IS David Suzuki evil?

[JerrySeinfeld]

OK - well for the sake of argument - if I can trace some man-made-climate-change researchers' funding back to an interested party such as an alternative energy company - can we discredit that "science" too?

Better yet - I betcha if you tried hard enough you could trace almost all scientific research back to a corporation of some variety.

If I could find a man-made-climate-change scientist whose funding is tracable back to BP Amoco, what would that tell you?

[speaker]

There are some pretty good sized corps that have supported all kinds of environmental impact assessment science. Up to a point there can be serious benefits from understanding what's actually happening around you. We'll see now whether there is staying power and backbone in them as the science gets out better.

and feel free to check out the Suzuki Foundation for its backers.

[Rue]

How many ways can you dress up "curtail development, tax corporations, redistribute wealth to poorer nations" and pretend it's not copmmunism?

Ask David. And he seems to think this climate change hysteria is his golden moment - that his time has finally come to rule the world with rhetoric and scare mongering.

Every time I see this guy speak, it becomse so much more and more obvious that he's less interested in FACTS and alot more interested in ATTENTION and INFLUENCE.

This is evil - and a scientist in drag is the worst kind.

Well if you read the posts on whether being gay is an anomoly you would know if he is evil he must be gay. But i am confused. I thought he was married.

Anyways I think your trying to turn David Suzuki into a demon is stretching it. The fact that you do not agree with him does not make him evil. Using your subjective name calling we could easily same of you in reverse because you continue to poison the planet and don't give a damn.

Why don't we avoid the name calling and stick to the issues and not demonize people.

I will say this though, David Suzuki is sort of beginning to look like Colonel Sanders. Some people believe Col. Sanders was Satan.

[JerrySeinfeld]

How many ways can you dress up "curtail development, tax corporations, redistribute wealth to poorer nations" and pretend it's not copmmunism?

Ask David. And he seems to think this climate change hysteria is his golden moment - that his time has finally come to rule the world with rhetoric and scare mongering.

Every time I see this guy speak, it becomse so much more and more obvious that he's less interested in FACTS and alot more interested in ATTENTION and INFLUENCE.

This is evil - and a scientist in drag is the worst kind.

Well if you read the posts on whether being gay is an anomoly you would know if he is evil he must be gay. But i am confused. I thought he was married.

Anyways I think your trying to turn David Suzuki into a demon is stretching it. The fact that you do not agree with him does not make him evil. Using your subjective name calling we could easily same of you in reverse because you continue to poison the planet and don't give a damn.

Why don't we avoid the name calling and stick to the issues and not demonize people.

I will say this though, David Suzuki is sort of beginning to look like Colonel Sanders. Some people believe Col. Sanders was Satan.

So to conclude. Stop demonizing people because of the potential bias and stick to the arguments?

Great.

[runningdog]

His actions prove otherwise.

Like how his bus is left idling for 90 min outside his speaking engagements.

so you're saying that Dr. Suzuki ordered the bus company to leave the engine running?

He didn't order them to turn the engine off.

ahh, yes, that is true.

[sharkman]

For Suzuki to characterize Harper as being up Bush's backside shows an agenda that goes far beyond science.

[jbg]

How many ways can you dress up "curtail development, tax corporations, redistribute wealth to poorer nations" and pretend it's not copmmunism?

Ask David. And he seems to think this climate change hysteria is his golden moment - that his time has finally come to rule the world with rhetoric and scare mongering.

Every time I see this guy speak, it becomse so much more and more obvious that he's less interested in FACTS and alot more interested in ATTENTION and INFLUENCE.

This is evil - and a scientist in drag is the worst kind.

I got my start with Canadian boards on that charlatan's forum. People who were skeptical of global warming were threatened with impunity, and generally ill-treated.

Suzuki is also a leading hypocrit.

[BubberMiley]

Threatened with impunity? That sounds painful.

[Higgly]

Let me ask you a very simple question. Do you consider it scientific or even remotely reasonable to only tout the DRAWBACKS of a warmer world without even giving MENTION to the benefits?

I love this line of reasoning. Global warming will stop when the porridge is just right. LOL.

[Higgly]

Threatened with impunity? That sounds painful.

LOL

[geoffrey]

Because every undergraduate knows it's only possible to become an expert in something by majoring in it.

No, but I'll cede to someone that is more qualified than I am on a topic. I'm going to venture the guess that Suzuki is not nearly as qualified as many people that disagree with his wild, emotional views on the whole issue.

He's in the same camp as Gore, he's a politican now, not a real scientist. Both have admitted up front or rhetorically that it's ok to exaggerate sometimes if your agenda is pushed through.

http://www.davidsuzuki.org/

There you go geoffrey, perhaps as an accountant you can find what you say they aren't telling. but be very careful.... your mind might be broadened.

You won't find funding information on their website, their annual report does not fully disclose the $5.7 million in public and foundation donations, but there are some interesting names I'll touch on later. Interestingly, you'll see that back in '05, climate change was a minor issue to the foundation, with Marine and Communications leading the way. Now, global warming outpaces them all. This particularly highlights my view that the GHG craze is going to do far more harm than anything else, as we now are neglecting the rest of our environment.

So the donators to Suzuki? Eagle Medallion Fortress Investment... a company tied to illegal online gambling in the US. That's one that I found quickly on there. Beyond that, much of the investment comes from these foundations, who themselves hide their funding, so it's all rather irrelevant as I can't follow the dollars back to where they came from.

I know lots of oil and gas lobbyists, but they'll admit it. Suzuki won't ever admit he's a pawn for the green industry.

For all realistic purposes, Suzuki doesn't show all his funding sources. And for someone that criticises environmentalists on the other side of the debate for taking oil and gas money, he does by the way openly accept donations from GHG leaders ATCO Gas and Encana.

