2

SOURCE MATERIAL

SINGER ADMITS HE IS FUNDED BY THE MOONIES [whose extreme anti-democratic, pro-business, anti-environmenta1 views are well-known] "When asked by Nightline [ABC NEWS TV SHOW], Dr. Singer openly acknowledged accepting free office space, science conference travel expenses and contributions from the Unification Church, as well as funding from large industries. 'Every environmental organization I know of gets funding from Exxon, Shell, Arco, Dow Chemical,' and so on,' said Singer. _/Tf it doesn't taint their science, it doesn't taint my science.'"

"Gore-Gate: An Abuse of Power" in Blue Ribbon Magazine (uploaded to CompuServe) April 1994 Quotes are from Ted Koppel's ABC Nightline program "Is Science for Sale".

"Vice President Gore, Koppel told his viewers, was particularly concerned about Dr. Fred Singer of the Washington, D.C.-based Science and the Environmental Policy Project (SEPP), well known for debunking the ozone depletion and global warming scares. [Blue Ribbon, as above]

SINGER'S PRO-WHALING ARTICLE, PUBLISHED IN THE MOONIE-OWNED WASHINGTON TIMES, IS USED BY PR FLACK FOR JAPAN WHALING ASSOCIATION. Alan Macnow of Tele-press Associates, is the U.S. public relations agent for the Japan Whaling Association, as well as the Japanese fishing industry. He uses Fred Singer's views, without explaining Fred's connections, to bolster his campaign on the Internet to defeat a whale sanctuary (Japan has been whaling in the Antarctic).

Topic 151 WHALE SANCTUARY CRITICIZED amacnow talk.environment 11:10 am May 6, 1994 Following is the text of an article written by Dr. S. Fred Singer, Professor of Environmental Sciences, University of Virginia, as printed in the Washington, DC, Times, on May 5, 1994. Dr. Singer directs the Science and Environmental Policy Project. Fred Singer, Expert Expert 3

SCIENTIFIC SHALLOWS OF WHALE SANCTUARY IDEA The push to set up an international "sanctuary" for whales in the southern Oceans appears to be yet another example of the misuse of science to support an ideological agenda.

The U.S. position, put forward by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) of the National Oceanographic and Atmo­ spheric Administration (NOAA), seems to have been shaped by years of pressure from special interests, like Greenpeace, thatfwant to outlaw any kind of whaling - even for abundant, non endangered species where there is no justification ..;. [edited for length] r HERE IS A PAID PRESS RELEASE, FROM SINGER'S MOONIE INSTITUTE, SAYING THAT U.S. GOVERNMENT SCIENTISTS WRECKED A PLANNED CONFERENCE OF HIS, BECAUSE THEY REFUSED TO SPEAK AT IT. THE ISSUE IS WHALING.

COMMENTS: [Mr. Singer has in previous years spoken widely only on climate related issues, but here expands his expertise, suddenly, into marine mammals...The "conference" was to be stacked with a preponderance of pro-whaling and right-wing sources, including: * the "High North Alliance" founded after an anti-Greenpeace film made by Icelandic film-maker Magnus Gudmundsson. Gudmundsson was successfully sued for damages by Greenpeace in an Oslo Norway court, and certain passages were ordered removed.

* "Putting People First" the then-Washington based fund-raising machine started by Bill Wewer and Kathleen Marquardt - her book being widely advertised in Larouche's 21st Century magazine, and her anti-environmentalist articles finding publication in magazines like the gun-crazy "Soldier of Fortune". * 3 representatives of the Norwegian government (who have been whaling despite IWC rules).

* "Sportsmen"> Icelandic (pro-whaling country) and Canadian experts (Canada allows whaling for aboriginal people), etc. etc. And tossed out as seemingly neutral parties - "PUBLIC POLICY ORGANIZATIONS" - the far-right think-tanks Competitive Enterprise Institute and the Hudson Institute. The conference was never held, as U.S. scientists refused to attend. Environmentalists listed did not plan to attend, and the listing of the IWC phone number at the bottom of the press release is very misleading, as though the IWC promoted this press Fred Singer, Expert Expert 4 release and Singer's conference. In fact, the IWC also refused to send a representative. The list of "attendees” is purely fictional.

