Heartland Institute
On June 16, 17, and 18, The Heartland Institute ran three full-page ads in the Washington Post calling for an open debate over the science of global warming. Please forward links to this page to friends and colleagues, and/or post these ads on your blog or Web site.
See larger version here.
See larger version here.
See larger version here.
Each of these ads make specific claims, such as “some of the most distinguished scientists in the world have called fear of global warming ‘preposterous’ and ‘grossly exaggerated,’” and “a recent national poll found only 34% of Americans believe global warming is man-made.” Sources backing up these statements appear below.
We placed these ads because the mainstream media refuse to report the views of many scientists - by some accounts, most scientists - who believe global warming is not a crisis. The media also fail to accurately report the enormous cost to workers and consumers of legislation that would limit greenhouse gas emissions and the extensive public opposition to “cap and tax” legislation.
The science and economics of global warming are not too complicated for the average person to consider and make up his or her own mind. We urge you to do that. Go here and view some of the articles linked under “What’s New” or “A Primer on Global Warming.” Or go here and read about the new report from the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC), which comprehensively rebuts the claims of the United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
Go here for the sources for the factual statements in the ads.
5 comments:
The Heartland Institute, and many of their "scientists" are paid by the fossil fuel industry to try to confuse the general public and policy makers about the current state of climate change science.
Visit my site for a relatively easy to read sumamry of the current state of climate research.
Global Warming: Man or Myth - The Science of Climate Change
These people are not paid by the "fossil fuel industry" and you know it. You are a liar.
According to Greenpeace's Exxonfactsheet Website:
The Heartland Institute created a website in the Spring of 2007, www.globalwarmingheartland.org, which asserts there is no scientific consensus on global warming and features a list of experts and a list of like-minded think tanks, many of whom have received funding from ExxonMobil and other polluters.
The Heartland Institute networks heavily with other conservative policy organizations, and is part of the State Policy Network, a member of the Cooler Heads Coalition (as of 4/04), and co-sponsored the 2001 Fly In for Freedom with the Wise Use umbrella group, Alliance for America. Heartland also co-sponsored a New York state Conference on Property Rights, hosted by the Property Rights Foundation of America. The Institute puts out several publications, including "Environment & Climate News" which frequently features anti-environmentalist and climate skeptic writing. They also published "Earth Day '96," a compilation of articles on environmental topics. The publication, distributed on college campuses, featured "Adventures in the Ozone Layer" by S. Fred Singer, and "the Cold Facts on Global Warming" by Sallie Baliunas. The articles denied the serious nature of ozone depletion and global warming.
Walter F. Buchholtz, an ExxonMobil executive, serves as Heartland's Government Relations Advisor, according to Heartland's 2005 IRS Form 990, pg. 15. http://www.guidestar.org/FinDocuments/2005/363/309/2005-363309812-0295fbb2-9.pdf
The Heartland Institute formerly sponsored and hosted www.climatesearch.org, a web page ostensibly dedicated to objective research on global warming, but at the same time presenting heavily biased research by organizations such as the American Petroleum Institute as an FAQ section.
Also see:
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Heartland_Institute
Nobody believes Greenpeace. wikipedia is not a credible source of information for anything. You'll have to do better than posting such nonsense.
Do some research on one of the founders of Greenpeace....he is now a realist, what you label a "skeptic"...or a "denier".
Friday, April 25, 2008
The Sad Truth About Greenpeace
The sad and dangerous truth about Greenpeace, and (I claim) the same applies to all of the Environmental Industry. They need to clean up their act! As jon_troll-del is fond of saying, they need to be "called out" about their myth of man-caused global warming. Please read the following letter. It offers a revealing look at the Environmental Industry from an "insider".
Peter
Why I Left Greenpeace
By PATRICK MOORE,
Noting particularly the scientifically nonsensical attacks on chlorine and PhthalatesIn 1971 an environmental and antiwar ethic was taking root in Canada, and I chose to participate. As I completed a Ph.D. in ecology, I combined my science background with the strong media skills of my colleagues. In keeping with our pacifist views, we started Greenpeace. But I later learned that the environmental movement is not always guided by science. As we celebrate Earth Day today, this is a good lesson to keep in mind.
At first, many of the causes we championed, such as opposition to nuclear testing and protection of whales, stemmed from our scientific knowledge of nuclear physics and marine biology. But after six years as one of five directors of Greenpeace International, I observed that none of my fellow directors had any formal science education. They were either political activists or environmental entrepreneurs.
Ultimately, a trend toward abandoning scientific objectivity in favor of political agendas forced me to leave Greenpeace in 1986.The breaking point was a Greenpeace decision to support a world-wide ban on chlorine. Science shows that adding chlorine to drinking water was the biggest advance in the history of public health, virtually eradicating water-borne diseases such as cholera. And the majority of our pharmaceuticals are based on chlorine chemistry. Simply put, chlorine is essential for our health.
(continued)
Post a Comment