Radio
Climate change rallies, realities and sacrificesConfronting the true costs of climate change "prevention"March 7, 2008 by CFACT The mantra is repeated daily. There is consensus on climate change. Global warming is real. It will be a disaster. Humans are to blame. We have to do something immediately.
However, the consensus of 100 scientists is undone by one fact, Albert Einstein noted. The United Nations and its Climate Cataclysm army of 15,000 in exotic Bali clearly understood that.
They were not about to let even one fact prevent them from promoting climate scares and a successor to the Kyoto treaty. Gloom-and-doom scientists and bureaucrats owned Balis podiums. Radical environmentalists fumed and staged stunts. Al Gore denounced President Bush, repeated myths that enthralled the Academy and Nobel committees, and demanded sacrifices by others. Meanwhile, respected climate scientists were barred from panel discussions, censored, silenced and threatened with physical removal by polizei, if they tried to hold a press conference to present peer-reviewed evidence on climate, such as: Climate change is natural and recurrent. The human factor is small compared to that of the sun and other natural forces. There has been no overall global warming since 1998, and most local and regional warming trends have been offset by nearby cooling. A half-degree of net warming since 1900 (amid a number of ups and downs) does not foreshadow a catastrophe. Recent glacial retreats, sea-level rise and migrations of temperature sensitive species are all within the bounds of known natural variability. The best approach is to adapt, as our ancestors did. Money and resources devoted to futile climate prevention actions would be better spent on malaria, AIDS, poverty and other pressing problems. Perhaps most important, no country can progress or prosper without abundant, reliable, affordable energy that would be in short supply if draconian climate laws are implemented. UN alarmists would not tolerate such heresies. They blamed every regional weather and climate blip on human emissions, and trotted out computer scenarios that they insist prove we must take drastic actions to avert Armageddon. But computer models do a poor job of incorporating our still poor grasp of complex and turbulent oceanic, atmospheric and solar processes. They are based on conjecture about future technologies and emissions, and cannot predict climate shifts even one year in the future, much less 50 or 100. They simply produce scenarios and projections of what might happen under assorted assumptions enabling alarmists to trumpet the most alarming outputs to support drastic action. Those scenarios are evidence of climate chaos the way Jurassic Park proves dinosaurs can be cloned from DNA trapped in prehistoric amber. However, Bali negotiators last December insisted that the world faces a climate crisis that can be averted only by slashing greenhouse gas emissions. Ultimately, they could agreed only to deep cuts by 2050, with definitions to be written later by countries that are not about to commit economic suicide. Many environmentalists and members of Congress nonetheless continue to demand CO2 reductions of up to 40% below current emission levels by 2020 and 80% or more by 2050. Itll be easy, they insist. Rubbish, Even a 25-40% reduction over the next twelve years would impose major sacrifices on families, workers and communities, especially poor ones while leaving no room for population or economic growth. Fossil fuels provide 85% of the energy we use. Slashing emissions by even 25% means slashing the use of these fuels, paying vastly more to control and sequester emissions, and radically altering lifestyles and living standards. Families will do so voluntarily, or under mandatory rationing systems, enforced by EPA, courts, climate police and patriotic snitches. Getting beyond 25% would require a radical transformation of life as we know it. Senator Joe Lieberman admits his climate protection bill would cost the United States hundreds of billions of dollars. Economist Arthur Laffer calculates that cap-and-trade schemes would reduce economic growth and penalize average American families $10,800 in lost income by 2020. Thats on top of the $2000 in higher energy costs that US families have endured since 1998 and the 11% extra that USA Today says average households will pay this winter compared to a year ago. Higher energy costs will increase the price of everything we eat, drive, buy and do. Reaching or exceeding 25% targets could require transformations like these. Parking your car and riding a bike. Youd get to work and the grocery in better shape and guilt-free if you dont exhale. Disconnecting air conditioners and setting thermostats to 50 degrees all winter. Swim suits and UnderArmour are excellent substitutes. Eating all leftovers. Seattle has decreed that by 2009 single-family homes must recycle all table scraps because their decomposition generates greenhouse gases or have their garbage collection terminated. Shutting down coal and gas power plants, and replacing them with new nuclear plants or forests of gargantuan wind turbines. Blanketing Connecticut with turbines could meet New York Citys electricity needs, and covering Texas and Louisiana could satisfy US needs, at least when the wind is blowing, says Rockefeller University professor Jesse Ausubel. Closing paper mills and factories. Perhaps newly unemployed workers could find jobs in China and other developing countries, where the tough emission standards wont apply or in the new carbon-free economy that politicians promise will arise once climate bills are enacted. Closing dairy and poultry farms. Producing meat accounts for 18% of all greenhouse gas emissions, so this would make both greens and PETA happy. Adopting sustainable green technologies, like the treadle-powered irrigation pumps environmentalists are sending to poor countries, to replace diesel pumps. An Indian villager toiling on his eco-bicycle for three years could offset the CO2 from one jetliner full of environmentalists heading to Bali. An appropriately green solution would be requiring that climate confabs be via video-conference from Albania or Zambia, to discourage attendance by bureaucrats and activists. We might also insist that politicians eschew private jets and take Smart Cars to campaign and global warming rallies. Meanwhile, China is adding the equivalent of another Germany every year to global greenhouse emissions, says climatologist Roger Pielke. Thus, if CO2 really does cause climate change, all these sacrifices might prevent global temperatures from rising 0.2 degrees. Adapting to whatever heat, cold, floods, droughts and storms nature (or mankind) might bring seems a much saner and less costly course of action. Paul Driessen is senior policy advisor for the Congress of Racial Equality and Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow (CFACT), and author of Eco-Imperialism: Green power ∙ Black death (www.Eco-Imperialism.com).
Read More
With Adversaries Like This – You Don’t Need FriendsAn independent review for the IPCC?National Journal: Clash between the Guardian and scienceAdapting to climate change through technology'Scientific consensus' should be put on the standSaving trees with keroseneLeader of noneClimate Depot is impacting Obama's climate initiativeNo, You Can Not!Climate change morality |
Get updates by email
 CFACT drops the banner on Greenpeace shipsIn daring land and sea raids, activists tag Greenpeace Rainbow Warrior with “Propaganda Warrior” banner; Arctic Sunrise hit with “Ship of Lies” banner earlier in the day... The rainforest issue: Myths and factsCFACT briefing paper compares two very differing views about people and nature in the tropics... All pain, no gainThe reality behind the mythology of Cap and Trade... The clear-cutting facts about the rainforestAre we really losing one football field every minute?... Melting the facts about Greenland's ice sheetViking history, ice core samples, and observations of solar cycle cast doubt on human responsibility for climate change... Addressing the root causes of illegal immigrationFocusing on property rights and economic opportunity back home could help solve growing border issue...  CFACT arrives in CopenhagenCFACT's delegation arived in Copenhagen, Denmark to educate delegates and media from around the world that the climate change treaty is All Pain No Gain.... Are organic foods really better?Facts challenge organic's benefits over modern agriculture... Climate Depot is impacting Obama's climate initiativeColumnist notes that President Obama must speak out or there will be an increase in climate change skepticism....  Plastic bags withstand the test of time ... and politiciansThe notion that plastic bags pose a threat to waterborne wildlife is as fashionable as it is false....  Health scare surrounding BPA still lacks scientific foundationWell-orchestrated health scares against beneficial products and technologies have become all too common....  CFACT's Marc Morano recognized for outstanding journalismMorano received The Reed Irvine Accuracy in Media Award for his exposé of the ClimateGate scandal....  Environmentalists attack nickel mineA proposed nickel and copper mine in Michigan’s economically hard-hit Upper Peninsula will never see the light of day if a coalition of environmental groups get their way....  Utah protests federal land controlLost jobs and tax revenues have made withstanding the current recession all the more difficult....  India sets up independent global warming panelPrediction: The Indian science panel will hasten the end for the IPCC’s once-dominant view of man-made climate change....  Disclosing the real risks of climate changeSEC says companies must disclose risks due to climate change. Seize the opportunity....  A chill hits wind powerHow likely is it that wind turbines can add to Oregon’s generating capacity in the midst of the winter electricity demand surge, and offset the hydroelectric generating restrictions? Not very.... mgoetzGreat points Bonner. I'd also add that plastic bags and bottles save fuel by being lighter to ship.... { from Plastic bags withstand the test of time ... and politicians }  mcharrisHeaven Help us AL GORE to be awarded Doctorate { from An independent review for the IPCC? } ComdenomCongrats and thanks to Marc Morano, we certainly need more like you and another big thanks to AIM for their moral and ethical perspective with the good sense to uphold and encourage these values...one great defense against propaganda.... { from CFACT's Marc Morano recognized for outstanding journalism } ComdenomWell I guess it's up to us to counter that petition, I can't believe the stunts Greenpeace gets away with.... { from Environmentalists attack nickel mine } thankevanneEven if you ignor the fact that production does not match need the fact is that wind generators produce only about one fourth of their rated max output because of the come and go nature of wind so the generator has to be 4 times as large (or 4 times as many generators) to produce the desired output. Imagine building a coal or NG or Nuclear plant and then running it at 1/4 of its capacity - its nonesense - nobody would build one with that kind of restriction - it's economically incompetant, it's inefficient, it's a waste of resources used to build it, and yet that is what we do when we build a wind farm or a solar farm. The 4x capital cost &maintanence (exorbitanly high for wind and solar)make them unfeasable. And then of course you have the unreliability of the production from them. The fact is they would not work at all without the leveling capability of the conventional power plants. Just ask anyone who is off grid with wind or solar - they have to use batteries for storage to do their leveling! { from A chill hits wind power } nypd204Um, how about the blood tests that showed high white blood cell counts, a precursor to leukemia, and chromosome damage in Love Canal residents. In fact, 33 percent of the residents had undergone chromosomal damage, while in a normal population, this should be at 1 percent...There was also dioxin (polychlorinated dibenzodioxins) in the water, a very hazardous substance. Dioxin pollution is usually measured in parts per trillion at Love Canal, water samples showed dioxin levels of 53 parts per billion...residents exhibited a "disturbingly high rate of miscarriages...stricken by nervous disorders and cancers to the discovery of toxic materials in the milk of nursing mothers." In one case, two out of four children in a single Love Canal family had birth defects one girl was born deaf with a cleft palate, an extra row of teeth, and slight retardation, and a boy was born with an eye defect. A survey conducted by the Love Canal Homeowners Association found that 56% of the children born from 1974-1978 had a birth defect. Everywhere the air had a faint, choking smell. Children returned from play with burns on their hands and faces. According to Dr. Whelan, she declared that people were not falling ill due to exposure to chemical waste, but from stress caused by the media. Who knew that stress causes birth defects. rgonz71"Smoke, Mirrors & Hot Air: How ExxonMobil Uses Big Tobacco's Tactics to Manufacture Uncertainty on Climate Science" rgonz71"You're not an 'activist' if you're being paid by Exxon. You're just a thug on the payroll." BobDevineI have no problem with anyone using wind power but they should do so at their own convenience not with government subsidies. The same goes for solar power. You like it you buy it the operative word being "you".... { from A chill hits wind power }  ibykusNot Bad. They should take things from a slightly higher standpoint and expose this swindle as part of the policy of empire.... { from Laughs for Greenpeace "Climate Caper" turning into international roar }  mcharrishttp://just-me-in-t.site40.net/1_3_AGW-Climate-Change.html { from Taxpayer Robbery Gate }  mcharrishttp://just-me-in-t.site40.net/1_3_AGW-Climate-Change.html  cindym03CFACT is mainly funded by private citizens. A smaller proportion of CFACT’s funding comes from corporations in various industries, as well as foundations. Its financial backers have included The Exxon Mobil Corporation (although Exxon no longer donates to CFACT),[6] The Chevron Corporation,[7] The DaimlerChrysler Corporation Fund,[7] The U.S. Council on Energy Awareness,[8] The Carthage Foundation, and The Sarah Scaife Foundation.