Follow the MONEY - Skeptics and Deniers

AGW - THE Climate Issue

By on January 4, 2010 9:19:28 PM from JoeUser Forums JoeUser Forums

Dr Guy

Join Date 09/2004
+129

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/

21 Replies
Search this post
Subscription Options


Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
January 5, 2010 9:13:45 PM from Stardock Forums Stardock Forums

Dr. I haven't had time to check the links (will soon just not tonight).  Is that where you got the figures for the money in your article?

Again, I know a lot of money is going into AGW.  Whenever science because politicalized that is when a monster is made.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
January 5, 2010 9:22:08 PM from JoeUser Forums JoeUser Forums

...and that's the problem. Too many people believe science is absolute, and that may be true in some cases, but for the most part it is subject to the same politics, greed, and corruption as any other sector of society. It is and has been manipulated throughout history, to suit the needs of a few.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
January 6, 2010 8:31:51 AM from JoeUser Forums JoeUser Forums

Dr. I haven't had time to check the links (will soon just not tonight). Is that where you got the figures for the money in your article?

Most of the figures can be derived from multiple sources, but I wanted to spread the references out to as many sources as possible in order to stop some from saying they were all right wing mouthpieces (some still will say that). 

When I started checking this (from a comment made elsewhere about the skeptics being paid off by anti-AGW sources - I beleive it was MumbleFratz that made that lie), I was shocked at what I learned!  We think of grants and such (the life blood of scientists) as being the "$500k for Squirrell love research" level, but I found that the money here is in the BILLIONS!  And the number doing the research is relatively very small.  So it means that the core climatologist behind the AGW push are getting very well paid (not counting Algore's slush fund).

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
January 6, 2010 8:35:49 AM from JoeUser Forums JoeUser Forums

Too many people believe science is absolute, and that may be true in some cases, but for the most part it is subject to the same politics, greed, and corruption as any other sector of society. It is and has been manipulated throughout history, to suit the needs of a few.

I disagree.  Sciense is absolute (and very hard to go from observation to hypothesis to theory to fact).  But SCIENTISTS are humans and as we see, susceptible to the same graft and greed as anyone else.

The SCIENCE of climatology is as sound as any other science.  The SCIENTISTS have abandoned science for the almighty dollar (pound, euro or yen) and corrupted the data to fit an agenda that has no relation to science.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
January 6, 2010 9:26:33 AM from JoeUser Forums JoeUser Forums

The SCIENCE of climatology is as sound as any other science.

It's actually not.  By definition, it cannot use standard scientific methods to test its hypotheses.  It is set of glorified video games (computer runs using various combinations & permutations of 'What if?' scenarios) which attempt to predict the future.  So far, I'm less than impressed with climatology's predictive capabilities.

That's not to say it is a total waste of time, it's just that when you see those full-color Mercator map computer graphics of what's going to happen on the Discovery Channel, they show you (typically) only one scenario.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
January 6, 2010 10:36:14 AM from JoeUser Forums JoeUser Forums

It's actually not. By definition, it cannot use standard scientific methods to test its hypotheses.

That's what I believe. If it were cut and dry, their would be no debate.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
January 6, 2010 10:43:29 AM from JoeUser Forums JoeUser Forums

It's actually not. By definition, it cannot use standard scientific methods to test its hypotheses. It is set of glorified video games (computer runs using various combinations & permutations of 'What if?' scenarios) which attempt to predict the future. So far, I'm less than impressed with climatology's predictive capabilities.

Well, I guess put that way I agree. What I meant is that if they were following standard scientific principals, the science could be legitimate.  Not that what they are doing in any way resembles science.  I think the predicitive models problems are with the scientists again, not the science.  The science of the Big Bang cannot really be tested iether, but at least they are going about it the right way - testing the parts they can, and looking for more clues.  Climatologists (the core AGW group) have stopped looking and starting stonewalling everyone else.

 

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
January 6, 2010 10:46:43 AM from JoeUser Forums JoeUser Forums

If it were cut and dry, their would be no debate.

