Desmogblog…....Giaever this!

Although all public relations professionals are bound by a duty to not knowingly mislead the public, some have executed comprehensive campaigns of misinformation on behalf of industry clients on issues ranging from tobacco and asbestos to seat belts. Lately, these fringe players have turned their efforts to creating confusion about climate change. This PR campaign could not be accomplished without the compliance of media as well as the assent and participation of leaders in government and business.

The world’s best-qualified scientists agree that climate is changing and that the burning of fossil fuels is mostly to blame. Although there is no debate in peer reviewed science journals, the well-funded and highly organized public relations campaign has left the impression – in mainstream media – of a lively and continuing scientific controversy.

Scientists from within the fossil fuel industries’ own organizations raised red flags about climate change as early as 30 years ago – and they specifically dismissed the credibility of deniers by 1995. Yet the fossil fuel industry has continued to support efforts to subvert the science, attacking real scientists and promoting a cast of “skeptics” in their place. DeSmogBlog looks behind these deniers to test their credentials and to search out their source of funding.

Democracy is utterly dependant upon an electorate that is accurately informed. In promoting climate change denial (and often denying their responsibility for doing so) industry has done more than endanger the environment. It has undermined democracy. There is a vast difference between putting forth a point of view, honestly held, and intentionally sowing the seeds of confusion. Free speech does not include the right to deceive. Deception is not a point of view. And the right to disagree does not include a right to intentionally subvert the public awareness.

People have a right to know who is paying the deniers. It is difficult to deceive or confuse a well-informed person. DeSmogBlog exists to clear up the PR pollution around fossil fuels and climate change.

http://www.desmogblog.com/ivar-giaever

It’s possible that some of the people included in this list sincerely doubt that human activity is promoting potentially catastrophic climate change. For example, the 79-year-old Nobel laureate (Physics, 1973) Ivar Giaever may, legitimately, have fallen behind in his reading. For that matter, it’s possible, perhaps evening likely, that Giaever has never taken any direct interest in atmospheric science.

By DAveKnTux, June 2 at 6:15 am #

“Well technicaly as I dont give him any money then im not really getting scammed”

You will be when climate change legislation goes into effect and everything in life gets even more expensive.

“Also i just like the way he enrages the whole climate change skeptic camp, makes me lol.”

Sounds like you have a real non-emotional scientific approach to the topic.  The environmental movement is full of religious zealots.

if you want to see the truth about cap & trade schemes go here: http://blip.tv/file/1004193/

Well technicaly as I dont give him any money then im not really getting scammed, also i believe that we pollute too much so im in favour of anyone who helps draw media attention to this issue, dont really care how much money he makes. Also i just like the way he enrages the whole climate change skeptic camp, makes me lol.

RE: DAveKnTux, June 1 at 5:12 am #

Are you dense man? He is running a scam on you in an effort to make money off your dumb gullible arse.

To everyone that believes the Co2 lie…

stop breathing. please

http://gayandright.blogspot.com/2009/03/more-scientists-doubt-man-made-global.html

“I am a skeptic…Global warming has become a new religion.” - Nobel Prize Winner for Physics, Ivar Giaever.

“Since I am no longer affiliated with any organization nor receiving any funding, I can speak quite frankly….As a scientist I remain skeptical…The main basis of the claim that man’s release of greenhouse gases is the cause of the warming is based almost entirely upon climate models. We all know the frailty of models concerning the air-surface system.” - Atmospheric Scientist Dr. Joanne Simpson, the first woman in the world to receive a PhD in meteorology, and formerly of NASA, who has authored more than 190 studies and has been called “among the most preeminent scientists of the last 100 years.”

Warming fears are the “worst scientific scandal in the history…When people come to know what the truth is, they will feel deceived by science and scientists.” - UN IPCC Japanese Scientist Dr. Kiminori Itoh, an award-winning PhD environmental physical chemist.

“The IPCC has actually become a closed circuit; it doesn’t listen to others. It doesn’t have open minds… I am really amazed that the Nobel Peace Prize has been given on scientifically incorrect conclusions by people who are not geologists.” - Indian geologist Dr. Arun D. Ahluwalia at Punjab University and a board member of the UN-supported International Year of the Planet.

“So far, real measurements give no ground for concern about a catastrophic future warming.” - Scientist Dr. Jarl R. Ahlbeck, a chemical engineer at Abo Akademi University in Finland, author of 200 scientific publications and former Greenpeace member.

“Anyone who claims that the debate is over and the conclusions are firm has a fundamentally unscientific approach to one of the most momentous issues of our time.” - Solar physicist Dr. Pal Brekke, senior advisor to the Norwegian Space Centre in Oslo. Brekke has published more than 40 peer-reviewed scientific articles on the sun and solar interaction with the Earth.

“The models and forecasts of the UN IPCC “are incorrect because they only are based on mathematical models and presented results at scenarios that do not include, for example, solar activity.” - Victor Manuel Velasco Herrera, a researcher at the Institute of Geophysics of the National Autonomous University of Mexico
“It is a blatant lie put forth in the media that makes it seem there is only a fringe of scientists who don’t buy into anthropogenic global warming.” - U.S Government Atmospheric Scientist Stanley B. Goldenberg of the Hurricane Research Division of NOAA.

“Even doubling or tripling the amount of carbon dioxide will virtually have little impact, as water vapour and water condensed on particles as clouds dominate the worldwide scene and always will.” – . Geoffrey G. Duffy, a professor in the Department of Chemical and Materials Engineering of the University of Auckland, NZ.

******************************

I do remember Gore saying that his part in a partnership to establish an exchange to trade carbon credits would contribute all profits to charity. He also said that all profits from his movie, An Inconvenient Truth, went to charity as well. I am not sure how he will get paid off on the other end, but I do remember how Ted Turner gave the UN $1 billion dollars, and Time Warner turned up to buy his struggling Turner network at a good profit to him. I don’t expect to see Gore to be paid off in straight quid pro quo fashion, but in some back hand fashion by the globalist community.

Al Gore is a PIG !  Cap-n-trade is another get rich quick scheme dreamed up by the Ivy league MBA’s. This legistlation will be the final nail that shuts the door on our economic freedom. FIGHT THIS with all the hope for your children’s future!! Invest in Solar and wind, money is the only thing these Greed-lusters understand. Al Gore is a PIG…....

I am of mixed emotions regarding Gore’s work and cap and trade in general.

I applaud Al Gore for his dedication in the fight against global pollution and associated evils but think cap and trade a stop gap that makes it less difficult for companies to continue to pollute, writing off the added costs as a tax deduction. But I guess we gotta start somewhere.

Far better would be the direct addressing of every form of pollution and , instead of buying or selling the right to pollute, forcing companies to actually stop doing so, whether by new technologies and govt assistance ( better use of our treasury that TARP I venture), or simply by mandate.

Good to see that someone is still on the case fighting global warming. Cutting pollution has got to be one of the biggest challenges of the 21st century.