...they should all open to a new tab/window
didn't for me.
I'll counter with this though.
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2008/03/the-global-cooling-mole/
http://www.exxposeexxon.com/facts/gwdeniers.html
WHY the confusion on global warming? For more than a decade, the best
science has been telling us that the Earth is warming at an alarming
rate with even more alarming consequences. Extreme droughts and floods
and longer-lasting and more frequent tropical storms are on the horizon.
The consensus among scientists has been that the prime cause of warming
is the emissions of heat-trapping gases caused by the burning of fossil
fuels. So why has global warming been largely covered in the U.S. as a
debate? For years, a network of organizations have worked together to
block action on global warming. In the words of the U.K.'s Royal
Society, one of the most prestigious scientific academies in the world,
these groups "misrepresent the science of climate change by outright
denial of the evidence." This network has been consistently funded by
ExxonMobil. Since at least 1998, ExxonMobil has spent $17 to $23 million
to bankroll these groups. Today, ExxonMobil is the only known oil giant
directly bankrolling global warming denier groups. The funding is part
of its continued involvement in an orchestrated plan to manufacture
uncertainty around climate science. The plan, made public by The New
York Times in 1998 (see clip at right), and retold recently by the Union
of Concerned Scientists, employed the same strategy and some of the same
personnel as the tobacco industry. The memo laid out a plan to
"identify, recruit and train" a small team of unknown scientists and
declared that: "Victory will be achieved when uncertainties in climate
science become part of the conventional wisdom" for "average citizens"
and "the media."
======================
American Enterprise Institute
$1,860,000
Offered $10k to scientists to write a paper on the UN IPCC "...that
thoughtfully explores the limitations of climate model [forecasting]
outputs as they pertain to the development of climate policy..." Project
was apparently canceled. (Letter, 2/5/07) "If you look closely at the
IPCC's full reports, they are hedged repeatedly in uncertainties and
limitations about what we know." Hayward, (FrontPage, AEI, 5/21/07)
American Legislative Exchange Council
$1,126,200
"The science of climate change is unsettled" and the "question is how
much, if any, of this warming is caused by human activities."(ALEC
Analysis, Fall 2006)
Cato Institute
$125,000
" Using normal scientific standards, there is no proof we are causing
the Earth to warm, let alone that such warming will cause an
environmental catastrophe." (publication, 7/11/07)
Citizens for a Sound Economy Educational Foundation [2004 in FreedomWorks]
$380,250
"Don't allow our corporations to be used as pawns for a radical agenda
which is not based on science...Human impact on global warming is likely
negligible at best!" (Stop the Extremists on Global Warming: An open
letter to ExxonMobil Shareholders, 5/26/03)
Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow (CFACT)
$567,000
"Despite the endless deluge of global warming claims there is also a
mountain of climate data to dispute them." (website, 2/20/07)
Fraser Institute
$120,000 All for climate projects
"Climate change activists are exaggerating the certainty in the linkage
between human action and climate change and advocating policies that
offer no environmental gain, but a lot of economic pain." (Press
Release, 7/21/03)
Free Enterprise Action Institute/ CSR Watch
$130,000
"...the junk science behind global warming hysteria,... subscribing to
the unproven notion that humans are altering global climate for the
worse..." (Top 10 Worst in 2004, 12/7/05)
Frontiers of Freedom Institute
$1,182,000
" there is a wide spectrum of opinion on almost every aspect of the
subject..."(Rebuttal to Al Gore's Congressional testimony, May 2007)
"Climate has always varied, often with large swings...These dramatic
climatic ebbs and flows are naturally occurring events." (Science Hill
Watch, 2/2/04)
George C. Marshall Institute
$745,000
"We have at least 25 years to research this issue before CO2 emission
cuts need to be considered." (A guide to global warming, accessed 10/07)
Heartland Institute
$830,000
"The supposed scientific consensus on global warming is pure fiction."
(Joseph Bast, president, 6/28/07 Press release) "... warming is likely
to be very modest relative to natural variation," (2007 Guidebook for
State Legislators)
Heritage Foundation
$565,000
" Virtually all of the alarming rhetoric surrounding global warming is
speculative and lies outside the scientific consensus.... given that
global warming is not unprecedented, is not catastrophic, we really need
to think seriously about the costs of some of these efforts to deal with
global warming...." (Cold Facts on Global Warming, accessed 8/07)
Media Research Center
$202,500
Dedicated to revealing liberal bias media."ABC, CBS, and NBC are giving
overwhelmingly one-sided coverage to the global warming issue with
numerous reports that largely mimic the talking points of former Vice
President Al Gore and climate disaster alarmists..." (Press Release,
4/19/07)
National Center for Policy Analysis
$545,900
"Due to the complexities of the climate system, we currently cannot
reliably connect emissions of greenhouse gases from any specific source
or group of sources to an increased risk of any particular
outcome..."(NCPA publication, 5/15/06)
National Center for Public Policy Research/ EnviroTruth
$335,000
"the science implicating human activity on global warming is uncertain
and speculative"(testimony of Sr. Fellow Thomas J. Borelli, 6/29/07)
"There is no serious evidence that man-made global warming is taking
place." (NCPPR website, 4/04)
Pacific Research Institute for Public Policy
$430,000
This example misinforms readers by confusing weather with climate:
"Warming theorists warn that there is more to come, but as farmers know,
the weather does not always cooperate with predictions." (Capital Ideas,
8/15/07)
The Advancement of Sound Science Center and Junkscience.com
$50,000
"Global warming alarmists, such as the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change (IPCC),..." Milloy replays hackneyed arguments that
attempt to disprove the IPCC conclusions of the state of science.
(lifted from a friend)
