There was/is a very interesting truth-telling item titled Corporate Cash Skews Science by John Ross featured in the Higher Education section of the Australian newspaper on Dec 2nd.

The 2nd paragraph reads: " An analysis by Yale University sociologist Justin Farrell has found the most influential climate deniers are those backed by key corporate donors. Their views are rehashed - sometimes word-perfect - by media and politicians.

Speaking of Royal Commissions into destructive policy decisions by Australian governments. A decision that resulted in the most human deaths, and which resulted in the highest number of injured and permanently traumatized human beings (and of their families too). And which wasted billions of dollars, and will continue to do so. And which provided the catalyst for the now never-ending war on terror, and of course the creation of ISIS (or whatever it is called).

Shouldnt there be a Royal Commission into the decision by a certain lying rodent and his government to participate in the coalition of the killing illegal (under international law) invasion of Iraq.

Daffy Duck

But according to you, rights are whatever the government says they are, remember? And according to you, governments have a right to unlimited power, remember?

" An analysis by Yale University sociologist Justin Farrell has found the most influential climate deniers are those backed by key corporate donors. Their views are rehashed - sometimes word-perfect - by media and politicians."

Nobody denies the climate you fool. In case you haven't noticed, governments have just spent billions and trillions of dollars on a theory of climate that all their legions of interested parasitic "scientists" are unable to prove, and which is disproved by one pair of data: emissions have gone up and up and up, while temperatures have not. This means that ALL the climate models you implicitly trust based on nothing but government authority were and are FLATLY INCORRECT.

Any way you try to spin it, your theory is simply wrong.

All
The great revolution of scientific thinking was to replace the open-ended unquestioning credulity in mere authority that you warmists are placing in the State. Look at what you've just written you fools. You're openly arguing that no-one has a right to question the government, and that truth is presumptively whatever the government says it is.

In every thread, you enter the discussion having simply assumed all the issues in your own favour. When challenged to actually prove what you are saying, you give us a fit of spiteful name-calling and question-begging, and then slink off only to re-appear re-running all the same flawed *unscientific assumptions*

Suseonline, lying comes easier to women doesn't it? why do you hate your children so much? how poor do you want them to be?

http://www.galileomovement.com.au/science_nutshell.php

Yuri, but your article is written by a communist & ALL communists lie.

Alice Thermopolis, but they are communists & therefore lying.

McReal, but we are already seeing less storms that are less intense.

Rhosty, the weather is improving, higher rainfall & milder storms.

ateday, your point being?

Cobber the hound, this may come as a shock to you but while i DO believe in evolution, being an enlightened, conservative, protesting Christian means that i don't automatically believe runner is an idiot for believing in creation. He may indeed be right & even if he is wrong, creation theory is NOT hurting anybody, no more than evolution theory is not hurting anybody. it is not worth starting WW3 over is it?

Daffy Duck, face palm, so what? neither creationists nor evolutionists are proposing we ALL pay a tax on the air we breath & give the cash to the richest families on earth so that they can gamble with OUR money.

mhaze, good comment till the end, scientific fraud with tax payers money is a serious offence or should be & the criminals should be jailed.

ant, WOW like WOW, one of the worlds biggest, nastiest multinationals wants to make workers pay a tax on the air we breath & steal the money with carbon derivatives. are you proud of yourself?

Daffy Duck, thank you for proving my point, big banksters want to steal OUR money via a tax on the air we breath & YOU are betraying the workers. YOU also believe we should do nothing to protect people from fascism.

Jardine K Jardine, "repeat the big lie, until it becomes the truth" Lenin. Daffy Duck is a disciple of the radical, extreme, left wing religious cult. he is totally brain washed, just like ALL other leftists. pity him as i do.

Peter Lang,

Really? You want evidence that things are better than in 1850? I don't know where to begin. I could probably go on for days:

* Life expectancy. There are many different indicators but (for example) the UNPD 1999 report (I'm not sure if its available digitally) shows life expectancy at birth rising from around 38 yrs in 1850 (it was probably unchanged since 1200) to 78yrs in 2000. This is averaged world-wide. The percentage improvement was even greater in the developing countries and better still for sub-Saharan Africa even allowing for AIDS.

* Average per capita calorie consumption has risen dramatically as food production has improved in extent, yield and quality. Current average intake is 2800 calories world-wide having risen by close on 25% in just the past 50 years. Data for 1850 is harder to come by but a figure of around 1800 calories seems about right. (Source: FAO report 2001). The percentage improvement for developing and undeveloped nations is greater still but you'd appreciate that data about, for example, Africa in 1850 is scarce. But since 1960 calories intake per capita for the developing world has risen from 1900 calories to 2600 calories. This is despite the massive increase in population. Another indicator is the fall in prices eg wheat prices are now a mere 10% of the price in 1850 (FAO 2000 report).

Statistics can't really capture the other improvements in welfare over the period. For women, the threat of dying while giving birth is virtually gone. Equally, their lives are totally changed due to labour saving devices such that they are now free to pursue careers and a life beyond the home and family. This is a first in human history.

Its impossible to cover all the ways the world is so much better since 1850 in just 350 characters - 350 pages or even 350 books wouldn't be sufficient. But this gives a flavour of this golden age.

"The carpet has all but been pulled from under anthropogenic climate change deniers."

ant,

Have you read the source documents yet? Scared of what you'll find?

You keep saying this has pulled the rug from under so-called deniers but never explained how. Is that just a line you read in one of the activist publications pushing this silliness?

Suppose, just suppose, that this is all correct and that Exxon did hide data and push alternate views they didn't believe. They didn't, but just pretend for a moment. How does that revelation pull the rug from under so-called deniers? If they didn't take any notice of what Exxon said in the past, if they based their 'deniership' on verifiable data outside of what Exxon offered, if they looked at all the data from a multitude of sources and made the only logical conclusion that its all a case of mass hysteria, then why would Exxon's recanting, if they did such a thing (which they didn't), why would that matter to such deniers?

Why?

( I actually know what your answer will be but it'll be fun to see your logical gymnastics just the same.)