciary way for reckoning with the future consequences of present choices.
But what about LBJ's warning to Congress a full 23 years earlier?
"This generation has altered the composition of the atmosphere on a global scale through ..... a steady increase in carbon dioxide from the burning of fossil fuels."
It seems odd to us how environmentalists are taking what is in those documents and portraying the situation as if Exxon scientists and its Board of Directors knew they were going to harm the planet and humans.
Thank you for your latest letter. Reading the story about Dr. Rose Abramoff, what strikes me as the sickness of our times is that as she attends a peaceful meeting and she is fired. If she had attended the January 6 attack on the capitol, she probably would still be employed.
When we say Exxon knew we tend to think only of the executives but what about all those scientists who did the actual research/calculations? Why did not one of them break secrecy and warn the world. They knew better than anyone what was at stake.
This is eerily reminiscent of the cigarette companies, who knew precisely the devastation and death caused by nicotine, as well as its highly addictive nature...and lied to the country for years. There were class action suits and massive government fines. Is there a reason why the same question average can't be brought against Exxon?
They actually hired the tobacco industry PR companies to help design the cover up and used the same tactics like fake science. See the excellent "Drilled" podcast for the full filthy story.
Naomi Oreskes has a book out called “Merchants of Doubt” that highlights the parallels between the tobacco industry’s campaign to deny cigarettes caused cancer and the oil industry’s campaign to deny burning fossil fuels was heating the climate snd causing irreparable harm. Highly recommend the book.
Such an ironic title for a book coming from a person like Oreskes on the subject of anything energy/environmental that it sailed right over her own head and that of her readers.
The fundamental problem in this country, whether we're in D.C., your local doctor's office, or the offices of Exxon, is our worship of the almighty dollar. More than any other nation, America's citizens equate wealth with virtue - this filters down from the Calvinist doctrine that says we're wealthy because God ordained it. Rich people are virtuous and hard working; poor people are lazy and immoral. Logic dictates then, that anything that stands in the way of greater and greater wealth goes against God's will.
Consequently, many in this nation loathe any restrictions on the accumulation of wealth or the exercise of that wealth to obtain even greater riches. Such restrictions fall into the category of "anti-Christian" behavior, it seems. And so I'm fairly certain that the executives of Exxon considered it virtuous to choose deception over honesty regarding climate change simply on the basis that honesty would have curtailed profits while the dishonesty that they chose facilitated even greater wealth.
Either that, or they didn't have the slightest concern for virtue, honesty, or anything other than increasing profit. And as I recall, Milton Friedman himself said that the highest ethical goal of a corporate manager was to increase profit - so maybe they thought themselves virtuous after all.
Bottom line is Americans desperately need to let go of this worship of money. We're killing ourselves over it.
So when does Exxon and any other lying, fossil fuel giants start using their billions of dollars to pay for the damage done WORLDWIDE?
When we the people elect governments that actually have teeth, and serve the people not the corporations. What most countries have now are hollowed out governments, and corporate executives calling the shots from behind the curtain.
This confirms everything that was shown in a three part series called Big Oil on Frontline awhile back. The lies we were told, the paid actors that were used to protest legislators do they would fold snd give these oil companies what they wanted. It’s horrible.
Thank you for all these stories....We were arrested with Bill and many others in Washington years ago....and it began the biggest change of our lives. We already had solar panels, but have added more since, drive an EV for the last 3 years, have given up our electric range for an induction stove....plus put induction into both our kids homes....for the good of our grandchildren.
We need more factual information, more truth telling and more action. Exxon could have led that charge with Hanson years ago.........but capitalist greed being what it is, they chose criminal behavior instead.
I dream of the day they will face jail time for it.
I saw the video of the rather short-lived protest by Dr. Abramoff and Peter Kalmus at the recent AGU conference. It was a fairly innocuous ask for scientists to take action beyond the walls of the academic ivory tower. (And it was likely THE most stimulating minute of the whole conference!) How can that alone possibly be grounds for termination?
Perhaps we're at a tipping point and they know it but we the people, as yet, don't??
More evidence that a strategy of leaving people who are getting rich perpetuating the climate problem in charge of solving that problem is not going to bring us to a resolution of the problem.
Decades of experience are teaching us that the Markets are not going to take action on climate, and Governments cannot. In truth, the Markets won’t because they can’t. They are not made for reckoning with the future in the way we need to be reckoning on the connections between our choices of energy technologies and the longevity of human-friendly habitats on earth. Neither is government.
We need to innovate a new way, a third way that will be a fiduciary way for reckoning with the future consequences of present choices.
1988 was one date.
But what about LBJ's warning to Congress a full 23 years earlier?
"This generation has altered the composition of the atmosphere on a global scale through ..... a steady increase in carbon dioxide from the burning of fossil fuels."
https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/special-message-the-congress-conservation-and-restoration-natural-beauty
Why can’t class action suits be brought? Corporation knowingly poisoning streams can be. Doctors lying about the efficacy of treatments can be.
It seems odd to us how environmentalists are taking what is in those documents and portraying the situation as if Exxon scientists and its Board of Directors knew they were going to harm the planet and humans.
And yet, when it comes to mining 500,000 pounds of earth for a single EV battery, these same folks are just as quiet as a mouse. https://bfrandall.substack.com/p/another-mining-truth-bomb-from-john?utm_source=profile&utm_medium=reader2
Dogs and kids love cargo bikes. NPR with a new Scottish reporter who's only just discovered bike Twitter: https://www.npr.org/2023/01/14/1147192225/e-bikes-more-affordable-than-cars
Thank you for your latest letter. Reading the story about Dr. Rose Abramoff, what strikes me as the sickness of our times is that as she attends a peaceful meeting and she is fired. If she had attended the January 6 attack on the capitol, she probably would still be employed.
Canada is central to this story (through Imperial Oil and Harper): See link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Petroleum_Papers
Is it possible to overwhelm twitter with climate brainstorming? i.e. What are the plans for implementing fusion energy if it becomes operational?
The impact of Exxon's deliberate deception is enormous. To me it qualifies as a crime against humanity.
When we say Exxon knew we tend to think only of the executives but what about all those scientists who did the actual research/calculations? Why did not one of them break secrecy and warn the world. They knew better than anyone what was at stake.