--- In [email protected], "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> --- In [email protected], "shempmcgurk" <shempmcgurk@> 
> wrote:
> >
> > Don't Believe the Hype 
> > Al Gore is wrong. There's no "consensus" on global warming. 
> > 
> > BY RICHARD S. LINDZEN 
> > Sunday, July 2, 2006 12:01 a.m. EDT
> 
> (His piece is from the Wall Street Journal, BTW.)
> 
> 
> Excerpts from "THE HEAT IS ON: The warming of the world's climate 
> sparks a blaze of denial" by Ross Gelbspan, from Harper's 
magazine, 
> December 1995
> 
> 
> For the most part the industry has relied on a small band of 
skeptics—
> Dr. Richard S. Lindzen, Dr. Pat Michaels, Dr. Robert Balling, Dr. 
> Sherwood Idso, and Dr. S. Fred Singer, among others—who have 
proven 
> extraordinarily adept at draining the issue of all sense of 
crisis. 
> Through their frequent pronouncements in the press and on radio 
and 
> television, they have helped to create the illusion that the 
question 
> is hopelessly mired in unknowns....
> 
> Last May, Minnesota held hearings in St. Paul to determine the 
> environmental cost of coal burning by state power plants. Three of 
> the skeptics—Lindzen, Michaels, and Balling—were hired as expert 
> witnesses to testify on behalf of Western Fuels Association, a 
$400 
> million consortium of coal suppliers and coal-fired utilities.
> 
> An especially aggressive industry player, Western Fuels was quite 
> candid about its strategy in two annual reports: "[T]here has been 
a 
> close to universal impulse in the trade association community here 
in 
> Washington to concede the scientific premise of global 
warming . . . 
> while arguing over policy prescriptions that would be the least 
> disruptive to our economy.... We have disagreed, and do disagree, 
> with this strategy." "When [the climate change] controversy first 
> erupted . . . scientists were found who are skeptical about much 
of 
> what seemed generally accepted about the potential for climate 
> change." Among them were Michaels, Balling, and S. Fred Singer....
> 
> But while the skeptics portray themselves as besieged truth-
seekers 
> fending off irresponsible environmental doomsayers, their 
testimony 
> in St. Paul and elsewhere revealed the source and scope of their 
> funding for the first time....Lindzen, for his part, charges oil 
and 
> coal interests $2,500 a day for his consulting services; his 1991 
> trip to testify before a Senate committee was paid for by Western 
> Fuels, and a speech he wrote, entitled "Global Warming: the Origin 
> and Nature of Alleged Scientific Consensus," was underwritten by 
> OPEC....
> 
> http://dieoff.org/page82.htm
>

And how does Lindzen's getting paid for his consulting services 
change the reality or unreality of what he says?

How does the attention and political agenda of Al Gore change the 
reality or unreality of what he says?

Why don't you address what he says and the logic and rationality of 
what he says instead of trying to show that the guy makes a living?

Oh, and by the way, Al Gore and Bill Clinton wouldn't even look in 
the direction of an offer of $2,500 a day...







------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
Check out the new improvements in Yahoo! Groups email.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/6pRQfA/fOaOAA/yQLSAA/UlWolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 

To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 


Reply via email to