The Denial Machine

Who is keeping the debate of global warming alive?
The documentary shows how fossil fuel corporations have kept the global warming debate alive long after most scientists believed that global warming was real and had potentially catastrophic consequences. It shows that companies such as Exxon Mobil are working with top public relations firms and using many of the same tactics and personnel as those employed by Phillip Morris and RJ Reynolds to dispute the cigarette-cancer link in the 1990s. Exxon Mobil sought out those willing to question the science behind climate change, providing funding for some of them, their organizations and their studies.

In the past few years, a firestorm has engulfed the debate about global warming. This issue has pitted science against spin, with inflammatory words from both sides. Former Vice-President Al Gore’s recent Nobel Peace Prize in recognition of his work on global warming, only served to heighten the rhetoric on both sides of the debate.

How could scientific fact, which many believe could determine the very future of the planet, become a political battleground, left versus right, environmentalist versus climate change sceptic?

Global warming: potential costs?
A 2006 British report estimated that the projected costs of global warming to be as costly as both world wars and the Great Depression added together. Yet, with such consequences, some scientists still insist that climate change, if it is happening at all, could be a good thing. The Denial Machine investigates the roots of the campaign to negate the science and the threat of global warming. It tracks the activities of a group of scientists, some of whom previously consulted for Big Tobacco, and who are now receiving donations from major coal and oil companies.

The Denial Machine also explores how the arguments supported by oil companies were adopted by policymakers in both Canada and the US and helped form government policy.

Join The Conversation

7 Comments / User Reviews

Leave Your Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

  1. 99% you have known, eh? You have known none. 99% of zero is zero. Names and phone numbers, or you are bullshitting.

  2. Hmm, I would like to keep an open mind on this but the fact is that is impossible as 99% of the anti-AGW scientists I have known over the last 10 years or so have received absolutely ZERO outside(corporate) funding for their work, it comes from their own pockets and not in very large amounts – hence the massive amount of pro-AGW propaganda and small amount of anti-AGW propaganda reaching the public these days through the mainstream media(expensive), and they’re about even in the online realm now(a lot cheaper).

    Last I checked it was the AGW crowd that had 90% of the money backing it(from companies like Shell Oil), only a few of the ‘big name’ anti-AGW scientists get any funding from anywhere but their own pockets, or the small research groups they form and get small donations for from ‘little people’ like me.

    Seriously, if you honestly believe the ‘big money’ is opposing AGW you need to consider how much money it takes to wage such a massive PR campaign as AGW has for 2 decades now throughout the media, and how the biggest profiteers from the whole game so far are the big banks and corporations backing the AGW crusade and carbon credit scheme that is already making them piles of money as they easily abuse a system specifically designed to be easily abused.

    Maybe that ‘big money’ was hiding under the bench at the old rundown restaurant I attended a meeting of opponents to AGW at a couple years back. Actually, it was probably hidden inside that old projector that didn’t work, hence why it didn’t work!(Duh, I’m a genius…)

    Maybe that’s why most of the forums I attend to discuss the real climate change science(not AGW crap) online look like they were made by homeless people with little or no money or professional assistance, cause all their money is going into TV and newspaper/magazine ads and video’s and pushing U.N agenda’s… oh wait that’s the AGW camp, my mistake.

    I support the environment by not letting myself get distracted from the real environmental problems and dangers we face today by some stupid CO2(natural fertilizer) nonsense that says the tiny amount of CO2 humans account for(4% of the total) is going to destroy us all.

    I think the burial/dumping of radioactive waste or the large spread use of dangerous pesticides and other chemicals and radioactive fertilizers is much worse for the world and is still rampant today thanks to the environmental movement being hijacked by CO2 bullshit the past 2 decades and only being minorly concerned about the real threats to our environment.

    Not to mention the massive environmental impact of every war that is fought around the world, especially American/Israeli/Western fought/backed wars that love depleted uranium, phosphorous, chemical bombs and gases, etc.

    Here’s a question – does blowing an Afghan wedding party to pieces produce any significant amounts of CO2?

    How about a few dozen wedding parties?

    Seriously, I really am curious how much CO2 the U.S is producing for each civilian and/or ‘terrorist’ they spend trillions to blow apart these days, maybe some figures on that might ignite the western anti-war movement that has dwindled into silence since Obama took over the White House and falsely alleviated a lot of guilt.

    Maybe when we’ve actually figured out all of the factors that influence our climate and there’s some hard evidence rather than just theory to support AGW I’ll reconsider, but for now I prefer to stay focused on real issues of more importance to humanity.

    Oh by the way, I wonder how much CO2 that volcano in Iceland gave off compared to how much the entire AGW campaign has kept out of our atmosphere since it’s inception? Actually, how many volcanoes have erupted in that time anyways… and how many animals have taken shits or died and decomposed during that time?

    Bloody hell the whole world really is against you all, no wonder it’s been almost 30 years since AGW was invented and you haven’t made much progress in calling off doomsday yet.

    Don’t worry, a few billion or trillion more taxpayer dollars invested in AGW science should fix that…

    • A pathetic list of just about every wearisome thousand times falsified piece of shit churned out by the fossil fuel lobby and their shills. And you suck it all up and then spew it all out like a good little useful idiot.
      Humans pump out over 120 times more CO2 than every active volcano on the planet. Something you could find out for yourself in two minutes.
      And that tired old ‘it’s only a tiny percentage’ BS. Maybe you should look up the Carbon Cycle seeing as you didn’t pay attention in class. You know what the word ‘cycle’ means right?
      It’s the EXTRA CO2 that we have dug out of the deep earth and put back in the atmosphere that is the problem dumbo. Not the 96% that has been cycling for millions of years.
      And ‘it’s been 30 years since AGW was invented’!!!! Bwahahahahahaahaaaa!
      It was first proved that CO2 was a greenhouse gas in 1896 you moron. It was already mainstream science by the 1950s. Utter and complete ignorance. Just shut up and go away.
      You are simply embarrassing.

    • What an idiot. You really think the fossil fuel corporations are just going to sit back and lose 18 trillion dollars in stranded assets without a fight.
      There’s none so blind.

    • breath buddy, breath…

    • You talk funny!