The Independent Admits Inaccuracy on ExxonMobil Article

[BRUCE]

ExxonMobil

"In Editorial and Opinion on Saturday (3 February) we wrote that 'ExxonMobil is attempting to bribe scientists to pick holes in the IPPC's assessment (on climate change). We now recognise that this statement is incorrect and we withdraw it."

Those of you that like to use The Independent as a reliable news source should probably reconsider what you deem to be 'reliable'.  I say this in tandem with their inability to correctly spell 'IPCC', as above.

The Independent has since removed this correction from their website, with no explanation forthcoming.

[Dos Equis]

*CRICKETS*

[BRUCE]

*CRICKETS*

 

I was waiting for someone to pitch in, but the silence was deafening!

[Dos Equis]

I was waiting for someone to pitch in, but the silence was deafening!

Many of the liberals on this site run like scalded dogs from the facts.   

[BRUCE]

Many of the liberals on this site run like scalded dogs from the facts.   

Whoops, don't say that too loudly - Beserker will berate you for having an opinion and then start a thread about your 'identity'!

[Dos Equis]

Whoops, don't say that too loudly - Beserker will berate you for having an opinion and then start a thread about your 'identity'!

Uh oh . . . . .

[BRUCE]

Uh oh . . . . .

Sorry, buddy, it's his job as a Moderator to 'call you out' on it.

[Dos Equis]

Sorry, buddy, it's his job as a Moderator to 'call you out' on it.

   But I don't have an identity crisis.  I'm an independent.  No, wait, I'm a Republican!  No, I'm a moderate Republican.  Wait, I'm a libertarian.  I'm SO confused!  Maybe I should ask Allied Powers for help.   

[BRUCE]

  But I don't have an identity crisis.  I'm an independent.  No, wait, I'm a Republican!  No, I'm a moderate Republican.  Wait, I'm a libertarian.  I'm SO confused!  Maybe I should ask Allied Powers for help.   

It all makes sense now, I got called out because I don't flip-flop!

[ieffinhatecardio]

Here's the source of this information. By the way there's no link or written proof of this anywhere, just what this guy posted on his website. 

http://dailyablution.blogs.com/the_daily_ablution/2007/02/a_day_at_the_in.html

This is the guy’s picture. By the way, he’s the one that named the file, apparently he thinks of himself as a devil. Nice job.

[BRUCE]

Here's the source of this information. By the way there's no link or written proof of this anywhere, just what this guy posted on his website. 

http://dailyablution.blogs.com/the_daily_ablution/2007/02/a_day_at_the_in.html

This is the guy’s picture. By the way, he’s the one that named the file, apparently he thinks of himself as a devil. Nice job.

Erm, good work Columbo - case closed!

The Independent deleted the correction, as I stated.  Do you believe the IPCC was bribed by ExxonMobil?  If so, you no doubt have proof.

[ieffinhatecardio]

Erm, good work Columbo - case closed!

The Independent deleted the correction, as I stated.  Do you believe the IPCC was bribed by ExxonMobil?  If so, you no doubt have proof.

LOL, here's your source. He's got no proof of course but we're all supposed to believe him.

He looks nice with the weapon in his hands don't you think? I love that he thinks of himself as "devil".

By the way, do you have any proof of what "devil" said?

[BRUCE]

LOL, here's your source. He's got no proof of course but we're all supposed to believe him.

He looks nice with the weapon in his hands don't you think? I love that he thinks of himself as "devil".

By the way, do you have any proof of what "devil" said?

Good to see you have fine-tuned your sense of humour.  I see you managed to avoid my question, though

[ieffinhatecardio]

Good to see you have fine-tuned your sense of humour.  I see you managed to avoid my question, though

Notice how you skip over the fact that there isn't an ounce of proof of these claims from "devil"?

Bruce, where is the proof? You started a thread, where is the proof of your point?

By the way, this is "devil" for all that want to know.

[BRUCE]

Notice how you skip over the fact that there isn't an ounce of proof of these claims from "devil"?

Bruce, where is the proof? You started a thread, where is the proof of your point?

By the way, this is "devil" for all that want to know.

Posting a bloke's pic that's dressed as an extremist for laughs (while you take it perfectly seriously) makes you look pretty silly, I hope you understand that.

[ieffinhatecardio]

Posting a bloke's pic that's dressed as an extremist for laughs (while you take it perfectly seriously) makes you look pretty silly, I hope you understand that.

Nice, again you skip that sticky subject of proof.

Where's your proof? 

By the way, have you given "devil" money? Front and to the left on his website is a large "Donate" button. I usually don't get my information from websites asking for money and with pictures of the owner with a weapon in his hand and a towel over his head but to each his own.

