[redpoint5]

I suppose I'd like to know more about the Koch Bros since the environmental religion type view them as worse than Stalin and Hitler combined.

As far as I can tell, they appear to be genuine in wanting human flourishing to continue and expand, but that doesn't mean they are always correct in how to pursue that end. Perhaps that their main industry depends on fossil fuels influences their receptivity to negative consequences of fossil fuel consumption, but they appear to be concerned more with winning issues they value than a particular political party holding power. They've made political contributions to Democrats, for example.

... and then one of them died not to long ago, if I recall correctly.

Probably the Koch Bros are to the left as George Soros is to the right. Neither will be around much longer.

EDIT: Listened to episode 2.

Koch Bros are in favor of economic prosperity for the US, which naturally makes them opposed to anything that is anti-prosperity. Unilateral carbon taxation is both ineffective and anti-prosperity, so that's why they chose that position. It's still the position most Americans would favor.

In episode 3 is Frontline going to discuss the economic cost and the ripple effect through the future if carbon taxation had been implemented? Are they going to discuss how cap and trade is about the dumbest way to tax fossil fuel consumption because it adds tons of unnecessary administrative overhead? Is Frontline going to show how economic prosperity and fossil fuel consumption are, for the time being, inextricably linked?

This episode has the clip of Obama saying we would look back and see his presidency as being the beginning of a healing earth. He can't be talking about CO2 emissions, because global CO2 skyrocketed during and following his presidency. Even in the US emissions have remained relatively steady, regardless who is president. Only Covid seriously put a dent in consumption.

If they're going to portray various people and groups as villians for being opposed to something, they had better let those people steel-man their reasons for doing so.

This series seems to clumsily walk around the various elephants under the rug, but perhaps they are saving those for future episodes. I shall hold my breath.

EDIT2: I'm pretty slow, but here's what the stated purpose of the series is;

"investigating the fossil fuel industry’s history of casting doubt and delaying action on climate change. "

They've conveniently focused narrowly enough that any discussion about certain climate actions being reasonable are not in scope. In other words, they want the viewers to "think past the sale" by assuming anything a politician would do under the guise of "for the planet" is certainly good.