[9] { from Monckton names names on Climategate } mkwrk2Is any possible link between the Rosenfeld Effect (a "flat" per capita energy consumption)http://www.mercurynews.com/green-energy/ci_14059885?nclick_check=1 and this topic, in California especially? RationalKeithIsn't Paul Watson of the Sea Shepard the same confrontational person who was one of the founders of Greenpeace, the organization that Patrick Moore dumped because their whole focus is negative, anti-life? ExxonShareholderSmoke, Mirrors & Hot Air: How ExxonMobil Uses Big Tobacco's Tactics to Manufacture Uncertainty on Climate Science MichaelGOPCFACT receives no funds from Exxon. CFACT and its allies are winning the climate debate with sound science, despite being outspent by far.... { from Monckton names names on Climategate }  MichaelGOPCFACT'S Bills are paid by average people who care about free markets, sound science and open minds. { from Socialists and Communists march to support global warming agenda }  MichaelGOPCFACT receives no funding from Exxon. Time to think up fresh propaganda. Or maybe actually engage in the science & policy debate and stop looking for a reason not to? Sorry, left wingers, you're losing the debate on every level.... { from Knute suit }  HarmenWell the first one on this site is denying global warming. { from Is global warming from man? } ClaudeebGood to see the neo eco-fascists getting a little hot under the collar. { from Monckton names names on Climategate } mistamillionsWell cfact get 10 out of 10 for that greenpeace stunt, It winds me up that greeenpeace are perpetuating the global warming myth... peeps need to open there eyes and get wise. { from Socialists and Communists march to support global warming agenda } ExxonShareholdershill [shil] Show IPA Slang –noun KenshinAwesome work CFact!  Curative_ProcessTHE REAL FACE OF COPENHAGEN is an Aussie Farmer named PETER SPENCER. { from Climate skeptics gain steam } Michael_H_AndersonI can post mainstream media links too if you like. Try these on - a little more recent than yours: Michael_H_AndersonLook whopays, let's be reasonable: you are here to disrupt this website. That's pathetic. You could try getting a life, you know. You're not going to change anyone's mind here, your information is outdated and no longer relevant, which makes your entire presence here irrelevant and frankly I'm embarrassed for you and I'm sure I'm not alone. Michael_H_Anderson'Scientific data doesn't go bad after a few years'? That's brilliant. What part of this did you miss, fool? whopaysyourbills1984Regarding the former links I sent regarding the overwhelming evidence that there is scientific consensus around climate change, scientific data doesn't go bad after a few years. Michael_H_AndersonI just wrote the admins here suggesting IP blacklisting this site is being systematically spammed, with the obvious intention of quashing genuine debate and wasting the time of genuinely interested users. Free speech is one thing spambots attacking a site another.... Michael_H_AndersonNice job reading those sites I mentioned, you useless braindead spamming halfwit sophomoric loser pathetic troll. Last time I bother addressing you - hell, you're probably just a spambot anyway. Much rather deal with actual human beings.... ExxonShareholderFellow Cimate Change Skeptics! Michael_H_AndersonI just checked those links...December 2004 for crying out loud! You IDIOT, are you living in a CAVE? Have your handlers not notified you of the huge global crisis assaulting the entire edifice of AGW theory? How cruel of them, and how pathetic of you to let them use you that way! Dumbass!!!... Michael_H_AndersonI just wanted to state that nobody here except you gives a damn, whopaysyourbills1984.... { from Socialists and Communists march to support global warming agenda } Michael_H_AndersonOnly complete nitwits get their science news from Greenpeace or mainstream media. Try these links, and READ them, don't use juvenile tactics like logical fallacies and misdirection to "support" your outdated True Believer viewpoint: whopaysyourbills1984For my fans out there I'd like to offer a few more links, these are for those who think there isn't a scientific consensus that global warming is real and that man contributes to global warming. Of course, it's hard to find scientific consensus that cigarettes cause cancer.  Michael_H_Andersonwhopaysyourbills1984's brain-dead spam is paid for by the taxpayers of whatever country he's from, since he's almost certainly on welfare.... Michael_H_AndersonI wonder who pays YOUR bills, whopaysyourbills1984. Living in Canada, I am grateful every day for oil companies as they have kept me and my family and friends and millions of others from freezing to death to say nothing of the other life-saving tecnologies the wealth oil produces have made possible. Maybe you live on a tropical island in a grass hut with solar-powered computer and Net connection, and have never used internal-combustion transport in your life. Unfortunately for the other 6.5 billion of us, we don't always have that luxury. { from Knute suit } Michael_H_AndersonI don't know if it's true, I wouldn't believe you if you told me the time of day, and don't care at least it isn't funded by liemongers like Greenpeace, the WWF, or the IPCC, you stupid troll.... { from Is global warming from man? } Michael_H_AndersonIf anyone is curious to know what I might mean by socially undeveloped, how about these pointers: Michael_H_AndersonYou're not an activist if you're whopaysyourbills1984, either - you're a puppet. Worse: a parrot of a puppet.... Michael_H_AndersonGreenpeace co-founder Patrick Moore writes: Michael_H_AndersonThis is an excellent essay. As a former Green NGO information officer and nature educator, I have been particularity interested in the extinction issue. In spite of the high-flown claims of environmental groups seeking power, funding and career relevance, it is impossible to know not only the rate of extinctions, but the number of species on earth.  DesertManwhopaysyourbills1984 wrote: "Why is Lord Monckton being interviewed on the subject of climate change? He's not a scientist. "  Michael_H_Andersonwhopaysyourbills1984 - you're missing the point. The POINT is that nobody in their right wits cares what a lobotomized cretin like you thinks about anything.... { from National Journal: Clash between the Guardian and science } DaveJGreat to see Greenpeace suffer and great to see so many comedy posts by "whopaysyourbills1984" Keep them coming old chap! philwynkA correction: it was 489 scientists surveyed, not 97. Ninety-seven was the percentage of those who agree that the earth warmed in the 20th century.... philwynkHard leftists generally assign individuals to counter sites like this one. Yours seems to have been inflicted with a fellow who calls himself "whopaysyourbills1984." sylvainrActivists told you that polar bear population is shrinking and you think it is sound science ? { from Knute suit } ExxonShareholderCraig, Curative_Processps People who know the truth and want the truth to be outted should not be called 'skeptics', they should be called GLOBAL WARMING REALISTS or CLIMATE TRUTHERS or CLIMATE REALISTS. { from Climate skeptics gain steam } Curative_ProcessWhat the mainstream propaganda media failed to tell you was the truth of the FALL OUT of events that started with LORD MONCKTONS Radio Interview with Alan Jones of 2GB, exposing the Treason of The Copenhagen Treaty. And what followed was the biggest People Power Ground Swell in virtual history as 11 Liberal MPs QUIT their portfolio's on the bench under Goldman Sachs Turnbull in disgust, as MANY THOUSANDS of Australians lobbied ALL of the Liberal MPs and National MPs to FIRE Malcolm Goldman Sachs Turnbull (at that time the leader of the Liberals who as a former CEO of Goldman Sachs in Australia, multi-millionaire and best buddies with PM Kevin Rude, who was bizarrely wanting to follow Kevin Rude up the ETS path). And for Tony Abbott to take over as the leader. { from Climate skeptics gain steam } Curative_ProcessWhilst Greenpeace are expanding their carbon foot print at COP15 ... whopaysyourbills1984Who should you believe regarding global warming, 97% of atmospheric scientists or Lord Monckton? robins111Is it just me, or does whopaysyourbills1984, troll here, as much as at SDA? whopaysyourbills1984Here's a small sampling of scientists and institutions who disagree with Lord Monckton on climate change. Since we're not scientists, how trusting some of these organizations? { from Monckton names names on Climategate } whopaysyourbills1984Chris, next time you guys are interviewing Lord Christopher Monckton, could you ask him if he still supports Internment Camps for those with AIDS? He seems like a really progressive thinker. Also, could you ask him if there is anyone else who he would like to start rounding up? { from Monckton names names on Climategate } PopsWell, whopaysyourbills1984 seems to have fallen out of the wrong side of his/her/its cot. Greenpiss have been doing this sort of thing for years, much to his/her/its delight no doubt, but I just bet he/she/it nearly swallowed his/her/its dummy (pacifier) when he/she/it saw this. whopaysyourbills1984Chris, next time you guys are interviewing Lord Christopher Monckton, could you ask him if he still supports Internment Camps for those with AIDS? He seems like a really progressive thinker. Also, could you ask him if there is anyone else who he would like to start rounding up? whopaysyourbills1984Craig, I has a suggestion. While you're fighting on behalf of Shell Oil, why don't you head down to Nigeria where can really crack some skulls: whopaysyourbills1984Your journalism is misleading crap. Curative_ProcessBRILLIANT! whopaysyourbills1984"Alaska’s climate is warming. While there have been warming and cooling trends before, climatologists tell us that the current rate of warming is unprecedented within the time of human civilization...." Curative_Process@whopays .. you do know it Exxon donates to both Democrats and Republican, they back both horses. But don't be fooled, they are 100% behind the Global Warming Scam as they will benefit in kickbacks and subsidies, a little fact your country's leader (Obaahma) has not told you about. So the front needs to be kept up for the the propogated dialectic for numbnuts like you 'who believe' to believe in the smoke screen. { from Monckton names names on Climategate } whopaysyourbills1984Donna, your web site is worse than this one. If you're writing your book discussing how there isn't a consensus on climate change, I would suggest that you interview some of the climatologists who disagree with you, and it shouldn't be difficult because 97% of climatologists disagree with you. whopaysyourbills1984This a great piece of 'journalism' considering the fact that two of the people who are interviewed, Craig Rucker 'College Graduate' Christina Wilson work for CFACT. I can see how it would be tiring to interview Lord Christopher Monckton over and over again considering the fact that he's the only one in Copenhagen who agrees with you. I should set up a website and interview myself to impress people and get some Exxon money. You're not excluded from the global warming debate if you've received over 585k from Exxon, however don't call yourself an activist for pulling these stunts, you're a corporate thug on the payroll.... Donna_LaframboiseInteresting to see Greenpeace get a taste of its own medicine. I disagree strongly, though, with Carbonlover's comment (Dec. 16, 8:54 am) that Greenpeace should be banned. To quote Noam Chomsky, "If you don't believe in free speech for those you despise, you don't believe in it all." I have made this point in several pro-green contexts and I'm repeating it loudly here. carbonloverWell done CFACT! Greenpeace should be banned, as should most do-good green zealots. They understand nought about the role of carbon dioxide. Despite what anyone thinks, there is not one single piece of actual observed evidence that links carbon dioxide with global warming or climate change. Such evidence can never be found because it does not exist. JenniferMarohasyCongratulations to Craig Rucker and crew! whopaysyourbills1984You're not an 'activist' if you're being paid by Exxon. You're just a thug on the payroll.... TheViewMaster
{ from Socialists and Communists march to support global warming agenda } whocareswhopaysbillsand other "greeny" websites are not funded by-sierra club, greenpeace, the UN, Al Gore and other activitist. Yea why don't you go out and gut down some more trees for a tree ring count you bafoon.... { from Monckton names names on Climategate } TheViewMaster
{ from Socialists and Communists march to support global warming agenda } whopaysyourbills1984Why is Lord Monckton being interviewed on the subject of climate change? He's not a scientist. Lord Monckton nice job here: whopaysyourbills1984Craig Rucker and David Rothbard are basically paid Exxon lobbyists. 97% of active climatologists believe that human activity is a significant factor in changing mean global temperatures. There is a link to the study here: http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2009/01/97_of_active_climatologists_ag.php... { from Knute suit }  whopaysyourbills1984Craig Rucker and David Rothbard are basically paid Exxon lobbyists. 97% of active climatologists believe that human activity is a significant factor in changing mean global temperatures. There is a link to the study here: http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2009/01/97_of_active_climatologists_ag.php... { from CFACT's Morano debates UN climate treaty on Britain's Sky News }  whopaysyourbills1984Craig Rucker and David Rothbard are basically paid Exxon lobbyists. 97% of active climatologists believe that human activity is a significant factor in changing mean global temperatures. There is a link to the study here: http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2009/01/97_of_active_climatologists_ag.php... whopaysyourbills1984Craig Rucker and David Rothbard are basically paid Exxon lobbyists. 97% of active climatologists believe that human activity is a significant factor in changing mean global temperatures. There is a link to the study here: http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2009/01/97_of_active_climatologists_ag.php... whopaysyourbills1984Craig Rucker and David Rothbard are basically paid Exxon lobbyists. 97% of active climatologists believe that human activity is a significant factor in changing mean global temperatures. There is a link to the study here: http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2009/01/97_of_active_climatologists_ag.php... { from Socialists and Communists march to support global warming agenda } whopaysyourbills1984Nice job with the graffiti Craig. Did Exxon pay for the spray cans too, or just your ticket to Copenhagen.... whopaysyourbills1984Craig Rucker is funded by Exxon. { from Knute suit } whopaysyourbills1984This organization is funded by Exxon: whopaysyourbills1984This website is funded by Exxon. whopaysyourbills1984This article has been brought to you by the Exxon corporation. It's the best junk science money can buy. { from All pain, no gain } whopaysyourbills1984If you're reading this site. I hope Exxon is paying you, because they're certainly paying the authors. { from National Journal: Clash between the Guardian and science } whopaysyourbills1984This website is an example of Exxon funding junk science. Exxon has paid CFACT over 500k so far. { from New York Times carries CFACT's 'Climate Sense' Conference } whopaysyourbills1984CFACT is Exxon propaganda. They should stop trying to hide this: { from CFACT arrives in Copenhagen }  whopaysyourbills1984Congratulations to Exxon for a organizing successful protest rally: { from CFACT Collegians organize protest against appearance by Al Gore } whopaysyourbills1984This website is funded by Exxon. Why doesn't CFACT state this in their about page?... { from Monckton names names on Climategate } whopaysyourbills1984This organization and web page are funded by Exxon. CFACT.org does a good job of hiding this.... { from Is global warming from man? } whopaysyourbills1984I just wanted to state that this website is paid for by Exxon. { from Socialists and Communists march to support global warming agenda } aimewI am having a hard time with the statement above where it states that only young, growing trees absorb CO2 it is my understanding that all green leaves take in CO2 and release O2 as long as they are alive. It is part of how plants opperate and has nothing to do with age or growth rate. What have I been missing?... sdlawrenceThat was a truly amazing exchange. I heard nothing but climate change mantras flying out of the good professor's mouth. Through all the rhetoric he truly sounded like a third-rate politician activist, and not an academician. It wasn't clear to me that he was a scientist until I heard him addressed as "Professor". { from CFACT's Morano debates UN climate treaty on Britain's Sky News } JohnOSullivanCFACT is providing an essential service to those who wish to read and understand all facets of this often misrepresented and globally important issue. For context, we need to understands that in the 1970’s the world’s scientists were convinced the planet was enduring global cooling. The CIA even wrote a 30-page report on this subject despite the warmists claiming this is all an ‘urban legend.’ { from CFACT arrives in Copenhagen } JohnOSullivanIt’s important that all world leaders take on board what sceptic scientists have to say. The examination of where the allocation of funds by governments to scientific and technological issues tells us most about the true priorities of politicians. { from CFACT sponsors climate science conference: The debate is not over } EuropeanAmericanI was on board with this organization until I came across this article with it's absolutely insane statement: { from Are organic foods really better? } john0sullivanAlarmists who plug the dodgy theory of man made global warming are not applying the scientific method. Scientists all know that the science must stand on its own. { from National Journal: Clash between the Guardian and science } HipnosisTo everyone at CFACT. Good luck with your mission. The service you are providing may very well be one of the most important ever attempted. Trillions of dollars, the prosperity of my country (Canada), the prosperity of the world and the truth are all in jeopardy. Thank you for doing this job.... { from CFACT arrives in Copenhagen } mkwrk2M. Kerjman 's "Of Planetary Change Short Story" http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Of+Planetary+Change+Short+Story-a01074017802 says much of a real way planetary change is going.... { from Is global warming from man? }  MacAaronIt would be interesting to find out who funds NRDC and to find out why they haven't been attacking the number one most-used herbicide in the U.S.: Roundup (Monsanto)...... { from Is government standing in the way of lower food costs? }  MichaelGOPThe Chesapeake has always been a special place for us. We saw (and tasted) a bumper crab harvest not too long ago. What a pleasure when common sense solutions improve life for both man and nature.... { from Science to save the Chesapeake Bay }  ProLibertatePeople do not need to eat eggs. ProLibertateTo megaskeptic- { from Giving up meat to Save the Planet? } ProLibertatePoint One: Not true- considering 95% of the 10 Billion livestock animals consumed a year in America are chicken. Millions of hectares of crop land and ever diminishing reserves of precious water is predominantly used to produce livestock feed. If those croplands were instead used for produce for humans instead of livestock, we could end world hunger. We don’t need the grasslands, in which the wild mustangs and prairie dogs are currently killed as pests, for cattleman lease our public lands for cattle. In America alone, 70% of the corn, 80% of the soy and 90% of the oats are fed to LIVESTOCK! And this is GMO corn and soy! Monsonto doesn't care how safe their product is "That's the FDA's job" to ensure. { from Giving up meat to Save the Planet? } BobDevineSomeone else more than likely asked this before buy why do we never hear of these things through the regular news sources? Some of it is a continuation of what I learned in school in the 1950s. Do they not teach the same basic science we used to get? { from Science to save the Chesapeake Bay } MegaSkepticThis is not a belief. Meat is the only product that humans can consume that can give them vitamin B12. There is NO other natural source for B12. Meat is a requirement of the human diet. If one does not eat meat in some form (eggs, fish, beef)then they WILL NOT get the proper amount of B12 unless they take supplements. If supplements are not taken or not available, an individual WILL be deficient in B12. Fact. { from Giving up meat to Save the Planet? } marklmYour belief that meat consumption is important to maintaining our health is wrong. There is no amino acid, vitamin, or mineral that can’t be obtained from plants, and plants are 100% cholesterol free. The ADA’s position paper on plant based diets states that vegetarian or vegan diets are nutritionally adequate and can help in the prevention of certain diseases.... { from Giving up meat to Save the Planet? } BobArmstrongDennis , Since moving out here next to Pike National Forest above Colorado Springs in 2005 from Manhattan , largely thanks to my sister who is an animal nut , I've experienced the cycle of life and death on a retail level uncomprehended in NYC . When I first came out she had chickens and roosters , a turkey , a pair of pea fowl , and ducks . And horses , and parrots and dogs and cats . Creatures coming up from out of the woods , and occasionally a new dog , reduced the fowl down to 3 ducks . The remaining female and her sons inbred back to about 10 ducks which declined back down to about 5 at which point my sister saw a deal on Craigslist for 10 free ducks from Denver's parks . We're now back down 10 total and haven't had any ducklings survive more than a few days this year . I think these duck tales sufficiently illustrate that I know where you're coming from , and don't need to get into the lives and deaths of various dogs and cats and horses - and a parrot . |
0
Please Note: You may have disabled JavaScript and/or CSS. Although this news content will be accessible, certain functionality is unavailable.
Plastic bags withstand the test of time ... and politicians
The notion that plastic bags pose a threat to waterborne wildlife is as fashionable as it is false.
Health scare surrounding BPA still lacks scientific foundation
Well-orchestrated health scares against beneficial products and technologies have become all too common.
With Adversaries Like This – You Don’t Need Friends
An independent review for the IPCC?
With adversaries like this – you don’t need friends
CFACT's Marc Morano recognized for outstanding journalism
Morano received The Reed Irvine Accuracy in Media Award for his exposé of the ClimateGate scandal.
Environmentalists attack nickel mine
A proposed nickel and copper mine in Michigan’s economically hard-hit Upper Peninsula will never see the light of day if a coalition of environmental groups get their way.
Utah protests federal land control
Lost jobs and tax revenues have made withstanding the current recession all the more difficult.
India sets up independent global warming panel
Prediction: The Indian science panel will hasten the end for the IPCC’s once-dominant view of man-made climate change.
Disclosing the real risks of climate change
SEC says companies must disclose risks due to climate change. Seize the opportunity.
A chill hits wind power
How likely is it that wind turbines can add to Oregon’s generating capacity in the midst of the winter electricity demand surge, and offset the hydroelectric generating restrictions? Not very.
A Sage Grouse hang up over barbed wire
CFACT continues their mission in Cancún
CFACT students deliver laptops and hope to la Ciudad de la Alegria.
After Copenhagen: Greens disappointed and directionless
Haiti's Desperate Food Crop Outlook
Haiti's Desperate Food Crop Outlook
EPA set to Impose Strict New Ozone Standard on U.S.
Welcome to Washington.
- CFACT combines the passion of environmentalism with the practical solutions of markets and technologies to help solve many of the world’s most pressing concerns.
CFACT is recognized as a tax-exempt 501(c)(3) organization with the Internal Revenue Service. All donations are tax-deductible.
Learn more about CFACT Follow us!
© CFACT
All articles on this site may be republished without modification and with an attribution of the author and a hotlink to CFACT.org within the body of the article.- Contact Us
Schedule a speaker
Schedule an interview
Media