The Climate Change Discussion Thread

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by Hackslack

Such a simple minded argument that whole tobacco comparison is…

Is it? The oil industry is using the same lobbyists and tactics as the tobacco industry. It's why many of us can see this shit coming a mile away.

[MolsonExport]

Naomi Oreskes says this understanding of the power of doubt is vital.

"They realise they can't win this battle by making a false claim that sooner or later would be exposed. But if they can create doubt, that would be sufficient - because if people are confused about the issue, there's a good chance they'll just keep smoking."

Hill advised setting up the "Tobacco Industry Research Committee" to promote "the existence of weighty scientific views which hold there is no proof that cigarette smoking is a cause of lung cancer".

As in the climate change debate decades later, "Project Whitecoat" would pit scientist against scientist.

The tobacco companies may have eventually lost their battle to hide the harms of smoking, but the blueprint drawn up by John Hill and his colleagues proved to be very effective.

"What he wrote is the same memo we have seen in multiple industries subsequently," says David Michaels, professor of public health at George Washington University, and author of The Triumph of Doubt, which details how the pesticides, plastics and sugar industries have also used these tactics.

"We called it 'the tobacco playbook', because the tobacco industry was so successful.

"They made a product that killed millions of people across the world, and the science has been very strong [about that] for many years, but through this campaign to manufacture uncertainty, they were able to delay first, formal recognition of the terrible impact of tobacco, and then delay regulation and defeat litigation for decades, with obviously terrible consequences."

We asked Hill and Knowlton about its work for the tobacco companies, but it did not respond.

In a statement, ExxonMobil told the BBC that "allegations about the company's climate research are inaccurate and deliberately misleading".

"For more than 40 years, we have supported development of climate science in partnership with governments and academic institutions. That work continues today in an open and transparent way.

"Deliberately cherry-picked statements attributed to a small number of employees wrongly suggest definitive conclusions were reached decades ago."

ExxonMobil added that it recently won the court case brought by the New York Attorney General which had accused the company of fraudulently accounting for the costs of climate change regulation.

But academics like David Michaels fear the use of uncertainty in the past to confuse the public and undermine science has contributed to a dangerous erosion of trust in facts and experts across the globe today, far beyond climate science or the dangers of tobacco.

He cites public attitudes to modern issues like the safety of 5G, vaccinations - and coronavirus.

"By cynically manipulating and distorting scientific evidence, the manufacturers of doubt have seeded in much of the public a cynicism about science, making it far more difficult to convince people that science provides useful - in some cases, vitally important - information.

"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.

https://www.bbc.com/news/stories-53640382

tobacco, big oil, vaccines, climate change, ....

[O-tacular]

Originally Posted by Hackslack

Lol, why are you being so contrarian!?! Eat your own words… btw, while the industry denying climate change is inexcusable, thankfully those who do smoke cigarettes have the oil commodity which has lead to such massive human innovations, by even as simple as generating billions of dollars of revenue, to saving the lives of those who developed health issues from the use of tobacco…. Such a simple minded argument that whole tobacco comparison is… seriously you should do an elementary comparison, what benefits to humanity has the tobacco industry produced, and what benefits has the oil industry produced

And yet thanks to Oil and Gas emissions we stand at the precipice of global disaster.

[MolsonExport]

Originally Posted by Hackslack

Lol, why are you being so contrarian!?! Eat your own words… btw, while the industry denying climate change is inexcusable, thankfully those who do smoke cigarettes have the oil commodity which has lead to such massive human innovations, by even as simple as generating billions of dollars of revenue, to saving the lives of those who developed health issues from the use of tobacco…. Such a simple minded argument that whole tobacco comparison is… seriously you should do an elementary comparison, what benefits to humanity has the tobacco industry produced, and what benefits has the oil industry produced

LOLs aside, you are right: Those silly cigarette companies only destroyed smoker's lungs. Fossil fuels are destroying the planet's lungs.

