Perfection. Now that's what I like. Real investigation into a claim. I still think that this religion of global warming is blown out of proportion BS with people like Gore riding it for all its worth, but....
On Dec 12, 2007 3:55 AM, Dana <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > ::sigh:: ok fine. Let us entertain for a moment the idea that this may > be serious journalism. > > This article, on the blog of an Oklahoma politician who 6 days ago was > threatening to filibuster to block a cap and trade energy measure, > leads with quotes from one Lord Christopher Monkton, who says that > "the UN conference is a complete waste of our time and your money and > we should no longer pay the slightest attention to the IPCC." > > Link one in the article follows this statement and appears to be > intended to bolster it. It is a press release by this very same > gentleman, who is essentially whining that the IPCC has not > acknowledged his role in allegedly pointing out certain errors in its > report. How this squares with his contention that the IPCC is not > worth troubling with is left to the imagination of the reader. > > This press release is posted on a website called Frontiers of Freedom, > a think tank based in Fairfax VA funded by Exxon-Mobil and founded by > one Sen. Malcolm Wallop, a Heritage Foundation fellow who was on the > board of directors of El Paso Energy. > > http://www.secinfo.com/dRa2f.3v.d.htm > > A long-time aide is now an executive with GE. > > http://www.wyomingbusinessreport.com/article.asp?id=89821 > > Shall we say -- peer-reviewed: not. > > But let us Google Lord Monkton. We find many of the same quotes on the > usual right-wing rags (Canada Freee Press, CNS et al) and a > tantalizing mention of the gentleman's belief that "persons with HIV > should be locked away for life." > > http://www.georgetownnews.com/articles/2007/11/22/opinion/opinion01.txt > > This would generally be more than enough for me right there, but > onwards. Lord Monkton is offended that the committee "refused (his) > credentials." This mind you from someone who has apparently dismissed > all credentials as socialism. > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Monckton%2C_3rd_Viscount_Monckton_of_Brenchley#_note-brown > > Back to the allegedly peer-reviewed links: > > Link 2 is to Bloomberg, a respectable publication but not > peer-reviewed, and no doubt looking for a skeptical spin in view of > its business readership. Note that the skepticism about carbon credits > is expressed by a trader. Bottom line -- some attendees tried to buy > carbon offsets. > > Link 3 is to an article on the same Inhofe blog. > > Link 4 is to a David Evans paper.on icecap.us. Let's just say that it > shows no sign of peer review. David Evans is a C++ programmer working > on a word processor. > > Link 5 is to a press release on blogspot. It does not link to the > article it refers to, perhaps because the cited Dec 2007 issue appears > to contain nothing of the kind. > > http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/116844649/issue > > Link 6 is to a personal blog, > http://www.jennifermarohasy.com/blog/archives/002586.htm. The pdf it > links to appears genuine, except it claims to be an aricle in the 2007 > issue of a magazine which Wikipedia says has not existed by that name > since 1980. Hmm. If anyone wants to pay $9 to investigate further, I > am curious about that. Could be wikipedia. It's worth noting though > that even if the article's genuine, it's written by a physicist and a > mathematician. > > Link 7 is to the same personal bog, which links to the icecap site > noted above. The article it links to does claim to be from a journal > which exists; however the table of contents for that month from that > journal does not contain that title. I also can't find any mention of > peer review in the information for authors on the website. > > > http://www.agu.org/contents/journals/ViewJournalContents.do;jsessionid=1466133091159F76AB9D0A46E63945ED?journalCode=JD&viewBy=date&year=2007&month=Dec&sortBy=pubDate > > Note that even if genuine, the article is written by an economist and > a Cato Institute shill who was admitted receiving funding from Western > Fuels. > > But why stop there. Link 8 is to a different blog. The article it > links to is on a site whose about us says it "funded primarily by > annual dues from its member companies , which collectively produce > more than 90 percent of the pulp and paper and a sizeable fraction of > the wood products manufactured in the United States." Peer-review -- > not. Agenda -- yes. > > The next link is also to the Inhofe blog, which also cites the Journal > of Geophysical research which has not existed as such since 1980. > > At this point I think I have more than done my due diligence, and > conclude that this Senator is either disingenuous -- I wonder how many > campaign contributions he received from interested parts? -- or he > needs new fact checkers. > > Dana > > > > > > > > > > > On 12/11/07, Robert Munn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > There are lots of links in the article to peer-reviewed papers that are > > beginning to come out and directly contradict the notion that carbon > > emissions have any effect on the atmosphere: > > > > > http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=c9554887-802a-23ad-4303-68f67ebd151c > > > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Adobe® ColdFusion® 8 software 8 is the most important and dramatic release to date Get the Free Trial http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;160198600;22374440;w Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:248280 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
