Organisation Name
US Chamber of Commerce
InfluenceMap Query
Climate Science Transparency
Data Source
Media Reports
 
 

Score for this Data / Query Cell

-2.0

InfluenceMap has researched and collated the following pieces of evidence associated with the data source and query indicated above. Extraordinary information is indicated by a coloured flag in the upper right corner. Evidence items in order of data inputted with exceptional items first.

 

Supporting climate change denial

InfluenceMap Comment:

Appearing to suggest the science of climate change is wrong, or global warming is over-estimated. (National Journal, March 2014)

Extract from Source:

"The Chamber has a long record on climate and here is what it is: Number one, we support addressing our environment [with] things that work {...} Menendez said. "I asked a very simple question: Does the Chamber believe that climate change is real and caused by humans? Yes or no?" Harbert replied: "We believe that we should be doing everything in our power to address the environment." Menendez replied: "That's great. But is climate change caused ... is it real?" Harbert: "The climate is warming, without a doubt." Menendez: "So climate change is real. Is it caused by humans?" Harbert: "And the other part of that answer is, is it warming as much as some of my colleagues on this panel have predicted in the past, and the answer is no." (The witness panel included former NASA climate scientist James Hansen and Sierra Club Executive Director Michael Brune.)

Created: 03/06/2015 Last edited: 24/06/2016

 

Supporting climate change denial

InfluenceMap Comment:

Not accepting the science of climate change (Guardian, September 2014)

Extract from Source:

“Companies can publicly state that, while they support a group financially, they disagree with its stance on climate change,” Goldman explains. “This can undermine the legitimacy and power of these groups that fail to accept climate science. For example, when we analyzed public disclosures from companies, we found that, while the US Chamber of Commerce does not accept climate science, not a single company on its board reported agreeing with that position.”

Created: 03/06/2015 Last edited: 24/06/2016

 

Supporting climate change denial

InfluenceMap Comment:

Not accepting the science of climate change, suggesting it should be put on trial. (The Guardian, September 8 2009)

Extract from Source:

But in an interesting recent twist, the US Chamber of Commerce is now calling for the "truth" to be outed once and for all. It is demanding that the science that underpins our understanding of anthropogenic climate change be "put on trial". In papers filed with the federal court on 25 August, it argues that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) should hold a public hearing "complete with witnesses, cross-examinations and a judge who would rule, essentially, on whether humans are warming the planet to dangerous effect". The LA Times, which broke the story, reported a US Chamber of Commerce official as describing the hearing as "the Scopes monkey trial of the 21st century", in reference to the 1925 test case that saw the prosecution of a Tennessee teacher named John Scopes for violating a state law that forbade any public school teacher from denying the Bible's account of man's origin. "It would be evolution versus creationism," said William L Kovacs, the US Chamber of Commerce's senior vice president for environment, technology and regulatory affairs. "It would be the science of climate change on trial." The papers filed with the federal court make interesting reading. The US Chamber of Commerce is saying that it wants the EPA to hold its "Endangerment Finding Proceeding" into whether carbon dioxide emissions are harmful to public health in public and on the record.It says that a proceeding on the record … … is necessary to narrow the areas of scientific uncertainty, to permit a credible weighing of the scientific evidence, and to enable submitters of proof to demonstrate the falsity of some [the EPA's] key erroneous claims. … will narrow any uncertainty on the question whether, on balance, higher temperatures will not lead to net increases in human mortality. … will enable the EPA to resolve any uncertainties about the impacts of higher temperatures on the conventional pollutants entitled to the greatest weight in considering the issue of endangerment. … will permit the parties to provide any necessary confirmation that temperature increases would overall benefit human welfare and the environment, and allow the EPA to receive evidence rebutting unsubstantiated claims to the contrary. … is the most efficient and only complete method for testing the competing claims in the record concerning extreme weather events and disease. … is necessary because the EPA has generated legitimate concern that it has prejudged the outcome of the proposed endangerment finding, only an on-the-record process can produce a reliable and legally durable outcome.

Created: 13/10/2016 Last edited: 13/10/2016