Rational Readings on Environmental Concerns

"...the ′proof′ of man′s destruction of the environment is consistently flawed.... the scientific method is being abused and ignored. The errors are not random, however, but are systematically biased toward attempting to prove the guilt of man in the alleged destruction of the planet. Objective science is disappearing and is being replaced by the pursuit of a philosophical agenda." —Richard F. Sanford in Environmentalism and the Assault on Reason Chapter 1 "The public has numerous misconceptions about the relationship between environmental pollution and human cancer. Underlying these misconceptions is an erroneous belief that nature is benign." —Bruce N. Ames, Ph.D. and Lois Swirsky Gold, Ph.D in Environmental Pollution and Cancer: Some Misconceptions Chapter 7 "Greenhouse gases have been increasing in the atmosphere, largely as a result of human activities. However, the climate record does not show the temperature increase and other telltale signs of the expected greenhouse effect. The mathematical models used for predicting such effects are evidently not complete enough to encompass all of the relevant physical processes in the atmosphere, thus throwing grave doubt on the drastic warming hypothesized for the next century." —S. Fred Singer in Global Climate Change: Facts and Fiction Chapter 13 "...There is now no prima–facie case for any expensive policy of safeguarding species without more extensive analysis than has so far been done." —Julian L. Simon in Disappearing Species, Deforestation and Data Chapter 26