These guys (UCS) are a radical left-wing group formed to protest the Vietnam war.
http://www.activistcash.com/organization_overview.cfm/oid/145 .... UCS continues to involve itself in issues where scientific credentials carry little weight. For example, the group opposes urban sprawl, disputes a war in Iraq, and supports abortion. While these positions may be perfectly legitimate in themselves, they are hardly the product of "rigorous scientific analysis." ... In 1997 UCS organized a petition that warned of "global warming" and advocated U.S. ratification of the Kyoto treaty. It was signed by 1,600 scientists, and so UCS declared that "the scientific community has reached a consensus." But when a counter-petition that questioned this so-called "consensus" was signed by more than 17,000 other scientists, UCS declared it a "deliberate attempt to deceive the scientific community with misinformation." Here's a good debate about this. The Al Gore/Lord Monckton debate http://ff.org/centers/csspp/pdf/20061121_gore.pdf On 1/5/07, Larry Lyons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >Larger swings, and different temperatures (and different changes) depending > >on where on Earth you are. But only about a 2 degree actual change overall. > > > > Exactly, global warming mean that there is going to be a lot more extremes, > hotter days in January, possibly very cold days as well. > > However if you look at the range of different plant species, there is data > that strongly supports global warming - with the migration of more southerly > species to what was formerly colder climates. > > I saw a very interesting article about the so called detractors of global > warming. I wonder how much involves a genuine belief that it doesn't exists, > and how much involves getting a cheque from such companies as Exxon: > > From the Washington Post a couple of days ago: > http://www.antiwrap.com/?1119 > > Group: ExxonMobil Paid to Mislead Public > > The Associated Press > Wednesday, January 3, 2007; 9:49 PM > > WASHINGTON -- ExxonMobil Corp. gave $16 million to 43 ideological groups > between 1998 and 2005 in an effort to mislead the public by discrediting the > science behind global warming, the Union of Concerned Scientists asserted > Wednesday. > > The report by the advocacy group mirrors similar claims by Britain's leading > scientific academy. Last September, The Royal Society wrote the oil company > asking it to halt support for groups that "misrepresented the science of > climate change." > > Many scientists say carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases from > tailpipes and smokestacks are warming the atmosphere like a greenhouse, > melting Arctic sea ice and alpine glaciers and disturbing the lives of > animals and plants. > > ExxonMobil called the scientists' report Wednesday "yet another attempt to > smear our name and confuse the discussion of the serious issue of CO2 > emissions and global climate change." > > ExxonMobil lists on its Web site nearly $133 million in 2005 contributions > globally, including $6.8 million for "public information and policy research" > distributed to more than 140 think tanks, universities, foundations, > associations and other groups. Some of those have publicly disputed any link > between greenhouse gas emissions and global warming. > > Alden Meyer, the Union of Concerned Scientists' strategy and policy director, > said in a teleconference that ExxonMobil based its tactics on those of > tobacco companies, spreading uncertainty by misrepresenting peer-reviewed > scientific studies or emphasizing only selected facts. > > Dr. James McCarthy, a professor at Harvard University, said the company has > sought to "create the illusion of a vigorous debate" about global warming. > > The company said its financial support doesn't mean control over any group's > views. > > "We find some of them persuasive and enlightening, and some not," ExxonMobil > spokesman Dave Gardner said. "But there is value in the debate they prompt if > it can lead to better informed and more optimal public policy decisions." > > He said the company believes that despite many scientific uncertainties, the > risk that greenhouse gas emissions may have serious environmental effects > justifies taking action to limit them. > > ___ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Create robust enterprise, web RIAs. Upgrade & integrate Adobe Coldfusion MX7 with Flex 2 http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;56760587;14748456;a?http://www.adobe.com/products/coldfusion/flex2/?sdid=LVNU Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:223812 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
