"So a person responsible for misrepresenting science in a government report has ties and presumably financial interests with companies that have an interest in climate policy outcomes?"
Posted by Kate at June 22, 2009 1:48 PMbookmark this site and get the story of the transnational environmental industry in action.
http://www.undueinfluence.com/
Quite an eyeopener.
Say it aint so Kate, Say it aint so.
How is this possible, I thought they have Gia on their side, and she never lies
Posted by: robins111 at June 22, 2009 2:06 PMAn Eyeopener it is, Fred !!
Posted by: ron in kelowna at June 22, 2009 2:10 PMYeah, baby, it COULD! It's the lack of common decency coupled with lack of scientific discipline. You need to be intimately familiar with modern North American education from kindergarten to university to understand WHY.
When instead of cultivating insatiable urge for knowledge in students, they are being turned into obedient slaves, this is what we get and the socialist educators are laughing all the way to the bank.
Like I said many times: talk to your children!
Posted by: Aaron at June 22, 2009 2:17 PMRelated, first June under 100F since 1913 in Arizona. They LIKE it! ~:D
http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2009/06/19/20090619junelovely0619.html
Posted by: The Phantom at June 22, 2009 2:19 PMOver the weekend, I called my 79 y/o dad to wish him a happy F/D. During the call, my mom chewed me out for always being so negative of the Left, for which I credit stories like this appearing frequently in the Rightosphere as well as the National Post.
In the family unit that encompasses my family, my parents as well as those of my three older siblings, I'm the only one who subscribes to the SDA/Five Feet of Fury/Mark Steyn school of thought. But truth be told, my father is onside wrt the critical view of Islam thing.
I know that the Right bases it's arguments on economics as well as science and not on emotion as is the wont of the Left. It's just that being as much makes family gatherings boring as we just leave discussions of politics/environment/etc at the door.
I'm certain that we on the Right will be vindicated; I just hope it's sooner rather than later.
Posted by: PhilM at June 22, 2009 2:28 PMThey're just putting their money where their lies are.
Perhaps the most intellectually honest (albeit misguided) liberal I knew bought Haliburton stock believing Cheney was working to enrich his former company. Few liberals I know ever put their money where their hyperbole said would make them rich. Not wanting to be 'an owner of the problem' was always their excuse.
Posted by: POWinCA at June 22, 2009 3:54 PMIts time to take names and charge these so-called scientists with fraud. If Conrad Black can get 10 years then these fraudsters should get life.
Posted by: Fritz at June 22, 2009 4:17 PMGeneral Electric invested millions in Obambi. GE also owns NBC. Obozo stated just this past weekend that most all media are in bed with him...Specifically NBC.
Have you seen the commercial with the fake old farmer that wants wind mills and solar panels instead of "dirty coal and oil"? Like a good old farmer who knows nature and weather would preach such nonsense.
Guess who wants to be US's main supplier of wind mills and solar panels?: General Electric.
Posted by: Right Honorable Terry Tory at June 22, 2009 4:56 PM
>>"Gross Misuse of Science to Achieve a Political End
By Dr. Tim Ball Monday, June 22, 2009
The enemies of freedom do not argue; they shout and they shoot. --Dean William Inge
there are many legislative actions sliding through almost unnoticed, based on equally false logic and information that are threats to freedom through increased government control and economically damaging.
Keeping silent about facts is as dangerous as shouting. Acting without evidence for purely political reasons is as threatening as not shooting. Both actions are a common theme of the climate change issue practiced by government. Those who use climate change to limit freedom also will not argue by claiming, “the science is settled”.
Action on Many Fronts
An all out assault to push a political and economic agenda on climate change is underway.
At the White House briefing Lubchenco said, ”This report provides the concrete scientific information that says unequivocally that climate change is happening now and it’s happening in our own backyards and it affects the kind of things people care about.” Lubchenco’s statement is like claiming there is concrete scientific information that says unequivocally women are having babies and it’s happening in our own backyards. Climate change is happening and has always happened – it would be more noteworthy if it weren’t happening. It is an incredibly silly and uninformed statement for anyone to make, especially a scientist."
http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/12192
I always like questions.
Where does all the water go from the oil? Is there a transfer of weight over the world?
Posted by: Guess What at June 22, 2009 7:16 PMTHE GOVT GOT THE TOBACCO COMPANIES FOR LYING,MAYBE A GOVT IN THE FUTURE WILL DO THE SAME TO THE WIND ENERGY PEOPLE.
Posted by: spike 1 at June 22, 2009 8:02 PMThis like the tobacco industry thingy.......only backwards.
Posted by: bruce wayne riley at June 22, 2009 8:03 PMWhat? Demand honesty? The impertinence! How can scaremongers do their work if some busybody demands common sense?!
Posted by: Osumashi Kinyobe at June 22, 2009 8:14 PMNot yet seen in the MSM.
"The move will disappoint many in the green movement, given Obama has previously been less supportive of oil sands, noting that the Us(sic) needed to ween itself off dirty and dangerous oil supplies."
Translation: O'Dirty Tar Baby.
...-
"Security trumps environment as Obama gives green light to US consumption of Alberta’s oil.
President Obama, in close discussions with Energy Secretary Stephen Chu and Alberta Premier Ed Stelmach is to give the green light for US consumption of oil sand oil, or rather the import of fuels considered among the “dirtiest” in the fuel market. In a meeting last week, President Obama decided that the Canada’s oil sands represented an important part of national security supplies for petroleum in America’s near future.
The move is not without immediate precedent, as Francois Cardinal at cybercress.ca notes, both Hillary Clinton had offered support for oil sands at a recent conference on energy security, and Obama’s national Security adviser General Jim Jones was similarly adamant that the US would be foolish to reject the possibility of a stable source from a close partner in Canada."
urlm.in/cqfp (Climatico)
Posted by: maz2 at June 22, 2009 10:01 PMIts Time for Roger Pieke Jr to talk to a Lawyer
If this report is a cut & paste, used to sell securities (carbon), he has damages
Posted by: Slap Shot at June 24, 2009 2:41 AMBefore submitting, review the post to ensure your comment is on topic and does not contain words that might get caught in the spam filter (eg: insurance, viagra, online, poker). This is not a forum or a repository for off-topic link dumps. Profanity is discouraged. Take your extended debates and/or flamewars to private email. Thankyou.