[Deedee]

Many of the liberals on this site run like scalded dogs from the facts.   

I'm surprised to see you contribute to the childish antics on this board that have become synonymous with "Bruce."

It would also behoove some people to stop, or at least slow down on the constant passing off of blogs and other assorted opinion-editorial pieces as the fact-based sources for their threads. It demeans the intelligence of people and clogs up the board with often unsubstantiated claims. If people want to read the opinions of other bloggers they're more than free to do so outside of Getbig. Most people come here because they want to read the thoughts of other Getbiggers.

[Camel Jockey]

ExxonMobil

"In Editorial and Opinion on Saturday (3 February) we wrote that 'ExxonMobil is attempting to bribe scientists to pick holes in the IPPC's assessment (on climate change). We now recognise that this statement is incorrect and we withdraw it."

Those of you that like to use The Independent as a reliable news source should probably reconsider what you deem to be 'reliable'.  I say this in tandem with their inability to correctly spell 'IPCC', as above.

The Independent has since removed this correction from their website, with no explanation forthcoming.

So a blog is supposed to be a credible source of information? 

btw now whenever I think of Bruce, I imagine some Steve Irwin look a like with a towel over his head and ak in his hand. 

[ieffinhatecardio]

Notice how the two people that were initially posting in this abomination of a thread haven't commented since the source of the information was outed?

They were ranting on Liberals before yet nothing now. 
How's that credibility thing working out for you?

What is it they always say?

CRICKETS...
Here's "devil".

[Dos Equis]

I'm surprised to see you contribute to the childish antics on this board that have become synonymous with "Bruce."

Deedee this is a lighthearted thread.  At least that's the way I viewed it.  And I like Bruce.  He has been a good addition to the board and I hope continues to post here.  But then again we disagree on whether this board tilts to the left or right.  

I'm also glad you started posting here.  Another great addition.    

[Deedee]

Here's the actual article as published in the Guardian, which at least is an acredited news source, not someone's basement blog.

Scientists and economists have been offered $10,000 each by a lobby group funded by one of the world's largest oil companies to undermine a major climate change report due to be published today.

Letters sent by the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), an ExxonMobil-funded thinktank with close links to the Bush administration, offered the payments for articles that emphasise the shortcomings of a report from the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

http://environment.guardian.co.uk/climatechange/story/0,,2004397,00.html

Erm, I found this in the regular pages of the online Guardian. 

Here's CNN's unretracted take on it...

http://money.cnn.com/2007/02/02/news/companies/exxon_science/index.htm?cnn=yes

[Camel Jockey]

Here's the actual article as published in the Guardian, which at least is an acredited news source, not someone's basement blog.

Scientists and economists have been offered $10,000 each by a lobby group funded by one of the world's largest oil companies to undermine a major climate change report due to be published today.

Letters sent by the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), an ExxonMobil-funded thinktank with close links to the Bush administration, offered the payments for articles that emphasise the shortcomings of a report from the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

http://environment.guardian.co.uk/climatechange/story/0,,2004397,00.html

So this is the third time that Bruce has shot himself in the foot? Polar Bears, Greenland and now this.. 

and man, that devil picture is cracking me up. 

[Deedee]

I'm also glad you started posting here.  Another great addition.    

Thanks Beach. I think though, if this was meant to be a light-hearted, or humor piece, it should have said so in the title, instead of implying that the attempted bribery of scientists by Exxonn associates and buddies of the Bush administration was false.  Or at least a HAHAHAHAHA in ( ) would have been an improvement. We leftist, liberal, commie pinkos are a slow bunch and don't always get the subtle goofing of our conservative brothers.

So this is the third time that Bruce has shot himself in the foot? Polar Bears, Greenland and now this.. 

Yes... 

[ieffinhatecardio]

BUMP for proof. Where's all the Liberal bashing on this now?

Crickets

[BRUCE]

Thanks Beach. I think though, if this was meant to be a light-hearted, or humor piece, it should have said so in the title, instead of implying that the attempted bribery of scientists by Exxonn associates and buddies of the Bush administration was false.  Or at least a HAHAHAHAHA in ( ) would have been an improvement. We leftist, liberal, commie pinkos are a slow bunch and don't always get the subtle goofing of our conservative brothers.

Yes... 

Deedee, you're becoming quite the spiteful Leftist here.  If I have been wrong on anything I have said on Greenland, Polar Bears or indeed this very thread, use posts and prove why.  So far you have proved me wrong on nothing, and you have accused me of being 'Right-Wing', yet refused to debate me on it.