Sentences with phrase «enviro activists»

A link to a New York Times article which itself featured not one bit of evidence proving the conspiracy, but which instead sourced its information from one of the core members of the small clique of enviro activists at the heart of the smear of skeptic climate scientists.

(6) These problems can not be solved through administrative policy, government regulation or funding, voluntary participation by corporations, enviro activists, or the general citizenry.

So the enviro activist fear of water contamination is absurd on its face.

Not exact matches

Are you saying these enviro - activists are liars, or are their comments being taken «out of context»?

Blogads are usually quite inexpensive for the number of people they allow you to reach (though prices on popular blogs have gone up significantly in the past few years), and they're putting you before a targeted audience: activists on a red - meat wave - the - bloody - flag political blog, pacifists on a peace - oriented site, enviros on a green energy blog, and so on.

In this collective exercise, the assertion about bribery is a linchpin for the whole premise of angelic enviro - activists vs evil corporate greed.

So, with friends like that and an unmistakably pro-global warming position, why on Earth would Avi Garbow go to work for one of the sworn enemies of enviro - activists, a planet - wrecking fossil fuel company?

Is it actually Chevron turning out the «fossil fuel industry denial light» about the certainty of man - caused global warming, or is it one solitary unmistakably pro-global warming lawyer nudging an entire company into the most inexplicable kind of politically correct appeasement to enviro - activists?

Think Ross Gelbspan is a long - forgotten figure from the past in the minds of enviro - activists?

Neither Gelbspan nor anyone repeating his accusation ever proved the money trail led to an industry directive to lie about global warming science; none of them have proved skeptic climate scientists were instructed to mimic tobacco industry tactics; journalists have demonstrably not offered overall fair balance in to skeptic climate scientists; the «wedge» being driven is one arguably pounded by enviro - activists who push the «skeptics don't deserve fair media balance» talking point; and Gelbspan was not the first one to bring up this talking point.

At the core, it shows Moore's epiphany at a UN sponsored environmental activist conference in Nairobi, 1982, when the author decided that what Western enviro - idealists wanted profoundly clashed with people from developing countries.

Pt 7, «Cancerous Greenpeace / Desmogblog / Gelbspan Stuff»: What's detailed in this post is how Dave Rado's Ofcom complaint is first and foremost pushing absolutely nothing more than guilt - by - association «evidence» to indict skeptic climate scientists of industry - funded corruption, and secondly, how Rado, much like any other prominent accuser, is enslaved to an accusation narrative which ultimately relies on sources who repeat material which inevitably traces back to Ross Gelbspan and the clique of enviro - activists surrounding him when he and they got the first real media traction for the accusation.

As ever, the fatal problem with enviro - activists» enslavement to the «reposition global warming as theory» phrase as proof that skeptics are paid illicit money to lie about certainty of global warming is that there is no evidence of it being a top - down fossil fuel industry directive of any kind.

But look far more carefully into this, and the widening situation around it leads to a maddeningly tangled source situation that ultimately does nothing to alleviate the problem of the smear of skeptic climate scientists — including efforts to discredit the Oregon Petition — appearing to be intertwined with a small clique of enviro - activists who have barely any separation from Ross Gelbspan.

: One of the bigger ironies about enviro - activists demanding full disclosure from skeptic climate scientists is the manner in which the enviros do not fully disclose information about their own people.

Myself, I've been trying valiantly to point out how we don't have fossil fuel companies & skeptics planting unneeded doubt about AGW, but instead how have the opposite: enviro - activists working non-stop to plant doubt about the motives of skeptics.

The collective enviro - activist movement wants the public to believe global warming science is settled and that opponents may be dismissed out - of - hand due to «extensive documentation» of skeptic climate scientists» industry corruption.

An insinuation so memorably compelling that ordinary citizen enviro - activists can regurgitate it with ease.

But such an award could be earned by objective unbiased investigative reporters for turning the tables on enviro - activists who fed that accusation to media people who never questioned it.

Dig deep enough in the «crooked skeptics» accusation, and you ultimately discover that in regard to the notion about skeptics being in a pay - for - performance arrangement with anybody in the fossil fuel industry, there's only one usable weapon in the enviro - activists» arsenal to indict those skeptics as industry - paid shills: the supposedly leaked industry memo set from a public relations campaign called the «Information Council for the Environment» (ICE) supposedly containing the «reposition global warming» strategy goal, which targeted «older, less - educated males» and «younger, lower - income women.»

Spend even the briefest effort doing a combined internet search of the words «Exxon» and «climate change», and it becomes abundantly obvious that enviro - activists have long believed Exxon is a fundamental threat to the planet (full archived text here), and now that Exxon's CEO — who supposedly has overseen a climate denial machine (full text here) over the last decade — has been tapped by President - elect Trump to be Secretary of State, we should be terrified of him.

Enviro - activists believe they are headed toward the light at the end of the tunnel on the man - caused global warming issue with this growing collection of lawsuits against fossil fuel companies.

But just a under two months ago, a situation arose which may indicate that this giant Rex - Exxon survival problem facing the planet could instead be a massive survival problem for enviro - activists.

