jcd11235 0 #1 April 25, 2009 For more than a decade the Global Climate Coalition, a group representing industries with profits tied to fossil fuels, led an aggressive lobbying and public relations campaign against the idea that emissions of heat-trapping gases could lead to global warming. “The role of greenhouse gases in climate change is not well understood,” the coalition said in a scientific “backgrounder” provided to lawmakers and journalists through the early 1990s, adding that “scientists differ” on the issue. But a document filed in a federal lawsuit demonstrates that even as the coalition worked to sway opinion, its own scientific and technical experts were advising that the science backing the role of greenhouse gases in global warming could not be refuted. “The scientific basis for the Greenhouse Effect and the potential impact of human emissions of greenhouse gases such as CO2 on climate is well established and cannot be denied,” the experts wrote in an internal report compiled for the coalition in 1995. Article It looks like even those who cried the loudest about global warming not being real knew themselves that their claims were not true.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
carmenc 0 #2 April 25, 2009 Quote It looks like even those who cried the loudest about global warming not being real knew themselves that their claims were not true. "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it!", Upton Sinclair Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #3 April 25, 2009 It's nuts. Why the hell are they paying these scientists if not listening to them? My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #4 April 25, 2009 QuoteIt's nuts. Why the hell are they paying these scientists if not listening to them? Generally speaking, when an industry pays a group of scientists to conduct a study, the people doing the paying will see what they want to see in the reports.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
carmenc 0 #5 April 25, 2009 QuoteQuoteIt's nuts. Why the hell are they paying these scientists if not listening to them? Generally speaking, when an industry pays a group of scientists to conduct a study, the people doing the paying will see what they want to see in the reports. That is not the case here, is it? I think that, on average, scientists are considerably more ethical than businessmen or politicians. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #6 April 25, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteIt's nuts. Why the hell are they paying these scientists if not listening to them? Generally speaking, when an industry pays a group of scientists to conduct a study, the people doing the paying will see what they want to see in the reports. That is not the case here, is it? I think that, on average, scientists are considerably more ethical than businessmen or politicians. That's EXACTLY what happened. The scientists made a report showing it had an effect and the people that paid for it read it a different way so it would agree with their world view.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
carmenc 0 #7 April 25, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteIt's nuts. Why the hell are they paying these scientists if not listening to them? Generally speaking, when an industry pays a group of scientists to conduct a study, the people doing the paying will see what they want to see in the reports. That is not the case here, is it? I think that, on average, scientists are considerably more ethical than businessmen or politicians. That's EXACTLY what happened. The scientists made a report showing it had an effect and the people that paid for it read it a different way so it would agree with their world view. I was under the impression that they simply ignored it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #8 April 26, 2009 QuoteI think that, on average, scientists are considerably more ethical than businessmen or politicians. on average, I think you're nuts and buying into a stereotype on average, there's not such thing as 'on average', scientists and businessmen and politicians are all individuals well, scientists and businessment, anyway politicians should be bunched into a stereotype because that's the one "I'm buying" into. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
