Fred Singer is a lot like George Costanza
One of my favorite Jerry Seinfeld episodes is the one where George Costanza tells Jerry that every decision he has ever made has turned out to be wrong. Jerry suggest that George should then “do the opposite” and maybe his luck would change. When George does the opposite, he begins dating a beautiful woman and lands a job with the New York Yankees.
S. Fred Singer is a lot like George Costanza.
S. Fred Singer is one of the notorious Merchants of Doubt described by Oreskes and Conway in their new critically acclaimed book titled Merchants of Doubt: How a Handful of Scientists Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke to Global Warming. S. Fred Singer has been on the wrong side of the scientific consensus on important issues such as:
1) Smoking and cancer
3) Acid rain
4) Ozone depletion
5) Manmade climate change
It is truly absurd that ANYBODY listens to this guy because his position is usually wrong. He is the George Costanza of science.
Whatever Singer says, believe the opposite and it is probably correct.
Furthermore, it is likely that the organizations (and their key people) that Singer is connected to are also making false statements and misleading the public on important issues such as manmade climate change. Using the Greenpeace Exxonsecrets.org site as a resource, I have mapped the organizations and key people that Singer is linked to. When you see that organization or key person making a public statement about climate change, think like George Costanza. Believe the opposite.
Before any of my detractors claim that guilt by association is unfair, consider this:
In their publication, The Organization of Denial: Conservative Think Tanks and Environmental Scepticism, Jacques, Dunlap & Freeman (2008) analyzed 141 English-language environmentally skeptical books published between 1972 and 2005. They found that that over 92% of these books, most published in the US, are linked to conservative think tanks (CTTs) like those above and that 90% of CTTs espouse environmental skepticism.The authors conclude:
- “Skepticism is a tactic of an elite-driven counter-movement designed to combat environmentalism, and that the successful use of this tactic has contributed to the weakening of US commitment to environmental protection.”
They further state:
- “Thus, the notion that environmental skeptics are unbiased analysts exposing the myths and scare tactics employed by those they label as practitioners of ‘junk science’ lacks credibility. Similarly, the self-portrayal of skeptics as marginalized ‘Davids’ battling the powerful ‘Goliath’ of environmentalists and environmental scientists is a charade, as skeptics are supported by politically powerful CTTs funded by wealthy foundations and corporations.“