Please see:
http://members.cox.net/rcoppock/CO2-6DegreesFreedom.jpg

Clearly, the atmospheric CO2 concentration is rising exponentially.
Compare the trend of the points on the graph I have provided with
a straight line.

The period term in the sine function was given freedom to
check the accuracy of both the measurement and numeric
computation. The optimizer computed 0.999477 for this
value that is obviously the 1-year CO2 cycle. The
coefficients determined by the curve fit are very probably
as accurate, slightly better than three decimal places.
(And, I didn't confuse radians for degrees like the infamous
Canadian fossil fool! Please see:
http://timlambert.org/2004/08/mckitrick6/)

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
These data may be found at:
http://www.cmdl.noaa.gov/projects/sr...co2_mm_mlo.dat

The yearly means of the 574 points of monthly data follow:
YEAR CO2_ppmv"
1958 315.33 8 months of data"
1959 315.98"
1960 316.91"
1961 317.65"
1962 318.46"
1963 318.99"
1964 319.20 9 months of data"
1965 320.03"
1966 321.37"
1967 322.18"
1968 323.05"
1969 324.62"
1970 325.68"
1971 326.32"
1972 327.46"
1973 329.68"
1974 330.17"
1975 331.14 11 months of data"
1976 332.06"
1977 333.78"
1978 335.40"
1979 336.78"
1980 338.70"
1981 340.11"
1982 340.98 11 months of data"
1983 342.84"
1984 344.20 11 months of data"
1985 345.87"
1986 347.19"
1987 348.98"
1988 351.45"
1989 352.89"
1990 354.16"
1991 355.48"
1992 356.27"
1993 356.96"
1994 358.63"
1995 360.63"
1996 362.37"
1997 363.47"
1998 366.50"
1999 368.14"
2000 369.41"
2001 371.07"
2002 373.16"
2003 375.80"
2004 377.55"
2005 379.75"
2006 382.79 8 months of data"

"Roger Coppock" wrote in message
ups.com...
Please see:
http://members.cox.net/rcoppock/CO2-6DegreesFreedom.jpg

Clearly, the atmospheric CO2 concentration is rising exponentially.
Compare the trend of the points on the graph I have provided with
a straight line.

BALLS.

Try this for size:

Sorry the figures are missing.
R


180 Years accurate CO2 - Gasanalysis of Air
by Chemical Methods (Short version)

Dipl. Biol. Ernst-Georg Beck, Merian-Schule Freiburg, 8/2006

1. Short summary on the knowledge about the CO2 air gas analysis (2006)

The context of carbon dioxide as the base of all organic matter on earth
with fundamental importance for metabolism of organisms is taught in each
school and all universities of the world.
The background for these realizations were investigated among other things
for approx. 200 years by scientists such as Pettenkofer, Benedict, Krogh
(nobel price), Lundegardh and Warburg (nobel price).

In IPCCs Climate Change 2001: Working Group I: The Scientific Basis you will
find the following in chapter 3: "The Carbon Cycle.":3.1: "

"The concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere has risen from close to 280
parts per million (ppm) in 1800, at first slowly and then progressively
faster to a value of 367 ppm in 1999, echoing the increasing pace of global
agricultural and industrial development. This is known from numerous,
well-replicated measurements of the composition of air bubbles trapped in
Antarctic ice. Atmospheric CO2 concentrations have been measured directly
with high precision since 1957; these measurements agree with ice-core
measurements, and show a continuation of the increasing trend up to the
present."

Responsible for the relative measurements since 1958 is C.D. Keeling,
University of California at San Diego, USA. He used cryogenic condensation
of the samples and NDIR spectroscopy against a reference gas with manometric
calibration. Today all measurements are done by this technique as a standard
(WMO). Keelings laoboratory delivers the reference gases worldwide and have
the calibration monopoly. .(38, 39, 40,41, 42, 43, 44, 45)

Measurements stations spreading over the world are mainly in oceanic areas
to get air without contamination from vegetation, organisms and
civilisation, the so called background level of CO2.
So his initial work mainly on the active volcano Mauna Loa (Hawaii) is the
todays reference for determination of carbon dioxide with an accuracy of
down to 0.1 ppm. (20, 21, 22, 24)
Accuracy from 1959 was much more in error and approx. 4 ppm between
1964 -1968 max. 1 ppm. (130)

A thoroughly review of existing literature (175 in this study) revealed in
contrast to the publisched opinion based on the founders of modern
greenhouse theory Callendar and Keeling that there exists some 90 000
accurate measurements by chemical methods before 1957 back to 1857 with an
accuracy below 3%.

