Climate Change Denial

[nwdiver]

The EIA has a good brief rundown of leaded gasoline. It was not until the 1970s that it became apparent leaded gasoline was harmful.

History of gasoline - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

A brief history of gasoline.

www.eia.gov

Would have been a lot sooner if not for misinformation from villains.

CONTAMINATED AND NATURAL LEAD ENVIRONMENTS OF MAN​

When would you say it became 'apparent' carbon emissions were harmful?

 

[Texas Electric]

What you fail to accept is that plenty of petroleum engineers are either more than capable of self delusion like Robert Kehoe or more than happy to accept personal gain at the expense of collective loss.

Robert Kehoe was not a petroleum engineer. He was a toxicologist who was hired to develop protocols for handling tetra ethyl lead (TEL) after workers fell ill from lead poisoning.

Robert A. Kehoe - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

 

[Texas Electric]

Would have been a lot sooner if not for misinformation from villains.

CONTAMINATED AND NATURAL LEAD ENVIRONMENTS OF MAN​

When would you say it became 'apparent' carbon emissions were harmful?

Calling somebody a villain doesn’t make them a villain. You are judging somebody from your comfy position of 20-20 hindsight.

 

[nwdiver]

Calling somebody a villain doesn’t make them a villain. You are judging somebody from your comfy position of 20-20 hindsight.

.... so you think a toxicologist honestly thought pumping lead out of tailpipes was harmless? Just a coincidence that their self-interest happened to align with that?

Do you also believe these guys were being honest? ..... REALLY? If 'villain' isn't a fitting definition for someone that intentionally uses deception to profit at the expense of society..... what is?

 

[Texas Electric]

Would have been a lot sooner if not for misinformation from villains.

CONTAMINATED AND NATURAL LEAD ENVIRONMENTS OF MAN​

When would you say it became 'apparent' carbon emissions were harmful?

After Richard Nixon launched the EPA, they hit the ground running on cleaning up the environment in the 1970s.

 

[nwdiver]

After Richard Nixon launched the EPA, they hit the ground running on cleaning up the environment in the 1970s.

??? Why did we need the EPA? I thought that once alternatives were available they would be used. 'petroleum engineers live on this planet too. They have every bit the incentive to clean up emissions as anybody else.' .... right?

 

[Texas Electric]

.... so you think a toxicologist honestly thought pumping lead out of tailpipes was harmless? Just a coincidence that their self-interest happened to align with that?

Do you also believe these guys were being honest? ..... REALLY? If 'villain' isn't a fitting definition for someone that intentionally uses deception to profit at the expense of society..... what is?

You are linking two unrelated issues. I have no idea what was going through Kehoe’s mind. Neither do you. You are simple-mindedly substituting what you think was going on between Kehoe’s ears. You are also judging somebody based on 1924 technology from today’s standard. You are taking the work of a toxicologist from a century back, and extrapolating it to the entire petroleum industry. That is flimsy!

 

[Texas Electric]

??? Why did we need the EPA? I thought that once alternatives were available they would be used. 'petroleum engineers live on this planet too. They have every bit the incentive to clean up emissions as anybody else.' .... right?

Since you like analogies with things unrelated, I would say for the same reason Fish and Wildlife regulation is supported by hunters and fishermen.

 

[nwdiver]

You are linking two unrelated issues.

??? How are they unrelated? It's industry sowing doubt to protect their product. Do you believe the tobacco industry? Then why do you believe the ethyl corp?

So you do accept we need government regulations to drive change and not simply alternatives? Just as we need Fish and Game to prevent poaching?

 

[ohmman]

It was not until the 1970s that it became apparent leaded gasoline was harmful.

Leaded Gas Was a Known Poison the Day It Was Invented

For most of the mid-twentieth century, lead gasoline was considered normal. But lead is a poison, and burning it has had dire consequences

www.smithsonianmag.com

This is patently false, and I'm worried you are bordering on trolling. Please stick to factual posts, or admit that you're unsure when you posit something that is an observation that isn't based in fact. That goes for anyone posting in this thread but your example is so blatant as to be viewed as purposefully misleading. We've known lead as a poison for thousands of years, and aerosolized lead is no different.

Additionally, this is off topic. This thread is about climate change. I'm willing to move off topic discussion away, if that's what it takes. But I'm not eager to spend a bunch of time dealing with posts that aren't made in good faith.

 

[Texas Electric]

Leaded Gas Was a Known Poison the Day It Was Invented

For most of the mid-twentieth century, lead gasoline was considered normal. But lead is a poison, and burning it has had dire consequences

www.smithsonianmag.com

This is patently false, and I'm worried you are bordering on trolling. Please stick to factual posts, or admit that you're unsure when you posit something that is an observation that isn't based in fact. That goes for anyone posting in this thread but your example is so blatant as to be viewed as purposefully misleading. We've known lead as a poison for thousands of years, and aerosolized lead is no different.

Additionally, this is off topic. This thread is about climate change. I'm willing to move off topic discussion away, if that's what it takes. But I'm not eager to spend a bunch of time dealing with posts that aren't made in good faith.

This is from the Energy Information Administration.

History of gasoline - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

A brief history of gasoline.

www.eia.gov

The 1970s was when action was taken to remove lead from gasoline.

 

[Texas Electric]

The complete phase out date of leaded gasoline was Jan 1, 1996. Do you not trust the EIA?

 

[drtimhill]

What you fail to accept is that the petroleum engineers live on this planet too. They have every bit the incentive to clean up emissions as anybody else. Government and private sector scientists have a long history of working together on improving environmental conditions.

