Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
How some of the world's most powerful interests made us doubt the connection between smoking and cancer, and how the same tactics were used to make us doubt climate change:
Exon started a decades-long campaign to shape public opinion and to spread doubt about climate change. They are worried the public will take this on, and enact radical changes in the way we use energy and affect their business, that's the bottom line.
Rather than accept the scientific evidence, they made the decision to fight the facts.
This important tactic assumed the public would be suspicious if oil industry executives dismissed climate change, but might trust the views of seemingly independent scientists.
The accusations against Exxon and others - the recent lawsuit claims that "previously unknown internal documents confirm that the defendant well understood the devastating effects that their products would cause to the climate".
There is no question that this distrust of science and scientists is making it more difficult to stem the coronavirus pandemic.
It seems the legacy of "the tobacco playbook" lives on.
The oil industry created the recycling industry also. They funded the initiative to help them look better as an industry heavily dependent on making plastics.
There is a lot of misconceptions about how much the oil industry knew, and when. There were a few scientists whose research in the 70's and 80's indicated that expanding use of fossil fuels would increase CO2 concentrations and potentially cause climate change. However, this was just a few of the scientists, and no one at the time had a full understanding of what the research meant, or even whether it was accurate. No large organization is going to pivot immediately based on the research of a small number of scientists.
Another issue I've never seen raised is that if any major oil company came out in the 80's and said "oil use will cause climate change, so we are going to stop looking for hydrocarbons and try to find alternatives", the general response would have been "darn oil companies, trying to raise prices again by lying to us".
I'm not sure that anything would have changed if the oil companies had said anything in the 80's. There were no alternatives, other than nuclear power. Viable solar was, and still is to a large extent, years away. Wind energy hadn't been developed much at all either.
We aren't going to stop using hydrocarbons anytime soon. Even if hydrocarbons stopped being used for transportation tomorrow, they are going to be used in plastics, resins, lubricants, and the myriad other products necessary for machinery, medical equipment, vehicle parts, etc. I also don't see an alternative to fossil fuels for air travel. Personally, I am not going to fly in an electric airplane.
Oil is used in about everything in modern life. If you bicycle every day you are using oil for a lot of what you are riding and the food you eat because you burn more will in turn have more oil consumption. Anyway, my point is our life is oil from top to bottom. So climate change is probably part natural and part man-made, but is it a bad thing? We focus on the negatives of it, but are their positives? Warmer climate might mean we can produce more food in places we couldn't before. Humans thrive in warm climates. Why is it all only bad?
The oil companies of course want themselves to look good, but they are energy companies. Look at BP for example and how much solar they are increasing.
Now to answer your question, did oil companies make us doubt climate change? No. we doubt climate change because we don't want to give up our conveniences and ease of life. Not them, but our own selfishness. Oil companies are just providing cheap energy and not to blame for our own wants.
It's true that industry does want to shape the scientific narrative to fit their best interest in profit. Eventually the science will play out though and curtains and smoke can only last so long.
The question I have is if oil companies were shaping a narrative to fit their profits, what makes one think the entire 'green' energy movement is not doing the same right now? They've shifted from global warming, a specific event, to climate change, which means basically everything that humans are doing that is bad. So climate change is this very broad, subjective problem where companies can come in and offer their solution to the problem, regardless of how green the solution actually is. So for instance a solar company would like to vocalize how much CO2 will cause harm but downplay how few of their panels actually get recycled and most end up in a landfill.
On recycling solar panels, EU has a much more developed market than the US, and AFAIK, some US panels are being sent to EU. That said, I also believe the science will win out. The stone age didn't end because we ran out of stones, and people will continue to profit from new opportunities.
The oil industry wasn't responsible for the Global Warming doubters.
The Global Warming crowd would have been more effective if they didn't continually yell at people telling them that they are the problem. "Change now, lest you not be saved". Most "Fire and Brimstone" preachers have been replaced by more moderate discourse. Not so the Global Warming crowd. Except now they call it climate change.
Many people would have been ready to discuss climate change, but not whilst being yelled at. Maybe we should have spent these past many years learning how to live with climate change and developing skills and products that will let us thrive, rather than forcing radical behavioral changes.
Last edited by Lillie767; 09-22-2020 at 08:02 AM..
The oil industry wasn't responsible for the Global Warming doubters.
The Global Warming crowd would have been more effective if they didn't continually yell at people telling them that they are the problem. "Change now, lest you not be saved". Most "Fire and Brimstone" preachers have been replaced by more moderate discourse. Not so the Global Warming crowd. Except now they call it climate change.
Many people would have been ready to discuss climate change, but not whilst being yelled at. Maybe we should have spent these past many years learning how to live with climate change and developing skills and products that will let us thrive, rather than forcing radical behavioral changes.
What about the people who are still agin climate change? Would they have been persuaded by a milder tone?
The people you say would have been ready, but for the yelling, are simply biting off their nose to spite their face, unable now to concede they were wrong. Give some examples of skills and products, we could have developed, but for the yelling.
There's a misconception with how man made green house effects to the global temps. I know NASA loves to put out stats that show temps around the world keeps going up. But the truth is that the earth was much hotter in the past. There was a time when the poles weren't frozen and there were abundance of life. And there was a time when the poles expanded and life perished and had to restart over.
So the narrative that climate change will kill everything is exaggerated, we have the technology to keep most nations alive if there were some extreme periods of weather we can get through them better today than ever.
The whole earth doomsday and going to mars is just a way for Elon Musk to sell Mars tickets. He knows perfectly well how to survive on earth with major climate changes.
There's a misconception with how man made green house effects to the global temps. I know NASA loves to put out stats that show temps around the world keeps going up. But the truth is that the earth was much hotter in the past. There was a time when the poles weren't frozen and there were abundance of life. And there was a time when the poles expanded and life perished and had to restart over.
So the narrative that climate change will kill everything is exaggerated, we have the technology to keep most nations alive if there were some extreme periods of weather we can get through them better today than ever.
The whole earth doomsday and going to mars is just a way for Elon Musk to sell Mars tickets. He knows perfectly well how to survive on earth with major climate changes.
Is this human life you are referring*to?
About these existing "savior" technologies you mention, do tell.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
