| Coverter Recommendations Please [message #80325] |
Mon, 19 February 2007 09:02  |
TC
 Messages: 327 Registered: September 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
of late he has thrown science roght out
the friggin window and become a fear mongering shill for the left.
"Gene Lennon" <glennon@NOSPmyrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:460ed64b$1@linux...
>
> Timothy F. Ball is a well-known PROFESSIONAL global warming skeptic. He
> started
> a non- profit in Canada (the Natural Resources Stewardship Project) from
> which he and Tom Harris (NRSP head) are well paid.
>
> The Canadian federal Lobbyists Registration System indicates that High
> Park's
> clients (NRSP) include the Canadian Electricity Association and the
> Canadian
> Gas Association.
>
> The Toronto Star Newspapers have done several articles outing the NRSP as
> a shill for Canadian energy giants.
>
> Do a little research before you jump on board the energy-backed
> misinformation
> train.
>
> Some info here:
> Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Coverter Recommendations Please [message #80336 is a reply to message #80325] |
Mon, 19 February 2007 12:38   |
Paul Artola
 Messages: 161 Registered: November 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
r />
http://www.exxonsecrets.org/
SCIENTIFIC CONSENSUS
The scientific consensus is actually pretty clear.
From: http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/306/5702/1686
******
"PCC is not alone in its conclusions. In recent years, all major
scientific bodies in the United States whose members' expertise bears
directly on the matter have issued similar statements. For example, the
National Academy of Sciences report, Climate Change Science: An Analysis
of Some Key Questions, begins: "Greenhouse gases are accumulating in
Earth's atmosphere as a result of human activities, causing surface air
temperatures and subsurface ocean temperatures to rise" [p. 1 in (5)].
The report explicitly asks whether the IPCC assessment is a fair summary
of professional scientific thinking, and answers yes: "The IPCC's
conclusion that most of the observed warming of the last 50 years is
likely to have been due to the increase in greenhouse gas concentrations
accurately reflects the current thinking of the scientific community on
this issue" [p. 3 in (5)].
Others agree. The American Meteorological Society (6), the American
Geophysical Union (7), and the American Association for the Advancement
of Science (AAAS) all have issued statements in recent years concluding
that the evidence for human modification of climate is compelling (8).
The drafting of such reports and statements involves many opportunities
for comment, criticism, and revision, and it is not likely that they
would diverge greatly from the opinions of the societies' members.
Nevertheless, they might downplay legitimate dissenting opinions. That
hypothesis was teste
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|