[Hackslack]

Originally Posted by O-tacular

And yet thanks to Oil and Gas emissions we stand at the precipice of global disaster.

***and even more so, coal.

[Hackslack]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

By your response I’m guessing you think humanity would be comparatively better off without the discovery of the commodities oil and gas?

Or was the input of the commodity of oil of no significant part to such incredible human innovation and ingenuity, even to be a stepping stone to where we are now, on the brink of a fully electrified auto industry? Are you mocking that?

[O-tacular]

Originally Posted by Hackslack

***and even more so, coal.

Yes another fossil fuel.

[Acajack]

It's an unfortunate characteristic of our era that people's ability and freedom to think for themselves has been and is being so viciously discredited.

(And yes I agree that the exercise this freedom can on occasion have unpleasant - and sometimes harmful - side-effects.)

I definitely think for myself and make up my own mind about things. Perhaps more than the average person.

My own conclusions have led me to support strong measures to address climate change (stronger than any government in Canada has put forward to date BTW), and also a stricter mandatory vaccine régime than what we've seen so far in this country.

[O-tacular]

Originally Posted by Acajack

I remember a couple of decades ago, BC was also hit by huge floods. At the time, the public blame was put squarely on the province's massive logging industry. This year, though, it's barely been mentioned at all. It's all about climate change. Hmmm....

https://twitter.com/FocusMagVic/stat...51957429665792

I think the logging industry is horrible (particularly when it goes after old growth forests and only replants monocultures of trees). That said the flooding that is occurring now combined with the heat dome that killed 700 people in the spring and summer is unheard of. Trying to compare this event to run of the mill floods is ridiculous.

[MolsonExport]

Originally Posted by Hackslack

By your response I’m guessing you think humanity would be comparatively better off without the discovery of the commodities oil and gas?

Or was the input of the commodity of oil of no significant part to such incredible human innovation and ingenuity, even to be a stepping stone to where we are now, on the brink of a fully electrified auto industry? Are you mocking that?

What a fucking ridiculous line of questioning.

[O-tacular]

Originally Posted by Acajack

It's an unfortunate characteristic of our era that people's ability and freedom to think for themselves has been and is being so viciously discredited.

(And yes I agree that the exercise this freedom can on occasion have unpleasant - and sometimes harmful - side-effects.)

I definitely think for myself and make up my own mind about things. Perhaps more than the average person.

My own conclusions have led me to support strong measures to address climate change (stronger than any government in Canada has put forward to date BTW), and also a stricter mandatory vaccine régime than what we've seen so far in this country.

Then why play devil's advocate using similar arguments to those seeking to do nothing?

[Hackslack]

Originally Posted by O-tacular

Yes another fossil fuel.

Yes, yet another source of destructive ghg emissions that cannot be forgotten. Which is why I pointed it out, it seemed you had forgotten it.

[Hackslack]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

What a fucking ridiculous line of questioning.

Almost as fucking ridiculous as your fucking image as a response, made to be mocking me and completely fucking condescending. Throwing fucking stones

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

....
https://www.bbc.com/news/stories-53640382

There's a much more recent example. From just days ago. Complete with taxpayer dollars from Albertans too.

Carbon emissions to pool noodles: oilsands producers seek a ‘beautiful’ rebrand

Alberta’s major oilsands producers want you to look at a barrel of bitumen and see a pool noodle.

A leaked PR campaign from the oilsands giants shows the companies are eager to rebrand the carbon-intensive industry as a net-zero resource that effortlessly turns its emissions into everything from water toys to carbon fibre boats and microchips.

Currently being tested in focus groups, the Oil Sands Pathway Alliance campaign focuses on transforming carbon into everyday products with the tagline “Energy. Beautifully Designed.”

A pitch video, initially posted online for focus group participants to view, but which has now been taken down, was sent to The Narwhal by Keith Stewart, senior energy strategist with Greenpeace Canada, shows what the campaign will prioritize.

“Creating jet fuel out of our petroleum while using carbon from that process to make carbon fibre boats is a beautiful thing,” a voice over the video says.