Accurate measurements had been done amongst others by de Saussure 1826,
Pettenkofer/v.Gilm 1857, Schulze 1864/71, Farsky 1874, Uffelmann 1886, Letts
und Blake 1897, Krogh and Haldane 1904, Benedict 1912, Lundegardh 1920, van
Slyke 1929, D¸rst and Kreutz 1934 alternatively 1940, Misra 1942 or
Scholander 1946 with measuring instruments through which from 1857
(Pettenkofer) an accuracy of +/-0,0006 Vol% to under +/-0,0003 Vol% =~3 ppm
(Lundegardh 1926) was achieved.
They show precise seasonal an some diurnal variation.
These pioneers of chemistry, biology, botany, medicine and physiology
constituted the todays knowledge of metabolism, nutrition science,
biochemistry and ecology. Modern climatology ignored their work till today
even though it is the basis of all textbooks of the mentioned faculties and
was honoured with several nobel prices.


2. Results of the literature review of this study:

To reconstruct historic fluctuation of carbon dioxide 137 yearly averages
were used out of 175 technical papers within 1812 until 1961, the end of
using chemical technique. .

Nearly all selected data had been received in rural areas or periphery of
towns under comparable conditions with a measuring hight of approx. 2 m
above ground and without large contamination of industry. Evaluation of
chemical methods revealed a systematic accuracy of maximum 3% down to 1% in
best cases by Henrik Lundegard 1920, a pionieer of plant physiology and
ecology.
11 often used measuring techniques ( gravimetric, titrimetric, volumetric
and manometric) had been evolved from 1812 to modern times, from which the
so called Pettenkofer method ( titrimetric) was easy, fast and well
understood and the optimized standard from 1857 for 100 years. Mentioned
authors had calibrated their methods against each others and samples with
known content. All measuring parameters, local modalities and measuring
errors can be extracted out of available literature.

The available data used in this study can be researched in several
comprehensive bibliographies:

Year Autors Cited autors and papers with data Notes
Gesamt 19. Jh 20. Jh
1900 Letts and Blake (53) 252 252 - only 19th century
1912 Benedict (51) 137 137 - only 19th century; focus on O2-determination
1940 Callendar (113) 13 7 6 cited Letts&Blake and Benedict
1951 Effenberger (54) 56 32 24 cited Duerst, Misra und Kreutz
1952 Stepanova (118)
1956 Slocum (128) 33 22 11
1958 Callendar (119) 30 18 12 No citing of Duerst, Kreutz and Misra
1958 Bray (129) 49 20 19
1986 Fraser (149) 6 6 -
1986 Keeling (147 ) 18 18 - Only 19th century same as Callendar;
2006 Beck (this study) 152 82 73 Only chemical determination until 1961

Table 1 Bibliographies und citation of papers

It could be shown that between 1800 to 1961 more than 320 technical papers
exists on the subject of air gas analysis conteining verified data on
atmospheric CO2 concentrations.
Callendar( engineer), Keeling (chemist) and IPCC do not evaluate these
chemical methods though being standard in analytical chemistry, discredited
these techniques and data and rejected most as faulty and highly inaccurate
because not helpful proving their hypothesis of fuel burning induced rise of
carbon dioxid in the atmosphere. In using their concept of unpolluted
background level theyhad examined about 10% of available literature and
considered 1% (M¸ntz, Reiset, Buch) as accurate. (see references)

But history of air gas analysis was not like this (see references).

From 1857 with Pettenkofer process as a standard accuracy of 3% was enough
to develop all modern knowledge of medicine, biology and physiology
(photosynthesis, respiration end energy metabolism) which are taught today
worldwide as a content of all text books of the mentioned faculties

Several Nobel (Krogh 1923, Warburg 1933, nominated Benedict 1923) and other
awards (Schuftan Memorial Prize in Process Design in Chemical Engineering
(UK)- and Pettenkofer award (medicine, D) honoured these pioneering findings
of modern natural science (58, 59, 60, 61, 64).
Others as Lundegardh induced a revolution of our knowlodge on ecology and
plant physiology inventing modern techniques and revealed today well known
facts (flame-photometer 1929, cytochrome 1950, (100))
And without the exact determination of blood gas levels with the aid of the
apparatus of van Slyke hundred thousands of patients had been died in 20th
century.
Modern climate scientists based on the tasks of Keeling, Callendar and IPCC
ignore their work.

