Environmental lies- what to do with those that promote "junk science?"

[Cheyenne]

The Missing Lynx
By Kimberley A. Strassel
Wall Street Journal
http://interactive6.wsj.com/articles/SB1011831434266681440.htm

Fur is flying in Washington, and it's about time.

In December, a scandal broke over a high-profile survey
to count threatened Canada lynx. Seven employees from
Fish & Wildlife, the Forest Service and a state agency
submitted hair samples from captive lynx and tried to
pass them off as wild. When caught, the employees claimed
they were testing the DNA identification process. Another
explanation is that they were attempting to establish
lynx in places where they aren't, potentially blocking
national forests to human use.

Washington is in an uproar. Rep. Scott McInnis (R.,
Colo.) has scheduled hearings, while several agencies are
investigating how far the bio-fraud extended.

Let's hope they dig deep. If they do, they might finally
understand what Western and rural landowners have known
for ages: These departments can no longer be trusted to
make fair or competent decisions about our nation's
resources.

The lynx scandal underscores everything that's wrong with
Fish & Wildlife and the Forest Service. It shows how the
agencies succumbed to a Clinton-era culture that puts
ideology ahead of science. It demonstrates the undue
influence environmental groups hold over the departments.
It also shows how vaguely written laws like the
Endangered Species Act can be used to further political
agendas, even in the complete absence of hard science.

When the species act was passed in 1973, it was a
bipartisan effort to save animals truly on the brink of
extinction. The law charged the government with making
decisions over which species to list, using the "best
scientific and commercial information" available. But
environmental groups with an anti-development agenda
quickly realized how easy it was to exploit the law.
Getting an animal or plant listed meant putting large
areas of rural America off limits to industries they
hated.

Environmental groups knew early on that getting the lynx
listed would prove a gold mine. While many animals are
limited to small geographic areas, the lynx had been
spotted in some 22 states, and they're so elusive they
could be anywhere. A federal listing could potentially
bar millions of acres of land from use, including
logging, skiing, road-building, trapping.

Environmental groups faced one major obstacle: scientific
proof. The best information said the Canada lynx was just
that -- Canadian. In fact, Canada has such a thriving
population it still allows trapping. Scientists say lynx
sightings below the border are the result of cats
wandering down from Canada; some northern states might
have small populations straddling the border. As late as
1994, Fish & Wildlife declined to list the species,
citing a "lack of residency of lynx populations."

By 1997 things had changed. For one, the Clinton
administration was filling the agencies with activists.
The director of Fish & Wildlife would ultimately become
Jamie Rappaport Clark, recently famous as the first
signature on a petition opposing "Big Oil's exploitation"
of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. There was also
Michael Dombeck, who crafted the infamous roadless policy
as the Forest Service head. Both Ms. Clark and Mr.
Dombeck have gone on to work for the left-wing, activist
National Wildlife Federation.

So it surprised few when, in the face of established
science, Fish & Wildlife released a 1997 report saying
"new information" indicated the U.S. had its own
"distinct population" of lynx. The report detailed how
humans were destroying the cat's habitat. Environmental
groups seized on this to sue for a listing.

Still, the agency had a problem. Fish & Wildlife admitted
it had no idea where lynx were or how many existed. Most
of its records were spotty and dated; some were based on
local sightings, some on records 100 years old. The
agencies began several survey projects.

In 1998, the Forest Service contracted with John Weaver,
who worked for an environmental group, the Wildlife
Conservation Society, to do a lynx survey in Oregon and
Washington. In early 1999 he reported findings of lynx
hair in both states, a surprise given no one thought lynx
were in the areas he listed. His information was
ultimately included in the agency's determination to list
the lynx as threatened.

In 1999, the agencies went further, teaming up on the
National Interagency Lynx Survey, a three-year project to
identify lynx across the U.S. It was then that Mr.
Weaver's findings became an issue. According to a report
by an outside investigator for the Forest Service,
employees working on the interagency survey in Oregon and
Washington "considered the results of the Weaver survey
to be valid" and were disturbed when they didn't turn up
evidence of lynx themselves.

And so in the 1999 and 2000 survey seasons, the employees
turned in fake samples to the lab labeled as wild lynx.
They were caught. Worse, in 2001 (a year after Fish &
Wildlife finally listed the lynx) it came out that Mr.
Weaver's findings were wrong; the samples he'd found were
from bobcats or coyotes.

The Lynx Seven claim they worried the lab wasn't
correctly identifying lynx and the submissions had been a
test. But the survey specifically didn't allow such
tests. Moreover, the reason the story came out was
because one employee, the day before he retired, blew the
whistle. A supervisor quoted in the report even suggested
one employee was "trying to hide the fact he sent in a
control sample." Still, none of the scientists were
fired; they were sent to counseling and given different
jobs.

What's needed is a thorough housecleaning. The Bush
administration must start by clearing away the worst
perpetrators of junk science. According to Jim Beers, a
30-year veteran of Fish & Wildlife, one of many pushed
into early retirement: "In recent years the agency
eliminated all the real requirements, pushed out people
that didn't fit the anti-hunting, anti-fishing,
anti-land-management profile. They've got to get back to
science."

In the interim, perhaps the services should be forced to
submit their studies to peer review -- by outside and
representative panels. Given that Fish & Wildlife and the
Forest Service are destroying private landowner's
livelihoods, it should be incumbent upon them to get
their science right. The lynx scandal shows that at the
moment, they can't.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Don't we have enough real envirnomental issues that these clowns have to create fake ones? I think instances like this take away from the good that Fish & Wildlife has done in the past.

 

[Bs]

Well, I for one refuse to sit and read that with out thinking you need to get some more facts, young lady!!!!

If any of that were true then I know that all our conservitive news media would be on it like ,,, stink on shit!!

and this isn't ...

 

[miles]

Bs

Absolutely brilliant post. Hats off to you.

 

[Texan]

Chey....

That was an interesting article..... a good read during a rather boring night on the board. And with your "memory," you might recall from threads last summer, that politically motivated and financially motivated "junk science" is one of my pet anoyances.

Oh...and Bs..... the article quoted by Chey was from the Wall Street Journal.... ditz....

 

[Cheyenne]

Chey....

That was an interesting article..... a good read during a rather boring night on the board. And with your "memory," you might recall from threads last summer, that politically motivated and financially motivated "junk science" is one of my pet anoyances.

Yup, I remember.


p.s. Read BS' post again but put your tongue in your cheek first.

 

[patient1]

I think it's called "Fraud"

If I were an enviornmental organization, I'd be calling for full investigation & prosecution to root out the decievers from the agencies & organizations concerned. I would draw the distinction between a just cause & "just because". I wouldn't allow the zealots to defame my cause, I'd disassociate myself from them!

 

[Samuari]

"We have to burn this forest to save it"

Wasn't this the same Clinton Forset Service which set the fires that destryed Los Alamos and parts of Bandolier National Monument, and set other fires that got out of control in Yellow Stone, Montania, and Idaho? As I recall, they tried to deny responcability for that SNAFU, so why would we expect good scientific practice from them now?

 

[Bs]

Thank you Cheyenne, I'm glad you were able to point out my post was a bit tounge in cheek!


Really now how many more facts does one need?

What thinking person with an IQ above 1 would say the News Media leans to the right?

Just a thought, for next time you may want to break a story like that into little sound bytes for our liberal freinds since they have attention spans as long as their dicks.

as always,

 

[Guest]

There are some very desperate and scared republicans in america right now. On the same day that the president of the united states had an enron employee murdered to try to cover up the presidents crimes which will likely lead to his impeachment because of his close involvement with the biggest busines scandal in the history of the united states, the republicans on this thread are copying and pasting right wing dibble about endangered foxes.

On the day that Bush is impeached, will you still be talking about endangered animals and pretending nothing is wrong?

 

[Cheyenne]

On any day, I'll be posting my opinions under my name here. Never as a no balls unregistered. Of course, if you post crap, no wonder you aren't proud enough to put your name to it.

 

[Unclebill]

Yup, I remember.


p.s. Read BS' post again but put your tongue in your cheek first.

But don't hold your breath waiting for a "conservative news media" to pick it up. You could go cyanotic.

 

[Cheyenne]

On the same day that the president of the united states had an enron employee murdered to try to cover up the presidents crimes which will likely lead to his impeachment because of his close involvement with the biggest busines scandal in the history of the united states, the republicans on this thread are copying and pasting right wing dibble about endangered foxes.

http://www.literotica.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=65181

p.s. a lynx isn't a fox. Think "cat."

 

[Cheyenne]

I guess I shouldn't hold my breath waiting for any of the "environmentalists" on the bb to show up in this thread, either! You'd think at least ONE of them would have an opinion!

 

[riff]

I'm an environmental wacko

And I am a little stoned right now, don't feel like reading all of that yadda yadda yadda.

Someone want to boil it down to a simple paragraph that a high fuckwit like me can understand?

Stomp on me if you must.

 

[Bs]

Just a thought, for next time you may want to break a story like that into

little

sound bytes for our liberal freinds since they have attention spans as long as their dicks.

as always,

Yea, what I said.... See what I mean.........

 

[riff]

Hey man, blow it out your ass. I am not at work, so don't fuck with me.

Have a great day.

 

[p_p_man]

"junk science" is one of my pet anoyances.

And what's wrong with 'junk science'?

Without Willie Ley, the resident science writer in the monthly pocket book "Galaxy -Tales From Outer Space", I wouldn't be where I am today...

 

[Guest]

Just a thought, for next time you may want to break a story like that into little sound bytes for our liberal freinds since they have attention spans as long as their dicks.

Translated into english this is: Don't copy and paste the whole press release from Rush's site, just do some of it. These type of made up articles and junk facts work better on radio. When you write them down they look more like a bad joke without a punchline so everyone with a brain will ignore you.

 

[Guest]

Chlorofluorocarbons and Ozone Depletion:

RUSH FICTION:

Limbaugh proposes that environmental "alarmists and prophets of
doom" have exaggerated the problem of ozone depletion,
suggesting that it has been limited to "occasional reduced levels of
ozone over Antarctica." 1/

SCIENTIFIC FACT:

Substantially reduced levels of ozone have been measured over
most of the globe, including North America, Europe, and elsewhere.
In fact, scientists have observed a thinning of the ozone layer at all
latitudes outside the tropics. By 1991, the depletion over North
America averaged nearly 5 percent. 2/ Since 1991, ozone depletion
has further intensified. 3/

RUSH FICTION:

"Mount Pinatubo in the Philippines spewed forth more than a
thousand times the amount of ozone-depleting chemicals in one
eruption than all the fluorocarbons manufactured by wicked,
diabolical, and insensitive corporations in history. . . . Conclusion:
mankind can't possibly equal the output of even one eruption from
Pinatubo, much less billion years' worth, so how can we destroy
ozone?" 4/

SCIENTIFIC FACT:

Limbaugh's numbers are completely off-base. Volcanoes emit two
sorts of ozone-depleting compounds. One is hydrochloric acid, but
the amount of this chemical in the stratosphere, measured before
and after Pinatubo's eruption in 1991, was found to be largely
unchanged. 5/

The other ozone-depleting chemical emitted by Pinatubo, sulfur
dioxide, is converted in the stratosphere into tiny particles which,
acting in combination with man-made chlorofluorocarbons (CFC's),
temporarily increased the rate of ozone depletion by several
percentage points during 1992 and 1993. 6/ Nevertheless, nearly
all the particles resulting from the Mt. Pinatubo eruption have
already washed out of the atmosphere, unlike CFC's, which remain
in the stratosphere for as long as a century. 7/

Cumulatively speaking, Pinatubo's destructive effect on the ozone
layer has been about fifty times less than that of CFC's, rather than
a thousand times greater, as Limbaugh claims. Thus, his estimate
is off by a factor of fifty thousand.

