As Chairman and CEO at EXXON MOBIL CORP, D. W. Woods made $33,402,868 in total compensation. Of this total $1,703,000 was received as a salary, $6,382,000 was received as a bonus, $0 was received in stock options, $24,939,000 was awarded as stock and $378,868 came from other types of
compensation. This information is according to proxy statements filed for the 2022 fiscal year.
COP 28 … Maybe still a crazy reality show….. but at least more reality for all!…
We hear complaints from the climate emergency advocates about the attendance at COP28 by the fossil resource sectors and even concerns about the event organizers agenda..
Putting aside that the whole COP thing is an overblown event devoid of any real purpose other than to allow the so called climate elites to virtue signal.. It is appropriate for all sides of the climate change argument to be present.
If the climate emergency activist cannot tolerate input from all sides of the very important argument that will effect EVERYONE on the planet then we must draw the conclusion that their scientific case that we have a climate emergency is weak.
Its high time for a much more open discussion on the UN climate emergency agenda that quite frankly is biased toward politics rather than science and is clearly unrealistic.
The oil and gas lobbyists have a reasonable and righteous purpose to be present as they represent the current ability of our civilization to survive and thrive and they serve the bulk of the population as we are all customers of their technology and without them, we would be back in the dark ages.
A good study for all of us would be to visualize a world that adopts NetZero and forces us toward a world without the use of fossil resources...It would mean …. No fuel, No plastics, No modern medicine, No internet, No modern manufacturing, No modern buildings, No food to feed the existing size of population... and much more life limiting essentials not mentioned.
We should welcome the dialogue and the balanced reality to ensure we get the climate change science and the associated policies correct.
Its now time for a truthful Scientific review….
It’s clear from the d growing level of scientific dissent that the climate science is far from settled, and the realization by many that even if NetZero were necessary, the policy solutions are highly unworkable and its clear that the current NetZero goals and plans are grossly unrealistic and place the whole global population into a prosperity and sustainability panic mode that is highly dangerous and irresponsible...
The way forward is to stop listening to anyone other than the top scientists on BOTH sides of the climate change emergency argument, and let’s convene a well-organized scientific review without the current political subjugation or confinement of the truth.
This review should be facilitated by the best, and included should be experts in the science of risk assessment.
This process must not be anything to do with The UN or the IPCC as they are far too biased to be objective.
The western nations that have the most to get right should host this process.
It should invite all factions of the scientific spectrum.
The outcome should be journalized by the best media entities so that the funding can be communicated without censorship to the general public in their own language.
What’s interesting is that the scientific data is mostly not in dispute, but the interpretation and the weight of the risk management is where the dissent resides.
I would lock out any activists or lobbyists from this review process as they have been most of the problem in distorting facts and have had far too much say already.
Then, at the conclusion of this process a summary report signed by all will be produced that will summarise the findings into a “range” of concurrence and risks.
This will then be presented to national governments that will have to craft what is hoped will be meaningful and manageable policies that balance the environmental versus economic risks on behalf of their populations.
Anything less than this attempt at a future plan is irresponsible, and without such a review process we will continue to follow dissent and ineptitude leading to the destruction of our civilization.
💀☠️the FUKKIN arabs are helping him Of Course!
2022:
As Chairman and CEO at EXXON MOBIL CORP, D. W. Woods made $33,402,868 in total compensation. Of this total $1,703,000 was received as a salary, $6,382,000 was received as a bonus, $0 was received in stock options, $24,939,000 was awarded as stock and $378,868 came from other types of
compensation. This information is according to proxy statements filed for the 2022 fiscal year.
******WTF****
COP 28 … Maybe still a crazy reality show….. but at least more reality for all!…
We hear complaints from the climate emergency advocates about the attendance at COP28 by the fossil resource sectors and even concerns about the event organizers agenda..
Putting aside that the whole COP thing is an overblown event devoid of any real purpose other than to allow the so called climate elites to virtue signal.. It is appropriate for all sides of the climate change argument to be present.
If the climate emergency activist cannot tolerate input from all sides of the very important argument that will effect EVERYONE on the planet then we must draw the conclusion that their scientific case that we have a climate emergency is weak.
Its high time for a much more open discussion on the UN climate emergency agenda that quite frankly is biased toward politics rather than science and is clearly unrealistic.
The oil and gas lobbyists have a reasonable and righteous purpose to be present as they represent the current ability of our civilization to survive and thrive and they serve the bulk of the population as we are all customers of their technology and without them, we would be back in the dark ages.
A good study for all of us would be to visualize a world that adopts NetZero and forces us toward a world without the use of fossil resources...It would mean …. No fuel, No plastics, No modern medicine, No internet, No modern manufacturing, No modern buildings, No food to feed the existing size of population... and much more life limiting essentials not mentioned.
We should welcome the dialogue and the balanced reality to ensure we get the climate change science and the associated policies correct.
Its now time for a truthful Scientific review….
It’s clear from the d growing level of scientific dissent that the climate science is far from settled, and the realization by many that even if NetZero were necessary, the policy solutions are highly unworkable and its clear that the current NetZero goals and plans are grossly unrealistic and place the whole global population into a prosperity and sustainability panic mode that is highly dangerous and irresponsible...
The way forward is to stop listening to anyone other than the top scientists on BOTH sides of the climate change emergency argument, and let’s convene a well-organized scientific review without the current political subjugation or confinement of the truth.
This review should be facilitated by the best, and included should be experts in the science of risk assessment.
This process must not be anything to do with The UN or the IPCC as they are far too biased to be objective.
The western nations that have the most to get right should host this process.
It should invite all factions of the scientific spectrum.
The outcome should be journalized by the best media entities so that the funding can be communicated without censorship to the general public in their own language.
What’s interesting is that the scientific data is mostly not in dispute, but the interpretation and the weight of the risk management is where the dissent resides.
I would lock out any activists or lobbyists from this review process as they have been most of the problem in distorting facts and have had far too much say already.
Then, at the conclusion of this process a summary report signed by all will be produced that will summarise the findings into a “range” of concurrence and risks.
This will then be presented to national governments that will have to craft what is hoped will be meaningful and manageable policies that balance the environmental versus economic risks on behalf of their populations.
Anything less than this attempt at a future plan is irresponsible, and without such a review process we will continue to follow dissent and ineptitude leading to the destruction of our civilization.