“Developing microchips out of carbon capture for refined oil is beautiful. Producing barrels of oil and making Styrofoam chips out of the resulting carbon. That’s beautiful. Producing oil and from the resulting carbon making pool noodles that kids can float on. Beautiful.”

The campaign was prepared for a group composed of Suncor, Imperial, Canadian Natural Resources, MEG Energy, ConocoPhillips and Cenovus, who together are responsible for what they say is about 95 per cent of oilsands production. Only MEG Energy responded to The Narwhal’s requests for comment, reiterating statements given by Pathways Alliance.

The alliance was formed to push forward a plan for net-zero emissions from the oilsands by 2050.

But the focus on promoting positive messages about the oilsands, as revealed in the leaked material, is only the latest in a series of public relations and marketing campaigns over the years by both industry and government. Many of the campaigns were aimed at countering criticism about environmental impacts of extracting heavy oil from Alberta’s oilsands, a region that holds the world’s third largest reserves of crude, after Saudi Arabia and Venezuela, and requires large amounts of energy and water in production.

“I think this will be the fifth or sixth attempt to rebrand the oilsands,” Stewart said.

....

Source: https://thenarwhal.ca/alberta-oilsan...mpaign-carbon/


What I do find deliciously ironic is that the whole concept of carbon footprint is now backfiring spectacularly on the oil sector as swathes of the public actually feel enough guilt to seek ways to cut emissions. BP really scored with that one.

Personally, I don't get the point with all this PR. The real changes that are about to run them over are technological. No amount of rebranding is going to save them from that. Didn't save the Luddites from the Jacquard Looms. Didn't save blacksmiths from the car. Won't save oilworkers and diesel mechanics either.

[O-tacular]

Originally Posted by Hackslack

Yes, yet another source of destructive ghg emissions that cannot be forgotten. Which is why I pointed it out, it seemed you had forgotten it.

I never forgot it. In fact our provincial government is now determined to mine more of it from the mountains in formerly protected areas for Australian penny stocks. If you are arguing about degrees of pollution we are far past the point where you can credibly claim that the fossil fuel industry isn't knowingly destroying the planet as we know it. A coal fired power plant in China doesn't erase the tarsands tailing ponds which can be seen from space or the amount of bullshit denialism that industry has sponsored.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Acajack

I am not a climate change denialist.

Just a "both sides" kind of guy then? You really had to dig to find that article.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Just a "both sides" kind of guy then? You really had to dig to find that article.

It literally popped up on my feed this morning out of nowhere.

And reminded me of how there was a big outcry over clearcut logging at the time, whereas no one is taking about it this year.

[MolsonExport]

Originally Posted by Hackslack

Almost as fucking ridiculous as your fucking image as a response, made to be mocking me and completely fucking condescending. Throwing fucking stones

Sorry, but what you wrote was fucking funny as hell. It did make me laugh out loud:

thankfully those who do smoke cigarettes have the oil commodity which has lead to such massive human innovations, by even as simple as generating billions of dollars of revenue, to saving the lives of those who developed health issues from the use of tobacco….

That is fucking hilarious!

Anyhow, I need not remind you that I am not on the side of the oil industry. You are.

To your statement on how wonderful oil has been for civilization (except the millions who died in the wars over oil, and millions more still living in the countries destroyed in wars connected to oil), you can look at the sentence in the top paragraph, right-hand side

For more than 300 years tobacco has given solace, relaxation, and enjoyment to mankind.

Should we continue to demonize such a wonderful product?

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by O-tacular

Then why play devil's advocate using similar arguments to those seeking to do nothing?

This has nothing to do with my basic point, which is the discomfort that increasing numbers of learned people have with other people thinking for themselves, as opposed to simply lapping up what they're told.

If the shoe fits, wear it.

[Acajack]

Oh yeah, and BTW I am rabidly anti-tobacco and a lifelong non-smoker.

In case someone wanted to go there.