What is left out, conveniently, is the Platonic, Freemasonic "Religion of Technology."
The fossil fuel industry has enjoyed especially lavish profits. As Jessica Corbett reported for Common Dreams in July 2022, the eight largest oil companies’ profits spiked 235 percent between the second quarter of 2021 and the second quarter of 2022, resulting in a combined $52 billion profit, according to an analysis by Accountable.US. ExxonMobil profited $17.85 billion; Chevron, $11.62 billion; and Shell, $11.47 billion. Notably, in 2021-2022, the oil and gas industry spent more than $200 million lobbying Congress to oppose climate action.
As Johnson reported in December 2022, the main beneficiaries of big corporations’ windfall profits have been the ultrarich. He cited EPI data showing that the average income of someone in the bottom 90 percent of the workforce in 2021 was $36,571, while the average income of the wealthiest 0.1 percent that same year was $3,312,693, or more than ninety times as much. In 1979, this discrepancy was not nearly so great, with someone in the bottom 90 percent earning $28,415, while the average individual in the top 0.1 percent earned $586,222, or 20.6 times as much. As of 2021, the share of wealth earned by the 0.1 percent had hit a historic high, while the wealth of the bottom 90 percent had sunk to a record low.
Makes you wonder if the Religion of Technology funded evangelical christianity ever since the boom of big oil? Professor David F. Noble went into this. So does my former classmate (and soccer team mate whom I scored on once!). I can go public since a famous Vikings player was in the news today for having scored against his own team also.
As I write I'm not able to open our doors - too much wildfire smoke from Canada - it's too dangerous to breathe the air outside!!
Dead Heat: Global Justice and Global Warming
Published by Seven Stories Press (edition First Printing), 2002
https://www.projectcensored.org/corporate-profits-record-high/
Today's "extreme weather" events (record-breaking heat waves, droughts, and melting ice caps) foreshadow an increasingly unstable and dire future. Yet, despite all, the Bush administration continued to reject the Kyoto Protocol, to deny the catastrophic consequences of oil dependency, and to define the politics of oil as the politics of U.S. unilateralism, domination, and war. In Dead Heat, Tom Athanasiou and Paul Baer explain the threat and the science of drawing the line before it becomes real. This science (and their sources are the very latest) demonstrates that, if greenhouse pollution is not drastically reduced, the earth's climate system is likely to shift—and perhaps soon—onto a terrifying and irreversible path. Then, on this grim ground, they proceed to argue that only a social justice approach can shape the necessary compromise between the rich world and the poor; that, in effect, justice can make it possible to cut a path to sustainability, even on this, a planet riven with explosive national, ideological, and class divides.
The problem is time. Today, the global average surface warming is only 0.6 degrees Centigrade, and already the climate is changing fast. And the science shows that any future in which we hold the warming to a maximum of 2°C (and 2°C, by the way, would mean massive destruction) will require decisive global action; something like a "global Marshall Plan"
sounds like the "satanic UN"?
This mini-doc expose on the Lucis Trust theosophy control of the UN is something I'm well aware - I wrote a recent book on this "There Is No Spoon" - but that doesn't mean that a Global Marshall Plan is not needed!
[Note: See, for example, Geoffrey Supran and Naomi Oreskes, “What Exxon Mobil Didn’t Say about Climate Change,” New York Times, August 22, 2017; Michael Hiltzik, “A New Study Shows How Exxon Mobil Downplayed Climate Change When It Knew the Problem Was Real,” Los Angeles Times, August 22, 2017].
Robinson Meyer, “It Wasn’t Just Oil Companies Spreading Climate Denial,” The Atlantic, September 7, 2022.
Zoya Teirstein, “America’s Electric Utilities Spent Decades Spreading Climate Misinformation,” Grist, September 7, 2022; republished by WhoWhatWhy
, September 14, 2022.
dozens of universities in the United States continue to accept millions of dollars from ExxonMobil, BP, Chevron, Shell, ConocoPhillips, and allied interests, such as Koch Industries, to fund climate and energy research. Based on its examination of twenty-seven universities that together received more than $667 million in fossil fuel donations or pledges between 2010 and 2020, Data for Progress reported that the top recipients of fossil fuel funding were the University of California, Berkeley; the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign; George Mason University; Stanford; the University of Texas at Austin; MIT; Princeton; Rice; Texas A&M; and Harvard. UC Berkeley alone accepted $154 million during the 2010s.
https://www.projectcensored.org/fossil-fuel-money-climate-energy-research/
No comments:
Post a Comment