[speaker]

You do find funding info on their website. Right down to the names you mentioned. Like I mentioned companies like encana can see their way to supporting groups like the Suzuki foundation because they understand there is a benefit to seeing what's written on the subway walls. Whether they will actually learn from it is probably another matter but it's nice to know the Foundation is broadminded enough to give them the chance.

Suzuki a pawn for the green industry.??? lolol geoffrey you are a card. one doesn't even have to contemplate the scale of the brown industries lobbying to understand how much of a card you are.

[jbg]

You do find funding info on their website. Right down to the names you mentioned.

Link to that portion of the Suzuki site please.

Suzuki a pawn for the green industry.??? lolol geoffrey you are a card. one doesn't even have to contemplate the scale of the brown industries lobbying to understand how much of a card you are.

Geoffrey is a long-established and respected poster. Why not discuss his ideas, not engage in Grade 7 rhetoric? Just a thought.

[speaker]

jbg, I posted a link to the Suzuki Foundation earlier. You won't find it difficult to find what you're interested in,,, if you are interested in it.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I was discussing his ideas. Did you think I was talking about yours? what a coincidence.

[jbg]

jbg, I posted a link to the Suzuki Foundation earlier. You won't find it difficult to find what you're interested in,,, if you are interested in it.

Why not a sublink, so I don't have to wade through his "love the earth" dogma?

[Michael Bluth]

Suzuki a pawn for the green industry.??? lolol geoffrey you are a card. one doesn't even have to contemplate the scale of the brown industries lobbying to understand how much of a card you are.

Maybe if you call geoff a card once more people won't notice that there is no substance to your argument.

You're such a card.

[speaker]

jbg sometimes one learns more from actually having to go that extra mile. It wouldn't hurt.

Dogma? what dogma.

michael bluth, and that was meant to be argumentative?

Brown industry lobbying is pervasive beyond redundancy, green industry lobbying is to the point and on the cheap in comparison.

[JerrySeinfeld]

Are we dickering about whether Suzuki is:

1. Biased

and

2. Trying to stifle honest scientific debate and muzzle dialogue

?

I think the answer is OBVIOUS from his language yes on both counts without having to resort to funnellnig through his opaque financings.

[speaker]

JerrySeinfeld, actually the original topic was laughably enough whether Suzuki is evil. Probably your interpretation of the discussion is a little less inflamatory. Suzuki probably is biased about the concerns surrounding global warming and the environment in general. I figure anyone who has taken the time to look at where we are has the same bias.

Given that Suzuki has immersed himself in the problems we are causing ourselves like energy waste, species loss, green house gases, water shortages, etc. I can understand how he might want to see some action rather than empty rhetoric that we have been getting from government for the last thirty years. However I have not seen anything that indicates he is trying to stifle debate. Perhaps advance the debate would be a more appropriate description.

[noahbody]

However I have not seen anything that indicates he is trying to stifle debate.

How about:

"...But he took exception when asked to comment on the "continuing debate" surrounding climate change.

"It’s no longer a debate. The debate is over.” " www.abc.net.au/queensland/stories/s1758830.htm

Looks like you didn't go the extra mile on that one.

[B. Max]

Dr Suzuki claims that the rate of increase in levels of carbon dioxide is faster than at any time in the past 400 000 years, and perhaps even the past million years.

He says scientists are able to use microscopic air particles frozen in Antarctic ice to see how levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere have changed over the centuries.

What he fails to say is that those changes show that CO2 is not a driver of global warming. Doctor fruit fly is a messenger of misinformation.

[JerrySeinfeld]

Dr Suzuki claims that the rate of increase in levels of carbon dioxide is faster than at any time in the past 400 000 years, and perhaps even the past million years.

He says scientists are able to use microscopic air particles frozen in Antarctic ice to see how levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere have changed over the centuries.

What he fails to say is that those changes show that CO2 is not a driver of global warming. Doctor fruit fly is a messenger of misinformation.

Exactly, and fails to mention that increases in earth warming have historically PREDATED CO2 concentrations by as much as 800 years.

[speaker]

noahbody, perhaps he meant it in the sense that the real debate is over, and all that's left is people trying to avoid their responsibilities, and or increase their profits, by trying to slow down public action to counter the problem. And that isn't debate, but rearguard action.

B. Max and JerrySeinfeld I believe he does say that co2 is a driver of global warming. which is not contradictory to the findings that co2 Peaking was eight hundred years after a heating cycle began. There is no doubt that co2 is helping to cause global warming, if some other mechanism drives co2 increases after the earth starts to heat up then we could be really up the creek 800 years from today, if we don't do what we can with our own contribution now.

[JerrySeinfeld]

noahbody, perhaps he meant it in the sense that the real debate is over, and all that's left is people trying to avoid their responsibilities, and or increase their profits, by trying to slow down public action to counter the problem. And that isn't debate, but rearguard action.

B. Max and JerrySeinfeld I believe he does say that co2 is a driver of global warming. which is not contradictory to the findings that co2 Peaking was eight hundred years after a heating cycle began. There is no doubt that co2 is helping to cause global warming, if some other mechanism drives co2 increases after the earth starts to heat up then we could be really up the creek 800 years from today, if we don't do what we can with our own contribution now.

Maybe - or the vast wasteland of northern Canada, greenland, siberia could all become arable land with amazing crop yields solving world hunger problems.

[Michael Bluth]

Maybe - or the vast wasteland of northern Canada, greenland, siberia could all become arable land with amazing crop yields solving world hunger problems.

World hunger has never been an issue of supply. Always an issue of distribution.

Are we gonna move all those starvin' people way up North?