• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Exxon Mobil Investigated in New York Over Possible Lies on Climate

donsutherland1 said:
The major issue concerns whether the company adequately disclosed its risk exposure to investors. From the NYT article:

Whether Exxon Mobil began disclosing the business risks of climate change as soon as it understood them is likely to be a major focus of the New York case.
Click to expand...

Since Exxon drew on publicly available research and materials I doubt that will be a problem.
 
imyoda said:
.............and I am sure they will uncover the front group and "scientists" the created and bought off............an hope the investigation ends as the tobacco company case did.........
Click to expand...

What was most disturbing to me with the tobacco settlements was the hypocrisy. As the money was divvied up under the guise of increased healthcare costs, designated for prevention, Democrats were sliding most of it into their general funds to offset budget shortfalls. What it really amounted to was theft. And then those costs were merely passed along to consumers.
 
Last edited:
betuadollar said:
What was most disturbing to me with the tobacco settlements was the hypocrisy. As the money was divvied up under the guise of increased healthcare costs, designated for prevention, Democrats were sliding most of it into their general funds to offset budget shortfalls. What it really amounted to was theft. And then those costs were merely passed along to consumers.
Click to expand...
Not only the Dems............many slipped it into the general fund..............then to be used anyway they wished............But I seem to recall ( and it may have been a dream) the courts of fed gov put a halt to that practice.............

Several of the southern states do the same with the Money from the fed to care for the health needs of children............and thumb their nose at the fed saying...........so sue me....
 
imyoda said:
Not only the Dems............many slipped it into the general fund..............then to be used anyway they wished............But I seem to recall ( and it may have been a dream) the courts of fed gov put a halt to that practice.............

Several of the southern states do the same with the Money from the fed to care for the health needs of children............and thumb their nose at the fed saying...........so sue me....
Click to expand...

There may have been a halt to the practice but I followed it closely here and that's exactly what happened. Only a small portion ever found its way into prevention. Everyone's concerned about taxes, but I still found that rather unethical. And hypocritical.
 
betuadollar said:
There may have been a halt to the practice but I followed it closely here and that's exactly what happened. Only a small portion ever found its way into prevention. Everyone's concerned about taxes, but I still found that rather unethical. And hypocritical.
Click to expand...


Sure as hill cannot argue about that...........
 
Beaudreaux said:
You've got to be kidding me????

We're going to start prosecute people for having a different opinion?

And they say that comparisons of Progressives to Stalin are not accurate... :damn
Click to expand...
The Hitlers of this nation are gaining power.
 
bubbabgone said:
I just saw that they again changed the sources of temperature data recently in order to help get rid of the modern cooling period.
Gotta admire their relentless dedication & inventiveness.
Click to expand...

They are the ones that should be convicted, for fraud.
 
Lord of Planar said:
They are the ones that should be convicted, for fraud.
Click to expand...

By happenstance I just read a WAPO piece about how NOAA is fighting a Congressional subpoena to disclose the internal details of their climate study and how they managed to eliminate the cooling period.
NOAA says the subpoena... "... imposes a chilling effect on future communication among scientists, and potentially disrupts NOAA’s critical efforts to protect life and property.”
Say WHAT?
How would that work?
It's supposed to be science.
What's to hide?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...aa-to-release-deliberations-on-climate-study/
 
bubbabgone said:
By happenstance I just read a WAPO piece about how NOAA is fighting a Congressional subpoena to disclose the internal details of their climate study and how they managed to eliminate the cooling period.
NOAA says the subpoena... "... imposes a chilling effect on future communication among scientists, and potentially disrupts NOAA’s critical efforts to protect life and property.”
Say WHAT?
How would that work?
It's supposed to be science.
What's to hide?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...aa-to-release-deliberations-on-climate-study/
Click to expand...

Hide the decline?

Mike's Nature trick?
 
". . . The advocates of a probe into Exxon Mobil are essentially proposing that the company be punished for expressing its opinions. These opinions may be smart or stupid, constructive or destructive, sensible or self-interested. Whatever, they deserve protection. An investigation would, at the least, constitute a form of harassment that would warn other companies to be circumspect in airing their views. Matters could be worse if the government somehow imposes monetary penalties or opens the floodgates to suits by plaintiffs’ attorneys, a la the tobacco industry. Significantly, the letter to Attorney General Lynch does not allege any violation of law.

