IF there was a prize for the most esoteric and stratospherically "out there" theory against human caused climate change, then surely Thomas Watson would be in line for this particular gong.
In an interview in January for the US-based internet radio show "It's Rainmaking Time", this 83-year-old Australian from Victoria told presenter Kim Greenhouse that carbon dioxide had nothing to do with climate change and that instead, natural variations in "magnetism" were responsible.
Watson said: "The term...
read more
Comments
I Smell a Rat
What do you want to bet he's probably being paid by Exxon to say those things? Typical denieralist.
Time for Desmogblog to get some dirt on this guy!
blinded
Don't you see the difference between someone who discloses their funding and someone who hides it?
Good point, Steve L.!
You've really hit on something there, Steve L.
Just why IS the CEO of Exxon hiding his funding sources??? If only we could find out which nefarious corporation is paying him?
I hope Desmogblog will get to the bottom of this.
Three question marks, indeed!
What are you trying to say? When someone pretends to be an honest broker or grassroots organisation but has a hidden agenda or source, as evidenced by attempts to hide their funding (e.g., friends of science), desmogblog is performing a legitimate service to expose them as having a conflict of interest or being an astroturf group. When someone has an obvious vested interest (e.g., Tillerson and Exxon-Mobil) and wades into debate on public policy, it's legitimate to point out why their pronouncements should be taken with numerous grains of salt. My point was that, contrary to your suggestion, desmogblog didn't have to dig up dirt on Tillerson since nobody would consider him an honest broker. What the hell was your point?
A little background on Mr
A little background on Mr Rex W Tillerson
Cash Compensation (FY December 2006)
Salary $1,500,000
Bonus $2,800,000
O
T
H
E
R Latest FY other short-term comp. $0
Latest FY other long-term comp. $8,709,495
Latest FY long-term incentive payout $0
Total $13,009,495
Stock Options (FY December 2006)
Number of options Market value
exercised 72,199 $2,355,728
unexercised 464,545 $7,477,219
unexercisable 0 $0
Total 536,744 $9,832,947
More here:
http://www.forbes.com/finance/mktguideapps/personinfo/FromPersonIdPersonTearsheet.jhtml?passedPersonId=932617
What?!!! Shocking.
Are you trying to tell us the CEO of Exxon is highly compensated?!
This is an outrage! Here I thought he'd be making somewhere around $18/hour.
Surely, he has stolen his salary and stock options from the cradles of starving Third World babies!
Now, now....
Don't get excited.
I think you should have a nice glass of warm milk, maybe a cookie and then have a little nappy.
When you wake up....just maybe you'll have a life...
Tillerson is telling it
Tillerson is telling it straight. Few countries in the world are energy independent. Could the US or Canada become completely energy independent? Possibly, but it would likely involve the construction of 100 to 200 nuclear reactors in North America.
Supply and demand
Interesting -- many people have a philosophical opposition to regulating the economy, and that is usually expressed with particular attention to supply. You seem to be in support of regulating the economy by maintaining domestic demand for a foreign good. Odd. Also strange is your assertion that Canada could not be energy independent without lots of nuclear. Canada is a net energy exporter:
http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/northamerica/engsupp.htm
I'm not against Canada developing more alternative energy (including nuclear), but it doesn't need to for energy independence.
Steve, if we wanted to be
Steve, if we wanted to be energy independent in Canada AND drastically reduce C02 emissions AND have this new energy source be affordable AND 7/24/365 reliable, yes, we would have to build many new nuclear plants here.
I agree that nuclear would likely increase
Your former comment was incorrect. This one is more accurate, but "many" is a relative term. It's unclear to me that the number of nuclear plants would be great relative to their acceptance. If a graduated carbon tax was implemented (with reductions in income tax), the market and democratic processes would determine how future energy needs could be sustainably met.
Agreed- Mr. Tillersons'
Agreed- Mr. Tillersons' statement is accurate and not worthy of attack. The U.S. is extremely dependent upon foreign energy sources and there is no obvious way to change the situation. While I would disagree with his use of the term "conceivable"- certainly we could come up with some solutions- there is likely not a viable means of making the U.S./Canada energy independent.
Whatever else he may be, Mr. Tillerson is not wrong in the quoted statement.
My opinion. Yours may vary.
Don't put the US and Canada
Don't put the US and Canada together in this matter. Canada has more energy than it needs.
ExMo Chief: energy independence is "isolationist"
According to the US Department of Energy Information, ExxonMobil is the second largest exporter of crude oil to the United States originating from the Persian Gulf.
http://www.bloglifetime.com/