3 ms·
I'm reposting this comment by "by" that got lost in the comments below. While all this seems pretty damming, it could be misinformation. Examiner.com seems to
by joecode 17y ago
I'm reposting this comment by "by" that got lost in the comments below. While all this seems pretty damming, it could be misinformation.
Examiner.com seems to be owned by Clarity Digital Group who are in turn owned by the Anschutz Company. The primary business of the Anschutz Company appears to be "Support Activities for Oil and Gas Operations".
http://dnb.powerprofiles.com/profile/874831126/ANSCHUTZ+COMP.. http://dnb.powerprofiles.com/profile/874831126/ANSCHUTZ+COMP.... http://investing.businessweek.com/research/stocks/private/sn.. http://investing.businessweek.com/research/stocks/private/sn.... http://www.fundinguniverse.com/company-histories/The-Anschut...* http://www.fundinguniverse.com/company-histories/The-Anschut...
- joecode 17y agowhat, i'm being voted down? so sources don't matter? i don't know whether the emails are authentic or not, but certainly there is cause for concern, no? if you look at the other articles of the author, tony hake, you will see they invariably fall into the "climate change skeptic" realm. maybe that's fine, maybe not. the warning is simply: wait for verification before jumping to any conclusions.
- Maktab 17y agoThe Examiner was not the source for the documents and emails, it merely picked up on the story after it had appeared on some climate change skeptic sites first. It had no role in this other than reporting on a story that already had legs. Therefore the organisation's background and corporate structure is irrelevant to this issue and bringing it up offers nothing new or of value to the discussion.