Reply With Quote
I blame consumers.
Who do you blame?
Global warming eh.
Well I was wondering why Vegas felt warmer...
I blame consumers.
Who do you blame?
I hope Manny doesn't see this.The phrase "very likely" translates to a more than 90 percent certainty that global warming is caused by man's burning of fossil fuels. That was the strongest conclusion to date, making it nearly impossible to say natural forces are to blame.
What that means in simple language is ,"we have this nailed" said top U.S. climate scientist Jerry Mahlman, who originated the percentage system.
The 20-page report, which was due to be officially released later in the day, represents the most authoritative science on global warming.
The new language marked an escalation from the panel's last report in 2001, which said warming was "likely" caused by human activity. There had been speculation that the participants might try to say it is "virtually certain" man causes global warming, which translates to 99 percent certainty.
Oh sure, now everyone believes the government.
Scientists Offered Cash to Dispute Climate Study
By Ian Sample
The Guardian UK
Friday 02 February 2007
Scientists and economists have been offered $10,000 each by a lobby group funded by one of the world's largest oil companies to undermine a major climate change report due to be published today.
Letters sent by the American Enterprise Ins ute (AEI), an ExxonMobil-funded thinktank with close links to the Bush administration, offered the payments for articles that emphasise the shortcomings of a report from the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
Travel expenses and additional payments were also offered.
The UN report was written by international experts and is widely regarded as the most comprehensive review yet of climate change science. It will underpin international negotiations on new emissions targets to succeed the Kyoto agreement, the first phase of which expires in 2012. World governments were given a draft last year and invited to comment.
The AEI has received more than $1.6m from ExxonMobil and more than 20 of its staff have worked as consultants to the Bush administration. Lee Raymond, a former head of ExxonMobil, is the vice-chairman of AEI's board of trustees.
The letters, sent to scientists in Britain, the US and elsewhere, attack the UN's panel as "resistant to reasonable criticism and dissent and prone to summary conclusions that are poorly supported by the analytical work" and ask for essays that "thoughtfully explore the limitations of climate model outputs".
Climate scientists described the move yesterday as an attempt to cast doubt over the "overwhelming scientific evidence" on global warming. "It's a desperate attempt by an organisation who wants to distort science for their own political aims," said David Viner of the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia.
"The IPCC process is probably the most thorough and open review undertaken in any discipline. This undermines the confidence of the public in the scientific community and the ability of governments to take on sound scientific advice," he said.
The letters were sent by Kenneth Green, a visiting scholar at AEI, who confirmed that the organisation had approached scientists, economists and policy analysts to write articles for an independent review that would highlight the strengths and weaknesses of the IPCC report.
"Right now, the whole debate is polarised," he said. "One group says that anyone with any doubts whatsoever are deniers and the other group is saying that anyone who wants to take action is alarmist. We don't think that approach has a lot of utility for intelligent policy."
One American scientist turned down the offer, citing fears that the report could easily be misused for political gain. "You wouldn't know if some of the other authors might say nothing's going to happen, that we should ignore it, or that it's not our fault," said Steve Schroeder, a professor at Texas A&M university.
The contents of the IPCC report have been an open secret since the Bush administration posted its draft copy on the internet in April. It says there is a 90% chance that human activity is warming the planet, and that global average temperatures will rise by another 1.5 to 5.8C this century, depending on emissions.
Lord Rees of Ludlow, the president of the Royal Society, Britain's most prestigious scientific ins ute, said: "The IPCC is the world's leading authority on climate change and its latest report will provide a comprehensive picture of the latest scientific understanding on the issue. It is expected to stress, more convincingly than ever before, that our planet is already warming due to human actions, and that 'business as usual' would lead to unacceptable risks, underscoring the urgent need for concerted international action to reduce the worst impacts of climate change. However, yet again, there will be a vocal minority with their own agendas who will try to suggest otherwise."
Ben Stewart of Greenpeace said: "The AEI is more than just a thinktank, it functions as the Bush administration's intellectual Cosa Nostra. They are White House surrogates in the last throes of their campaign of climate change denial. They lost on the science; they lost on the moral case for action. All they've got left is a suitcase full of cash."
On Monday, another Exxon-funded organisation based in Canada will launch a review in London which casts doubt on the IPCC report. Among its authors are Tad Murty, a former scientist who believes human activity makes no contribution to global warming. Confirmed VIPs attending include Nigel Lawson and David Bellamy, who believes there is no link between burning fossil fuels and global warming.
====================
It's an eternal verity that corps will pursue, amorally/immorally/up to and beyond the limit of law, their own interests (enriching their management and financial backers), aka "free market" / "invisisible hand", no matter who or what gets ed in the process.
If I were republican, I'd suggest that one of Bushes conversations with God is what spawned his denial of global warming. God hates the south and scientist.
Blame God.
Exxon offered 10 Grand?
$10,0000 !!!!!!
After they recorded over $39,000,000,000 in profits yesterday??!!@!
Cheapskates.
No way it's 39 billion. More like 50 billion. Don't demand a link, just use your head.
Is this sort of like Halliburton purchasing KBR as a front for doing business in Iraq?
Why would a company announce the largest annual profit in United States History and fudge about 11 billion?
That's like lying to your wife about going to the Palace Men's Club by telling her you're going to Cheetah's Mens Club.
This reminds me of the time in class when someone asked Dr Parmesan
"So why is there such a big stance amongst the scientific community that global warming is false?"
She gave the girl a look that was like "god i hate people" and said, "There isnt."
Brown and root has performed many construction jobs in texas for years and years. I don't live in texas, but am quite familiar with the logo. Faded Haliburton logo's covered up with the freshly painted Brown and root. Back in the day, you could find this equipment in Israel, N. Ireland, Lebanon and countless other regions deemed strategically important to US interest.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
