Climate Change is a Threat that Dirty Oil/Coal does not want you to know about.
“Reposition Global Warming as Theory Rather than Fact”
It was a simple strategy of deception and it worked brilliantly!
The fact that we are still debating human’s influence on the climate 30 years later is exactly what they wanted.
They won, we lost, and our children, and our country, will suffer the consequences.
This goal of their strategy was to create an illusion of “doubt” about the cause of climate change in the mind of the public and policy makers and thus avoid any regulatory or competitive threats to their very, very profitable business model.
Oil companies knew this strategy of deception would work because the same strategy worked for tobacco companies for decades.
“Doubt is our product since it is the best means of competing with the “body of fact” that exists in the mind of the general public.“
–Unnamed tobacco executive, Brown & Williamson (1969)
The doubt that was created about tobacco’s link to cancer helped to hold off meaningful regulation and taxation for a few decades, but eventually there were just too many dead or dying smokers and the ugly truth about cigarettes prevailed.
Oil companies have enjoyed similiar success through the means of deception, however, like tobacco, their time is up.
The climate system has already deteriorated considerably and it’s only going to get worse.
We CANNOT allow dirty oil and coal to continue to profit by polluting our atmosphere, wrecking the climate system and threatening our children’s future.
We have a civic and patriotic responsibility to our nation and a moral responsibility to our kids and theirs to protect them before it’s too late.
What should you do?
Start by educating yourself and watching “FRONTLINE: Climate of Doubt”
PBS airdate: Tuesday, 10/23 at 9 P.M. (check local listings)
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/climate-of-doubt/
Stay tuned to this Patch Blog for more information
Apparently, Margaret, anybody who disagrees with your view is an idiot evidenced by your description, "complete with terrible spelling, grammar, and punctuation." But then, you 'already "know" what you want to believe.' Larry, I love the 'unnamed tobacco executive" comment. Couldn't you find an unnamed global warming skeptic to quote, as well? Did it ever occur to you that money is the driver for all those scientists with their hands out for global warming study money? Actually, the only bravery that is being exhibited here is by those in the scientific community who dare to raise their voices with any doubt about global warming hysteria and find themselves lumped in with holocaust deniers as well as learning that the funding spigot is closed tight to any such ideas. These are just not very convenient ideas to raise the specter of the genius noble prize winning globAL GOREming. Do yourself a favor Larry and Margaret, while you are decrying the idiocy of anybody who disagrees with your view, why don't you watch Bjorn Lomborg's, "Cool It," or, heaven forbid, maybe something even more critical of your viewpoint...I'm sure there's plenty out there.
"...still debating human’s influence on the climate 30 years later..." Let's see if we can resolve this by affirming the consequent: If A is true, then B is true. B is true. Therefore, A is true. Debate over! Wow, that was easy. One more thing though is your comment that I educate myself by watching a show on PBS. FYI, PBS is not my idea of objective programming. I realize that is only my opinion but would venture to say that I have as much right to such as you. I know, I know, Larry...really, I do.
Actually, the scientist that disproves human-caused global warming would probably get all the fame and fortune that society could heap upon him/her!! There is tremendous motivation among the scientific community to disprove global warming!! On the other hand, the fossil fuel companies stand to lose tens of trillions of dollars if the world decides to begin ceasing oil and gas production and begins to transitin to alternative energy sources. They have an enormous motivation to confuse the issue and perpetuate their product!!
I have watched Lomborg's "Cool-it" and I also read/follow many of the dissenting blogs, websites and articles. As I have no training in cimate science, I'll stick with the consensus statement of every climate related scientific organization in the world as well as the National Academy of Science I have looked for accredited scientific organizations with opposing views, but frankly, there aren't any. As I'm sure you are aware, a key component of critical thinking is the ability to weigh sources and evaluate of evidence. My experience has shown me that Science and the known laws of physics have a pretty good record of getting it right. If you are interested in reading more about critical thinking, please check out my first Patch blog post which is linked below: http://eureka-wildwood.patch.com/blog_posts/ls-critical-thinking-corner-intro
"As I'm sure you are aware, a key component of critical thinking is the ability to weigh and evaluate sources of evidence