Global Warming Deniers Well Funded | Newsweek Project Green

Posted By: florianb @ 03/15/2008 7:04:50 PM

Comment: The reason "deniers" do not like being called deniers is because it is a very insulting ad-hominem. Five years ago I was fully convinced that man-made CO2 is by far the largest driver of global warming and that the cost to man-kind in the future are going to be staggering if "we don't do something now". Since then I have spend considerable time researching this issue by studying what is actually known and with what certainty it is known by reading scientific publications. I have a B.S. from Caltech *** laude, and probably a better quantitative understanding on these matters than Al Gore or Sharon Begley. There are distortions of facts on both sides of the argument, but what is astonishing to me is the lengths some people in the media and in politics (Al Gore) go to denounce anyone who may question the wisdom of the Kyoto Treaty as a stooge of big oil or a whacko. This is one of the worst pieces of journalism I have come by in a while, and consists of little more than ad-hominems. To any sensible and critically-minded reader, I highly recommend doing some personal research on this, admittingly difficult, issue and judge for yourself.
Regards,
Florian

Posted By: rockhead @ 02/23/2008 12:54:28 PM

Comment: I guess that I am one of the deniers, and this probably disqualifies me to the enlightened ones that want to tell the rest of us how to live. Maybe Mr. Gore should lead by example by getting rid of his mansion(s) and showing the rest of us how it is done. Maybe those who would wreck our economy by instituting draconian cuts should be forced to live the life style that this would cause. Maybe someone that thinks that Kyoto was such a great idea should check out how many countries have dropped out of the protocols, and how many others have failed to abide by it. Remember that when the treaty was first negotiated, the U.S. Senate voted UNANIMOUSLY to reject it.
I have no problem with living a simpler life and I do try to reduce my use of energy, but my primary reason is that I have to pay my own bills, and energy is expensive. Maybe we should try making everyone pay for what they use. I had Greenpeace come to my door to try to convince me that the local power company could more to reduce emissions. After a little give and take, I asked them if they really wanted to help reduce emissions. Of course, both of them readily agreed. I told them to go home, open their main breaker and shut off their gas. They were not so enthused about that solution.

Posted By: Deep Blue @ 01/24/2008 8:41:22 AM

Comment: Here in Sweden we get to hear about how the US is the main leg-dragger for a global consensus on man-made global warming (MMGW). Gore was treated like a demi-god during his visit here to pick up the Peace prize (which seems to no longer be given to people who have worked for peace, but for those who create conflict - ???...to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between the nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses???) and there were yards of full-page "People=Cars=CO2 =MMGW" stuff in the papers for weeks. But nowhere were there voices questioning all this information except for the rare ???reader send-ins???.

Unfortunately, Sweden does not have as open of a climate for criticism of "known facts" as the states do, therefore the media continues to pump out these MMGW ???truths??? and the schools swallow them since there's never been a public factual challenge to Gore's movie like in England.

For example, my girlfriend's daughter (15) is preparing to write a report about man-made global warming and I've been introducing, what Sharon Begley calls ???...a paralyzing fog of doubt ???, where I suggest that ???MMGW??? is more of a prideful exaggeration of our very limited power to really effect a global climate change. For an example we get a 145-255 million ton CO2/Methane injection each year from volcano eruptions. This ???volcanic injection??? into our atmosphere (along with other cyclic ???warming??? activities like our sun), provide, in my opinion, a much heavier GW load than anything that we have produced since we started making fires outside of our caves (unless we unleash all of the world's nuclear warheads of course).

Because of my ???paralyzing fog of doubt??? she was interested in learning more, so I gave her some links to check out which may help her to separate the husk from the corn and encourage her to think (and write) critically about today's political and scientific ???facts???.

http://www.solarnavigator.net/volcanoes.htm
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2007-04/rtsu-slv042507.php
http://www.inteliorg.com/co2_climate_change.html

Posted By: Deep Blue @ 01/24/2008 8:38:42 AM

Comment: Boy did my post look terrible! Looks like this website can't swallow UTF8 ;-)... I'll try again!