In every decade from 1857 we will find several measuring series with
hundreds of precise continous data.
The highest data density is achieved by W. Kreutz in the state-of-the-art
meteorologic station of that time at Gie_en (Germany) using the best
available equipment ( closed, volumetric, automatic system) designed by Paul
Schuftan, the father of modern gas chromatography. He¥d done more than 65
000 single measurements in 18 month from 1929 -1941 with 120 determinations
a day every 90 minutes.
The longest series had been done in Paris at Montsouris laboratory with
12000 Determinations in 30 years from 1876 until 1910.
Presented data in this study are initially not modified, selected for a
measuring hight of approx. 2 m above ground, geographicly spreading mainly
in northern hemisphere from Alaska over Europe to Pune (India).

Table 2 shows series of measurements since 1860 more than a year using the
titrimetric Pettenkofer process. The Pettenkofer process and all its
variants included the absorption of a known volume of air in alkaline
solution (Ba(OH)2, KOH, NaOH) and titration with acid( oxalic, sulphuric
acid) of the produced carbonate. Basic accuracy is +-0,0003 volume% (70 )
optimized to 1% by Lundegardh and it can be found several comparative
measurements with the other techniques.

Table 2 Series of measurements since 1860 more than a year using the
titrimetric Pettenkofer process

year author locality Amount of determinations

1. from 1855 v. Pettenkofer M¸nchen many
2. 1856 (6 month)1 v. Gilm1 Innsbruck1 19
3. . 1863 -1864 Schulze Rostock, (D) 426
4. 1864/65 Smith London, Manchester Scotland 246
5. 1868 - 1871 Schulze * Rostock, (D) 1600
6. 1872 - 1873 Reiset Dieppe, France (Northsea) (F) 92
7. 1873 Truchot Clermont Ferrand 60
8. 1874 -1875 Farsky * Tabor, B^hmen, (Cz) 295
9. 1874 -1875 H?sselbarth* Dahme (D) 347
10. 1879 - 1880 Reiset Dieppe (F) 118
11. 1883 Spring L¸ttich 266
12. 1886 - 1887 Uffelmann Rostock 420
13. 1889 - 1891 Petermann Gembloux (B) 525
14. 1897 - 1898 Letts&Blake N?he Belfast (I) 64
15. 1898 - 1901 Brown& Escombe Kew Garden England (GB) 92
16. 1917 -1918 A. Krogh Kopenhagen (DK) viele
17. 1920-1926 Lundegardh in southern Sweden (Kattegat) (S) 3000
18. 1928 Krogh/Rehberg Kopenhagen
19. 1932 -1935 Buch Northern atlantic ocean/Finland (FIN) 176
20. 1936 - 1939 Duerst bei Bern (Schweiz) (CH) 1000
21. 1941 -1943 Misra Poona, Indien (IND) 250
22. 1950 Effenberger Hamburg (D) 40
23. 1954 Chapman et al. Ames (IOWA, USA) 100
24. 1957 Steinhauser Vienna (AUS) 500
25. 1955-1960 Fonselius et al. Bischof Skandinavia 3400
1v. Gilm: similar process as Pettenkofer, first calibrated
* identical variant of Pettenkofer process, sampling by tube through opening
in window

Table 3 volumetric and manometric measurements

1 1875 (M?rz) Tissander Paris, Ballonfahrt (volumetrisch) 10
2 1880 - 1882 M¸ntz & Aubin Bei Paris, Pyren?en, Karibik usw. /F)
volumetrisch 81+
3 1910 - 1912 Benedict Washington (USA), volumetrisch 264
4 1912 -1936 Haldane volumetrisch 1500
5 1939-1941 Kreutz volumetrisch 64 000
6 1946 Scholander volumetrisch 1000

The volumetric equipment before Haldane (84) and Benedict/Sonden/Petterson
( e.g.. 1900, 51,82,83) used by Regnault, M¸ntz, Tissander were open systems
without efficient control of reacting temperature (see Schuftan 1933 (72))
So their data are partly erroneous.
Especially M¸ntz was highly praised by Keeling and IPCC as a source of best
available data for that time.
(Further comments and detailed analysis of methods and data see full
version.)

