[Coral-List] global warming

[Alexandra Barron]

Wow! Not sure I want to get into this debate, but just have to represent
the British as it seems we were inadvertantly pulled in...

Having read the transcript of Senator Inhofe's speech, and being
somewhat disturbed by it in general, the thing that gave me major
concern was his use of David Bellamy to promote and justify skepticism
(http://www.junkscience.com/july04/Daily_Mail-Bellamy.htm). As a Brit
who grew up with Bellamy and who was inspired to work in conservation in
part by this man I am deeply ashamed and would like to point out that
Bellamy has since admitted making errors in the letter which was
published in New Scientist and the article in the Daily Mail (not often
known for it's [scientific] accuracy)
(http://www.monbiot.com/archives/2005/05/10/junk-science/) and has
subsequently publicly withdrawn from the debate
(http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2088-1631977,00.html),
furthermore he has been widely denounced for his statement and in
addition to losing public respect, lost his positions within many
British conservation groups. Finally, Bellamy made his initial statement
in 2004 and the debate and subsequent 'retraction' took place in
2004/2005, Inhofe should not use this as an example.

I appreciate that this is just a brief statement in an extremely emotive
and divisive speech, and something that most of you may feel is
unimportant in the grand scheme, but I wanted to clarify this situation,
Bellamy was cited as an expert to justify an opinion when he probably
should not have been as much of his statement was discredited.

Having just watched 'the film', I was just wondering if any one could
verify a statement made by Gore. About 2/3 through An Inconvenient
Truth, when addressing skepticism, he shows the results of an analysis
on all (?) scientific papers relating to global warming, which
essentially suggested that none (?) of them were skeptical in their
conclusions/suggestions compared with almost half of popular media
articles on the subject - is this right? Please forgive my uncertainty
about the figures but I watched the film on a long haul flight and so
couldn't give it deserved attention to detail (and yes I shall be
planting trees for the flight). 

If indeed the statement is true, then does that not place the onus on
the skeptics to conduct and publish research on this matter and conduct
their critique via the scientific establishment and peer review
(regardless of funding source), rather than via the media and government
offices? 

Regards,

Lex

-----Original Message-----
From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
[mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] On Behalf Of Michael
Risk
Sent: 17 November 2006 02:41
To: Gene Shinn; coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
Subject: Re: [Coral-List] global warming


I can always depend on Gene to turn my crank, but this time I will hold
my tongue. Instead, I will direct -listers to:

http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/denialmachine/index.html

-which is a CBC TV special shown last night, tracing the histories of
those scientists who are global-warming "skeptics." It may be viewed
on-line, and for those who have access to CBC TV, will be repeated at
some future times.

Turns out there are no surprises, and some surprises.

No surprises: the skeptics aren't skeptical at all, they are funded by
Big Oil, in most cases through channels that are hard to uncover.  They
are paid to say what they say, no matter what the science. Amongst
serious climate scientists, the debate is over. Was over a decade ago.

One surprise, at least to me: many of these so-called "skeptics" are
retreads from the Great Tobacco Court Cases! Remember all those PR
firms, and those "scientists", who kept saying "correlation is not
proof?" Well, their job was to delay action while the cigarette
companies raked in more dough. The same people now show up as "climate
skeptics." Their role, again, is to delay action. It's a dirty game
here.

Mike

On Thu, 16 Nov 2006 14:27:55 -0500
 Gene Shinn <eshinn at marine.usf.edu> wrote:
>   Co2 global warming advocates might find this of interest.
> http://epw.senate.gov/pressitem.cfm?party=rep&id=265956
> -- 
> 
> 
> No Rocks, No Water, No Ecosystem (EAS)
> ------------------------------------
> -----------------------------------
> E. A. Shinn, Courtesy Professor
> University of South Florida
> Marine Science Center (room 204)
> 140 Seventh Avenue South
> St. Petersburg, FL 33701
> <eshinn at marine.usf.edu>
> Tel 727 553-1158----------------------------------
> -----------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> Coral-List mailing list
> Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
> http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list

Mike Risk
Marine Ecologist
PO Box 1195
Durham Ontario
N0G 1R0
_______________________________________________
Coral-List mailing list
Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list