If ExxonMobil was a Country...
by Union of Concerned Scientists on 01. 8.07
If it were counted as a nation, ExxonMobil would be the sixth largest emitter of carbon dioxide in the world. The corporation has been antagonistic toward global warming science, and according to a new report (there's a PDF of the full report there) from the Union of Concerned Scientists, it has funneled nearly $16 million to a network of 43 advocacy organizations that seek to confuse the public on global warming science.
These front organizations provide a platform for a small group of climate change contrarians to cast doubt on the scientific consensus surrounding global warming.
The George C. Marshall Institute, for instance, which has received $630,000 from ExxonMobil, recently touted a book edited by Patrick Michaels, a long-time climate change contrarian who is affiliated with at least 11 organizations funded by ExxonMobil.
These shady tactics are similar to those employed by the tobacco industry to cast doubt on the link between cigarette smoking and lung cancer.
UCS is asking you to contact your representatives in Congress and urge them to send a message to ExxonMobil that these activities are dishonest and harmful. In addition, UCS members are calling on Congress to immediately repeal tax breaks for ExxonMobil and other major oil companies and redirect that money to renewable energy programs and energy efficiency technologies that will help fight global warming.
Problem with the link:
http:/ucsaction.org/campaign/1_3_07_Exxon_report/
--
editor note: Thanks, fixed it.
Science isn't about consensus. It's about reproducible testing of hypotheses. If we didn't worry about what idea is more popular, but what idea is backed by the best argument and test results, we would be much better off.
.
Sean, exactly! But Exxon isn't trying to convince scientists, they're trying to convince the general public (and thus indirectly, allow politicians and corporations to stay with the status quo). Maybe if the general public had a better scientific training things would be better...
"ExxonMobil would be the sixth largest emitter of carbon dioxide in the world" ... does that mean the company itself, or the net effect of the products it sells? If the latter, then it's a little misleading :-)