Who has more scientific credibility? NASA or EXXON?

Question

NASA scientists say that Global Warming is caused by man and EXXON scientisits say it is a hoax? Who to believe? Hmmmm

Gee that is a hard one. What do you think ?

Answer 1

Why do you believe that intelligent and knowledgeable people who don't buy into the greenhouse warming thing must be funded by the evil oil giants?  Or can you not prove your arguments adequately and thus fall back into character assassination rather than factual refutation?

Answer 2

This is a rhetorical question right?

Answer 3

I GUESS THEIR'S ALWAYS A FEW THAT HAVE TO GO AGAINST NATURE'S WAY, EVEN THOUGH THEIR WRONG. A FEW AGAINST 31,000 IS IGNORANT, EVEN BY NASA. HERE YOU PROVE IT TO YOUR SELF. WATCH A FOREST FIRE, DO YOU SEE THE AIRCRAFT COMING IN TO DROP THEIR LOADS OF WATER, IF THE SMOKE DID'NT DECIPATE IN THE FRIDGID TEMPERATURES, THOSE AIRCRAFT WOULD'NT BE ABLE TO SEE WHERE TO DROP THEIR LOADS ON THE FIRE. ALSO FOREST TREES ARE ABOUT 160 FEET HIGH. SO IF YOU CAN SEE THE AIRCRAFT COMING IN,  THEN THE  SMOKE IS DECIPATING LESS THAN 200 FEET.

Answer 4

believe it or not, most people believe ExxonMobil over anyone.

I think Exxon pulled funding just because they've finished brainwashing everyone and now it's far too late to do anything.

mission accomplished, and the bad guys won

Answer 5

There is an important distinction that needs to be made here.

We're not talking about scientists who work for Exxon (mainly petroleum geologists who know diddly squat about global warming).  We're talking about scientists who have taken money from Exxon in order to produce arguments which undermine the man-made global warming theory.  They are paid to produce a desired result.

That's not how science works, that's how propaganda works.

NASA's mission is to produce accurate unbiased scientific data.  NASA also employs some of the smartest minds on the planet, including the head of NASA GISS - James Hansen - who is one of the foremost climate scientists in the world.

Exxon pays people to lie like this: http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;...

Although to be fair to Exxon, they have finally started pulling back their funding from right-wing think tanks who deny AGW.

Between an unbiased scientific organization and scientists paid to produce a particular result, who has more scientific credibility?

Anyone who said Exxon is in complete and utter denial.

Answer 6

None of the above.

My 2 cents.

Answer 7

I think I'd follow NASA if I wanted to know about global warming a space flight and such.

Drilling techniques and oil exploration, Exxon any day.

Answer 8

Exxon has a group of very qualified scientists.  NASA is a government agency with political figures appointed by biased government officials.  I personally wouldn't trust what either said without looking at the evidence.  As a geologist, I can say that those that think there are geologist at Exxon that are bent on destroying the world for profit, are very much mistaken.  I would tend to believe what Exxon scientists say over NASA.  NASA is a space organization.  Exxon deals with producing oil.  Both are dealing with effects of CO2 as a tangent to their more important goals.

Answer 9

"the accumulation of greenhouse gases in the Earth's atmosphere poses risks that may prove significant for society and ecosystems."

-- Exxon's 2006 report on "Tomorrow's Energy"

Exxon has faced the reality longer than some posters on YA.

Answer 10

I doubt any Exxon scientists actually say it's a hoax. Some may express doubt about how serious the problem is, but I don't think any would be likely to consider it a hoax. That's a view expressed only by the most uninformed individuals on yahoo answers.

But as far as who's more credible in the realm of Global Warming, it would clearly be NASA.  Exxon scientists are mostly Geologists and Chemists (neither which are likely to be involved in the study of climate), whereas NASA has more climate scientists than any other organization in the world.

Answer 11

.  Both have some very good scientist  ANd it looks like Exxon as seen the light.

Answer 12

I think that you have a bias towards EXXON scientist.

Answer 13

Theres no question over this.

Nasa are a governmental organisation, who get their funding from the government, and aim to collect data for scientific advancement and exploration. They gain no advantage from misleading the public with false interpretations of research. There is no conflict of interest amongst their staff.

ExxonMobil, however, are a private corporation. Their revenue is based entirely on exploitation of hydrocarbon reserves and petroleum products - such as gasoline. These products are known to produce carbon dioxide, which contributes to climate change. As such, they stand to lose a great deal if people use less oil, whereas they stand to profit in vast sums by convincing people to keep using oil and that climate change is a hoax.

With reference to global warming, I would trust NASA considerably more so that ExxonMobil, mostly because of a conflict of interest.

Answer 14

What you may not realize is that ALL of NASA does not agree with your statement. The ones you hear are the administrators in charge of budgets and the like. Oh wait, I forgot, the administration muzzled Hansen so how did you know about it? You must be an insider. LOL

If I were able to increase my budget by claiming a false theory, I to may be tempted....Nah. Sorry, but I have some self respect.

As far as the Exxon thing, you really are either kidding or misinformed. Many of the studies have NOTHING to do with oil companies. Sure some are financed by oil companies, but so what? Are they not allowed to research the issue and make an informed decision? If we use your theory, no study can be financed by any party which has a stake in the outcome. Sorry, but those are the only people who do finance science. As for the funding for pro-AGW studies, your theory effectively eliminates all studies financed by the IPCC (their only mission is to prove AGW), governments (they are already using this a means to increase taxes, and their power), any scientific group who benefits from increased grant money.

Maybe you need to mature and realize that the funding is not the issue. The science is what matters. And this is why most of us realize that it is  a big hoax.

Answer 15

This is a no-brainer of course; the answer is NASA. Though there are plenty of people with no brain who will continue to source "Think Tanks" and individuals funded by Exxon.

Edit. I was surprised to see that some people below actually picked Exxon, and I believe that their answers were sincere and sarcastic. It would be interesting to see who these same people believe is more honest on the dangers of second hand smoking: the Surgeon General or the  R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Company?

Answer 16

NASA is broke, Exxon had record product sales,   Hmmmmm

NASA has had how many ships explode?

Exxon has had how many ships explode?

Any other commits?

Answer 17

'Tis a hard one, my friend.  You can tell Exxon is trying to fool you into thinking Global Warming is a hoax because they want profit; they are an independent company!  NASA has more credibility because they are a government-run organization and they aren't influenced by profit like Exxon.

Answer 18

Let's see.  NASA can send men to the moon and bring them back. The U.S. and the world then reaps the benefits from the technology used in developing the program.

Exxon Valdez.  They changed the name, to Exxon Mediterranean, but to me that defines them.

NASA has stepped up and provided results time and time again. Exxon reaps obscene profits and discourages competition, while befouling the water, air, and soil.

Gee, that is a tough one.

Answer 19

I would say Exxon because they have used statistics and economics (forms of mathematical science) to s***w us all.  NASA landed someone on the moon, big deal!  Exxon is landing 200 million people into bankruptcy.

Answer 20

Actually, Exxon just pulled its funding from the research groups that it was funding to refute evidence of global warming. Looks like maybe even Exxon is willing to start building a better future of sustainable energy (that they will attempt to control).

Answer 21

Of course nasa they have more scientific proof than exxon. does exxon has already goes to the moon and observe the earth right there of course not. nasa has more credibility than exxon.