> Dismissing some because they receive money from energy companies is not constructive. If it were then we should be equally dismissive of those who receive money from Greenpeace or The Sierra Club.
Ah, I knew your weren't 'jesting'. Its not constructive for your arguement i'll give you that. Why should we be equally dismissive of an outfit that lobbies against the development and/or use of some natural resource?
> The harping was absurd.
I'm going back in history farther than you. The tobacco labelling and the TV ad banning wasnt done at the behest of the tobacco companies. The tobacco industry fought a very deceptive campaign denying the harmful aspects of their products. It took them a good long while to come around to acknowledging that their products are harmful, which is what a lot of people had been harping on for a long time. The industry had funded scientists who determined that the industry's products were not harmful. Thats the comparison i am making.
> The criticisms of man-made global warming and its impact are coming from a number of scientists for a number of reasons.
I am sure that there are energyco-independant scientists who have this opinion, but the ones you reference in your posts don't fit that criteria.
> The current policy paper from ICPP is just that, a policy paper. Drawn up by politicians and ambassadors.
This link refutes that claim that was echoed by the energyco-funded scientiest your referenced.
>
>>>>>>>
http://www.desmogblog.com/discredited-friends-of-science-emerge-as-the-natural-resources-stewardship-project>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>One side is funded by environmental groups and the other by energy interests.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>So what?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Surely you jest.
>>>>>
>>>>>Actually, yes, that was a joke to demonstrate the absurdity of constantly harping on energy companies for protecting their interests. Apparently too subtle. Maybe I should've compared them to union's giving money to Pelosi.
>>>>
>>>>Are you impressed with how the tobacco companies protected their interests... back in the day?
>>>
>>>Actually no. They ended up looking foolish and getting creamed by lawsuits.
