5 ms·

old news? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19986910 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19986910

aritmo 7y ago
It is back in the news. https://insideclimatenews.org/news/24102019/massachusetts-sues-exxon-climate-change-investor-fraud-misleading-advertising-healey https://insideclimatenews.org/news/24102019/massachusetts-su...
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
xurias 7y ago
I mean, until somebody does something about it, there's value in repeating it over and over. Maybe at some point it'll sink in how criminal these companies are.
- VvR-Ox 7y ago
  Indeed! Let's just repeat it until nobody can forget it ever again and also drop tax avoidance by these huge companies in the mix. Maybe there is still hope for something we can call justice and probably the money they stole from exploiting the commons can be used for something more valuable than personal gains of some managers and stakeholders.
makomk 7y ago
Different document. I think this is probably referring to https://insideclimatenews.org/sites/default/files/documents/1982%20Exxon%20Primer%20on%20CO2%20Greenhouse%20Effect.pdf https://insideclimatenews.org/sites/default/files/documents/... since that's what the news articles making the same claim are based on. There's a few things worthy of note in there. Firstly, according to the document Exxon wasn't at all sure that their products actually were causing global warming. Secondly, they predicted if it did happen it would have much lower impacts than claimed by all the climate activists and press pointing to Exxon's "accurate" predictions as proof they knew their products were destroying the world. Highlights inclue 1.9 to 3.1 C warming by 2090, no potentially serious climate-caused problems until the end of this century, and rising sea levels maybe causing coastal flooding in several centuries but only at the upper end of possible warming. Thirdly, they argue any major shift from fossil fuels would have had to be based on nuclear rather than solar and wind - not exactly popular with environmentalists, to put it lightly.

It is back in the news. https://insideclimatenews.org/news/24102019/massachusetts-sues-exxon-climate-change-investor-fraud-misleading-advertising-healey https://insideclimatenews.org/news/24102019/massachusetts-su...

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

xurias 7y ago

I mean, until somebody does something about it, there's value in repeating it over and over. Maybe at some point it'll sink in how criminal these companies are.

VvR-Ox 7y ago
Indeed! Let's just repeat it until nobody can forget it ever again and also drop tax avoidance by these huge companies in the mix. Maybe there is still hope for something we can call justice and probably the money they stole from exploiting the commons can be used for something more valuable than personal gains of some managers and stakeholders.

makomk 7y ago

Different document. I think this is probably referring to https://insideclimatenews.org/sites/default/files/documents/1982%20Exxon%20Primer%20on%20CO2%20Greenhouse%20Effect.pdf https://insideclimatenews.org/sites/default/files/documents/... since that's what the news articles making the same claim are based on. There's a few things worthy of note in there. Firstly, according to the document Exxon wasn't at all sure that their products actually were causing global warming. Secondly, they predicted if it did happen it would have much lower impacts than claimed by all the climate activists and press pointing to Exxon's "accurate" predictions as proof they knew their products were destroying the world. Highlights inclue 1.9 to 3.1 C warming by 2090, no potentially serious climate-caused problems until the end of this century, and rising sea levels maybe causing coastal flooding in several centuries but only at the upper end of possible warming. Thirdly, they argue any major shift from fossil fuels would have had to be based on nuclear rather than solar and wind - not exactly popular with environmentalists, to put it lightly.