6 thoughts on “Exxon put on mock trial in Paris for ‘climate crimes’”
Climate Change is a religion and like the Catholic church in the middle ages, anyone who disagrees with the religion or doesn’t toe the line, is a heretic and will be burned at the stake. Just remember Niemoller” famous quotation:
“First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out —
Because I was not a socialist,
Then they came for the Trade Unionists , and I did not speak out —
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out —
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me– and there was no one left to speak for me.
Well first they are going after the big corporations. Whose next?
Comments have already been proposed by Suzuki, McKibbon et al, that deniers should be jailed. It is a short reach to giving them capital punishment.
Does this whole climate change situation, including the apparent need to demonize, have more to do with the group psychology of a “club” that consists of apparently like-minded human beings than with the physics and chemistry of the climate of planet? Just for a very general background, I think the short article that’s at the link at the bottom of this comment is well worth the time for reading it. I admit that I’m mystified about so-called hard, natural “scientists” who sort through and reject or disregard any facts and information that seems to counter what appear to be their pre-conceived conclusions. And then much in the manner of a pack of rabid canines, attack anyone who is unwilling to reject and disregard what appear to be valid data in order to conform to the crowd think.
For instance, why is it necessary that the greenhouse effect that is attributable to water molecules in the atmosphere be ignored when the amount of H2O that’s present in parts per million is roughly 100 times greater than the amount of CO2 that is present? Dry atmosphere? Not on this planet.
Ffs surely you guys can see the parallels with the anti-smoker agenda that was so successful in conning normal people on what we now know was very sparse evidence (despite anti-smoker rhetoric)
This is a straight copy from the tobacco CONTROL blueprint; First they identify a ‘devil’ and demonise or spoil the identity of that ‘devil’ -(deeming them money grabbing liars who don’t mind killing your children for profit). Then they use that to undermine any evidence that challenges their junk science. The evidence for anthropogenic global warming IS very sparse SO, just as with tobacco, they attack ‘the man’ using emotional propaganda. People WILL fall for it just as they fell for the same emotional blackmail when it was directed at tobacco companies.
Well, you may say, there is masses of evidence that smoking kills and we KNOW they lied about the health aspects for profit – absolute poppycock! YOU may have been conditioned by anti-smoker propaganda and reluctant to accept being conned (you’re too intelligent for that, aren’t you?) Don’t fall for it – Don’t let ego control your thinking;
“One of the saddest lessons of history is this: If we’ve been bamboozled long enough, we tend to reject any evidence of the bamboozle. We’re no longer interested in finding out the truth. The bamboozle has captured us. It’s simply too painful to acknowledge, even to ourselves, that we’ve been taken. Once you give a charlatan power over you, you almost never get it back.”― Carl Sagan.
Climate change pseudo-religious nutters are drawn from the same cabal as anti-smoker nutters. If you allow the anti-smoker deception to continue, you have no chance in stopping the climate change clone of it! That is IF you want to stop it – i.e. Is this web site genuinely committed to exposing junk science – or just the bits you don’t agree with?
This train has certainly gone well off its rails, hasn’t it.
Is there someplace that we may be able to read at least a sampling of the 25 year “Campaign of Misinformation” that was conducted by Exxon. Is a sampling available of the scientific findings that Exxon withheld from publication?
Why doesn’t Exxon fight back?
They are being attacked and they have ample resources to counter these outrageous claims.
A major reason why the coverage of this issue has been so one-sided is that the oil companies have been deafeningly silent.
Why doesn’t Exxon fight back?
Leave a Reply
Discover more from JunkScience.com
Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.
Climate Change is a religion and like the Catholic church in the middle ages, anyone who disagrees with the religion or doesn’t toe the line, is a heretic and will be burned at the stake. Just remember Niemoller” famous quotation:
“First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out —
Because I was not a socialist,
Then they came for the Trade Unionists , and I did not speak out —
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out —
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me– and there was no one left to speak for me.
Well first they are going after the big corporations. Whose next?
Comments have already been proposed by Suzuki, McKibbon et al, that deniers should be jailed. It is a short reach to giving them capital punishment.
Does this whole climate change situation, including the apparent need to demonize, have more to do with the group psychology of a “club” that consists of apparently like-minded human beings than with the physics and chemistry of the climate of planet? Just for a very general background, I think the short article that’s at the link at the bottom of this comment is well worth the time for reading it. I admit that I’m mystified about so-called hard, natural “scientists” who sort through and reject or disregard any facts and information that seems to counter what appear to be their pre-conceived conclusions. And then much in the manner of a pack of rabid canines, attack anyone who is unwilling to reject and disregard what appear to be valid data in order to conform to the crowd think.
For instance, why is it necessary that the greenhouse effect that is attributable to water molecules in the atmosphere be ignored when the amount of H2O that’s present in parts per million is roughly 100 times greater than the amount of CO2 that is present? Dry atmosphere? Not on this planet.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychology
Ffs surely you guys can see the parallels with the anti-smoker agenda that was so successful in conning normal people on what we now know was very sparse evidence (despite anti-smoker rhetoric)
This is a straight copy from the tobacco CONTROL blueprint; First they identify a ‘devil’ and demonise or spoil the identity of that ‘devil’ -(deeming them money grabbing liars who don’t mind killing your children for profit). Then they use that to undermine any evidence that challenges their junk science. The evidence for anthropogenic global warming IS very sparse SO, just as with tobacco, they attack ‘the man’ using emotional propaganda. People WILL fall for it just as they fell for the same emotional blackmail when it was directed at tobacco companies.
Well, you may say, there is masses of evidence that smoking kills and we KNOW they lied about the health aspects for profit – absolute poppycock! YOU may have been conditioned by anti-smoker propaganda and reluctant to accept being conned (you’re too intelligent for that, aren’t you?) Don’t fall for it – Don’t let ego control your thinking;
“One of the saddest lessons of history is this: If we’ve been bamboozled long enough, we tend to reject any evidence of the bamboozle. We’re no longer interested in finding out the truth. The bamboozle has captured us. It’s simply too painful to acknowledge, even to ourselves, that we’ve been taken. Once you give a charlatan power over you, you almost never get it back.”― Carl Sagan.
Climate change pseudo-religious nutters are drawn from the same cabal as anti-smoker nutters. If you allow the anti-smoker deception to continue, you have no chance in stopping the climate change clone of it! That is IF you want to stop it – i.e. Is this web site genuinely committed to exposing junk science – or just the bits you don’t agree with?
This train has certainly gone well off its rails, hasn’t it.
Is there someplace that we may be able to read at least a sampling of the 25 year “Campaign of Misinformation” that was conducted by Exxon. Is a sampling available of the scientific findings that Exxon withheld from publication?
Why doesn’t Exxon fight back?
They are being attacked and they have ample resources to counter these outrageous claims.
A major reason why the coverage of this issue has been so one-sided is that the oil companies have been deafeningly silent.
Why doesn’t Exxon fight back?