Sign DeSmog's petition to throw the Junk Science off Fox News

'Steve Milloy (aka. "The Junkman") is a regular Fox News columnist and tireless campaigner in the war against climate science. A quick read of Milloy's website and you will find the usual laundry list of scientific claims that have long been dismissed by the scientific community -- the experts in the field of climate science. 'Milloy was at one point the director of an organization called the Advancement of Sound Science Coalition (TASSC), which by many is considered the grand-daddy of modern industry front groups. TASCC cut its teeth on the war against tobacco smoke and later expanded into other areas like global warming.' Congratulations, you've made the usual green effort to attack the man, not his argument. Whatever TASSC has done says nothing about the claims on Milloy's website... and neither does your sad attempt to gloss over the fact that the "scientific community" is made up of far more scientists than the haters of humanity that you support. 'One of the first big steps Murdoch can make to show this commitment to climate change would be to ensure quality coverage based on the best available science. 'Offer viewers the real scientific story. 'That is not to say that other scientific opinions should be somehow censored, but instead there should be effort put into ensuring that these other opinions represent the current scientific thinking on the issue of global warming. The public deserves the best media coverage possible on this issue, so we can make informed decisions and separate the "spin" from the truth.' I'm having an awfully hard time parsing this bit of gobbledygook. You appear to be saying that while you don't believe in censoring opposing viewpoints, you believe that only those viewpoints you support should be made available to the public. Then, you suggest that we should be able to "make informed decisions and separate the 'spin' from the truth." Okay, I'll bite: if all opinions published are to represent the "current scientific thinking" as you see it (i.e. the thinking of those scientists/environmentalists with whom you agree) what will we have to separate your so-called truth from? No matter how many times you repeat the term "scientific consensus" you cannot hide the fact that science does not operate by consensus. It never has, and never will. You have far more in common with those in the religious right than I suspect you will ever admit to. It is the religious right that challenges science on the premise that it can't be right because it's always changing. What they, and you, miss, is that science changes because it is a never-ending quest for truth. When you attempt to silence those who continually search for scientific truth, in favor of those who will accept any answer, as long as mankind is to blame, you are admitting to the world that your belief in anthropogenic global warming is based not on science, but on faith -- faith in the evil of modern society. You're welcome to that belief -- but when you realize (if you haven't already) that regression to the level where human beings have little or no impact on the world will mean the death of most people, I hope you'll stand up for your values, and volunteer to be one of the first to go.

This has been a very interesting arguement. However there is still a few rather important points to be made: 1. Your beloved IPCC is a political entity and not a purely scientific one. This leads to scientists being paid to investigate the causes AGW. Not making an unbiased investigation into the causes of climate change. The first political figure to put money on the table to prove AGW existed was dear old Maggie Thatcher. She needed AGW as a way to control the Coal Miners in the UK. This started the trend of Government funding and backing of the AGW theory. With a rather baseless theory, though if made of glass would not be able to hold water (seeing as its closely related to the holes in swiss cheese), they decided to lump any problem with natural (or even unnatural) events like tidal waves and hurricanes (tidal waves can be created by well positioned bombs). This gives obvious cause of alarm on a monthly basis which they then discuss on the TV for years. 2. Al Gore is again a Political animal. He has been hired to champion an idea that has no scientific basis other than manipulating results incorrectly. According to the Hockey stick theory the global temperature has remained almost constant for almost 1500 years??? How can that be when there is mountains of data (a lot provided by the IPCC too!!) backing up the mini-ice age and the medieval warm period. Going back even further there are details of the UK being more like the South of France where vinyards were kept with ease rather than the difficulty there is now. Please for this theory to have any credibility it must take into account real data and real interpretations. 3. Mr Milloy does nothing but provide data to debunk the junk that is spewed out by the governmental fear machines. I hear on the news everyday something somewhere is the result of AGW. If this is left uncontested then it must be truth... Well if you get strung up for contesting it does that not mean the whole lot is being FORCED on the unwitting public? This poses a problem. As soon as there is censorship then there is misinformation which people are afraid the public might just pick up on and understand. However they forget that anybody who speaks out in such a society is more likely to be denounced (if not by their peers by the government or other controlling body) and by doing it themselves actually incriminate themselves in the process. 4. Then there is the final most important point. You trust the governments. Well therein lies the biggest problem. You trust governments that cry a war on terror when they themselves created the terror (9/11, the 7/7/05 London Bombings, to name but 2 events). You then trust everything spouted out of their mouths regarding AGW. The sheeple who believe this tripe can be forgiven to an extent because they have been taught to follow so well. But people who claim to be intelligent and have an extensive knowledge. Well there is no excuse for you... At the end of the day I accept your theory of AGW if you can provide proof of its existence, with information that is true, correct, complete, and not misleading. As long as it can satisfy that then I will take it under consideration. Until then I will hold the belief that the propaganda put out by the IPCC and many western Governments is just that, propaganda based on a baseless theory.

Not sure about the evidence for GW persay, as this is not my field, but readers may be interested in reading more about FOX commentator Steve Milloy from SourceWatch, a nonprofit that tracks & discloses issues related to campaign finance, corporate ties, and other potential ethical conflicts that influence public policy. From SourceWatch: "Steven J. Milloy is a columnist for Fox News and a paid advocate for Phillip Morris, ExxonMobil and other corporations." "Milloy runs the website Junkscience.com, which is dedicated to debunking ... global warming, DDT, environmental radicalism and scare science among other topics.[1] His other website, CSR Watch.com, is focused around attacking the corporate social responsibility movement. He is also head of the Free Enterprise Action Fund, a mutual fund he runs with tobacco executive Tom Borelli, who happens to be listed as the secretary of the Advancement of Sound Science Center, an organisation Milloy operates from his home in Potomac, Maryland." "Milloy has spent much of his life as a lobbyist for major corporations and trade organisations which have poisioning or polluting problems. He originally ran NEPI (National Environmental Policy Institute) which was founded ... using oil and gas industry funding. NEPI was dedicated to transforming both the EPA and the FDA, and challenging the cost of Superfund toxic cleanups by large [oil and gas] corporations." "In January 2006, Paul D. Thacker reported in The New Republic that Milloy has received thousands of dollars in payments from the Phillip Morris company since the early nineties, and that NGOs controlled by Milloy have received large payments from ExxonMobil [3]." http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Steven_J._Milloy No matter your position on global warming, one cannot help but question the influence of large sums of gas and oil money on a person's "impartiality" in evaluating environmental science- not to mention the professional ethics of someone who continues to lobby for the tobacco industry...

khzjoyafw cgqnzbw vetqwlox fyvoms emriuf gupj axuwfd