Notices
Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Gore: Polluters Manipulate Climate Info

  1. #1 Gore: Polluters Manipulate Climate Info 
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Sacramento
    Posts
    237
    Well now isn't this the pot calling the kettle black!

    Gore: Polluters Manipulate Climate Info

    By GILLIAN WONG

    SINGAPORE (AP) - Research aimed at disputing the scientific consensus on global warming is part of a huge public misinformation campaign funded by some of the world's largest carbon polluters, former Vice President Al Gore said Tuesday.

    "There has been an organized campaign, financed to the tune of about $10 million a year from some of the largest carbon polluters, to create the impression that there is disagreement in the scientific community," Gore said at a forum in Singapore. "In actuality, there is very little disagreement."

    Gore likened the campaign to the millions of dollars spent by U.S. tobacco companies years ago on creating the appearance of scientific debate on smoking's harmful effects.

    "This is one of the strongest of scientific consensus views in the history of science," Gore said. "We live in a world where what used to be called propaganda now has a major role to play in shaping public opinion."
    http://apnews.myway.com/article/20070807/D8QS3JEO0.html


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2 Re: Gore: Polluters Manipulate Climate Info 
    Forum Ph.D. GhostofMaxwell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Thames estuary
    Posts
    851
    Quote Originally Posted by scpg02
    Well now isn't this the pot calling the kettle black!

    Gore: Polluters Manipulate Climate Info

    By GILLIAN WONG

    SINGAPORE (AP) - Research aimed at disputing the scientific consensus on global warming is part of a huge public misinformation campaign funded by some of the world's largest carbon polluters, former Vice President Al Gore said Tuesday.

    "There has been an organized campaign, financed to the tune of about $10 million a year from some of the largest carbon polluters, to create the impression that there is disagreement in the scientific community," Gore said at a forum in Singapore. "In actuality, there is very little disagreement."

    Gore likened the campaign to the millions of dollars spent by U.S. tobacco companies years ago on creating the appearance of scientific debate on smoking's harmful effects.

    "This is one of the strongest of scientific consensus views in the history of science," Gore said. "We live in a world where what used to be called propaganda now has a major role to play in shaping public opinion."
    http://apnews.myway.com/article/20070807/D8QS3JEO0.html
    He's talking out of his ass. For a start the very definition of a consensus is that its a majority view, not unanimous.

    I have no affiliation with any energy company or ever have had(I also dont even drive), but still see how green propaganda and false assertions have taken over the scientific caution in climate science.


    Es ist Zeit für sauberen



    You guys
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Sacramento
    Posts
    237
    Here is the other side of the story just for balance. I haven't read the whole thing yet but funding part on PDF page 2 caught my attention.

    CO2: The Greatest Scientific
    Scandal of Our Time

    by Zbigniew Jaworowski, M.D., Ph.D., D.Sc.

    This obviously is not the case with the IPCC, which is
    stuffed with money, and in agreement with the UN politics, which are dominated by greens and misanthropic fanaticism. During the past six years, the President of the United States devoted nearly $29 billion to climate research, leading the world with its unparalleled financial commitment (The White House 2007). This was about $5 billion per year, more than twice the amount spent on the Apollo Program ($2.3 billion per year), which in 1969 put man on the Moon. A side-effect of this situation, and of politicizing the climate issue, was described by meteorologist Piers Corbyn in the Weather Ac-tion Bulletin, December 2000: “The problem we are faced with is that the meteorological establishment and the global warming lobby research bodies which receive large funding are now apparently so corrupted by the largesse they receive that the scientists in them have sold their integrity.”

    The question arises: Were the decisions concerning this enormous funding for global warming research taken out of genuine
    concern that the climate is allegedly changing as a result of CO2 industrial emissions, or do some other undis-closed
    ideas stand behind this money, IPCC activity, Kyoto, and
    all the gruesome catastrophic propaganda the world is now exposed to? If this concern is genuine, then why do we not see a storm of enthusiastic environmentalists and United Nations officials demanding to replace all fossil-fuel plants with nuclear plants, which have zero emission of greenhouse gases,
    are environmentally friendly, more economical, and much
    safer for plant workers and much safer for the general population than other sources of energy?
    http://www.larouchepub.com/eiw/publi...11_science.pdf
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4 Re: Gore: Polluters Manipulate Climate Info 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    38
    Quote Originally Posted by GhostofMaxwell
    Quote Originally Posted by scpg02
    Well now isn't this the pot calling the kettle black!