Posted By: Deep Blue @ 01/24/2008 8:34:31 AM

Comment: Here in Sweden we get to hear about how the US is the main leg-dragger for a global consensus on man-made global warming (MMGW). Gore was treated like a demi-god during his visit here to pick up the Peace prize (which seems to no longer be given to people who have worked for peace, but for those who create conflict - ???...to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between the nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses???) and there were yards of full-page "People=Cars=CO2 =MMGW" stuff in the papers for weeks. But nowhere were there voices questioning all this information except for the rare ???reader send-ins???.

Unfortunately, Sweden does not have as open of a climate for criticism of "known facts" as the states do, therefore the media continues to pump out these MMGW ???truths??? and the schools swallow them since there's never been an open public challenge to Gore's movie like in England.

But there is hope for all. My girlfriend's daughter (15) is preparing to write a report about man-made global warming and I introduced what Sharon Begley calls ???...a paralyzing fog of doubt ???, when I suggested that ???man-made GW??? is more like a prideful exaggeration of our very limited power to really effect a global-wide climate change. I gave her an example: We get a 145-255 million ton CO2/Methane injection each year from volcano eruptions. This ???volcanic injection??? into our atmosphere (along with other cyclic ???warming??? activities like our sun and oceans) provide, in my observations, a much heavier GW load than anything that we have produced since we started making fires outside of our caves (unless we unleash all of the world's nuclear warheads of course).

Because of my ???paralyzing fog of doubt??? she was interested in learning more, so I gave her some links to check out which may help her to separate the husk from the corn and encourage her to think (and write) critically about today's political and scientific ???facts??? and come to her own conclusions.

http://www.solarnavigator.net/volcanoes.htm
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2007-04/rtsu-slv042507.php
http://www.inteliorg.com/co2_climate_change.html

Posted By: AGWISBS @ 01/06/2008 8:35:19 PM

Comment: SInce as Newsweeks bio on states "Sharon Begley, widely known throughout the industry for her ability to break down complex scientific theories", let's break this down a little further with some facts:

Recently, 400 prominent scientist who were Global Warming alarmist and friends of Al Gores further reviewed the scientific data and concluded in 2007 that have many objections to AGW theory and all become skeptics.

More simple facts that aren't being told:
- Based on the ice core samples, CO2 has been proven without question to follow, not lead temperature rises and falls for the past 400,000+ years.
- The Antarctic ice sheet is actuallg growing and temperatures have been cooling the past decades.
- The Greenland Ice sheet is also growing at rate of 2" per year in thickness. It's not melting away.
- 1934 is now reported as the hottest year, not 1998. James Hansen made a significant error with the temperature coorelations causing the switch. In fact, 5 of the past 10 hottest years recorded all occured before 1940.
- The infamoue MANN Hockey stick, so profiled by the alarmist has been proven without question a fraud. The intent by MANN was to eliminate the Medevil Warm Period and the Little Ice Age. Surrprisingly his paper was not peer reviewed but the IPCC without hesitation published it in 2001. With out much comment, it did not appear in the 2007 report. Turns out the MWP was hotter than today's climate and it was a global phenominum from 1000 - 1200.
- Plants thrive in CO2 rich environments and CO2 has no ill effects on animal life, even in doses exceeding 1000 ppm. (about 3X today's level).

Other facts of note:
- 100 top scientist wrote the UN Secretary General a memo on 12/13/2007 stating that man cannot control the climate and all recently observed climate change is within natural bounds.

- The IPCC is not a scientific entity. It is a polical entity funded by the UN. It's members are all appointed by their respective governments. If you review their backgrounds, they are all pro-global warming fans. There are not any skeptics on any of their committees. You don't think they are biased do you? What a joke!

Lastly, the debate is not over. AGW is by no means a settled science. Us skeptics need to continue the fight against AGW alarmism and activists - as their cause is political in nature.

Posted By: AD21 @ 12/11/2007 6:20:53 PM

Comment: Sorry guys-you are whacked. We're in big trouble here, and where is denial going to get you- and more importantly, your kids and grandkids?