According to Callendar, Keeling and IPCC allowed variations of atmospheric
CO2 are the diurnal, the seasonal and ice age/ interglacial fluctuations.
Natural concentrations are in equilibrium, mankind disturbed this natural
situation.
So let¥s look at the data within 160 years air gas analysis by chemical
means, at first the raw data out of 138 papers:

Fig. 1 138 yearly average from 1812 up to 1961 chemical determination (raw
data)

And now the same data with 5 years average smoothing:




Fig. 2 138 yearly averages of local effective atmospheric CO2 concentration
from 1812 up to 1961 by chemical determination, smoothed as 5 years average
(raw data); icecore reconstruction (Neftel et al. (13,14,15)) and
Keeling measurements in Mauna Loa from included.

It is easily seen that

atmospheric carbon dioxide fluctuates through 19th and 20th century
contradicting the icecore reconstructions.
In 20th century we notice one big maximum around 1942 with more than 420 ppm
and several little maxima in 1915 and 1905; in 19th century a big maximum
occurred before 1870 and perhaps a big maximum in 1820 out of precise
measurement area. Little maxima appeared around 1876, 1880 and 1890.
CO2 concentrations rises from approx. 1880 to 1930 by some 20 ppm as
Calledar speculated in 1938.
Big maximas with an amplitude of 100 ppm like the one in the 40s should be
easily reproduced with chemical methods (3%). It do not exist in modern
literature.
See full version of detailed analysis.

As an example for the quality of chemical measurements and real existing
CO2-maxima let¥s take a closer look to the big CO2 maximum 1942 in Fig. 3.

Fig. 3 The big CO2 maximum around 1942 in northrrn hemisphere detected with
chemical analysis.

There are a lot of indications for this big variation:

High density of data with broad geographic coverage:
41 series includes approx. 70 000 single data with highest density in peak
area 1939-1942,
Measuring stations are spread throughout middle- and northern Europe, USA,
Atlantic ocean Alaska, India and Antarctica. Continous rise since. 1925.
Application of different accurate standard measuring systems with high
accuracy of 2-3% designed by Krogh, Schuftan, van Slyke, Haldane,
Scholander.
Measured by different, competent experts: Buch, Duerst, Kreutz, Scholander,
Lockhart
Verified conditions of measuring stations, no exceptional contamination by
local CO2 sources e.g. civilisation, war, soil degassing, volcanic
emissions.

The second world war cannot be responsible for high values because there is
a continous rise from 1925 culminating still 1939 and second part of maximum
was measured at places with no war activities. (Alaska, India)
To show quality of data and methods see results of W. Kreutz (Germany
1939 -1941):

Fig. 4 CO2 concentration at meteorological station in periphery of Gie_en
(Germany) 1939/40 smoothed
by decade average

Climate science ignore the work of Kreutz, IPCC and Keeling have not cited
him, Callendar excluded his data because of out of allowed range. (119 ),
others Slocum (128), Effenberger (54) and Bray (130) gave faulty citation of
details. ( see more facts in full version)

The same overall precision adn accurate measurement of seasonal and diurnal
variation one can see in a lot of determinations by 19th century scientist
as F. Schultze (Rostock) at the Baltic sea.


Fig. 5 CO2 concentration at meteorological station near Rostock, Baltic sea
(Germany) 1863/64
smoothed by decade average

( see much more in full version)



Fig. 6 Diurnal variation of CO2 in 24th/25th of july 1876 in Dame (Prussia,
Germany) by H?sselbarth

A smoothing of 138 yearly averages of CO2 by 11 years of sunspot cycle
maxima/minima leads to:



Fig. 7 Effektive local CO2 concentration chemically determined between
1812 - 1861 of northern
hemisphere Nordhemisph?re (11 year averages with sunspot cycle
maxima/minima) including data
coverage, number of data and important scientists.

Fig. 7 shows also guessed linear error correction below accurate measuring
1857 The little maximas cannot reproduced by this smoothed curve. Result are
3 big maxima with one 1820 not exactly valuable because of missing
comparative informations.

All needed details for evaluation can be found in full version.

Especially interesting is a comparison of measured atmospheric CO2 to
measured temperature.



