Here is a bigraphical article on ExxonMobil from knowmore.org which is a new wiki promoting ethical consumption.
-PHiZ

Chuckles, "STart boycotting? I've been boycotting them for so long that I think it stretches back to the Exxon Valdez."

Javarod,

Hopefully a whole new generation will join the boycott!

I asked about boycotting Exxon to someone I know who works over there. They basically said Exxon makes almost no money from their gas stations, most of the company's profit comes from its selling of petroleum products to other large corporations. So boycott if you want, but don't stop there, consider the rest of the things listed in the above linked ExxposeExxon Action Center if you want to get Exxon's attention.

To be blunt: science is not about consensus. It's about hypotheses supported by experimentation with repeatable results.

Scientific "consensus," you will remember, supported ideas like the Earth-centric universe, phrenology, and racial theory.

This notion that the support of a majority of scientific organizations lends any validity to a concept is harmful to the entire field of scientific inquiry, and ought to be done away with.

Not making any claims for or against global warming theories, here, I'm just saying that if you want to gain traction with it, frame it like the hypothesis it is, and not as a matter of popular agreement. That's the only way to gain real credibility.

Ian: Thanks for putting forth a reasonable response. Political groups don't carry much weight in my book when it comes to science. Not only that, I seriously doubt those at Exxon are having meetings about how best to destroy the planet. Seems a little alarmist.

Ian:

The whole point is that Exxon and the US government are saying: "Look, we can't act because scientists disagree and it could be either one or the other."

I say: "Not true, most scientists agree so your excuse is bunk."

I'm not saying that something is true because there's a consensus, I'm saying that you can't use the fake absence of one as an excuse to not act.

"Not only that, I seriously doubt those at Exxon are having meetings about how best to destroy the planet. Seems a little alarmist."

Not, but they certainly are having meetings about how to make as much short-term profit as possible, like most big corporations that are punished by shareholders when they drop short-term profits in favor of planning for long-term sustainability (a side effect of quarterly reports and one-year financial plans, in part).

It's a bit like with cigarette companies: I doubt that there's a big conspiracy to actually kill people, but they seem ready to look the other way and play with science quite a bit to keep doing business as usual and rake in the dough. Imperfect analogy, but you get the idea.

Damn, that's a good point, Guy5000. I hadn't even thought about that. Of course, everyone (hopefully) knows that if there's a Citgo in your area you should get your gas there since it's owned by the Venezuelan government. Essentially, buying gas from Citgo is the only way to support a democracy by buying gas.

I think there's an article about this at CommonDreams.org and I know I've blogged about it at my website.

So, avoid Exxon and embrace Citgo!

Um, or something like that...

umm...how 'bout ride a bike, pete?

MGR--

That's my point: the whole issue now rests on the red herring of "consensus" rather than a search for scientific truth.

The government is claiming an irrelevant excuse for inaction, but the nullification of that excuse isn't sufficient cause for action...all you've done is establish a consensus, which is, in and if itself, irrelevant.

In practical terme, you *are* granting credence to the idea that consensus lends validity to an idea. And as long as you do that, you'll get stonewalled.

Seeking out the reality of the matter gets ignored, and the entire enterprise becomes not scientific, but political.

Not at all. Political action in such matter should be based on the best science available, and when uncertain about it the precautionary principle applies.

When all the best scientists in the world agree about something (to different degrees, but there's agreement on the general idea), that's what the best science available is. Any other thing that is used to act or not act is external to that "best science available".

I'm pointing out the consensus because there's one - something rare and that just gives more weight to the science - not because it's a prerequisite for action.

I like this MGR guy. Saves me the posting time.

Glad to be of service, phishJam!

At this point, I can see a few safe courses of action. They cost a bit more money, but work well.

1) Look for products that are made without oil. Buy things made from wood or metal rather than plastic, cotton and wool rather than rayon.

2) Don't drive. I ride a bike. I got rid of my car and *made* myself figure out how to do without. The vast majority of people will tell me why they "can't" while stuck in a number of assumptions about things they need that they really don't. I choose to live in a place where I can bike and bus. The first step is making that choice - choose to live in an environment where a car is not necessary.

But, even when people recognize that they're burning up their futures, there's nothing to keep them from continuing as long as it suits them. Oh well.

I myself own a home 35 miles from the nearest store & I have a life so riding a bike is out for me, but I am getting ready to purchase a hybrid vehicle in the next 2 years. I would do it now but they are still priced a little out of my range. With so many auto manufacturers jumping on the bandwagon and building them I expect the price to begin dropping to the point they are comparably priced to the gas hogs. The car I have does get 26 miles to the gallon which is pretty good, but a hybrid will get over 40 mpg with 0 emissions! Oil companies are not liking this hybrid thing, but thankfully it has come to far for them to stop the progress. I expect hydrogen cars to be in full production within the next 10-12 years! They are already a reality but we need to get the water fuel cells in mass production to be affordable and then you have the hydrogen water at the pumps conversion.

Their days are numbered, they know it and they are fighting it tooth and nail.

Check out Exxoff