Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below 
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070103/ap_on_bi_ge/exxonmobil_global_warming
Concerning, but interesting nonetheless.
Concerning, but interesting nonetheless.
ExxonMobil paid to mislead public
- Thread starter EnderJE
- Start date
mountain muscle
New member
The link won't let me open it or copy it right now.
Lots of concerns about global warming true or not.
I will be interested to see why EM was singled out though.
Lots of concerns about global warming true or not.
I will be interested to see why EM was singled out though.
ASHINGTON - ExxonMobil Corp. gave $16 million to 43 ideological groups between 1998 and 2005 in a coordinated effort to mislead the public by discrediting the science behind global warming, the Union of Concerned Scientists asserted Wednesday.
ADVERTISEMENT
The report by the science-based nonprofit advocacy group mirrors similar claims by Britain's leading scientific academy. Last September, The Royal Society wrote the oil company asking it to halt support for groups that "misrepresented the science of climate change."
ExxonMobil did not immediately respond to requests for comment on the scientific advocacy group's report.
Many scientists say accumulating carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases from tailpipes and smokestacks are warming the atmosphere like a greenhouse, melting Arctic sea ice, alpine glaciers and disturbing the lives of animals and plants.
ExxonMobil lists on its Web site nearly $133 million in 2005 contributions globally, including $6.8 million for "public information and policy research" distributed to more than 140 think-tanks, universities, foundations, associations and other groups. Some of those have publicly disputed the link between greenhouse gas emissions and global warming.
But in September, the company said in response to the Royal Society that it funded groups which research "significant policy issues and promote informed discussion on issues of direct relevance to the company." It said the groups do not speak for the company.
Alden Meyer, the Union of Concerned Scientists' strategy and policy director, said in a teleconference that ExxonMobil based its tactics on those of tobacco companies, spreading uncertainty by misrepresenting peer-reviewed scientific studies or cherry-picking facts.
Dr. James McCarthy, a professor at Harvard University, said the company has sought to "create the illusion of a vigorous debate" about global warming.
ADVERTISEMENT
The report by the science-based nonprofit advocacy group mirrors similar claims by Britain's leading scientific academy. Last September, The Royal Society wrote the oil company asking it to halt support for groups that "misrepresented the science of climate change."
ExxonMobil did not immediately respond to requests for comment on the scientific advocacy group's report.
Many scientists say accumulating carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases from tailpipes and smokestacks are warming the atmosphere like a greenhouse, melting Arctic sea ice, alpine glaciers and disturbing the lives of animals and plants.
ExxonMobil lists on its Web site nearly $133 million in 2005 contributions globally, including $6.8 million for "public information and policy research" distributed to more than 140 think-tanks, universities, foundations, associations and other groups. Some of those have publicly disputed the link between greenhouse gas emissions and global warming.
But in September, the company said in response to the Royal Society that it funded groups which research "significant policy issues and promote informed discussion on issues of direct relevance to the company." It said the groups do not speak for the company.
Alden Meyer, the Union of Concerned Scientists' strategy and policy director, said in a teleconference that ExxonMobil based its tactics on those of tobacco companies, spreading uncertainty by misrepresenting peer-reviewed scientific studies or cherry-picking facts.
Dr. James McCarthy, a professor at Harvard University, said the company has sought to "create the illusion of a vigorous debate" about global warming.
redguru
New member
WODIN said:
Do those same "many scientists" say that the vast majority of CO2 emissions actually come from the ocean floor? Global warming is occuring, it is not man-made and there is nothing we can do about it. Stop trying to social-engineer the planet through the same fear-mongering you disparage the Right for.
mrplunkey
New member
Anyone who's ever applied for a research grant (public or private) knows that bias is ALWAYS present before the first nickle is handed over.
Even basic science stuff, like NIH grants aren't immune. When I was doing my graduate work in visual neuroscience, "cortical oscillations" were the rage. They were bullshit discovered by a bunch of guys who didn't realize that CRT monitors have a 17-msec flicker and they used their flawed results to build this elaborate model about how the brain works. Any grant that had the word "oscillations" in it got funded, and any grant that opposed or blew-off the notion didn't. We played along and got the money.
This notion that science is this pure, unbiased institution is just silly.
Even basic science stuff, like NIH grants aren't immune. When I was doing my graduate work in visual neuroscience, "cortical oscillations" were the rage. They were bullshit discovered by a bunch of guys who didn't realize that CRT monitors have a 17-msec flicker and they used their flawed results to build this elaborate model about how the brain works. Any grant that had the word "oscillations" in it got funded, and any grant that opposed or blew-off the notion didn't. We played along and got the money.
This notion that science is this pure, unbiased institution is just silly.
Similar threads
- Locked
