When I send news tips to influential investigative groups / reporters / legal profession analysts on how the “ExxonKnew” lawsuit filings have an enslaved reliance on the meritless “reposition global warming” memos to support their claims that the industry ran ‘disinfo campaigns,’ the one thing that worries me is how those people might respond with, “oh, come on – the enviros surely would not be so dumb as to put all their faith for the last two decades into just one single major accusation like that. And surely there’s more than one corroborating source for that memo set beyond what you say is just one source. You must be exaggerating on all of this.”
No, I’m not. Watch this, it’s a short Instagram video, only a bit over two minutes long:
“MANOSPHERE,” by “liaandtheworld,” April 8, 2026
– Except – if any viewers clicking on my link there bail out of this utterly frantic person’s diatribe after just the first 20 seconds because of her raving delivery style and irritatingly brief flashes of images she uses to support her points, I’d fully understand. So, to spare my readers from that discomfort, I’ve utilized a free online ‘A.I.’ video text transcriber to get text which can be read in its full context. I’ll also cut to the chase below for the specific quotes I need, since this person spends nearly the first minute and a half of her diatribe on “petro-masculinity,” which has absolutely nothing to do with the climate issue.
Her distraction tactic of showing ‘fossil fuel industry evidence’ to drive home her fundamental point – starting at the 1:20 point and not lasting any longer than the 30 seconds afterward – is really no different than the brief little sequence in Al Gore’s 2006 movie where he relies on the same ‘evidence’ to kill any interest viewers might have about what’s in skeptic climate scientists’ science-based reports. This social media influencer’s tangent about ‘settled science’ packs no punch whatsoever without the ‘industry disinfo campaigns evidence‘ she blitzes in front of her face. Click on my screencapture timestamp links after the quoted section below, to see the critical images she flashed on the screen (I’ve used someone else’s Facebook video shorts upload of her Instagram video, since the FB version since it shows time stamps where I’ve paused the video):
1:20 to 1:50 point: … we actually have evidence from fossil fuel PR that targeted male-coded audiences of climate doubt for decades. In 1991, internal documents from a coal and utility-backed campaign literally said their goal was to reposition global warming as theory, not fact.
And they identified the most persuadable audience as older, less educated males who weren’t active information seekers. So then what do you get today? Well, it’s the same doubt tactics that have been repackaged into lifestyle and identity content. The persuasion is not on the science, it’s a deeper-rooted identity persuasion.
She apparently believed the ‘evidence’ images she found or was more likely fed, without questioning anything about them. I did; here’s where each one implodes:
1:23 – that’s the “Chicken Little” newspaper advertorial, on for barely a half second, which was never published anywhere. It’s been a mainstay of countless accusations across the internet for years about ‘energy company disinfo campaigns.’ I detail that fatal fault situation at length here, it’s the ad with the cropped-off lower section which – despite that suspicious condition – is cited as coming from Kert Davies’ Climate Files website by the main law firm filing the most “ExxonKnew” lawsuits across the country. Where is the proof that’s inadvertently seen showing the ad was never published? At the old Greenpeace USA / Ozone Action scans collection. Prior to creating Climate Files, Kert Davies had previously worked at both enviro groups, as I showed in my Background post on the man.
1:27 – this is the Edison Electric Institute’s (EEI) Bill Brier letter to Arizona Public Service company CEO O. Mark DeMichele. The tan color rectangles down at the lower left indicate how this scan comes from Kurt Davies’ page at his Climate Files site; move the cursor over the tan box at the side and it generates a clickable link which goes to a page where this ‘document’ can be shared. However, the scan itself is gleaned from the old Greenpeace USA / Ozone Action scans which date from sometime back in the mid- late-1990s. Why this latest social media influencer chose to show it is baffling, because the letter itself – when read slowly in its full context either at Davies’ page or at the original old Greenpeace USA / Ozone Action scan – does nothing to prove the actual 1991 “Information Council for the Environment” (ICE) PR campaign contained any disinformation. Give her some credit for showing – however briefly – the scan page where Bill Brier’s name was legible. Fault the lawyers handling the (now dismissed) Puerto Rico v Exxon lawsuit for relying on the other EEI Greenpeace/Ozone Action page scan (albeit seemingly surreptitiously through copies of those scans by the Union of Concerned Scientists), where they misread the name to be “E. Erie,” as I detailed in my dissection of that lawsuit.
1:29 – this is the current Wikipedia page on the ICE campaign. Even her straightforward bit here leads to many more questions rather than provide killer information. As I detailed back in 2014 about its long-term history, it was first placed in Wikipedia by an individual apparently having much too close of an association with one of the early promulgators of the worthless, never-implemented “reposition global warming” memo. The current Wikipedia page at least spells out the ICE name correctly. For 18 years, it did not.
1:32 – this is not just any copy of the notorious rejected EEI strategies page memo suggestions; it’s Kurt Davies’ page at his Climate Files site, where his upload has annotated tan boxes with his notes about particular bits. But it’s the same scan page with the same photocopy dust marks that dates all the way back to when Davies worked at Ozone Action.
1:36 – her effort here unravels under hard scrutiny at several levels. First, this is a cropped version (hold that thought for just a moment) of the “older, less educated males” memo page which the old Ozone Action group made famous way back in 1996, it was part of the larger rejected “reposition global warming” memos set. I detailed that wipeout situation al length here, where I showed congressional testimony from 1991 on how the the actual ICE campaign never restricted its message ‘in a sinister way’ to any narrow audience demographic, the PR campaign goal was to tell everyone about the skeptic side of the issue, which the mainstream media was irresponsibly not reporting. Unlike her use of the just-above tan-colored annotation blocks seen in Davies’ Climate Files page for the “reposition global warming” memo phrase, her image here has blue highlighting. Davies’ page has that same memo page area covered over in a huge tan notes annotation block. Readers can click on his button to “View and download PDF” for that scan page, but it isn’t formatted in a way to permit a cursor to highlight any words. At Desmogblog’s copy of the 50-page Greenpeace USA / Ozone Action scans (it actually credits those two groups) readers can marquee words to create a blue highlight …… and if they choose, they can crop the image to chop out the exact same other words which undermine this “liaandtheworld” social media influencer’s claim that the name of the ICE campaign was “The Information Council for the Environment” and that the whole ICE campaign PR effort was a ‘man-splaining’ means of spreading disinformation.
Oops.
Thus the basic support for this entire 2 minute+ lecture by social media influencer “liaandtheworld” relies on to explain how the “manosphere” operates from the position of putting out disinformation – i.e. ‘older less educated men who reposition global warming as not factual’ ….. is based on outright disinformation. Made exponentially worse – again – by the fact that this specific memo section on illogically narrow audience targeting was never implemented. Funny how that works out.
Even more comical at the end is how this person showcased the main hallmark of far-Left politics: psychological projection.
The persuasion is not on the science, it’s a deeper-rooted identity persuasion.
Exactly. As I pointed out in my somewhat off-topic March 13 blog post, the climate issue has never been about the climate science. To borrow the words from the legendary Rush Limbaugh, it’s the enviro-Left who have a deep-rooted need to feel that they have value on Earth. That they matter.
So, once again, the collective enviro-activist community shows the world how their entire accusation about a ‘fossil fuel industry-led disinformation’ effort is a one-trick pony. When the gullible folks out there, particularly the youth believers, start saying “you mean to tell me you did not check the veracity of the accusation you hurled in this video that you wanted me to trust??!” … the collapse of the faith in these types of climate issue ‘influencers’ could be epic. But if these ‘influencers’ – no matter who they are or where they operate – decide to roll on the folks who fed them this disinformation, well, that’s when their lives will actually take on some value.
Problem here is, how are the gullible folks out there going to learn about this? While it might be entertaining to place this “liaandtheworld” social media influencer under oath somewhere under penalty of perjury if she lies after being asked how she came across the the “Chicken Little” / the notorious “reposition global warming” strategies memo page and the “older, less educated males” memo page, she might honestly say she doesn’t remember. I personally encountered that situation a year ago when I asked a hapless professor how he got that same basic accusation material. What I suggest concerning where the major new would erupt, is if people with major investigative influence would ask the big name accusers – Naomi Oreskes / the Sher Edling law firm / the Milberg Coleman law firm / Rhode Island Senator Sheldon Whitehouse / (former) NM Senator Tom Udall where they got this same accusation material.
Apply enough pressure on those far bigger luminary names, and they may choose to roll on who it was who provided them with that worthless accusation material.