Fig. 8 Global temperature (stations, IPCC 2001) from 1860 and atmospheric
CO2 by chemical analysis

The carbon dioxide maximum of 1942 perfectly fits to the measured temperatur
maximum at that time. Smaller maxima cannot be seen because of 11 year
smoothing.

Using the 5 year average all 8 temperature maximas within 100 years
correspond accurate to CO2-maximas. Temperature data, northern hemisphere,
land from GHCN (170), Jones (171), Hansen (172).


Fig. 9 Comparing measured temperature in northern hemisphere (land) from
1850 (Jones (171), Hansen (172), GHCN(170)) with CO2 fluctuation. (5 years
difference by averaging corrected)

So the there is no problem to explain temperature maximum around 1940
because of exponential rise of CO2. It¥s the reverse. High temperature
around 1940 had induced CO2 maximum.

:
Summary

Accurate chemical CO2-gas analyses of air since 180 years show a different
trend compared to the literature of climate change actually published. From
1829 the concentration of carbon dioxide of air in the northern hemisphere
fell down from a value of e.g. 400 ppm up to 1900 to less than 300 ppm
rising till 1942 to more than 400 ppm. After that maximum it fell down to
e.g. 350 ppm and rose again till today, 2006 to 380 ppm. Accurate
measurements had been done amongst others by de Saussure 1826,
Pettenkofer/v.Gilm 1857, Schulze 1864/71, Farsky 1874, Uffelmann 1886, Letts
und Blake 1897, Krogh and Haldane 1904, Benedict 1912, Lundegardh 1920, van
Slyke 1929, D¸rst and Kreutz 1934 alternatively 1940, Misra 1942 or
Scholander 1946 with measuring instruments through which from 1857
(Pettenkofer) an accuracy of +/-0,0006 Vol% to under +/-0,0003 Vol% =~3 ppm
(Lundegardh 1926) was achieved. These pioneers of chemistry, biology,
botany, medicine and physiology constituted the todays knowledge of
metabolism, nutrition science, biochemistry and ecology. Modern climatology
ignored their work till today even though it is the basis of all textbooks
of the mentioned faculties and was honoured with several nobel prices. In
total over 90 000 measurements within nearly every year since 180 year gave
the following results:

There is no constant exponential rising CO2-concentration since
preindustrial times but a variing CO2-content of air following the climate.
E.G. around 1940 there was a maximum of CO2 of at least 420 ppm, before 1875
there was also a maximum.
Historical air analysis by chemical means do not proove a preindustrial
CO2-concentration of 285 ppm (IPCC),as modern climatology postulates. In
contrast the average in the 19th century in northern hemisphere is 321 ppm
and in the 20th century 338 ppm.
Todays CO2 value of. 380 ppm, which is considered as threatingly had been
appeared several times in the last 200 years, in the 20 th century around
1942 and before 1870 in the 19th century. The maximum CO2-concentration in
the 20th century roses to over 420 pmm in 1942.
Accurate measurements of CO2 air gas contents had been done from 1857 by
chemical methods with a systematical error of maximal 3%. These results were
ignored reconstructing the CO2-concentration of air in modern warm period.
Callendar and Keeling were the most important founders of the modern
greenhouse theory (IPCC) beside Arrhenius. Literature research confirmed
that they ignored a big part of available technical papars and selected only
a few values to get a validation of their hypothesis of fuel burning induced
rise of CO2 in air. Furtheron these authors discussed and reproduced the few
selected historic results by chemical methods in a faulty way and propagated
an unfounded view on quality of these methods, without having dealed with
its chemical basis.
To reconstruct the modern CO2-concentration of air icecores from antarctica
had been used. The presented reconstructions are obviously not accurate
enough to show the several variations of carbon dioxide in northern
hemisphere.


"The maximum CO2-concentration in
the 20th century roses to over 420 pmm in 1942."

LOL There's a flowery claim if there ever was one.
Is pmm is kind of rosebush?
;-)


Where did you get this article, Mr. Dewhurst?
Given the very many spelling and grammar errors,
it didn't come from a refereed scientific journal.

"Roger Coppock" wrote in message
ps.com...
"The maximum CO2-concentration in
the 20th century roses to over 420 pmm in 1942."

LOL There's a flowery claim if there ever was one.
Is pmm is kind of rosebush?
;-)


Where did you get this article, Mr. Dewhurst?
Given the very many spelling and grammar errors,
it didn't come from a refereed scientific journal.

The author is German. If you do not like his conclusions go back to the
original authors of which there are many!