The funny part, even scientific studies that for the most part are accepted as fact (if not actually being fact in the scientific sense) have not stopped, ended or squelched debate.  There is still debate about the big Bang, about evolution, about dark matter.  It may not be the debate of either or, but there is still healthy debate.  In the "science" of AGW, you will find very few pro AGW (if any) people that will even acknowledge debate about anything related to the subject, even though it is not out of the hypothesis stage.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
January 6, 2010 8:15:12 PM from Stardock Forums Stardock Forums

I've been trying to tell people all along that it is all about money...big money. Many just dismiss that as nonsense. Of course that tells me they are simply either too stupid to understand or simply refuse to see the truth because it may force them to rethink their ideas about it.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
January 7, 2010 8:59:50 AM from JoeUser Forums JoeUser Forums

Of course that tells me they are simply either too stupid to understand or simply refuse to see the truth because it may force them to rethink their ideas about it.

Or a 3rd alternative - they already know the truth, but it goes against their religion and/or agenda.  The Greens may know the truth, but they see it as a way to advance their agenda.  Liberal power brokers know the truth, but it goes against their religion (they created the religion after all).

I have been reading SciAm lately.  A waste of time for anything science, but it is informative to see how the religious are arguing the issue.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
January 8, 2010 12:58:45 AM from Stardock Forums Stardock Forums

In his latest book BREATHLESS, Dean Koontz has an exchange between a scientist and some laymen who have made an unexplainable discovery.  The scientist says that whenever a scientist tells you the science is settled, he has stopped being a scientist and become a politician.  He pointed out that most of what mankind knew to be fact 2000 years ago has been proven to be wrong...and in one or two hundred years from now there is no telling how much of what we "know" now will be proven balderdash.  Science is full of little errors over the span of man's existence.  The skull of the missing link turned out to be the kneecap of an elephant, recently it was discovered that the method used to measure distances in space was based on a flawed formula and everything had to be recalculated.  It was once common practice to put leeches on sick people (I know, they are doing it again), The Earth was once the center of the universe.  In the orient, many people still won't sit in a chair that is warm from its last occupant, they believe disease spreads that way.  I am just shooting from the hip here, with a little research you could fill up pages with idiocy that was once the standard of science.  So with a track record like that, what makes scientists so infallible now?

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
January 8, 2010 8:56:24 AM from JoeUser Forums JoeUser Forums

he scientist says that whenever a scientist tells you the science is settled, he has stopped being a scientist and become a politician.

Exactly!

So with a track record like that, what makes scientists so infallible now?

I think the vast majority of scientists know they know not, and are constantly searching for answers.  Scientists are just people and so when they get an idea in their head, they try to run it to ground.  That is natural.  The real scientist are those that when faced with contradictory evidence, admit the flaw in their original thinking and then try to come up with a new idea.  The politicians just ignore the new evidence, vilify the founders of it, and maintain their infalibility.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
January 20, 2010 12:21:39 AM from JoeUser Forums JoeUser Forums

The root of real science is the simple expression "I don't know".

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
January 20, 2010 8:51:14 AM from JoeUser Forums JoeUser Forums

Quoting MasonM,
The root of real science is the simple expression "I don't know".

And the willingness to state that.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
January 23, 2010 10:47:58 PM from JoeUser Forums JoeUser Forums
Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
January 24, 2010 10:45:15 AM from JoeUser Forums JoeUser Forums
Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
January 24, 2010 4:39:15 PM from JoeUser Forums JoeUser Forums

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.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
January 25, 2010 9:27:51 AM from JoeUser Forums JoeUser Forums

Quoting 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.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
January 25, 2010 9:33:57 AM from JoeUser Forums JoeUser Forums

Quoting Daiwa,
But deniers are in it for the money.

Quoting Daiwa,
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.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
January 25, 2010 10:09:44 AM from JoeUser Forums JoeUser Forums

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

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
January 25, 2010 11:00:45 AM from JoeUser Forums JoeUser Forums

Quoting Daiwa,
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.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
Stardock Forums v1.0.0.0    #108432  walnut2   Server Load Time: 00:00:00.0000265   Page Render Time: