Regardless of who published the article, it's true that lots of scientists
don't accept the new party line on global warming that is being now handed us
as gospel. I've read articles from several sources along this same line (sorry,
didn't copy and can't quote -- next time I see some, I'll send them to FFL).
Many independent scientists are saying the earth is simply going into a warm
cycle due to increased sunspot activity: the sun is hotter, so the earth is
hotter. That doesn't mean pollution shouldn't be eliminated or that it's not
poisonous to the earth. Why are the politicians on the bandwagon of global
warming, though, if it may not really be caused by pollution but may be
natural? Could it be they want to scare us enough that we'll willingly let them
tax us still further or take away still more of our freedoms? 911/Iraq War
tactics applied to environmental issues: the big guys want something, they
create a problem to scare and upset everybody, then they present the solution
which is what they wanted us to give them all along.
"do.rflex" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
--- In [email protected], "shempmcgurk" <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> from earthtimes.org
>
> Challenge to Scientific Consensus on Global Warming: Analysis Finds
> Hundreds of Scientists Have Published Evidence Countering Man-Made
> Global Warming Fears
>
> Posted : Wed, 12 Sep 2007 14:58:42 GMT
> Author : Hudson Institute
Shemp never fails to amuse. While Shemp accuses all the world's
representative governments of being biased, leftist funders of climate
change research, all he can come up with in rebuttal to their science
is self-interested right wing corporately funded, cherry-picked
science - and no cohesive comparable body of science to the world-wide
National Academies of Science and the IPCC.
--
The Hudson Institute, author of Shemp's article, gains financial
support from many of the foundations and corporations that have
bankrolled the conservative movement. The Capital Research Center, a
conservative group that seeks to rank non-profits and documents their
funding, allocates Hudson as a 7 on its ideological spectrum with 8
being "Free Market Right" and 1 "Radical Left." [...]
While many conservative think tanks eschew government funding, Hudson
happily takes government contracts. The Capital Research Centre (CRC)
database lists Hudson as having received six grants between 1996 and
2002 totalling $731,914 (unadjusted for inflation). Five of the six
grants were from the Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs.
In 2002 Hudson received a grant of $173,484 from the Department of
Commerce.
The far right Hudson Institute is funded in part by the following BIG
PHARMA, BIG AGRA, and BIG OIL corporate interests. Below is a partial
list:
* American Cyanamid
* Archer Daniels Midland
* Ciba-Geigy
* ConAgra Foods
* Conrad Black
* DowElanco
* DuPont
* Eli Lilly and Company
* *EXXON MOBIL*
* Lilly Endowment
* Merck
* Monsanto
* National Agricultural Chemical Association
* PhRMA
* PriceWaterhouseCoopers
* Syngenta Crop Protection
* United Agri Products
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Hudson_Institute
---------------------------------
Tonight's top picks. What will you watch tonight? Preview the hottest shows on
Yahoo! TV.
