OH NO! Pepsi/Coke Cause Cancer says "Watchdog" Group. "Troubling" Chemical to Blame.

Posted by Brian

Should the new slogan for Pepsi be "Cancer for a New Generation"?

The Center for Environmental Health (CEH) reports that the caramel coloring used in Pepsi contains carcinogens which can cause cancer.  They qualify their statement by stating that the ingredient is a "possible" carcinogen.

Why "possible"?  Perhaps it is because you would have to drink one thousand sodas a day to reach the dosage levels which the CEH administered to show links to cancer.

As Pepsi contains 150 calories per can, you would have to consume 150,000 calories per day of Pepsi to reach these levels.  You would also be consuming 40,000 grams of sugar, and 31,000 milligrams of salt.  Pardon me for putting a damper on these idiots "scientific" study, but it seems to me (and any other rational person), that if you are consuming this much Pepsi, there are going to be myriad other health issues you will face, and cancer is the least of your problems.

By the way, this supposed scientific group is basing its warning on a single study of rats and mice, failing to mention that NO studies show any effect on humans.  Yet, here come the idiotic "the sky is falling" media to report this crap, with ZERO perspective on the actual risks involved, and how ridiculous these kind of studies are.

How about we have some news stories on how extreme some of these so-called watchdog groups like Center for Science in the Public Interest, and CEH are, and how they are conducting studies with a political agenda as the impetus to reach the conclusions they desire!

Have a Coke and a smile.

Environmental group: Cancer-causing agent found in Pepsi products  

The Center for Environmental Health has found that the caramel coloring used in Pepsi contains a high level of a probable carcinogen, despite the company's claims that it has removed the chemical.

The Center for Environmental Health said that Pepsi bought from 10 different states contained 4-methylimidazole, or 4-Mel. The compound can form during the cooking process and, as a result, may be found in trace amounts in many foods.
Read More Here

Related articles

• Study: Pepsi Drinks Bought in Md. and Other States Contain Cancer-Causing Chemical
• Group Finds Carcinogen in Pepsi Products

PBS: "Discovery" of Global Warming Greatest Scientific Achievement

Posted by Brian
H/T to Real Science

The propaganda arm of the left is in full swing at PBS.  Saying the "discovery" of global warming may be science's greatest achievement, and that we start with the assumption it is real, our excited host spews the party line on man-made climate change.
Greater than the discovery of smallpox and polio vaccines? Greater than Einstein's Theory of Relativity?
Of course we all know that prior to the invention of the automobile global warming and climate change didn't exist.  The Little Ice Age never happened.  The Medieval Warming period was a right-wing conspiracy. And of course, CO2 levels have never been higher, in the entire history of the planet, than they are now.



For thinking people with the ability to think critically, global warming and cooling (also known as climate change) is constant.  It is a cyclical phenomenon that has occurred since Creation, and will continue long after we are gone, To pompous, liberal, bourgeois elites like this guy, history began the day he was born.  Arrogantly, they believe man has the capability to actually change the climate of an entire planet with wind turbines, capturing cow flatulence, installing solar panels, and using paper instead of plastic.
It sounds ridiculous because it is.

Related articles

• Obama Warned that Climate Change to Global Cooling more likely than...
• Only 65 Scientists of 12,000 Make up Alleged 97% on Climate Change and Global Warming Consensus According to Breakdown of Cook et al study, say Friends of Science
• Friends of Science Challenge the Cook Study for Bandwagon Fear Mongering on Climate Change and Global Warming

Liberal Researcher Fabricated Data in Dozens of Studies For Personal Gain, Agenda

Posted by Brian

How many more Diederik Stapel's are there in the different sciences, driven by fame, skewing data in order to reach that individual scientists own preconceived bias'?  It was only a few years ago that scientists from the University of East Anglia were found to be skewing climate data to push the global warming/climate change agenda.

Diederik Stapel made up the data for dozens of studies

The Mind of a Con Man

By YUDHIJIT BHATTACHARJEE
Published: April 26, 2013 443

One summer night in 2011, a tall, 40-something professor named Diederik Stapel stepped out of his elegant brick house in the Dutch city of Tilburg to visit a friend around the corner. It was close to midnight, but his colleague Marcel Zeelenberg had called and texted Stapel that evening to say that he wanted to see him about an urgent matter. The two had known each other since the early ’90s, when they were Ph.D. students at the University of Amsterdam; now both were psychologists at Tilburg University. In 2010, Stapel became dean of the university’s School of Social and Behavioral Sciences and Zeelenberg head of the social psychology department. Stapel and his wife, Marcelle, had supported Zeelenberg through a difficult divorce a few years earlier. As he approached Zeelenberg’s door, Stapel wondered if his colleague was having problems with his new girlfriend.

