Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : The Environmentalist Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: maceng2 who wrote (11218)	4/5/2007 9:26:13 PM
From: Thomas A Watson	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 36921

" for decades. Scientists and experts of all descriptions said smoking was not bad for you. " So why does Pearly_Button believe all those Scientists and experts of all descriptions who now work for the Idiots Proffering Climate Crisis(IPCC)

To: maceng2 who wrote (11218)	4/6/2007 2:17:22 AM
From: Nadine Carroll	Respond to of 36921

It worked just fine and dandy for the tobacco industry for decades. Scientists and experts of all descriptions said smoking was not bad for you. Over and over again we heard "case not proven" on the health issues. It was laid to rest by scientific evidence, statistically and reproducably proving the link between cigarettes and heart disease and cancer. If we had such evidence for manmade climate change, we wouldn't be having this argument. Right now I'm listening to another burst of hysteria from the BBC, where every single change in anybody's climate anywhere is 'proof' of global warming and the huge problems it's going to bring. Insects ranges changing? Climate Change! Desertification in Western China? Climate Change! Storms in the North Atlantic? Climate Change! And worse to come! Everything is 'proof' of climate change. As if storms and droughts and changes in local climate never happened before. Bet they wish the Prairie Dust Bowl was going on, can't you just imagine what they would do with that one?

To: maceng2 who wrote (11218)	4/6/2007 6:09:02 AM
From: Wharf Rat	Respond to of 36921

Some of the same people involved... Oregon petition and big tobacco It’s interesting to note that Fred SIETZ, the author of the cover letter is also the former medical advisor to RJ Reynolds medical research program. A 1989 Philip Morris memo stated that Seitz was: “quite elderly and not sufficiently rational to offer advice.” However, 9 years later, it seems that he was “sufficiently rational” to lead the charge on Robinson’s Oregon Petition. It also seems that Seitz is still “sufficiently rational” to sit as the Chair of notorious climate change denier, Fred Singer’s, Science and Environmental Policy Project. Message 23397598 ================= Fred Seitz is not as pure as the driven snow..... Since people keep referring to Fred Seitz as the scientist he was rather than the propagandist he has been for the past twenty or more years, it is worthwhile to bring together several comments on this matter that E has made so that he can simply point to a URL in response. In another universe, Dr. E was challenged to show that Fred Seitz was not as pure as the driven snow. Seitz, of course, was an eminent condensed matter physicist, President of the National Academy of Sciences and President of Rockefeller University. In the later role he developed, shall we say, a close relationship with the tobacco industry, that somehow, later morphed into a close relationship with the fossil fuel industry. Both were remunerative, both personally and for organizations Seitz was associated with. There are good sources you can use to show the octopus like reach that Seitz has had on both issues, for example, the disinfopedia, the tobacco document archive, and the Exxon Secrets site and, for those who like their meat red, an ecosyn blog. Message 23380735