R

Roger Dewhurst wrote:
"Roger Coppock" wrote in message
ps.com...
"The maximum CO2-concentration in
the 20th century roses to over 420 pmm in 1942."

LOL There's a flowery claim if there ever was one.
Is pmm a kind of rosebush?

No, it's a form of ambergris. Of course if you have attar, the whale
vomit might come in handy. **** and roses go together in the garden and
in perfumery.

As does carbon dioxide and methane I suppose, in the natural cycle of
events that is.

Congratulations ,Roger, you made a chart. Now if this chart only
followed the temperature record, like the solar forcing chart does, you
might have something.

Otherwise, we might as well say the rising misquito rates are causing
GW.

Idiot.

wrote:
Congratulations ,Roger, you made a chart.
Yep, you don't see the fossil fools of this forum
doing that, or anything else with data.

Now if this chart only
followed the temperature record.

Why do you think that the chart and the temperature
record should follow each other? I don't.

Do you know that:

--- a very good approximation for CO2 forcing is:
CO2_Forcing = 5.35 * ln( FinalCO2 / InitialCO2 )
and, as the graph clearly shows, CO2 is rising
exponentially. So, ln ( exp() ) == a straight line.

-- There is a huge half century delay and low pass
filter between planetary forcing and global mean
surface temperature rise.

like the solar forcing chart does,
Over the last three decades, there is no correlation
between solar forcing and global mean temperature.
Try to find a valid signal detection of the 11-year
solar cycle in the global mean surface temperature.
You can't.

you might have something.
I've got data, you've got pure fantasy.

The whole thing reminds me of the creationist effort to claim
that the speed of light has radically slowed down in the last
couple of hundred years. The creationists used old error
prone historical reports of speed of light measurements,
just like this report is using old and buggy CO2 concentration
measurements.

No wonder it never was published in a serious scientific
journal. Where did you get this article, Mr. Dewhurst?



Roger Dewhurst wrote:
"Roger Coppock" wrote in message
ps.com...
"The maximum CO2-concentration in
the 20th century roses to over 420 pmm in 1942."

LOL There's a flowery claim if there ever was one.
Is pmm is kind of rosebush?
;-)


Where did you get this article, Mr. Dewhurst?
Given the very many spelling and grammar errors,
it didn't come from a refereed scientific journal.

The author is German. If you do not like his conclusions go back to the
original authors of which there are many!

R

wrote in oups.com:


Congratulations ,Roger, you made a chart. Now if this chart only
followed the temperature record, like the solar forcing chart does, you
might have something.

Otherwise, we might as well say the rising misquito rates are causing
GW.

The message paid for by OILY INC.

"Doubt is our product." "Doubt is our product." "Doubt is our product."
"Doubt is our product." "Doubt is our product."
"Doubt is our product."
"Doubt is our product." "Doubt is our product." "Doubt is our product."
"Doubt is our product." "Doubt is our product."
"Doubt is our product."
"Doubt is our product." "Doubt is our product." "Doubt is our product."

http://www.markhertsgaard.com/Articl...shingtonSlept/
"... But if the deniers appear to have lost the scientific argument,
they prolonged the policy battle, delaying actions to reduce emissions
when such cuts mattered most. "For 25 years, people have been warning
that we had a window of opportunity to take action, and if we waited
until the effects were obvious it would be too late to avoid major
consequences," says Oppenheimer. "Had some individual countries,
especially the United States, begun to act in the early to mid-1990s,
we might have made it. But we didn't, and now the impacts are here."

"The goal of the disinformation campaign wasn't to win the debate,"
says Gelbspan. "The goal was simply to keep the debate going. When the
public hears the media report that some scientists believe warming is
real but others don't, its reaction is 'Come back and tell us when
you're really sure.' So no political action is taken."

Representative Henry Waxman, the California Democrat who chaired the
1994 hearings where tobacco executives unanimously declared under oath
that cigarettes were not addictive, watches today's global-warming
deniers with a sense of déjà vu. It all reminds him of the
confidential slogan a top tobacco flack coined when arguing that the
science on smoking remained unsettled: "Doubt is our product." Now,
Waxman says, "not only are we seeing the same tactics the tobacco
industry used, we're seeing some of the same groups. For example, the
Advancement of Sound Science Coalition was created [in 1993] to debunk
the dangers of secondhand smoking before it moved on to global
warming."

