[Vision2020] Global Warming Contrarians Exposed

[lfalen]

Ted
Do you discount John Coleman and all 500 of the Climate Scientists that recently met in New York. I think that the question is still open. That is not to say we shouldn't be working on decreasing air pollution.
Roger

-----Original message-----
From: "Ted Moffett" starbliss at gmail.com
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2008 11:22:09 -0700
To: "Vision 2020" vision2020 at moscow.com
Subject: [Vision2020] Global Warming Contrarians Exposed

> MUST SEE VIDEO FOR JOURNALISTS
> Global Warming Contrarians Exposed
> 
> http://www.uctv.tv/search-details.asp?showID=13459
> 
> An extremely informative, in-depth account of four of the major global
> warming "confusionists" is available free-online.
> 
> Naomi Oreskes of the University of California, San Diego Science Studies
> Program is currently giving a lecture about the people at the center of the
> denialist camp. It is exceptionally well researched back to the first
> scientists to raise a red flag about the rising CO2, and who have been
> proven to be correct with alarming accuracy in their projections of climate
> change.
> 
> She very powerfully dismantles the idea that "nobody could have predicted
> what we now know to be true". The answer to that is: "Not only could they
> have, but they did".
> 
> But people weren't very concerned in the 50's and 60's, seeing the problem
> as one far off in the future.
> 
> After making an indisputable account of the scientific community's knowledge
> before the eighties, she examines the people who have seemed to ignore what
> was known, and more importantly, why they continue to this day to argue that
> 'the debate is not over'. This is the purpose of the lecture and video as
> the title is "The American Denial of Global Warming".
> 
> "We think that the scientists are still arguing about it, because this is
> what we have been repeatedly told" (by the press) states Oreskes.
> Journalists feel a need to give balance to their work and rightfully so. But
> in the case of a handful of deniers against a couple thousand scientists,
> the need to hear from the very few is ridiculous and, as she explains,
> harmful.
> 
> The famed republican strategist who gave us such wonderful phrases as "The
> Clear Skies Initiative", "No Child Left Behind", "Healthy Forests
> Initiative" (which have all been proven to be spin) Frank Luntz wrote "…you
> need to continue to make the lack of scientific certainty a primary issue".
> Mr. Luntz has since given up that idea, but other republicans, sadly, have
> not, Oreskes says.
> 
> She uncovers revealing documents and some humorous facts about the deniers
> and their tactics. "The plan was never to debate fellow scientists in the
> halls of science, but rather in the mass media", says Oreskes, with the main
> goal to confuse the public instead of proving a scientific fact.
> 
> It was the same tactic for confusing the public about the link between
> cancer and cigarettes, and ……… not surprisingly …….. it is some of the same
> people doing it now on the CO2 issue.
> 
> I highly recommend this video. It very clearly explains a situation that is
> causing much harm to the American public's understanding of a very dangerous
> situation.
> 
> *************
> The American Denial of Global Warming, 12/12/07, free on-line, 58 min.
> http://www.uctv.tv/search-details.asp?showID=13459
> 
> ------------------------------------------
> Vision2020 Post: Ted Moffett
> 
>