“Glenn Beck Brings Exxon-Mobil-linked Religious Front Group to Tell Christians Not to Believe in Climate Change” by Lee Fang, was posted on thinkprogress.org. This article is about an “exclusive investigation into the Cornwall Alliance— a corporate front designed to deceive evangelicals into doubting the science underpinning climate change.” Fang’s argument, stated in the second paragraph, is that Cornwall Alliance is actually a part of a group called the James Partnership who is run by Chris Rogers who’s firm worked with the bush administration, and is in cahoots with oil front group operative David Rothbard, president of CFACT and that the Cornwall Alliance is actually the Interfaith Stewardship Alliance, led by Exxon-Mobil, and they are the ones who are really trying to deceive evangelicals into thinking climate change is not real, for their own profit. I think that the argument is directed toward the general public, but maybe more toward the democrats because he is making accusation against the Republican Party. Fang backs up his argument that the Cornwall Alliance is actually a part of Rogers’ Consulting Firm, CDR Communications, Roger’s Nonprofit hub, the James Partnership, and the “Resisting the Green Dragon,” by showing public records that they are all registered at the same address. He also states that the reason they’re doing this is because of The Cornwall Declaration which “stressed a free-market environmental stewardship and emphasized that individuals and private organizations should be trusted to care for their own property without government intervention” which means that the government could not regulate them even if climate change was their fault. To make his point, Fang’s says “according to disclosures, CFACT is funded by at least $542,000 from ExxonMobil, $60,500 from Chevron, and $1,280,000 from Scaife family foundations, which are rooted in wealth from Gulf Oil and steel interests.” So the oil companies are behind CFACT which is behind the James Partnership which is behind the Cornwall Alliance, which make the audience think that these companies do this to try and hide what their real intentions are. Overall Fang has done is research well, given a lot of strong evidence for his argument, and I agree with him. Fang relies on the fact the oil companies are funding CFACT, but the assumption is that the money is for that purpose, the money can be for something else CFACT does for the companies, but it sure does stir up a lot of questions.
No comments:
Post a Comment