I think you are being naive. What do you think would happen in a large, profitable corporation if an engineer suddenly said "I have discovered one of our products appears to be bad for the environment?" (a) The corporation thanks the engineer, goes public with the news, and withdraws the product, or (b) the corporation gets the engineer to sign a whole bunch of legally binding documents to shut him up and then quietly get rid of him?

When they get big enough, corporations are not shaped by their employees, their employees are shaped by the corporation. Engineers who are concerned are sidelined and/or removed, and engineers who dont care and/or are in denial are successful.

For every example you can give of government/corporations working together I can give you a dozen counter examples. That is the nature of the free market .. a corporation wants to grow and be profitable without limit. It's darwinian natural selection. it is therefore inevitable that any regulatory body, governmental or otherwise, is either going to be in conflict with the corporations it governs, or corrupted and conspiring with those corporations. I'm not judging this, its actually a very efficient system in the darwinian sense, but imagining that corporations are all benevolent and caring is naive .. in the long term those that are caring are either eaten by those that are callous or gradually evolve to be uncaring. Look at Google for example, a company whose motto used to be "do no evil" and is now a huge bloated business based around extracting as much personal data as possible on every single person on the planet (and fights any legislation that restricts its ability to do that).

 

[nwdiver]

The 1970s was when action was taken to remove lead from gasoline.

Point is that the harm was known and action delayed intentionally for decades by industry intransigence and lies just like climate change.

 

[Texas Electric]

Per the moderator - back to climate. La Niña pattern is shaping up for the Fall and Winter. This occurs when sea surface temperatures are below normal in the Tropical Pacific.

La Niña pattern shaping up for the fall and winter across the U.S.

COLUMBUS (WCMH) – There are strong signs that a La Niña pattern will return later in the year and likely linger through much of the upcoming winter, according to NOAA’s Climate Prediction Center. T…

www.nbc4i.com

 

[Texas Electric]

I think you are being naive. What do you think would happen in a large, profitable corporation if an engineer suddenly said "I have discovered one of our products appears to be bad for the environment?" (a) The corporation thanks the engineer, goes public with the news, and withdraws the product, or (b) the corporation gets the engineer to sign a whole bunch of legally binding documents to shut him up and then quietly get rid of him?

When they get big enough, corporations are not shaped by their employees, their employees are shaped by the corporation. Engineers who are concerned are sidelined and/or removed, and engineers who dont care and/or are in denial are successful.

For every example you can give of government/corporations working together I can give you a dozen counter examples. That is the nature of the free market .. a corporation wants to grow and be profitable without limit. It's darwinian natural selection. it is therefore inevitable that any regulatory body, governmental or otherwise, is either going to be in conflict with the corporations it governs, or corrupted and conspiring with those corporations. I'm not judging this, its actually a very efficient system in the darwinian sense, but imagining that corporations are all benevolent and caring is naive .. in the long term those that are caring are either eaten by those that are callous or gradually evolve to be uncaring. Look at Google for example, a company whose motto used to be "do no evil" and is now a huge bloated business based around extracting as much personal data as possible on every single person on the planet (and fights any legislation that restricts its ability to do that).

The problem with your analysis is that you fail to realize a corporation wants to please their customers. I don’t think I need to explain to you why.

 

[JRP3]

Per the moderator - back to climate. La Niña pattern is shaping up for the Fall and Winter. This occurs when sea surface temperatures are below normal in the Tropical Pacific.

La Niña pattern shaping up for the fall and winter across the U.S.

COLUMBUS (WCMH) – There are strong signs that a La Niña pattern will return later in the year and likely linger through much of the upcoming winter, according to NOAA’s Climate Prediction Center. T…

www.nbc4i.com

La Nina/El Nino events are not caused by human induced climate change.

 

[ohmman]

The 1970s was when action was taken to remove lead from gasoline.

That was not in question. You suggested that we only then learned that leaded gasoline was hazardous, which was why it was legislated out. That is blatantly false.

Thanks for moving on. I am moving these posts to a more appropriate thread.

 

[mspohr]

Business Insider: Fossil-fuel companies spent millions to play up your carbon footprint. The companies polluting the planet have spent millions to make you think carpooling and recycling will save us

Ben Franta is trying to collect every climate-related ad the oil and gas industry has ever produced. Franta, who is pursuing a law degree and PhD at Stanford, is among a small cohort of researchers who track fossil-fuel industry propaganda. These historians, social scientists, and activists have documented the extent to which major oil companies knew their products were changing the climate as early as the 1960s, and how they poured tens of millions of dollars into sowing doubt about the science through the 1990s. "Not to get too tin-hat-y, but once you start to see these ads over and over again, you see the common elements arise," Franta told Insider. So it was clear to him that around the year 2000, fossil-fuel companies changed marketing tactics. After decades of denial, they pivoted to blaming the climate crisis on you and me.

This approach — telling people to solve a crisis by changing their own habits — is a tried and true corporate tactic, pioneered by the tobacco and plastics industries. Now, fossil-fuel giants like Chevron, BP, and ExxonMobil have spent millions to convince the public that consumer choices and lifestyle changes will solve the problem.

 

[Texas Electric]

That was not in question. You suggested that we only then learned that leaded gasoline was hazardous, which was why it was legislated out. That is blatantly false.

Thanks for moving on. I am moving these posts to a more appropriate thread.

Here is the exact quote from the EIA:

“By the 1950s, cars were becoming bigger and faster. Gasoline octane increased, and lead was added to improve engine performance.
Unleaded gasoline was introduced in the 1970s when health problems from lead became apparent.”

That is what I was referring to. I wasn’t suggestion anything. Are you suggesting that the EIA is wrong, and I should have known that?