    Gore: Polluters Manipulate Climate Info

    By GILLIAN WONG

    SINGAPORE (AP) - Research aimed at disputing the scientific consensus on global warming is part of a huge public misinformation campaign funded by some of the world's largest carbon polluters, former Vice President Al Gore said Tuesday.

    "There has been an organized campaign, financed to the tune of about $10 million a year from some of the largest carbon polluters, to create the impression that there is disagreement in the scientific community," Gore said at a forum in Singapore. "In actuality, there is very little disagreement."

    Gore likened the campaign to the millions of dollars spent by U.S. tobacco companies years ago on creating the appearance of scientific debate on smoking's harmful effects.

    "This is one of the strongest of scientific consensus views in the history of science," Gore said. "We live in a world where what used to be called propaganda now has a major role to play in shaping public opinion."
    http://apnews.myway.com/article/20070807/D8QS3JEO0.html
    He's talking out of his ass. For a start the very definition of a consensus is that its a majority view, not unanimous.

    I have no affiliation with any energy company or ever have had(I also dont even drive), but still see how green propaganda and false assertions have taken over the scientific caution in climate science.
    Out of his ass?
    There is going to be trillions of dollars made by Arab leaders who are dynastic rulers in coming years according to a TV oprogramme I saw from oil.
    Do you not consider it likely that they should invest money into their business by creating atmosphere of scientfic discussion where there is clarity - that coal and oil will eventually cause such great negative climate changes that it will soon be too late to reverse them.
    I think they are investing very smart.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,328
    Meanwhile Iranians assert that their economy depends on cheap electricity plus energy export, and that to continue this strategically they must master the nuclear fuel cycle. Iran happens to sit atop a huge uranium reserve.

    I'm posting from the country exporting CANDU reactors by the way, which also owns a major uranium resource. We're solidly opposed to Iran's development of nuclear technology, IAEA safeguarded or not. But we offer this solution: foreign consortium including Canadians will mine and value-add Iran's uranium and then perhaps burn it in foreign-controlled local plants, like CANDUs.

    Canada quit Kyoto when federal government changed to party based in Canada's oil country. Our current Prime Minister was born to an Imperial Oil family, worked for the company. Albertan. It should be obvious what's going on. See Kyoto Protocol - Canada (Wikipedia).

    What scares me most is that Canada will stand by these greedy energy politics even to the point of coalition war against Iran. If Canadians elect a government more loyal to the nuclear heartland (Ontario) the (anti-oil) Protocol may be reaffirmed but regarding Iran: gloves come off.

    The Northwest passage is a plot twist. After all these centuries (why we explored Canada in the first place) the fabled route has in fact opened. Here is huge commercial advantage to Canada, if we can keep it and control it. A little global warming is a good thing. We want scientists to prove that warming has promoted diversity in the Arctic, and that return to cooler temperatures hurts the environment.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Forum Isotope Bunbury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    2,590
    ExxonMobil has given $23 million over ten years to groups and academics to create the impression that there is disagreement in the scientific community. If you add in the coal and utility company propaganda I don't doubt that the ttoal could be $10 million a year. This is, however,changing, as ExxonMobil and others finally realize that they are only fooling a smaller and smaller minority among the public, and they cannot afford to be behind public opinion.

    See this:

    A survey carried out by the UK's Royal Society found that in 2005 ExxonMobil distributed $2.9m to 39 groups that the society said "misrepresented the science of climate change by outright denial of the evidence". In 2006 the society wrote to the company to ask them to stop funding such groups.
    and now ExxonMobil is stopping such funding:

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/environmen...ge.fossilfuels
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    180
    Gore is not a scientist - he's a hack - and woudn't know sciecne if it bit him on his fat carbon dioxide emitting ass.

    Ever seen "inconvenent truth"I? f anyone manipulates data , it;' big carbon footprint liar Al Gore.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Forum Isotope Bunbury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    2,590
    Ever seen "inconvenent truth"
    Yes, I saw it. Please post your point by point critique here. You are obviously a "sciecntist" so no hype please - just the errors.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    180
    agree - Gore manipulates environmental information ala "Inconvenient Truth."
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •