The Reckoning: big oil execs to face congressional hearings on decades of deliberate, systematic campaigns of public disinformation on climate change

[ataraxia]

For many years, there has been absolutely no question in the scientific community that climate change is happening, that it is mostly caused by human activity, and that it is potentially catastrophic. Evidence suggests the fossil fuel companies have known this as well, but have engaged in very systematic and deliberate campaigns of misinformation to the public- as can be seen by all the victims of this campaign still passionately trying to defend such nonsense on this forum. It seems the time for a reckoning has come, and they are now having to face the piper for endangering lives and economies for such selfish, short-sighted greed and self-interest.

"The heads of major oil companies will make a historic appearance before Congress on Thursday to answer accusations that their firms have spent years lying about the climate crisis.

For the first time, the top executives from the US’s largest oil company, ExxonMobil, as well as Shell, Chevron and BP will be questioned under oath about the industry’s long campaign to discredit and deny the evidence that burning fossil fuels drove global heating.

‘The nation’s worst polluters managed to evade accountability and scrutiny for decades as they helped the fossil fuel industry destroy our planet.’

A leading critic of the petroleum industry behind the hearing by the House oversight committee, Representative Ro Khanna, said the executives’ testimony has the potential to be as significant as the 1994 congressional hearing at which the heads of the big tobacco companies were confronted with the question of whether they knew nicotine was addictive.

They denied it and that lie opened the door to years of litigation which resulted in a $206bn settlement against the cigarette makers.

Khanna told the Guardian that the oil company chiefs face a similar moment of reckoning.

“They’ve got a very tricky balance. They either have to admit certain wrongdoing or they run the risk of lying under oath. If I were them, I would come in with more of a mea culpa approach and acknowledge what they’ve done wrong,” he said.

“It’ll be a turning point for them. It could be the big tobacco moment. We’ve never had a situation where the big oil executives have to answer under oath for their company’s behaviour.”

Khanna said that he wanted Americans to take away the message from the hearing that the oil companies “knew they lied” about the climate emergency.

The CEOs, who have opted to testify by video, are Darren Woods of Exxon, David Lawler of BP American, Michael Wirth of Chevron and the president of Shell, Gretchen Watkins.

The leaders of two powerful lobby groups accused of acting as front organisations for big oil, the American Petroleum Institute and the US Chamber of Commerce, will also testify.

Khanna said the oil chiefs will be confronted with evidence of a persistent and coordinated cover-up, including documents that have not been made public before.

“The documents confirm the misinformation and deception that they’ve engaged in in the past explicitly, and that they continue to engage in through third parties,” he said. “The record is so clear that they will be risking perjuring themselves if they deny the record.”"

Oil executives face ‘turning point’ US congressional hearing on climate crisis

The heads of top US oil companies will answer accusations that their firms have spent years lying about the climate crisis

www.theguardian.com

 

[ataraxia]

"The hearings follow the release of a growing body of evidence that the oil industry knew about and covered up the growing threat from burning fossil fuels for decades. That includes a raft of Exxon documents held at the University of Texas, and uncovered by the Columbia Journalism School and the Los Angeles Times in 2015.
In 1979, a study by Exxon’s own scientists concluded that burning fossil fuels “will cause dramatic environmental effects” in the coming decades. It called the issue “great and urgent”.

Exxon’s response to that and similar warnings was to shut down research into global heating and to go on a public relations offensive to discredit climate science as no more than a theory, and to shift responsibility on to consumers.

In 2019, Martin Hoffert, a professor of physics at New York University, told a congressional hearing that his climate modelling for Exxon in the 1980s showed that burning fossil fuels was “increasingly having a perceptible influence on Earth’s climate”.

Meanwhile the company was pushing a different narrative.

“Exxon was publicly promoting views that its own scientists knew were wrong, and we knew that because we were the major group working on this. This was immoral and has greatly set back efforts to address climate change,” said Hoffert.

Other oil firms face similar accusations alongside trade groups and thinktanks they funded to deny climate science."

Oil executives face ‘turning point’ US congressional hearing on climate crisis

The heads of top US oil companies will answer accusations that their firms have spent years lying about the climate crisis

www.theguardian.com

 

[ataraxia]

It seems that from Covid, to Donald Trump's lies for years about Obama's secret birth certificate, to the big lie about the stolen election, to now climate change, the never-ending slew of dangerous and destructive lies from the right is finally coming under some degree of accountability and scrutiny. It's good to know things are not SO open to baldfaced lies by any idiot who gets off his couch.

 

[Da Mole]

For many years, there has been absolutely no question in the scientific community that climate change is happening, that it is mostly caused by human activity, and that it is potentially catastrophic. Evidence suggests the fossil fuel companies have known this as well, but have engaged in very systematic and deliberate campaigns of misinformation to the public- as can be seen by all the victims of this campaign still passionately trying to defend such nonsense on this forum. It seems the time for a reckoning has come, and they are now having to face the piper for endangering lives and economies for such selfish, short-sighted greed and self-interest.

"The heads of major oil companies will make a historic appearance before Congress on Thursday to answer accusations that their firms have spent years lying about the climate crisis.

For the first time, the top executives from the US’s largest oil company, ExxonMobil, as well as Shell, Chevron and BP will be questioned under oath about the industry’s long campaign to discredit and deny the evidence that burning fossil fuels drove global heating.

‘The nation’s worst polluters managed to evade accountability and scrutiny for decades as they helped the fossil fuel industry destroy our planet.’

A leading critic of the petroleum industry behind the hearing by the House oversight committee, Representative Ro Khanna, said the executives’ testimony has the potential to be as significant as the 1994 congressional hearing at which the heads of the big tobacco companies were confronted with the question of whether they knew nicotine was addictive.

They denied it and that lie opened the door to years of litigation which resulted in a $206bn settlement against the cigarette makers.

Khanna told the Guardian that the oil company chiefs face a similar moment of reckoning.

“They’ve got a very tricky balance. They either have to admit certain wrongdoing or they run the risk of lying under oath. If I were them, I would come in with more of a mea culpa approach and acknowledge what they’ve done wrong,” he said.

“It’ll be a turning point for them. It could be the big tobacco moment. We’ve never had a situation where the big oil executives have to answer under oath for their company’s behaviour.”

Khanna said that he wanted Americans to take away the message from the hearing that the oil companies “knew they lied” about the climate emergency.

The CEOs, who have opted to testify by video, are Darren Woods of Exxon, David Lawler of BP American, Michael Wirth of Chevron and the president of Shell, Gretchen Watkins.

The leaders of two powerful lobby groups accused of acting as front organisations for big oil, the American Petroleum Institute and the US Chamber of Commerce, will also testify.

Khanna said the oil chiefs will be confronted with evidence of a persistent and coordinated cover-up, including documents that have not been made public before.

“The documents confirm the misinformation and deception that they’ve engaged in in the past explicitly, and that they continue to engage in through third parties,” he said. “The record is so clear that they will be risking perjuring themselves if they deny the record.”"

Oil executives face ‘turning point’ US congressional hearing on climate crisis

The heads of top US oil companies will answer accusations that their firms have spent years lying about the climate crisis

www.theguardian.com

"For many years, there has been absolutely no question in the scientific community that climate change is happening, that it is mostly caused by human activity, and that it is potentially catastrophic"

If your first statement were true, how do you explain climate change when there were very few humans inhabiting this planet and there were no fossil fuels being burned?

 

[ataraxia]

"For many years, there has been absolutely no question in the scientific community that climate change is happening, that it is mostly caused by human activity, and that it is potentially catastrophic"

If your first statement were true, how do you explain climate change when there were very few humans inhabiting this planet and there were no fossil fuels being burned?

Other factors. Each episode had a different cause. Climate change is complex. This time, the factor is us.

As an analogy: people die from many different factors too. If a doctor is telling you that you have heart disease right now and may die from it, does it make sense to point to someone in the past who died of other causes, and ask your doctor: how do you explain that person dying and not having heart disease?

 

[Nomad4Ever]

If your first statement were true, how do you explain climate change when there were very few humans inhabiting this planet and there were no fossil fuels being burned?

In particular, they point out nonlinearities, the so-called “tipping points,” where small, gradual changes in one component of the system can lead to a large change in the entire system. Such nonlinearities arise from the complex feedbacks between components of the Earth system.

The Younger Dryas event (12,900 to 11,600 years ago) is the most intensely studied and best-understood example of abrupt climate change. The event took place during the last deglaciation, a period of global warming when the Earth system was in transition from a glacial mode to an interglacial one.

The Younger Dryas resulted from an abrupt shutdown of the thermohaline circulation in the North Atlantic, which is critical for the transport of heat from equatorial regions northward (today the Gulf Stream is a part of that circulation). The cause of the shutdown of the thermohaline circulation is under study; an influx of large volumes of freshwater from melting glaciers into the North Atlantic has been implicated, although other factors probably played a role.

Climate change - Abrupt Changes, Earth History, Impacts

Climate change - Abrupt Changes, Earth History, Impacts: An important new area of research, abrupt climate change, has developed since the 1980s. This research has been inspired by the discovery, in the ice core records of Greenland and Antarctica, of evidence for abrupt shifts in regional and...

www.britannica.com

 

[Da Mole]

Other factors. Each episode had a different cause. Climate change is complex. This time, the factor is us.

As an analogy: people die from many different factors too. If a doctor is telling you that you have heart disease right now and may die from it, does it make sense to point to someone in the past who died of other causes, and ask your doctor: how do you explain that person dying and not having heart disease?

Ok, factor this. We destroy our economy in an effort to reduce emissions to zero, while the rest of the world continues to pollute at will. We suffer the consequences without changing a damn thing. Please tell me how you get Russia, China, and India to comply.

 

[bluesmoke]

Congressional hearings. What a joke. Senators receive money from oil in the form of campaign contribution and holding stock. More of the Senators receiving the most $ are Reps, but Manchin, a Dem, gets the most $ of them all. Manchin is more a con than a Dem, point being he's the one that joined the Reps and blocked the climate plan part of the bill. What a joke. Hilarious. Without campaign reform and limits on voting by our representatives on matters to do with what they've a financial interest in...what a joke.

 

[ataraxia]

Ok, factor this. We destroy our economy in an effort to reduce emissions to zero, while the rest of the world continues to pollute at will. We suffer the consequences without changing a damn thing. Please tell me how you get Russia, China, and India to comply.

How does this justify lying by the fossil fuel industry?

We can acknowledge the facts, and then soberly go about addressing the difficult problems and questions which face us. Denying the problems and propagating lies is not the way to solve problems. Is that how you go about addressing difficult questions and problems in your own life?

 

[longview]

How does this justify lying by the fossil fuel industry?

We can acknowledge the facts, and then soberly go about addressing the difficult problems and questions which face us. Denying the problems and propagating lies is not the way to solve problems. Is that how you go about addressing difficult questions and problems in your own life?

What lie do you think the oil companies have been telling?

 

[Antiwar]

The Republicans are playing their usual bullshit games.

 

[Antiwar]

"We're committed to a one to two percent annual reduction of production of fossil fuels."

Wow, that's quite the commitment.

 

[ataraxia]

What lie do you think the oil companies have been telling?

Listen to the hearings. You’ll find out what the documents show they knew vs what they were saying (and even more interestingly, NOT saying).

I’m sorry you fell for their scam. It can happen to the best of us.

 

[longview]

Listen to the hearings. You’ll find out what the documents show they knew vs what they were saying (and even more interestingly, NOT saying).

I’m sorry you fell for their scam. It can happen to the best of us.

You are the one saying they have been lying, so you must know what the lie they are telling is, tell us what you think?

 

[Antiwar]

Ro Khanna is smacking these CEO clowns around.

 

[Antiwar]

Gym Jordan: "$8 to $10 gas prices!!!"

 

[Antiwar]

"Climate change is real ... but China!"

 

[ataraxia]

You are the one saying they have been lying, so you must know what the lie they are telling is, tell us what you think?

I am inclined to believe this from the OP:

“ The hearings follow the release of a growing body of evidence that the oil industry knew about and covered up the growing threat from burning fossil fuels for decades. That includes a raft of Exxon documents held at the University of Texas, and uncovered by the Columbia Journalism School and the Los Angeles Times in 2015.

In 1979, a study by Exxon’s own scientists concluded that burning fossil fuels “will cause dramatic environmental effects” in the coming decades. It called the issue “great and urgent”.

Exxon’s response to that and similar warnings was to shut down research into global heating and to go on a public relations offensive to discredit climate science as no more than a theory, and to shift responsibility on to consumers.”

Say, do you happen to be on their payroll?

 

[Antiwar]

The Republicans are trying to try the Biden administration. "Liberal socialists, der border, Afghanistan, that evil Green New Deal, Russian collusion." ****ing corporate prostitutes and hacks.

 

[longview]

I am inclined to believe this from the OP:

“ The hearings follow the release of a growing body of evidence that the oil industry knew about and covered up the growing threat from burning fossil fuels for decades. That includes a raft of Exxon documents held at the University of Texas, and uncovered by the Columbia Journalism School and the Los Angeles Times in 2015.

In 1979, a study by Exxon’s own scientists concluded that burning fossil fuels “will cause dramatic environmental effects” in the coming decades. It called the issue “great and urgent”.

Exxon’s response to that and similar warnings was to shut down research into global heating and to go on a public relations offensive to discredit climate science as no more than a theory, and to shift responsibility on to consumers.”

Say, do you happen to be on their payroll?

In Science, there is something called uncertainty.
There is no uncertainty that increased CO2 can cause some warming,
there is however a lot of uncertainty about the level of that warming, or if that warming is harmful or beneficial.
This topic I think has even been brought up under oath before, as the oil companies were sued unsuccessfully in state courts.
Judge throws out New York City’s climate change lawsuit against 5 major oil companies

 

[Dans La Lune]

How does this justify lying by the fossil fuel industry?

They justify it the same way they justify literally everything. They lie and obfuscate, while indulging in pure ignorance. In addition, 100% of conservatives are selfish assholes who believe in corporatism. They don't care about future generations, because conservatism is also about self-gratification and short-sightedness.

The modus operandi of corporate conservatism is to lie, lie, lie and lie -- and then when the truth catches up to them, say, 'What are you gonna do? Crash the economy?'

 

[Antiwar]

"It's a first amendment right for fossil fuels companies to do what they want."

A Republican prostitute (Byron Donalds?) deep throating big oil corporations.

 

[Antiwar]

"We want to maintain our power and obscene profits as we destroy Earth's ecosystems."

 

[Antiwar]

Republican prostitutes are apologizing to big oil executives.

"We should thank the oil industry for vaccines because they provide the raw materials for hypodermic needles."

 

[Antiwar]

In Science, there is something called uncertainty.

The CEOs are no longer outright denying that the burning of fossil fuels has a direct and detrimental connection to climate change. What decade are you stuck in? That's a rhetorical question.