"A new report by UCS uncovers how ExxonMobil has adopted tobacco-industry tactics to spread disinformation on global warming science. By funneling millions of dollars to groups that support a handful of climate change contrarians, ExxonMobil has succeeded in confusing the public about our scientific understanding of global warming (and delaying action needed to slow the trend)." http://www.ucsusa.org/news/press_release/E...ng-tobacco.html
I can't remember which documentary I was watching. I think it was History Channel about seven ways the world will end. They were comparing Big Oil's tactics to Big Tobacco just like this article says. In the documentary, they had video of the Big Tobacco hearing in which they went down the line and every tobacco exec said into the microphone, "I do not believe that nicotine is addictive." Then the narrator said, "of course we now know that nicotine is highly addictive."
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TonyPSchaefer @ Jan 4 2007, 02:33 PM) [snapback]370783[/snapback]</div> Yeah. The weirdest part, as the report documents, is that it is literally some of the same (tobacco) people that are working the misinformation campaign (see below). Then again, you probably couldn't find anyone more qualified for the job . Steven Milloy Tobacco Headed The Advancement of Sound Science Coalition (TASSC), a group that the Philip Morris tobacco company covertly created in 1993 to manufacture uncertainty about the health hazards posed by secondhand smoke Oil Member, Global Climate Science Team (GCST), a group created in part by ExxonMobil that outlined an explicit strategy to invest millions of dollars to manufacture uncertainty on the issue of global warming. Home address listed for the slightly renamed The Advancement of Sound Science Center (TASSC) and the Free Enterprise Action Institute, both funded by ExxonMobil
Well, that little investment certainly paid off for them, didn't it? Aside from the cynicism and outrage, I think it's time to change our definition of "Limited Liability". There's something deeply wrong when a company claims responsibility, and I use that term loosely, only to its shareholders and not to the rest of the planet.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TonyPSchaefer @ Jan 4 2007, 10:33 AM) [snapback]370783[/snapback]</div> I think people need to understand the context of that quote by the executives. Of course, it doesn't change the fact that it is probably a lie, and not acceptable from a moral standpoint. But that quote was, for a congressional hearing, the equivalent to a defendant's plea of "not guilty". Stated another way, if one exec had said "Nicotine is addictive" he would have been in a whole lot of legal trouble. Even if he had said "Nicotine is NOT addictive", he could be in a lot of trouble because nicotine IS addictive. By equivocating and using the "I believe" phrase, the executives immunized themselves from being personally liable. Its hard to prove someone is lying when he states his opinion! It was, I'm sure, a phrase crafted by their lawyers.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(MegansPrius @ Jan 4 2007, 10:47 AM) [snapback]370799[/snapback]</div> LOL, Steven Milloy is about as bad as you can get. His skill at spreading misinformation is only matched by Michael Jackson's way with kids and equally WRONG!
