Debate, and discuss, just dont Bore me.
AGW - THE Climate Issue
Published on January 4, 2010 By Dr Guy In Politics

Many of the faithful have denigrated skeptics by calling them names, throwing insults, and basically crying for their beheading at the new Spanish Inquisition.  Surprising if you believe in AGW.  If indeed it is a "fact", why are threats and insults needed?

As more and more of the research that has gone into AGW is being called into question, these same faithful have started a new tactic.  Impugn the reputation.  Malign the skeptics accusing them with association and payoffs from Big Oil (or other corporate money bags).

Having done a little research, I have discovered that there is indeed a lot of money in the AGW debate.  So much so that even Christ would be tempted!  The figures are astounding!  To wit:

1: a scientist who received $19 million in research grants between 2000 and 2006, six times the amount doled out to him during the previous decade.(1)

2: $3 billion ear marked in appropriations (that is billion with a bee) (2)

3: $2 billion allocated through 3 programs (3)

4: $3 billion by Richard Branson (4)

5: $100 million from Exxon Mobile (paltry in comparison, but that is big oil!) (5)

This does not include other sources not enumerated, but almost equally as large.  And where is all this money going to?

AGW proponents!  Yep, the ones accusing all of being corrupted by money (from big oil!) are in actual fact the ones being corrupted by money (some of it even from Big oil!).

Now do you see why they accuse the skeptics of it?  Because of the embarrasment as these figures come out and show they are the ones cooking the books for the almighty dollar (or Yen, Euro, or Pound).  Hypocrites?  Sure!  Liars?  Not most of the faithful, just willing stooges for the ones pocketing the money and counting on their converts to do their bidding!

The whole AGW affair does stink to high heaven.  And the stink is coming from East Anglia, NASA, and the Met.  Where money has subverted real science.  Indeed, they are the real deniers.  The deniers of real science and their own sins.

1. http://www.examiner.com/x-32936-Seminole-County-Environmental-News-Examiner~y2009m12d23-Spreading-global-warming-doom-delivers-big-money-to-climate-researchers

2. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703939404574566124250205490.html

3. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,251458,00.html

4. http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/8906.html

5. http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2007/04/15/doubting_doomsday/


Comments (Page 2)
2 Pages1 2 
on Jan 24, 2010
on Jan 24, 2010

4: $3 billion by Richard Branson (4)

Big difference between receiving money from 'big oil' and a businessman - the first makes the reliability more questionable all else equal, since big oil would have a clear vested interest in discrediting the global warming theory, while no such obvious direct interest exists for a businessman (not to say there isn't, but it's far less obvious if there is).

Often the issue isn't so much the money, but where it's come from.

on Jan 25, 2010

aeortar

4: $3 billion by Richard Branson (4)

Big difference between receiving money from 'big oil' and a businessman - the first makes the reliability more questionable all else equal, since big oil would have a clear vested interest in discrediting the global warming theory, while no such obvious direct interest exists for a businessman (not to say there isn't, but it's far less obvious if there is).

Often the issue isn't so much the money, but where it's come from.

That was my point. And where it is going to.  The clear indication is that "Big Oil" is funneling a lot of money to the AGW crowd, and virtually none to any skeptics.  Which is the reverrse of what some of the AGW crowd would like you to think.  But the reasoning is very simple.  Whether the energy is coming from oil, gas, coal, or martians, "Big Oil" is going to have their mitts into the pie and get their slice of it.

Which makes the spurious allegation that the "denier" (a term used by those who have lost the debate) movement is funded by "Big Oil" patently false.  And that was all I was showing with this post.

on Jan 25, 2010

But deniers are in it for the money.

Pachaurigate?

The story has been breaking since about last Thursday (with of course the American Media ignoring it).  But it is not going away and since it is International, the cries have become a lot louder.  I do not expect pachauri to survive it (nor should he).  In addition, English Parliment has now taken up the flag of an investigation into east Anglia - http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/01/22/uk-parliament-to-investigate-climategate-and-cru-data-issues/

The American MSM may very well hide its head in the sand until this has become a fait accompli'.  It would not be the first time, nor surprising.

on Jan 25, 2010

IPCC has been COMPLETELY apolitical, PURELY about science, NOTHING but a Joe Friday Operation.

on Jan 25, 2010

IPCC has been COMPLETELY apolitical, PURELY about science, NOTHING but a Joe Friday Operation.

Yes, the old Science of Ostriches technique!

However, an analysis of those 500-plus formal review comments, to be published tomorrow by the Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF), the new body founded by former Chancellor Nigel Lawson, suggests that when reviewers did raise issues that called the claim into question, Dr Lal and his colleagues simply ignored them.

2 Pages1 2