Please offer your thoughts on my global warming LTTE!

[bbernardini]

For those of you who have been following along, a local uninformed crank has been using the editoral page of the local rag for ages to attempt to refute and shame anybody who disagrees with him about the realities of global warming (he doesn't think it's a problem). The original thread about this, with quotes from the letter, is here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=2988485&mesg_id=2988485

Here is the response I have crafted. Any thoughts on how to improve it would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!

Once again, Dan Pourreau uses the Editorial page of the Daily Local News to further his ill-informed claims and denials about global warming. His letter is filled with so many inaccuracies and half-truths, one hardly knows where to begin. For example, Pourreau cites a survey from 2003 to support his claims. Are we to believe that there has been no scientific study between 2003 and 2008 that might result in a change to these survey numbers (most likely a change that Pourreau won’t like, and therefore ignores)?

The claim that over 19,000 scientists believe that humans do not contribute to global warming is laughable. First of all, how many of those 19,000 scientists are climate scientists? Very few, I suspect. In fact, none of the faculty members of the institute that distributed this petition are climate scientists. Their scientific opinion is no better than the average non-scientist. Secondly, this petition was originally distributed beginning in 1999, long before current studies showing the clear impact of humans and industry on global warming.

As for the “international conference,” it was sponsored by the Heartland Institute, the website of which Pourreau also cites. What he fails to mention is that the Heartland Institute is funded in part by Philip Morris, ExxonMobil, and countless conservative foundations and business owners who stand to lose some of their precious billions if they do the right thing and clean up their act. This so-called scientific conference was not an attempt to discuss ideas and further scientific understanding. Its purpose was, in the words of a letter sent out by the Heartland Institute, “to generate national media attention” for global warming denial. Of course, the scientists speaking at this conference are going to say global warming isn’t a crisis. They’re being paid by the people who would benefit most from that position.

Could the fact that Pourreau’s employer was identified by researchers at the University of Massachusettes Amherst as being the 53rd largest corporate producer of air pollution in the US have anything to do with his position? As Upton Sinclair once said, “it is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it.”

[Number9Dream]

1. Excellent rebuttal

I bookmarked this thread for future reference... thank you.

[bbernardini]

2. Kick!

[Mabus]

3. Really good letter

You're right about the signatories of the petition. Here's what the website hosting the petition says "Qualification to be a signatory requires that the individual have a university degree in physical science, either BS, MS, or PhD." (source: http://www.oism.org/pproject/s33p357.htm) It does not require a special knowledge of or familiarity of the research into global climate change. My husband could have signed that petition (but knows better) because he has a degree in a physical science: physics.

There's some great information about the petition and the guy behind it at http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Oregon_Institute_of_Science_and_Medicine

K&R

[OhioChick]

4. Good LTTE!

:thumbsup:

[kwolf68]

5. Good job

... Like good Conservatives global warming/climate change isn't being caused in any way by man because

THEY BELIEVE IT.

These people need no evidence or statements of testimony, they only need FAITH.

[iris5426]

6. Great LTTE!

:applause:

[Martin Eden]

7. Kick for Upton Sinclair ...

... and for your excellent rebuttal.

Sinclair's statement bears repeating because it is such an important and relevant truth these days.

[bbernardini]

8. I've revised my response just a bit. Thoughts?

Thanks to some info from a similar thread in the Environment forum, I've added a bit and tweaked a few things. Here's the new version:

Once again, Dan Pourreau uses the Editorial page of the Daily Local News to further his ill-informed claims and denials about global warming. His letter is filled with so many inaccuracies and half-truths, one hardly knows where to begin. For example, Pourreau cites a survey from 2003 to support his claims. Are we to believe that there has been no scientific study between 2003 and 2008 that might result in a change to these survey numbers (most likely a change that Pourreau won’t like, and therefore ignores)? Additionally, the manner in which the 2003 survey was conducted was so flawed, there is no way the results can be seriously considered.

The claim that over 19,000 scientists believe that humans do not contribute to global warming is laughable. First of all, how many of those 19,000 scientists are climate scientists? Very few, I suspect. In fact, none of the faculty members of the institute that distributed this petition are climate scientists. Their scientific opinion regarding this matter is no better than the average non-scientist. Secondly, this petition was originally distributed beginning in 1999, long before current studies showing the clear impact of humans and industry on global warming.

As for the “international conference,” it was sponsored by the Heartland Institute, the website of which Pourreau also cites. What he fails to mention is that the Heartland Institute is funded in part by Philip Morris, ExxonMobil, and countless conservative foundations and business owners who stand to lose some of their precious billions if they do the right thing and clean up their act. This so-called scientific conference was not an attempt to discuss ideas and further scientific understanding. Its purpose was, in the words of a letter sent out by the Heartland Institute, “to generate national media attention” for global warming denial. Of course, the scientists speaking at this conference are going to say global warming isn’t a crisis. They’re being paid by the people who would benefit most from that position.

Pourreau cites the Canadian survey in a misleading fashion. 70% of the respondents to this survey were engineers, not scientists. My father is an electrical engineer, and he's no more scientifically qualified in matters of climate change than the average person. Pourreau also conveniently left out the fact that while 26% of respondents did not believe climate change was caused by humans, another 45% believed that humans were partially responsible. Finally, the number of participants in the survey was not 50,000, but 1,077 (this number is directly from the report on the survey).

Could the fact that Pourreau’s employer was identified by researchers at the University of Massachusettes Amherst as being the 53rd largest corporate producer of air pollution in the US have anything to do with his position? As Upton Sinclair once said, “it is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it.”

[fascisthunter]

9. Wow... Really Well Said, bbernardini

Concise and to the point.

PS - you misspelled Massachusetts }(

[bbernardini]

10. Oops! Thanks for catching that.

Oddly enough, the computer told me every time I used the guy's name, but didn't correct that. Weird.