The scientific work Frederick Seitz oversaw for R. J. Reynolds from
1978 to 1987 was "perfectly fine research, but off the point," says
Stanton A. Glantz, a professor of medicine at the University of
California, San Francisco, and a lead author of The Cigarette Papers
(1996), which exposed the inner workings of the Brown & Williamson
Tobacco Corporation. "Looking at stress, at genetics, at lifestyle
issues let Reynolds claim it was funding real research. But then it
could cloud the issue by saying, 'Well, what about this other possible
causal factor?' It's like coming up with 57 other reasons for Hurricane
Katrina rather than global warming."

For his part, Seitz says he was comfortable taking tobacco money, "as
long as it was green. I'm not quite clear about this moralistic issue.
We had absolutely free rein to decide how the money was spent." Did the
research give the tobacco industry political cover? "I'll leave that to
the philosophers and priests," he replies. ..."

http://snipurl.com/txkv
http://tobaccodocuments.org/all/?mod...cument_code=&d
ate_op=&date=&records_per_page=100&sort_by=date

"Doubt is our product." "Doubt is our product." "Doubt is our product."

http://tobaccodocuments.org/bliley_bw/680110947.html
"... memorandum dated August 21, 1969 from J. W. Burgard to Mr. R. A:
Pittman and others. The subject of the memo is "Doubt. " The memo reads
approximately as follows: "Doubt is our product since it is the best means
of competing with the body of fact that exists in the mind of the general
public. It is also the means of establishing that there is a controversy.
....

"Doubt is our product." "Doubt is our product." "Doubt is our product."

http://tobaccodocuments.org/nysa_ti_m2/TI04450339.html
It cited an Aug. 21, 1969, internal memorandum W. Burgard, Brown &
Williamson's vice president for marketing, saying. "Doubt is our product
since it is the best means of competing with the body of fact that exists
in the minds of the general public. It is also the means of establishing a
controversy."

"Doubt is our product." "Doubt is our product." "Doubt is our product."

http://tobaccodocuments.org/nysa_ti_s3/TI22182043.html
http://tobaccodocuments.org/bw/12515397.html
http://tobaccodocuments.org/nysa_ti_s4/TI25930219.html
http://tobaccodocuments.org/bw/267023.html Page 212: 0000267023
http://tobaccodocuments.org/bw/11839935.html Page 213: 0011839935

"Doubt is our product." "Doubt is our product." "Doubt is our product."

http://tobaccodocuments.org/nysa_ti_m2/TI09110286.html Page 2: TI09110286
Documents obtained by the Federal Trade Commission show that as early as
1969 one tobacco company had a plan to sow doubt and confusion in the
public's mind about the validity of evidence linking smoking to disease
and death. The company's document says Doubt is our product since it is
the best means of competing with the "body of fact" that exists in the
mind of the general public. It is also the means of establishing a
controversy.

"Doubt is our product." "Doubt is our product." "Doubt is our product."

http://tobaccodocuments.org/bw/332501.html
competition as the body of anti-cigarette fact that exists in the public
mind. We have chosen the mass public as our consumer for several reasons:
- This is where the misinformation about smoking und health has been
focused. The Congress and federal agencies are already being dealt with
-- and perhaps as effectively as possible -- by the Tobacco Institute. It
is a group with little exposure to the positive side of smoking and
health. It is the prime force in influencing Congress and federal agencies
without public support little effort would be given to a crusade against
cigarettes. Doubt is our product since it is the best means of competing
with the "body of fact" that exists in the mind of the general public. It
is also the means of establishing a controversy. Within the business we
recognize that a controversy exists. However, with the general public the
consensus is that cigarettes are in some way harmful to the health. If we
are successful in establishing a controversy at the public level, then
there is an opportunity to put across the real facts about smoking and
health. Doubt is also the limit of our "product".
http://tobaccodocuments.org/bw/332506.html

"Doubt is our product." "Doubt is our product." "Doubt is our product."



"Doubt is our product." "Doubt is our product." "Doubt is our product."



"Doubt is our product." "Doubt is our product." "Doubt is our product."



"Doubt is our product." "Doubt is our product." "Doubt is our product."

Bush-Afghan #1 Opium Supplier to the World! wrote:
The message paid for by OILY INC.

You work for OILY INC.?
You're doing a good job. You make all the AGW'ers look like
crackpots.....