DeSmog

Judge CEI "Experts" by the Company They Keep

authordefault
on

In the history of protecting businesses from the inconvenience of environmental regulation, no example has been more obvious or objectionable than tobacco.

We know, without doubt, that the tobacco companies spiked their product with nicotine to increase its addictive qualities and lied about it. We know that they created phony grassroots organizations, like The Advancement of Sound Science Coalition (TASSC)  to question the motivations of the Environmental Protection Agency and that they paid off scientists to take issue with the science.

We also know that TASSC decided to also take an interest in issues like climate change, just so it wasn’t obvious that they were completely in the pocket of Philip Morris.

Now we know that while all this was going on, the Competitive Enterprise Institute was soliciting money from the Tobacco Institute so it could produce a mini-series that would “set the record straight” on environmental science. This show was to be based on a book, Progress and the Planet, written by think tank-“experts” like the emminently flexible Dennis Avery of the Hudson Institute.

The question, given all we know, is why anybody with a hint of objectivity or integrity still listens to these guys.

Related Posts

on

The Conservative candidate has changed his tune on climate action, recently attacking Labour’s net zero policies and arguing for new fossil fuel extraction.

The Conservative candidate has changed his tune on climate action, recently attacking Labour’s net zero policies and arguing for new fossil fuel extraction.

Clintel’s fifth anniversary conference in town outside Amsterdam offers a glimpse of the group’s transatlantic ties.

Clintel’s fifth anniversary conference in town outside Amsterdam offers a glimpse of the group’s transatlantic ties.
on

The government is being taken to court for failing to publish the evidence provided to ministers before they backed the controversial scheme.

The government is being taken to court for failing to publish the evidence provided to ministers before they backed the controversial scheme.

Les responsables de campagne critiquent des programmes volontaires « fortement défectueux », tandis que l’analyse de DeSmog révèle l'absence de représentation de la société civile ou des communautés locales affectées par les dommages causés par l’industrie des farines et huiles de poisson.

Les responsables de campagne critiquent des programmes volontaires « fortement défectueux », tandis que l’analyse de DeSmog révèle l'absence de représentation de la société civile ou des communautés locales affectées par les dommages causés par l’industrie des farines et huiles de poisson.