Quote:
|
Originally Posted by retsuki03
|
Gotcha. I thought you were referring to erroneous information in the article that we were discussing at the time (
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4171591.stm).
...I'm going to disagree with you on two things here. First off, I don't believe all scientists have an agenda, specifically those that work at universities (such as Dr. New) since very, very few universities have a scientific agenda. Most universities just like to see results and grant money, regardless of what the findings are.
Also, I'm not convinced that the WWF is lying, per se, as I'm not so sure that they're statements are totally untrue or their intent is to decieve. Are they being selective in the information that they are using? Probably. Would they like to influence other people's opinions? Definitely. But again, the issue they are addressing (future climate changes) would be nearly impossible to verify with current scientific methods one way or the other, so saying that they're lying is a little extreme in my opinion.