Editing Global Climate Coalition (section)

== Reception ==
In 2015, the [[Union of Concerned Scientists]] compared GCC's role in the public policy debate on climate change to the roles in the public policy debate on tobacco safety of the [[Tobacco Institute]], the tobacco industry's lobbyist group, and the Council for Tobacco Research, which promoted misleading science.<ref>{{harvnb|Mulvey|Shulman|2015}}: With key members bowing out, the GCC announced in 2000 that it would undergo a “strategic restructuring” much as the tobacco industry, under growing pressure, gave up its lobbying arm (the Tobacco Institute) and its wing devoted to promoting misleading science about the links between tobacco and disease (the Council for Tobacco Research) as part of the 1998 master settlement agreement with U.S. states.</ref><ref>{{harvnb|Rahm|2009}}: The strategy drew on tactics pioneered by the tobacco industry in the 1960s - to promote doubt and uncertainty in the minds of the public that human actions were not contributing to global warming.</ref> Environmentalist [[Bill McKibben]] said that, by promoting doubt about the science, "throughout the 1990s, even as other nations took action, the fossil fuel industry's Global Climate Coalition managed to make American journalists treat the accelerating warming as a he-said-she-said story."<ref>{{cite news |title=Climate of Denial |first=Bill |last=McKibben |author-link=Bill McKibben |date=May 2005 |magazine=[[Mother Jones (magazine)|Mother Jones]] |url=https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2005/05/climate-denial |access-date=February 10, 2016 |archive-date=May 6, 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210506210704/https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2005/05/climate-denial/ |url-status=live }}</ref> According to the ''[[Los Angeles Times]]'', GCC members integrated projections from climate models into their operational planning while publicly criticising the models.<ref>{{harvnb|Lieberman|Rust|2015}}: O’Keefe said no one in the coalition denied the existence of global warming, but there was uncertainty about how well the models could project its future impact. What coalition members felt certain about, he said, was that any government-mandated emission reductions would have “a clear negative impact,” including unemployment, higher energy prices and a drop in the U.S. standard of living. When it came to their own investments, though, coalition members relied on scientific projections — from rising sea levels to thawing permafrost — to design and protect multibillion-dollar investments in pipelines, gas developments and offshore oil rigs.</ref>

Former Vice President [[Al Gore]] described the oil companies' blocking campaign as "the most serious crime of the post-World War Two era".<ref name="BBC">{{cite news|url=https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-62225696|publisher=BBC|author1=Jane McMullen|title=The audacious PR plot that seeded doubt about climate change|date=23 July 2022|access-date=23 July 2022|archive-date=23 July 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220723034755/https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-62225696|url-status=live}}</ref>