Scientific opposition to climate change

Discussion in 'Environment' started by Saigon, Feb 17, 2013.

  1. Saigon
    Offline

    Saigon Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2012
    Messages:
    11,434
    Thanks Received:
    864
    Trophy Points:
    175
    Location:
    Helsinki, Finland
    Ratings:
    +1,232
    Oddball yesteray posted an overview of scientific organisations who do not accept climate change.

    It's worth taking a serious look at -

    ExxonMobil has funneled nearly $16 million between 1998 and 2005 to a network of 43 advocacy organizations that seek to confuse the public on global warming science.

    Greening Earth Society

    The Greening Earth Society (GES) was founded by the Western Fuels Association to promote the view that increasing levels of atmospheric CO2 are good for humanity. GES and Western Fuels are essentially the same organization. Both used to be located at the same office suite in Arlington, VA. The Western Fuels Assocation (WFA) is a cooperative of coal-dependent utilities in the western states that works in part to discredit climate change science and to prevent regulations that might damage coal-related industries.

    Spin: CO2 emissions are good for the planet; coal is the best energy source we have.

    Funding: The Greening Earth Society receives its funding from the Western Fuels Association, which in turn receives its funding from its coal and utility company members.


    Global Climate Coalition

    Founded in 1989 by 46 corporations and trade associations representing all major elements of US industry, the GCC presents itself as a "voice for business in the global warming debate." The group funded several flawed studies on the economics of the cost of mitigating climate change, which formed the basis of their 1997/1998 multi-million dollar advertising campaign against the Kyoto Protocol. The GCC began to unravel in 1997 when British Petroleum withdrew its membership. Since then many other corporations have followed BP s lead and left the coalition. This exodus reached a fevered pitch in the early months of 2000 when DaimlerChrysler, Texaco and General Motors all announced their exodus from the GCC. Since these desertions, the GCC restructured and remains a powerful and well-funded force focused on obstructing meaningful efforts to mitigate climate change.

    Spin: Global Warming is real, but it is too expensive to do anything about. The Kyoto Protocol is fundamentally flawed.

    Funding: Corporate members (industries, trade associations etc.)


    Science and Environmental Policy Project (SEPP)

    Founded in 1990 by widely publicized climate skeptic S. Fred Singer, SEPP s stated purpose is to "document the relationship between scientific data and the development of federal environmental policy." SEPP has mounted a sizeable media campaign -- to discredit the issues of global warming, ozone depletion, and acid rain.

    Spin: Moreover, climate change won t be bad for us anyway. Action on climate change is not warranted because of shaky science and flawed policy approaches.

    Funding: Conservative foundations including Bradley, Smith Richardson, and Forbes. SEPP has also been directly tied to ultra right-wing mogul Reverend Sung Myung Moon s Unification Church, including receipt of a year s free office space from a Moon-funded group and the participation of SEPP s director in church-sponsored conferences and on the board of a Moon-funded magazine.

    Global Warming Skeptic Organizations | Union of Concerned Scientists

    It's interesting to note - and I really hope scpetics will take note of this - that three of the best sources producing sceptical science are funded by the coal industry, the automotive industry and the Reverand Moon.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 2
  2. SSDD
    Online

    SSDD VIP Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2012
    Messages:
    5,177
    Thanks Received:
    360
    Trophy Points:
    85
    Ratings:
    +615
    $16 million between 1998 and 2005? Really? Care to take an estimate of how much money during that same time period went into the pro AGW machine?

    http://climatechange.procon.org/sourcefiles/CBO_Climate_Funding.pdf

    During that same period, according to the Congressional Budget Office, the US government alone poured 38.4 BILLION dollars into the pro AGW machine. That is the US government alone. How much more money do you suppose came from the IPCC, greenpeace, WWF, and all the other sources of Pro AGW funding?

    Another 10.5 billion owas was spent on the pro AGW machine for the years 2000, 2001, and 2002 by just the top 80 sources funding climate change projects. 10.5 billion in just 3 of the 8 years in question in addition to the 38.4 billion from the US government. If your argument is that money corrupts....and it does, then there is little doubt as to which side of this debate is more vulnerable to the corrupting influence of money. And you are waving your hands over a mere 16 million over an 8 year period? You are laugable.

    http://www.marshall.org/pdf/materials/289.pdf

    And you believe that 16 million over that same period is a sure indicator of corruption? The fact that the discussion continues considering the vast disparity in funding is prima facie evidence that there is substance to the skeptic argument.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 2
  3. Saigon
    Offline

    Saigon Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2012
    Messages:
    11,434
    Thanks Received:
    864
    Trophy Points:
    175
    Location:
    Helsinki, Finland
    Ratings:
    +1,232
    Right...so Bush, who denied climate change, was actually funding the research which confirmed climate change.

    That's logical, isn't it?

    btw. The funding you refer to was patently NOT given to companies which produce renewables. That is the figure for all research into the climate - a good 90% of which went to universities, quangos and federal agencies involved in this kind of thing. Again, there is no reason at all why anyone would think that research was anything else but first class.
     
    Last edited: Feb 17, 2013
  4. SSDD
    Online

    SSDD VIP Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2012
    Messages:
    5,177
    Thanks Received:
    360
    Trophy Points:
    85
    Ratings:
    +615
    FInest research money can buy and the results they wanted to....how about that.

    So we have hundreds of billions vs a paltry 16 billion over 8 years and you think skeptics are being corrupted by money. You are at least as stupid as I thought you were.
     
  5. TheOldSchool
    Offline

    TheOldSchool Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2012
    Messages:
    14,879
    Thanks Received:
    3,024
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Location:
    Your moms Ebola-infested cavernous Virginia
    Ratings:
    +4,426
    Skeptics are not being corrupted. You can't intellectually corrupt something that didn't have an intellect in the first place.
     
  6. SSDD
    Online

    SSDD VIP Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2012
    Messages:
    5,177
    Thanks Received:
    360
    Trophy Points:
    85
    Ratings:
    +615
    Talk about not having an intellect...you thanked me for a post that you disagree with.
     
  7. TheOldSchool
    Offline

    TheOldSchool Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2012
    Messages:
    14,879
    Thanks Received:
    3,024
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Location:
    Your moms Ebola-infested cavernous Virginia
    Ratings:
    +4,426
    Say what now. I may have been drunk at the time.
     
  8. SSDD
    Online

    SSDD VIP Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2012
    Messages:
    5,177
    Thanks Received:
    360
    Trophy Points:
    85
    Ratings:
    +615
    Just read it again when you are sober.
     
  9. TheOldSchool
    Offline

    TheOldSchool Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2012
    Messages:
    14,879
    Thanks Received:
    3,024
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Location:
    Your moms Ebola-infested cavernous Virginia
    Ratings:
    +4,426
    I'm sober now. Still don't get it.
     
  10. SSDD
    Online

    SSDD VIP Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2012
    Messages:
    5,177
    Thanks Received:
    360
    Trophy Points:
    85
    Ratings:
    +615
    Guess you won't.
     

Share This Page