RUSH FICTION:

What "environmental wackos . . . really want to do is attack our way
of life" in the effort to limit CFC's. "Their primary enemy:
capitalism." 8/

SCIENTIFIC FACT:

Limbaugh ignores the fact that the conservative Reagan
administration signed onto the Montreal Protocol, the international
agreement to restrict CFC's, and that crucial support for the
measure came from some of the largest manufacturers of these
chemicals, who, like Ronald Reagan, are hardly enemies of
capitalism. Although many of these corporations initially resisted
action when the ozone problem was discovered, Dupont, Allied
Signal, and other domestic producers of CFC's have long favored
strong restrictions concerning their production and use. Indeed,
Dupont proposed a global ban of CFC's before European or United
States governments did. 9/

RUSH FICTION:

"In just one day in January [1992], NASA measured the amount of
chlorine and another gas in the atmosphere of the Northern
Hemisphere and found an unusually high level compared to normal.
. . . There were headlines for days about an ozone hole in the
atmosphere above North America. Senator Al Gore . . . predicted
that President Bush would soon come around on all this because of
the 'ozone hole over Kennebunkport,' despite the fact there was no
such thing. . . . Within a few weeks, it was learned that most of the
unusual measurements could be attributed to Mount Pinatubo's
eruption, a fact the agenda-oriented scientific community attempted
to ignore." 10/

SCIENTIFIC FACT:

Limbaugh's last statement is absolutely false. The measurements to
which he refers, of extremely high levels of chlorine monoxide, were
made by NASA only six months after Pinatubo's eruption and in a
particular region of the Arctic stratosphere that was at the time
unaffected by the volcanic emissions. Furthermore, large amounts
of these chemicals were measured throughout the month of
January, not just on one day, as Limbaugh asserts. 11/

As for the rest, the condition of the ozone layer in January of 1992
was a great deal more complex than Limbaugh's account would
suggest. Indeed, many scientists were disturbed by the high
chlorine monoxide levels. For a very large depletion to occur,
however, the Arctic stratosphere would have had to remain cold for
several more weeks, as it often does that time of year. Instead, a
sudden warming occurred the following month, so the damage to
the ozone layer never became as severe as originally feared. If it
had, the depletion might well have reached 20 to 30 percent in the
lower stratosphere, rather than the 10 to 15 percent that was
recorded. Indeed, such large depletions could occur over parts of
Northern Europe and Canada during any winter, and may do so in
the future. 12/

In his most recent book, See, I Told You So, Limbaugh returns to
the subject of ozone depletion. This time, he discusses the
implications of a possible prehistoric supernova that may have
damaged the atmosphere:

RUSH FICTION:

"Scientists say a supernova 340,000 years ago disrupted 10
percent to 20 percent of the ozone layer, causing sunburn in
prehistoric man. Wait a minute - I thought only man could destroy
the ozone. . . . And if prehistoric man merely got a sunburn, how is
it that we are going to destroy the ozone layer with our air
conditioners and underarm deodorants and cause everybody to get
cancer? Obviously we're not...and we can't ...and it's a hoax." 13/


SCIENTIFIC FACT:

The report of a prehistoric supernova exploding close enough to the
Earth to have possibly affected its ozone layer, thousands of years
ago, though of doubtful relevance to Limbaugh's argument, was
published in the British journal Nature and followed up by the New
York Times in 1993. As quoted in the Times, Dr. Neil Gehrels, one
of the authors of the report, clearly did not mean to minimize the
possibility that the ozone loss that may have resulted would have
damaged whatever forms of life were roaming the planet. Indeed,
he was reported as saying that the effects of such an ozone
depletion may well "have impaired the health of human beings and
other creatures..." 14/

RUSH FICTION:

"Even The Washington Post - that haven of liberal mythology -
published a front-page story on April 15, 1993, that dismissed most
of the fears about the so-called ozone hole... had this to say: 'In
fact, researchers say the problem appears to be heading toward
solution before they can find any solid evidence that serious harm
was or is being done.'" 15/

SCIENTIFIC FACT:

Limbaugh neglects to mention that the problem of ozone depletion
appears to be heading towards solution only as a result of
international agreements to restrict the production and use of
CFC's. Thanks to these agreements, the ozone layer should return
to near-normal levels around the year 2045. Before 1998,
however, stratospheric ozone is expected to become thinner every
year, and the amount of ultraviolet radiation reaching the Earth to
increase, assuming other influences remain constant. 16/
Although the consequences of increased ultraviolet exposure for
plants and marine life are just beginning to be explored, the
damage to humans from long-term exposure is well known. In
many parts of the globe, ozone depletion is likely to cause a rise in
rates of skin cancer, particularly non-melanoma cancers, which, due
to lifestyle factors, are already at record levels. 17/

RUSH FICTION:

"A few days later, the authoritative journal Science published a
story headlined 'Ozone Takes Nose Dive After the Eruption of Mt.
Pinatubo.' It pointed out that the ozone layer should show
significant signs of recovery by 1994. But have you heard Algore
(sic) or any other ozone alarmist step up and admit that he or she
perpetuated (sic) a fraud on the American people?" 18/

SCIENTIFIC FACT:

Indeed, the ozone layer did not thin as much in 1994 as it did in
1993, due to the washing out of emissions from Mount Pinatubo
(see above). Nevertheless, as Science magazine pointed out in a
recent issue, this improvement is only temporary, since levels of
"atmospheric chlorine will continue to increase until controls on
CFC emissions take hold late in this decade. Pinatubo or no,
things will get worse." 19/

Global Warming and the Greenhouse Effect

Global warming is another topic about which Limbaugh attempts to
mislead his readers, despite the international scientific consensus
on many aspects of this issue. This consensus is reflected in the
findings of the top researchers in the field, as published in the peer-
reviewed scientific literature, and the conclusions of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the
international scientific panel assessing climate change, which
consists of a network of 2,500 experts worldwide. The IPCC has
issued two reports clearly stating and then reaffirming that the
Earth's climate will warm due to the buildup of man-made
greenhouse gases. 20/ In 1992, the National Academy of Sciences
published its own report, concluding that "greenhouse warming
poses a potential threat sufficient to merit prompt responses." 21/

Instead of taking on the international scientific community directly,
however, Limbaugh chooses to attack Vice-President Al Gore, and
his book Earth in the Balance.

RUSH FICTION:

"Algore's (sic) book is full of calculated disinformation. For
instance, he claims that 98 percent of scientists believe global
warming is taking place. However a Gallup poll of scientists
involved in global climate research shows that 53 percent do not
believe that global warming has occurred, 30 percent say they don't
know, and only 17 percent are devotees of this dubious theory." 22/

SCIENTIFIC FACT:

These numbers, apparently lifted from a George Will syndicated
column of September 3, 1992, 23/ are supposed to reflect the
findings of a Gallup poll taken in late 1991 to ascertain the opinions
of research scientists concerning global warming. Even though
polling is of doubtful relevance for determining the scientific truth of
any proposition, it should be pointed out that nowhere in the actual
poll results are there figures that resemble those cited by Will or
Limbaugh.

Instead, the Gallup poll found that a substantial majority of the
scientists polled, 66 percent, believed that human-induced global
warming was already occurring. Only 10 percent disagreed, and
the remainder were undecided.

Moreover, the 98 percent figure appears in the context of Al Gore's
book to refer to the percentage of scientists who believe that
human-induced global warming is a legitimate threat, not, as
Limbaugh frames it, to the number of those who argue that it is
already in effect. In fact, the Gallup poll seems to bear out Gore's
estimate as well, finding that only 2 percent of the scientists polled
believed that there was no chance that substantial, human-caused
warming will occur over the next fifty to one hundred years. 24/

RUSH FICTION:

"Algore told the Washington Times on May 19, 1993: 'That
increased accumulations of greenhouse gases, particularly CO2,
cause global warming, there is no longer any serious debate.
There are a few naysayers far outside the consensus who try to
dispute that. They are not really taken seriously by the mainstream
scientific community.' Yet we saw in the last chapter that there is
nothing resembling a consensus on this issue among scientists who
have some expertise in this area. In fact, a majority clearly does
not believe global warming has occurred." 25/

SCIENTIFIC FACT:

See the preceding item. Furthermore, even the most publicized
and vehement of scientific naysayers, such as Pat Michaels of the
University of Virginia, agree that increased accumulation of carbon
dioxide will eventually cause global warming. What they disagree
about is how much warming will occur over what period of time. 26/

RUSH FICTION:

"...back at the time of the first Earth Day, the big concern wasn't
global warming, it was global cooling. . . . the view of
most environmentalists for years after." 27/

SCIENTIFIC FACT:

Although the Earth has warmed by about one degree Fahrenheit
over the past hundred years, this warming has not occurred
uniformly. In particular, during the period from 1940 to 1970, the
Northern Hemisphere stopped warming and may have even cooled
slightly. 28/ This hiatus in the long-term trend contributed to
concerns that the Earth was about to cool significantly, possibly due
to the increased amount of soot and other particulates in the
atmosphere.

However, warming resumed again in the 1970's and the nine
warmest years on record have all occurred since 1980. 29/ Recent
calculations indicate that the greenhouse effect will outrun the
effects of particulate cooling in the future, although the
accumulation of particulates in the atmosphere may slow the overall
rate of warming. 30/

RUSH FICTION:

"A fact you never hear the environmentalist wacko crowd
acknowledge is that 96 percent of the so-called 'greenhouse' gases
are not created by man, but by nature." 31/

SCIENTIFIC FACT:

This is an obvious straw man set up by Limbaugh. It is true that the
greenhouse effect is, by and large, a natural phenomenon,
produced by gases in the atmosphere such as carbon dioxide and
water vapor that have warmed the Earth for eons, making its
climate moderate enough to support life as we know it. Without
these gases, Earth would be forty to sixty degrees colder,
essentially a frigid desert. 32/

However, in nature these gases usually remain in balance, leading
to a stable climate, while the greenhouse gases added by humans
over the last two hundred years have accumulated to the point that
the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, for example, is
now more than 25 percent above what it had been for the previous
10,000 years. (Scientists have direct evidence of this data, from
measurements of air bubbles trapped in polar ice cores.) 33/ The
scientific consensus is that the accumulation of carbon dioxide and
other gases due to human activity will alter the climate substantially,
warming the globe by three to eight degrees Fahrenheit over the
next century. 34/

Forests and the Spotted Owl

One of the most contentious of current political debates
concerns the old-growth forests in the Northwest. Limbaugh
addresses this issue in See, I Told You So by citing mostly
irrelevant statistics on tree growth in the United States as a whole:

RUSH FICTION:

"Would it surprise you to learn, for instance, that America's forests
are much healthier today in the 1990s than they were at the turn of
the century? In fact, you could say that in the last seventy years
America's forests have been reborn. There are 730 million acres of
forest land in our country today, and the growth on those acres is
denser than at any time. . . . New England has more forested acres
than it did in the mid-1800s. Vermont is twice as forested as it was
then. Almost half of the densely populated northeastern United
States is covered by forest. Why? How could this be? If we are
ravaging our land, as the environmentalists suggest, why are there
more trees around -- more forests?" 35/

SCIENTIFIC FACT:

Here, it seems, Limbaugh cannot see the forests for all those trees.
It is true that due to the abandonment of farming, there has been a
regeneration of forests in the northeastern United States over the
past century, although not with all the species they originally
contained.

Instead, environmentalists' primary concern during the last decade
has been the rampant destruction of old-growth forests, particularly
in the Northwest, where ancient trees were being cut down at an
unprecedented rate, leaving only about 11 to 14 percent of the
original forests still standing. 36/

RUSH FICTION:

"What the environmentalists are saying, in effect, is that some
trees are better than others. Trees that have been planted by man
are not as worthy or valuable as those that grow in 'virgin' forests.
What is a virgin forest anyway? Most trees live for only a couple of
hundred years and then die. No tree lives forever." 37/

SCIENTIFIC FACT:

Virgin forests are forests untouched by humans. In the
Northwest, they are mostly old-growth forests, featuring towering
stands of trees, 200 to over 1,000 years old. 38/ These trees are
known to harbor a number of endangered or threatened species,
among them (but not limited to) the Northern spotted owl. Which
brings us to Limbaugh's next point:

RUSH FICTION:

"It reminds me of the researchers who recently ventured into the
forests of California. Do you know what they found? No, not
Algore. They found spotted owls. It seems the place is teeming
with spotted owls - even though they're supposed to be an
endangered species." 39/

SCIENTIFIC FACT:

Fewer than two thousand pairs of the Northern spotted owl are
thought to survive in California forests -- a number that could hardly
be described as "teeming". 40/ Even more importantly, at a meeting
of experts called by the U.S. government in December 1993 at Fort
Collins, Colorado, virtually every biologist who presented data
concluded that the total numbers of the owl are still in decline.
Moreover, the population loss rate appears to be accelerating. 41/

On the whole, Limbaugh dealt with this issue more honestly in his
first book, The Way Things Ought to Be, when he asserted, "If the
owl can't adapt to the superiority of humans, screw it. . . ." 42/

Conclusion

Although he attacks his opponents in the scientific community
for being driven by ideology, it is Rush Limbaugh who clearly allows
his political biases to distort the truth about a whole range of
important scientific issues.

All in all, the words he uses to describe Al Gore's book could more
appropriately be applied to his own. Limbaugh's most recent work,
just like the previous one, is "nothing more than a hysterical,
pseudo-scientific tract designed to cut off calm, reasoned
discussion of environmental issues and simply push the nation
toward irrational, irreversible, misguided (not to mention expensive)
public policies." If the words of Rush Limbaugh on scientific
subjects prove anything, it should be "to discredit from any
serious participation in our nation's debate over the
environment."

 

[miles]

Aside from the military, can anyone name an agency that completed its mission?

It's the MO of government - create a crisis where one doesn't exist to ensure the survival of the agency and the jobs of bureaucrats.

 

[Cheyenne]

Is Riff the only environmentalist with enough (stoned) balls to use his "name" here? Do the rest of you think it is okay to fake something like this?

Junk science is just fine with you? Of course, if you don't know the difference between a fox and a lynx... maybe it doens't much matter in the scheme of things.

 

[Silverlily]

I don't exactly call myself an environmentalist, more like a felinist.

Falsifying government records is fraud, plain and simple, and should be punished as such. Counseling , you've got to be kidding me.

I'm not as well versed in the lynx situation as say the cougar situation. For example, the Florida panther (really a type of cougar) will be extinct in 30 years if something doesn't change. The Eastern cougar is also in trouble. However, the Western and Yuma cougars are doing rather well, very well in places like Texas. So I'm curious if there are certain types of lynx with some in more dire straits than others.

Regardless, faking a report solves nothing. As always, it was found out and now, if anything, doubts have been cast over efforts to protect the animal. All the Lynx Seven have accomplished is to undermine work done by others.

 

[zantac666]

lynx

I think the lynx are beautifull animals i have held one there soft and cuddly this one one lost a leg in a steele trap and a vet. kept him and it became very friendly he lets it run loose in his house he will jump up on your lap and let you pet him. and as far as the ozone maybe it's mother natures way of cleaning house what happend to all the pollutants from when the earth was being formed. Maybe the ozone depletes and a door opens and the pllutants are sucked out the door closes and new ozone forms. Who know. and for rush he's a jerk.

 

[Texan]

Cheyenne darlin...

Other than your original post.... this thread has been very painful to read. I think you know what I'm talking about.

I won't characterize my thoughts anymore than that, but I just had to say SOMETHING.

 

[SINthysist]

The greens do not for one second understand asset management.

Take the spotted owl hoax. The research used was work done by a graduate student and conclusions reached from it. So without further study and in an effort attack the logging industry, the cutting of timber, i.e., habitat was forbidden.

The result? Disease began to kill the prefered trees of the spotted owl while other junk tress began to thrive. As the favored trees died, they fed fires that nature could not withstand further destroying the habitat. After the fires, even junkier trees began to flourish further reducing the spotted owl's habitat.

Yes, Texan, I too remember the Global Warming threads and still fight that junk although not as intelligently as you. A_J out!