Posted By: Henrik @ 12/11/2007 4:50:05 PM

Comment: A very balanced article indeed. The author must be very proud of this wonderfully unbiased approach to a very simple and uncomplicated topic. Now where can I deposit my brain - and where do you want me to pay?

Posted By: Henrik @ 12/11/2007 4:18:05 PM

Comment: I cannot remember reading an article with so much bias put into it. Is this a journalist who wrote this? Can??t be. Must be a spokesperson for James Hansen. Fortunately the internet has been invented so any layman can check out the temperatures for themselves. At RSS (NASA) you can check it out. http://www.remss.com/rss_research/climate_change_in_the_tropics.html
The temperature above us is the same as it was 27 years ago. The sea surface temperature is the lowest in 9 years. The warming has disappeared - Poof!
henrikoelund@gmail.com

Posted By: closethestore @ 11/25/2007 1:54:58 PM

Comment: Very balanced article, I really feel like I was able to understand both sides of this issue. The author's unbiased aproach was refreshing and has gained my respence. I think the message here is clear, that there is no debating this issue, we need to destroy our society because it is a bad thing and it is making the planet unhappy. Everyone who disgrees with this point of view is ignorant and being paid off and anyone who agrees is smart like the author. So let's stop asking questions and just turn off the lights!

Posted By: closethestore @ 11/25/2007 1:54:44 PM

Comment: Very balanced article, I really feel like I was able to understand both sides of this issue. The author's unbiased aproach was refreshing and has gained my respence. I think the message here is clear, that there is no debating this issue, we need to destroy our society because it is a bad thing and it is making the planet unhappy. Everyone who disgrees with this point of view is ignorant and being paid off and anyone who agrees is smart like the author. So let's stop asking questions and just turn off the lights!

Posted By: closethestore @ 11/25/2007 1:53:46 PM

Comment: Very balanced article, I really feel like I was able to understand both sides of this issue. The author's unbiased aproach was refreshing and has gained my respence. I think the message here is clear, that there is no debating this issue, we need to destroy our society because it is a bad thing and it is making the planet unhappy. Everyone who disgrees with this point of view is ignorant and being paid off and anyone who agrees is smart like the author. So let's stop asking questions and just turn off the lights!

Posted By: closethestore @ 11/25/2007 1:52:44 PM

Comment: Very balanced article, I really feel like I was able to understand both sides of this issue. The author's unbiased aproach was refreshing and has gained my respence. I think the message here is clear, that there is no debating this issue, we need to destroy our society because it is a bad thing and it is making the planet unhappy. Everyone who disgrees with this point of view is ignorant and being paid off and anyone who agrees is smart like the author. So let's stop asking questions and just turn off the lights!

Posted By: Anti-Propoganda @ 11/10/2007 6:09:09 AM

Comment: Environmentalism in modern society poses to care about the people and the world when in fact the organizers behind the movement in particular WWF and others are heavily funded by corrupt institutions for a formerly secrete agenda Eugenics. I say formerly because now they have openly discussed their plans in various books knowing full well the world is too dumb to call them on it, because 90% of us don't read! SAD:(

Posted By: Anti-Propoganda @ 11/10/2007 6:04:19 AM

Comment: this is absolutely sad that government can buy fake news like this, don't believe me, follow the money 2.3 trillion missing from the pentagon, also more corporations are making money from these policies than stand to loose from them.. warming isn't the issue it's the FACT that people like Al Gore admit to wanting to TAX the very air we breath in and out... this is not they way to go about environmentalism, the Rothschild's own you!

Posted By: charlsong1 @ 10/17/2007 1:52:48 PM

Comment: This entire article is merely an opinionated editorial by some guy who tries to sound factual. The bottom line is that there is too much money being made by the big boys for the major players to actually do anything. If humans cause glabal warming or not is irrelevant when compared to the money. Big oil reached another record high, and until the government forces them to change, they won't, regardless of what the average middle-class American thinks. All the legislation about what we're supposed to do by 2050 is also a joke, since the guys who come up with that will be gone, and newer elected officials will then say what they need to so they can get elected as well. No one with any real power actually cares about it, and voters' opinions after elections don't matter. Congressmen and CEOs do what they want, and they want more money and power, not a cleaner environment.