Friends of Science: Forgotten, but Not Dead

Sat, 2007-04-21 08:44Richard Littlemore
Richard Littlemore's picture

Friends of Science: Forgotten, but Not Dead

The Calgary-based and oil-industry-funded Friends of Science is still foundering about, denying the science of climate change and embarrassing itself by trying to overstate its connections to the University of Calgary.

The good folks at SourceWatch have done a great deal more work on this file, including documenting the efforts that the university's External Vice-President Roman Cooney has made to distance the institution from this very unscientific organization.

There's also a lovely new (to us, at least) website called FriendsofScience.ca (the toxic original is FriendsofScience.org).

Comments

“Oh what a tangled web we weave,
When first we practise to deceive!”

Sir Walter Scott, Marmion, Canto vi, Stanza 17.

I hope the CCRA is busy doing an audit of the whole bunch of them. Seems to me that they are breaking every rule in the “charitable donations” book.

Ian Forrester

“Friends of Science: Forgotten, but Not Dead.”

That is very surprising, considering that their main representative Tim Ball received 5 (FIVE) death threat e-mails (well, negative in tone, at least). We know that this is a certified true fact, because this claim was published by hundreds of bloggers and news services. They can’t all be wron… !?! HOLD IT. The FOS-deniers say that when you see a consensus, it means it can’t be true. Well, now we know.
It appears that they are still convincing others to invite them to share opinions.

http://fcpp.org/main/media_file_detail.php?StreamID=575

“Tim Ball’s testimony -US House Subcommittee on Climate Change”

Slides: www.ff.org/centers/csspp/docs/20070321_ball.ppt

From the talk:

“The explanation for that melting is primarily given my these factors, which is called the Milankovitch effect, and interestingly enough, this is not included in most of our textbooks across North America today, I’ve checked them out. What it shows in the lower right, is the orbit of the earth around the sun, as an almost circular but slightly eliptical orbit. That’s the situation right now. But the orbit is changing every single year, pulled by the gravitational pull of the planet Jupiter, and what you see on the lower left is the orbit of the earth as it was 22,000 years ago, an extreme ellipse. So the orbit is changing every single year. And in the center of the diagram you see that the tilt is shown at 23 and a half degrees. It isn’t; it’s just close enough for government work, but it also constantly changes from 21.4 to 24.8, …” etc., etc.
that should say “given by these factors”
Regarding the discovery (by NRSP?) that mention of Milankovitch is “not included in most of our textbooks across North America today”…

I decided to see which textbooks do not include it, but just looking at my shelves, I was unable to find any that don’t at least mention it. I assumed he meant ice ages and paleoclimate (I also assumed he meant current or recent), since that is what he was talking about at the time.

I searched others on the web. Milankovitch, yup. Milankovitch, yup. Going farther afield - climatology; biogeography; weather and climate; general earth science - yes, it is still there. Maybe it is missing from others that he knows about.

Then I realized that maybe he means ALL textbooks used in North America, including accounting, sociology, religious studies, drafting, music, political science, bread-making, Nietchsche, Kirkegaard, soil biology, DNA, truck driving, etc. If you include ALL North American textbooks, I agree that Ball is correct in claiming that presentation of Milankovitch is included in only a small proportion, i.e., the ones that concern climate, or ice ages.

Everyone needs at least one great discovery.

“The explanation for that melting is primarily given my these factors, which is called the Milankovitch effect, and interestingly enough, this is not included in most of our textbooks across North America today, I’ve checked them out.”