For the seventh time, ExxonMobil shareholders voted down a resolution to require the corporation to set goals for reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
What Tillerson probably meant to say is “WHY SAVE HUMANITY AND THE PLANET IF PROFITS SUFFER?”
A 2011 report by Carbon Brief has found 9 out of 10 of the most prolific published which deny the existence of climate change are connected to ExxonMobil.
The top ten contributors are alone responsible for 186 of the papers cited by the Global Warming Policy Foundation. The data also shows that there are many other familiar climate sceptic names among the major contributors to the list.
Dr Sherwood B Idso is the most cited academic on the list, having authored or co-authored 67 of the 938 papers we analysed, which is seven percent of the total.
Idso is president of the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, a thinktank which has been funded by ExxonMobil. Idso has also been linked to Information Council on the Environment ( ICE ), an energy industry PR campaign accused of “astroturfing”.
The second most cited is Dr Patrick J Michaels – with 28 papers to his name. Michaels is a well known climate sceptic who has revealed that he receives around 40% of his funding from the oil industry.
Third most cited is Agricultural scientist Dr Bruce Kimball – the list shows that all of his cited papers were co-authored with Dr Sherwood B Idso.
Tillerson went on to state:
“We do not see a viable pathway with any known technology today to achieve the 350 outcome that is not devastating to economies, societies and peoples’ health and well-being around the world,”
“So the real question is, do you want to keep arguing about that and pursuing something that cannot be achieved at costs that will be detrimental? Or do you want to talk about what’s the path we should be on and how do we mitigate and prepare for the consequences as they present themselves?”
This contrasts with ExxonMobil climate change denying activities in that Tillerson no longer denies the scientific evidence, does not question whether or not human activities contribute to climate change, and has all but abandoned claims about natural gas being “clean fuels”.
Tillerson is telling his shareholders to prepare for the worst, screw humanity and the planet – save the profits.
Tillerson is overlooking one huge fact – all the profits in the world, all the money in the world won’t stop a hurricane or a tornado or any other type of “super storm”. Waving a profit & loss statement or a bank book at a storm won’t stop it. Storms pay little attention to paperwork.
If you only follow the mainstream news, and only pay attention to headlines and press releases, you probably are only aware that the issue of Climate Change is still being debated. Whether you believe climate change is real or not – the media continues to present it as a “debate”.
One source often cited by Kevin Begos of the Associate Press is The Breakthrough Institute (TBI).
(RELATED: Natural Gas Methane – Omitted Results)
In 2006, TBI, along with the Center for American Progress and the American Environics issued a white paper titled: A Plan for Global Warming Preparedness: A Proposal to Manage Risk & Invest in Resilient Communities
In November 2005, the Nathan Cummings Foundation supported the Breakthrough Institute and the Center for American Progress (CAP) to conduct research and develop one or more Strategic Initiatives that would better prepare America for future disasters. Together, Breakthrough and CAP developed a proposal for “Global Warming Preparedness,” which reframes global warming from prevention to preparedness, from certainty to uncertainty, and from limits on human activity to greater activity.
TBI’s paper also includes some spiffy posters for a marketing campaign. Why would TBI prepare marketing tools if climate change wasn’t real?
In 1999, at the 27th International Conference of the Red Cross and Red Crescent the following decision was adopted in its plan of action:
The International Federation, while drawing upon existing research and the competence of relevant international bodies, will undertake a study to assess the future impact of climatic changes upon the frequency and severity of disasters and the implications for humanitarian response and preparedness.
If Climate Change isn’t real, why is the Red Cross preparing for it?
The State of Connecticut prepared a draft in 2011 entitled: Connecticut Climate Change Preparedness Plan: Adaptation Strategies for Agriculture, Infrastructure, Natural Resources and Public Health Climate Change Vulnerabilities
Other states and communities have prepared similar plans, even the US Federal Government is in “Preparedness Mode” with its recently released The National Global Change Research Plan 2012-2021.
If Climate Change isn’t real, would the time and money be spent to prepare for it? Would Tillerson be telling his shareholders to SAVE THE PROFITS, and prepare for climate change?
Go ahead and google “climate change preparedness plans”, take a look for yourself how many states and communities are taking this seriously. Is Climate Change real? Apparently it is – the debate is over, there is no more debate.
UC Berkeley physics professor Richard A. Muller says that, after years of paying for studies by global warming skeptics, the Koch brothers honestly want to get the science clarified. They helped fund Muller who, only three years ago, doubted that the Earth was heating up to dangerous levels due to human activity. Now, with his Koch-funded research complete, he has reversed himself.
The Conversion of a Climate-Change Skeptic | By RICHARD A. MULLER | July 28, 2012 appeared in the New York Times:
CALL me a converted skeptic. Three years ago I identified problems in previous climate studies that, in my mind, threw doubt on the very existence of global warming. Last year, following an intensive research effort involving a dozen scientists, I concluded that global warming was real and that the prior estimates of the rate of warming were correct. I’m now going a step further: Humans are almost entirely the cause.
Do we have the political will to do what is necessary to stop or lessen the impact of climate change? The science on climate change is clear, but too many members of Congress remain in complete denial. We need to change that.
©2013 by Dory Hippauf