Enviro - activists using the mainstream media's monster - megaphone to push claims of catastrophic man - caused global warming as a settled science needing immediate fixing have almost completely drowned out the opposition, and an unmistakable part of the blaring 20 year + message was the demand to ignore industry - bribed skeptics.

Swallow these single - serving talking points from enviro - activists at your own peril?

(Back then, the CAGW movement hadn't developed yet; mankind was being blamed for global cooling; and enviro - activists didn't universally know which way to fudge the data yet).

The other way enviro - activists try to support the «industry - corrupted skeptics» accusation is to say leaked industry memos prove it.

When enviro - activists do actually attempt to point to evidence supporting the crooked skeptics accusation, many just point the public to entire websites, books, or presentations.

What makes it exponentially worse is how enviro - activists can't even hardly bring themselves to point out specific hard evidence for industry money corrupting the skeptics.

Taken further against a central clique of enviro - activists, the claim that Exxon's «faillure to disclose that it knew its products increased the health hazard of global warming» was racketeering could be flipped against them.

Another story favored by enviro - activists has a detail about «deliverables» from skeptic climate scientist Dr Willie Soon to Exxon.

But in the case of particular enviro - activists, it makes a person wonder why publicly accessible Friends lists seem to be disappearing.

When I suggest we have a polar opposite situation here, enviro - activists appearing to be doing all the racketeering to keep their cause alive in the face of withering science - based criticism, this sort of thing is what I'm talking about — Newsweek «s Sharon Begley practically yelling about the need to stop skeptic climate scientists in their tracks, and less than three years later, Dr Schneider telling policy analysts and media experts at a major symposium exactly how such critics can be marginalized.

enviro - activists who could see their beloved issue dying at the hands of skeptic scientists» detailed climate assessments if nothing was done to stop them.

There will be some enviro - activists who may use it as a cudgel to beat rejectionists over the head without much critical assessment of the research.

And that enviro - activists» collective accusation against skeptic climate scientists might backfire under tough scrutiny, potentially exposing them — Shabecoff, Gelbspan, Naomi Oreskes, «Greenpeace USA née Ozone Action,» and Al Gore — as people engaging in the kind of racketeering action they claim is being done by the fossil fuel companies?

To quash the notion that no valid scientific criticism exists against the idea of man - caused global warming, enviro - activists often say «denier scientists» are paid by the fossil fuel industry to lie about the issue, insinuating a parallel to expert «shills» who did the same for «big tobacco».

Joining the enviro - activists in chaining yourself to plant and machinery at a coal mine isn't a great look, and the Australian Rugby Union won't give you a second chance.

and how this old situation has a direct tie to enviro - activists» current efforts to use racketeering laws to persecute people who criticize the notion of catastrophic man - caused global warming.

For over two decades, both the overall enviro - activist community and the mainstream media have had what amounts to nearly absolute control over framing the public narrative about the global warming issue.

Enviro - activists don't, and I don't try to analyze why.

That's all the enviro - activists have.

*... To refresh the raison d'être of the EPA & UN...... To move environmentalism from the fringes to the center of social concern...... To justify increased media coverage of environmental issues...... To give enviro - groups a powerful fund - raising and consciousness - raising tool...... and allow them access to the levers of national and international power...... To give activist & green parties a vote - getting wedge issue...... and a case - study justification for their habitual «hammer» (increased regulation and taxation)...... To provide at - a-loss «engagé / enragé» types with a new stick with which to bash the beastly bourgeoise...... To transfer wealth from the West to the South...... To fund alternative energy developers and researchers...

However, this is also a can't - miss opportunity to put that entire enviro - activist notion to the ultimate test, with an outright challenge to billionaire Tom Steyer to consider a far more chancy gamble than the $ 100 million he's pledged toward Senate and gubernatorial races that «attack climate - change deniers» — a gamble that either makes or totally busts the two decade - old accusation that skeptics are paid to lie and spread misinformation.

Where enviro - activists went too far was their belief that Exxon would surrender to the same sort of legal settlements that the tobacco industry faced.

When enviro - activists see how they can get away with murder, they will keep on committing murder.

Witness how BHP Billiton had an obviously pro-global warming position prior to the 2015 Paris Climate Accord conference, yet enviro - activists called one of BHP's conference attendees a corporate criminal.

All we see are pure guilt - by - association talking points, which first got their media traction in late 1995 / early 1996 from the small clique of enviro - activists surrounding Gelbspan.

Meanwhile, someone in the enviro - activist community decided to apply that same kind of complaint to high - level global warming nuisance lawsuits.

Instead of the accusation from Schneiderman et al. being that Exxon engaged in racketeering in order to misinform its shareholders about the certainty of man - caused global warming, the question should be asked if a particular clique of enviro - activists (Gore, Oreskes, Gelbspan and those at «Greenpeace USA née Ozone Action» http://gelbspanfiles.com/?p=4482) instead engaged in racketeering when it comes to hoodwinking environmentalist donors about the certainty that skeptic climate scientists are «industry - paid crooks.»