>Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2007 19:59:37 -0700
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], "Kelly Decker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>From: Kelly Decker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: Re: Heads up: The new Global Warming Denial Front
>
>Here is some results for you: I wrote my concerns to the webmaster at the
>California Climate Change Portal and he will be removing it, because it
>was an oversight. He cited the Governor's comments that "the debate is over"
>
>Horaay!
>
>
>At 03:44 PM 10/20/2007, Malcolm McCallum wrote:
>>If we can get enough folks together who have credibility, I think it would
>>work. LEtssee who the group of us can get together!
>>
>>
>>On Sat, October 20, 2007 12:43 pm, Kelly Decker wrote:
>> > Malcolm,
>> >
>> > What a great idea!! I am not sure what I can do right now because my
>> > volunteer time is being spent working on a county-wide GHG footprint.
>> > Perhaps I can have a small role?
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> >
>> > kelly
>> >
>> > At 10:08 AM 10/20/2007, you wrote:
>> >>How many of us would be willing to critique this white paper as a group
>> >>and send it in to eitehr Science or Nature. Certainly if 10-20 of us
>> >>coauthored it, it would be a major slap in the face.
>> >>
>> >>Any takers??
>> >>
>> >>We should have a number of ecologists, but also atmospheric chemists
>> >>involved. We take each of their arguements, tear them apart.
>> >>
>> >>Malcolm McCallum
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>On Sat, October 20, 2007 12:35 am, Kelly Decker wrote:
>> >> > The George C. Marshall Institute, which has a long history of global
>> >> > warming and nuclear weaponry science denial (specifically arguing in
>> >> favor
>> >> > of SDI or "Star Wars" against the consensus of physicists) has
>> >> launched a
>> >> > new PR campaign to suggest that scientists are biased in their
>> >> findings of
>> >> > global climate change due to the fact that there is grant monies to
>> >> study
>> >> > global climate change.
>> >> >
>> >> > The president of this institute, Jeff Kueter, has written a non-peer
>> >> > reviewed white paper that purports to compile all the funding sources
>> >> and
>> >> > recipients. Making the point that ties to the oil companies are often
>> >> > cited
>> >> > as a reason for discrediting climate change deniers such as Richard
>> >> > Linzen,
>> >> > he suggests that there is a lack of equivalent skepticism due to the
>> >> grant
>> >> > money that goes to climate change science. Ironically, this "study"
>> >> lacks
>> >> > what all the University studies have: peer review and cited
>> >> literature.
>> >> > The
>> >> > literature he cites include a report of the American Enterprise
>> >> Institute
>> >> > and Michael Crighton's book "State of Fear" but not other peer
>> >> reviewed
>> >> > articles. It is a common tactic to take this discussion safe outside
>> >> the
>> >> > realm of scientific discussion and rigorous analysis-straight into the
>> >> > public forum. It's pure talking points for those who do not want to
>> >> see
>> >> > the
>> >> > world make headway against greenhouse gas emissions.
>> >> >
>> >> > What is most troublesome, is that somehow this publication has been
>> >> linked
>> >> > to by the California Climate Change Portal (bottom of the funding
>> >> tab),
>> >> > which is a government website meant to aid scientists in addressing
>> >> this
>> >> > problem. http://www.climatechange.ca.gov/index.html
>> >> >
>> >> > Heads up.
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>Malcolm L. McCallum
>> >>Assistant Professor of Biology
>> >>Editor Herpetological Conservation and Biology
>> >>http://www.herpconbio.org
>> >>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>Malcolm L. McCallum
>>Assistant Professor of Biology
>>Editor Herpetological Conservation and Biology
>>http://www.herpconbio.org
>>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