[] PR Newswire September 15, 1993, Wednesday ' SECTION: Washington Dateline DISTRIBUTION: TO NATIONAL AND BUSINESS EDITORS , LENGTH: 780 words HEADLINE: SEPP CONFERENCE ON WHALING POSTPONED; NOAA REFUSES TO ALLOW U.S. SCIENTISTS TO SPEAK ON 'TOO SENSITIVE' ISSUE PRIOR TO CLINTON'S DECISION ON TRADE SANCTIONS AGAINST NORWAY, DUE OCT. 4 DATELINE: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) — Under Secretary of Commerce Dr. D. James Baker, administrator, 202-482-3436 — Rebecca Roots, 202-482-6076 Norwegian Embassy — Olav Berstad, first secretary for economic affairs, 202-944-8926 — Birgir Xarsen, counsel, 202-333-6000 Congressional Sportsmen's Caucus, U.S. House of Representatives — Dallas Miner, 202-785-9153

SCIENTISTS: — Dr. William Aron, director, Alaska Fisheries Research Center,206-526-4000 — Dr. Milton Freeman, Canadian'Circumpolar Institute, University of Alberta, expert on community-based whaling, 403-492-4512 — Dr. Daniel Goodman, adviser to Canadian minister of fisheries, 613-990-0284 — Dr. Philip Hammond, former chairman, IWC Science Committee, marine population biologist with the Sea Mammal Research Unit, Cambridge, England, 011-44-223-311-354, fax: 011-44-223-328-927

- Dr. John Knauss, former U.S. IWC commissioner and NOAA administrator, 401-294-4877 — Dr. Eugene LaPointe, former secretary general of UN-CITES, 813-734-4949 — Dr. Brian Rothschild, University of Maryland, 410-326-4281 — Dr. Johann Sigurjonsson, Marine Research Institute (Iceland), 011-354-1-20240 — Dr. Tim Smith, Woods Hole Marine Research Institute, 508-548-5123 Fred Singer, Expert Expert 5

ECONOMISTS/INTERNATIONAL LAW EXPERTS: — Dr. Daniel Esty, Institute for International Economics, 202-328-9000 — Dr. Ted McDorman, University of Victoria, expert on legality of trade sanctions on the whaling issue in relation to GATT, 604-721-8181

ANTI-WHALING ACTIVIST GROUPS: — Earth Island Institute: 415-788-3666 — Humane Society of the United States, 202-452-1100 * — Sea Shepherd Conservation Society: 310-394-3198 — Greenpeace: Gerald Leape, 202-319-2401 PRO-WHALING ACTIVIST GROUPS: — High North Alliance: Georg Blichfeldt, 011-47-88-92-414 (Norway) — Putting People First: Mark La Rochelle/ Kathleen Marquardt, 202-364-7277 INDUSTRY ASSOCIATIONS: — National Fisheries Institute: Lee Weddig, 703-524-8880

PUBLIC POLICY ORGANIZATIONS: — Competitive Enterprise Institute: James M. Sheehan, 202-331-1010 . — Hudson Institute: Dave McIntosh, 317-545-1000/

BODY: T)ie conference, 11 From 'Moby Dick' to 'Free Willy': Conflicting Views on the Whaling Issue," scheduled for Sept. 15 on Capitol Hill, was forced into a last-minute postponement last week when the sponsoring organization, The Science & Environmental Policy Project (SEPP), was informed by Under Secretary of commerce D. James Baker, administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), that no U.S. government scientist would be cleared to participate prior to President Clinton's decision on possible trade sanctions against Norway. A similar response was received from the International Whaling Commission (IWC), through its Secretary Dr. Ray Gambel. According to Rebecca Roots of Baker's office, the issue is just "too sensitive."

The Norwegian government, which played a vital role in the just- signed peace agreement between Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization, came under threat of U.S. trade sanctions on Aug. 5, when U.S. Secretary of Commerce Ronald H. Brown "certified” Norway under the Pelly Amendment to the Fishermen's Protective Act. Norway's harvest of 296 minke whales this year was deemed to have ’’diminished the effectiveness of the conservation program of the International Whaling Commission.” As Fred Singer, Expert Expert 6 a result of the certification President Clinton must report to Congress on actions taken within 60 days, or by Oct. 4, 1993. Said SEPP President S. Fred Singer: "The United States is threatening economic sanctions to accommodate environmental extremists who want an outright ban.on all whaling. This is contrary to the principle of sustainable development, which permits the harvesting of a renewable resource based on scientific data. What we have here," he concluded, "is yet another example of environmental policy based on the deliberate avoidance of scientific evidence." *

Plans for the SEPP conference were set in motion after the abrupt resignation of Dr. Philip Hammond, chairman of the International Whaling Commission's Science Committee. As reported in the June 18, 1993, issue of the journal "Science," Hammond stepped down after the IWC failed to adopt the committee's unanimous recommendation on quotas for whale catches that would not harm a species population. (At the request of the IWC, the Science Committee has spent five years developing a computer model for the purpose of establishing quotas* The IWC must adopt the model before it can lift its seven-year-old moratorium on commercial whaling.) The refusal of the IWC to accept the Science Committee's report has led to fears that it is moving toward a permanent ban on whaling — despite evidence that many whale populations are not endangered — thus violating its basic management mission. In his resignation letter to IWC Secretary Ray Gambel, Hammond questioned the point of retaining a Science Committee whose advice is "treated with such contempt."

Norway announced its intention to, resume whaling, with or without a lifting of the IWC moratorium, on June 29, 1992, and went ahead with its first whale hunt this year. The situation, as it now stands, is a potential embarrassment for the president. The minke whale, at eight tons, the smallest of the so-called "great whales," is not an endangered species. By IWC estimates, there are close to 1 million minke whales worldwide and nearly 90,000 in Norway's coastal waters alone. Japan is already permitted to harvest 300 minke whales a year in the Antarctic — for research purposes — with the by-product distributed for food. Moreover, the United States delegation to the IWC secured permission for an annual take by Alaskan natives of some 50 bowhead whales — - a truly endangered species.

Should the president go ahead with sanctions it could be seen as a slap in the face to a long-time ally that has achieved in the Middle East what the United States was unable to accomplish through decades of negotiations. If Clinton does not take action against Norway, however, he will incur the wrath of tJ.S. Fred Singer, Expert Expert 7 environmental groups who are pushing hard for sanctions and have made Norwegian whaling a central issue on their activist agenda. The Science & Environmental Policy Project, an independent affiliate of the Institute for Contemporary Studies, is a nonprofit research group that studies*.and documents the use of scientific data in the development of federal environmental policy. International Whaling Commission, 011-44-223-971, fax: 011-44-223-232-876 — Dr. .Ray Gambel, secretary — Dr. Gregg Donovan, scientist '

CONTACT: Candace Crandall of The Science & Environment Policy Project, 703-527-0130

REPRINT OF LAROUCHIAN 21ST CENTURY MAGAZINE FALL 93, TOUTING SINGER, leading the charge against ozone depletion. (21st CENTURY SCIENCE Sc TECHNOLOGY; FALL 1992, p.33)

[] Environmental Information Networks, Inc. Ozone Depletion Network Online Today October 29, 1992 LENGTH: 313 words

HEADLINE: CONGRESSMAN, SCIENTISTS CHARGE OZONE HOLE MAY BE A HOAX BODY: "Politics has run way ahead of science," said William Dannemeyer (R-CA) as he explained to a press conference on August 6, why the "ozone hole" may be a hoax. Supported by Hugh W. Ellsaesser and S. Fred Singer, both atmospheric scientists, Dannemeyer asked that a presidential commission be established to investigate the ozone hole "scare."

Dannemeyer stated that twenty to forty million deaths per year could result from the ban on CFCs set forth by the Montreal Protocol to go into effect in 2000 (1995 and sooner in a number of countries including the U.S.). He argued that the ban had been based on "very bad science and bad politics," and has been joined by Reps Dick Armey (R-TX), Jack Fields (R-TX), Bob Stump (R-AZ) and Clyde Hblloway (R-LA) in asking for the establishment of the commission. Dannemeyer is also calling for mobilization of public support to prevent the congressional committee to which the resolution is referred, from quashing the movement. Fred Singer, Expert Expert 8

Both Ellsaesser, retired frdm Lawrence Livermore Laboratory, and Singer, who is with the Science and Environmental Policy Project, said that scare stories were exaggerated concerning skin cancer in particular. Ringleaders of the fraud, says Ellsaesser, are the environmental groups who have $544 million to back their clout. ■■ ; . .j“ ' A group of 20 scientists is said to be supporting the resolution. Those calling for an investigation say that EPA has caved in to scare tactics before. The group stated that the EPA has admitted it made a mistake in exaggerating dioxin's * harmfulness, and they further accuse the agency of overlooking the results of a $600 million government study that identified no convincing connection between sulfur dioxide and acid rain. (21st CENTURY SCIENCE Sc TECHNOLOGY: FALL 1992, p.33)

(] [SINGER PART OF PAID PRESS RELEASE FOR "CONSUMER ALERT" a phoney "consumer" group set up to represent views of industry, headed by John Sununu (see Greenpeace Guide to Anti-Environmental Organiz ations...) BRIEFING TO BE HELD ON 'GLOBAL WARMING: DISSECTING THE THEORY' DATE: April 20, 1990 . EVENT: Four noted scientists will challenge the conventional wisdom about global warming, arguing that current climate data and models are two crude and inconsistent to support drastic action yet, and will warn against being stampeded into adopting rash and expensive policies before the evidence is clear. HOST: Consumer Alert (CA) , a consumer organization devoted to disseminating accurate risk data and promoting the advancement of science and safe technology. CA also spearheads the National Consumer Coalition, made up of 38 national, regional and statewide consumer and public policy groups representing the views and opinions of 2.5 million members and supporters. PRINCIPALS: -— Barbara Keating-Edh, president, CA — Dr. Hugh W. Ellsaesser, participating guest scientist, Atmospheric and Geo-physical Sciences Division, Lawrence Livermore Laboratory — Dr. Richard Lindzen, Sloan professor of meteorology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology — Dr. Patrick Michaels, Department of Environmental Sciences, University of Virginia — * Dr. S. Fred Singer, director, Science and Environmental Policy Project, Washington Fred Singer, Expert Expert 10 decision making," concluded Dr.v Fred Singer, director of the Science and Environmental Policy Project of the Washington Institute fbr Values in Public Policy and professor of environmental sciences at the University of Virginia. The Committee For a Constructive Tomorrow is one of 38 national, regional and statewide consumer and public policy groups that form the National Consumer Coalition (NCC). Spearheaded by Consumer Alert, NCC represents the views and opinions of 2-1/2 million members and supporters. t CONTACT: Ron De Fore or Lisa K. Franklin, 202-638-1200, for the 1990 National Consumer Coalition

[] SINGER ON AUTO EMISSIONS. "A review of the data from the National Academy study was conducted in April 1976. The review, which disagreed with the earlier report's conclusions, was prepared under a grant from the National Science Foundation by University of Virginia Professor S* Fred Singer. He claimed retaining the same standards would result in net losses in excess of $10 billion per year. n2 n2 "A Re-Examination of Costs and Benefits of Automobile Emission Control Strategies," The National Science Foundation, March 22, 1976, 6 ER — CD 2140." ( Environment Reporter December 17, 1982 Vol. 13, No. 33; Pg. 1) =end=