Zeelenberg, a stocky man with a shaved head, led Stapel into his living room. “What’s up?” Stapel asked, settling onto a couch. Two graduate students had made an accusation, Zeelenberg explained. His eyes began to fill with tears. “They suspect you have been committing research fraud.”

Stapel was an academic star in the Netherlands and abroad, the author of several well-regarded studies on human attitudes and behavior. That spring, he published a widely publicized study in Science about an experiment done at the Utrecht train station showing that a trash-filled environment tended to bring out racist tendencies in individuals. And just days earlier, he received more media attention for a study indicating that eating meat made people selfish and less social.

His enemies were targeting him because of changes he initiated as dean, Stapel replied, quoting a Dutch proverb about high trees catching a lot of wind. When Zeelenberg challenged him with specifics — to explain why certain facts and figures he reported in different studies appeared to be identical — Stapel promised to be more careful in the future. As Zeelenberg pressed him, Stapel grew increasingly agitated.

Finally, Zeelenberg said: “I have to ask you if you’re faking data.”
Continue Reading at The New York Times

Related articles

• The Four Corners of Deceit: Prominent Liberal Social Psychologist Made It All Up
• Inside The Mind Of A Scientist Who Made Up More Than 50 Studies | Popular Science
• Diederik Stapel retraction count hits 50
• Diederik Stapel: The Bernie Madoff of academic research

Top German Environmentalist-UN forecasts on severity of climate change are "overstated", "supported by weak science"

Posted by Brian

'I Feel Duped on Climate Change'

Will reduced solar activity counteract global warming in the coming decades? That is what outgoing German electric utility executive Fritz Vahrenholt claims in a new book. In an interview with SPIEGEL, he argues that the official United Nations forecasts on the severity of climate change are overstated and supported by weak science.

The articulate utility executive is nervous at the beginning of the conversation. He is groping for words -- not a common occurrence for the practiced provocateur. After all, Fritz Vahrenholt, 62, who holds a doctorate in chemistry, has been a rebel throughout his life. "Perhaps it's just part of my generation," he says.

He is typical of someone who came of age during the student protest movement of the late 1960s, and who fought against the chemical industry's toxic manufacturing plants in the 1970s. His party, Germany's center-left Social Democratic Party (SPD), chose him as environment senator in the city-state of Hamburg, where he incurred the wrath of the environmental lobby by building a waste incineration plant, earning him the nickname "Feuerfritze" (Fire Fritz). He worked in industry after that, first for oil multinational Shell and then for wind turbine maker RePower, which he helped develop. Now, as the outgoing CEO of the renewable energy group RWE Innogy, he is about to embark on his next major battle. "I'm going to make enemies in all camps," he says.

He wants to break a taboo. "The climate catastrophe is not occurring," he writes in his book "Die Kalte Sonne" (The Cold Sun), published by Hoffmann and Campe, which will be in bookstores next week.

Read More at Der Speigel

Related articles

• Two more scientists change sides in the AGW debate (hotair.com)
• Rolling Back The Global Warming Faith (papundits.wordpress.com)

Research: Climate "may be less sensitive" than "models have predicted"

Posted by Brian

POSTED ON JANUARY 26, 2012 BY STEVEN HAYWARD IN CLIMATE

THE COUP DE GRACE FOR GLOBAL WARMING CATASTROPHE?

Going through this week’s issue of Nature magazine, which arrived in my in-box yesterday, the following short squib in their “research highlights” section appears:

Warming, but not as much

The climate system may be less sensitive to greenhouse-gas warming than many models have predicted.

Read More at Powerline Blog 

Global Warming: Scientists View Warming As A Political "Cause" in New E-Mails

Posted by Brian

Climategate 2.0: New E-Mails Rock The Global Warming Debate

A new batch of 5,000 emails among scientists central to the assertion that humans are causing a global warming crisis were anonymously released to the public yesterday, igniting a new firestorm of controversy nearly two years to the day after similar emails ignited the Climategate scandal.

Three themes are emerging from the newly released emails: (1) prominent scientists central to the global warming debate are taking measures to conceal rather than disseminate underlying data and discussions; (2) these scientists view global warming as a political “cause” rather than a balanced scientific inquiry and (3) many of these scientists frankly admit to each other that much of the science is weak and dependent on deliberate manipulation of facts and data.

Read More at Forbes

Related articles

• Climategate 2.0: Kjellén has a better name for global warming (junkscience.com)