Exxon Mobil (2014 earnings: $32.5 billion) does not command our sympathy. But free speech does not belong only to the sympathetic. Casting Exxon Mobil as the scapegoat for global warming’s dilemmas is historically inaccurate and a political cheap shot with troubling constitutional implications."



The war against Exxon Mobil


Those calling for a “probe” of the company threaten free speech.




 
Prepare for $10 a gallon gas. Not because it's rare, but because of Government. Won't hurt the rich ****s pushing this, it'll hurt everyone else.
 
Renae said:
Prepare for $10 a gallon gas. Not because it's rare, but because of Government. Won't hurt the rich ****s pushing this, it'll hurt everyone else.
Click to expand...

Government shouldn't be interfering with any aspects of our lives, and respect the 10th amendment. If they did, takes would be less, and we would have less of a dependent population.

I don't see this so much as protecting the rich. i see it as protecting freedom. If you don't like what you see, push to change the laws. the liberals have done real good pushing for agendas that siphon more than half the revenue to their voters.
 
[h=1]Climate Law in Action[/h] Posted on 13 Nov 15 by Paul Matthews • Leave a comment
A few weeks ago there was a meeting on Climate change and the rule of law including a lecture by Professor Philippe Sands, in which he said that “the single most important thing [the Court] could do is to settle the scientific dispute” and that the courts could play a role in “scotching” challenges to the consensus. These … Continue reading →
 
Jack Hays said:
[h=1]Climate Law in Action[/h] Posted on 13 Nov 15 by Paul Matthews • Leave a comment
A few weeks ago there was a meeting on Climate change and the rule of law including a lecture by Professor Philippe Sands, in which he said that “the single most important thing [the Court] could do is to settle the scientific dispute” and that the courts could play a role in “scotching” challenges to the consensus. These … Continue reading →
Click to expand...

LOL....

wants the courts to rule on science?

LOL...

Is this another inquisition?

LOL...
 
Climate ugliness / Opinion
[h=1]Exposing the well funded & manufactured campaign of blame on the ‘Exxon knew climate change would be dangerous’ fiasco[/h] New Disclosures Help Pull Back Curtain on Who’s Funding Manufactured Climate Investigation by Steve Everley energyindepth.org , Dallas, Tex. A letter reportedly being circulated among a handful of Democrats this week in the U.S. House of Representatives, calling for an investigation into energy companies’ opinions on climate change, references news reports that the letter’s authors…
 

[h=1]Uh, oh. Rockefellers Admit Paying For #ExxonKnew Media Coverage[/h] From the “cloak and dagger journalism for hire” department comes this today from EnergyInDepth and Katie Brown, PhD In a stunning admission, Lee Wasserman, Director of the Rockefeller Family Fund (RFF), today openly admitted that the Rockefellers are pouring millions of dollars into “media” organizations like InsideClimate News (ICN) and projects at Columbia University School of…
Continue reading →
 
Climate ugliness / Green Mafia / Politics
[h=1]A Climategate-like bombshell: State Attorney Generals colluded with Green groups to punish political opponents[/h] Guest essay by Chris Horner Emails obtained by the Energy & Environment Legal Institute (E&E Legal) show that the offices of New York Democratic Attorney General Eric Schneiderman and those of other politically aligned AGs, secretly teamed up with anti-fossil fuel activists to launch investigations against groups whose political speech challenged the global warming policy…
 
Manc Skipper said:
There had to be a conspiracy in there somewhere!
Click to expand...

[h=1]Climate dumb and dumber[/h] Posted on 23 Apr 16 by Richard Drake • Leave a comment
Tim Montgomerie has some things to get off his chest on the arrival of Barack Obama in the UK in today’s cover article for The Spectator: Nobody could describe Donald Trump as lacking in self-confidence, but the billionaire egomaniac is emotional jelly compared with King Barack. Even before he won the Nobel peace prize, Obama … Continue reading
 
Manc Skipper said:
There had to be a conspiracy in there somewhere!
Click to expand...
There may well be, just not what you think.
Perhaps the Rockefeller Family Fund, views Exxon as a good long term investment,
and would like to improve their position. A little bad news will allow them to buy more stock.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom