The Marshall Institute Funding Flows for Climate Change Research and Related Activities identifies the “leading suppliers and recipients of government and foundation resources in climate-based research”.
(Partial view)
The top recipients of foundation funding for the 2000-2002 period represent some of the most well-known names in the climate change debate. Ranking first on the list, having received more than $9 million, is Strategies for the Global Environment, which is the umbrella organization for the Pew Center on Global Climate Change and the Center for SeaChange. The Energy Foundation also ranks highly on this list as it is the recipient of considerable support from other organizations. It received $7.6 million over the three years surveyed. Rounding out the top three is the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), which brought in $6.7 million for climate change-related projects between 2000-2002.
[…]
These lists are indicative of the minimum amount expended in this area, but they are not definitive. The nature of the initial constraints on the quality of the data used for this analysis precludes definitive statements about maximum dollar values for climate change related activities, as many foundations do not identify the specific activities for which their contributions are granted. These general operating or support grants can be used for any purpose by the recipient; some of those uses may be in the area of climate change, but the specific proportions are not known.
See the PDF for full charts and analysis. Also in HTML.
Via CNS News – ‘Scientist’ Group’s Funding Comes with Liberal ‘Strings Attached’
Ahhhh yes…there’s our old friend again…the all purpose political cash laundromat; the “Foundation”…..and foundation funding of duplicitous scientists hungry for grants has been the key source of support for pro kyoto climate-doomsday hysteria.
Pretty simple transaction; cash in exchnage for scientific credibility/support for theories which will profit the funders.
If I was a wealthy oil commodity trader (Like David Rockefeller) I would certainly want to buy some professional scientific credibility for fear-mongering theories which make my abundant but indespenable commodity all the more valuable and the supply last longer with fuel taxes, new fule scrimping technology and supply regulation.
Also, if I was a wealthy international deal broker (like Moe Strong) I would want to buy some scientific credibility for my scheme to hamstring western nations with tax regimes which the emerging nations (where I have my investments) are not burdened with. I would devise an international “commodity brokerage” based on the rediculous precept of buying and selling credit for emissions of a common biological gas which will become a tradable commodity under the stifling taxation regime I devised…I take a “skim” of this massive wealth redistribution in my exclusive carbon brokerage…I’d wrap the whole profiteering con job in a global environmental dooms day cloak and buy some scientific credibility to sell this monster to the guilt ridden upwardly mobile Lib-left sheep in western nations.
If I was a famous TV “environmentalist” ( like Dave Suzuki) who makes a living from the donations (to my save the earth “foundation”) which result from my TV fear mongering eco-evangelizing, I would be happy to see some political slush money wash through my foundation in return for promoting a certain political party in all my TV enviro evangelizing.
Yes, the foundation is doing for science what it has done for politics and private political agendas in western nations.
The agency that has spent the most researching climate change is NASA.
My son’s high school geography teacher is full-tilt bought into this flim-flam, and his marks depend on his ability to regurgitate the statist group-think on demand. Indoctrination is more effective if you start young.
Our only hope for the planet is the state-provided, and therefore state-controlled daycare starts their morning with a pledge of allegiance to Mother Earth, Sister Moon and Brother Sun. Feel guilty for living, and appease that guilt by surrendering your output to the state, for redistribution by those far wiser than yourself.
Say no to the Kyoto Scam, say no to Global Warming Group Think, say no to Statist Indoctrination Centers dressed up as daycare.
“My son’s high school geography teacher is full-tilt bought into this flim-flam, and his marks depend on his ability to regurgitate the statist group-think on demand. Indoctrination is more effective if you start young.”
He’s also got to learn evolution I’m afraid. Poor kid.
I was also taught about global warming in grade 10 back in 1984. For some reason the idea wasn’t controversial back then.
There are so many scientific falsehoods in Al ‘I created the internet’ Gore’s movie it is laughable. The vast majority of people are concerned if there is a problem with the environment, but actions and responses to deal with environmental problems need to be reasoned, scientically sound, and fiscally prudent,
“I was also taught about global warming in grade 10 back in 1984. For some reason the idea wasn’t controversial back then”
Jose
What text book or publications did you use for reference Jose?
I’m also suspicious that anybody was talking about global warming in 1984. I have vivid memories of shivering in a poorly-heated apartment in Chicago (okay, not as cold as Saskatchewan, but still plenty cold) during the winter of 1976-1977, and, if memory serves, the next two winters were just as cold. All the “climate scientists” then were talking about continued cooling, and I doubt that much had changed by 1984.
For my part, if the government or anybody else gives me a grant of $120,000 US, I will reduce the approximately 4,000 miles that I drive annually. I’ll do it for the children.
I’ve noticed an encouraging trend among the global warming believers: on recent threads on various sites people are saying they’re no longer going to get angry at the sceptics anymore, because it’s too late to do anything. Too late!!!
Anyway, the self-righteous silence will be nice; don’t think they’re capable of it though.
As sensible bloggers have been saying for years….the so called “Scientific Experts” that are so frequently being called upon to bolster and support the political positions of the left are bought and paid for!
Self interest trumps professional integrity producing Junk Science!
Jose… don’t let the truth get in the way of making everyone feel guilty. Keep preaching the pseudo-science — with your help, we’ll cripple Canada, put millions out of work, and make zero change to the climate.
Russian radio waves were causing climate change in the 70’s and 80’s.
“I was also taught about global warming in grade 10 back in 1984. For some reason the idea wasn’t controversial back then”
Jose
Back in the 1980’s it was global cooling not warming, was the flavour of the day.
Latest newscast scare story Global Warming will lead to terrorism. Knobs.
Opinion Editorial
Foes of Global Warming Could Thank George Bush
By Elliot Diringer, director of international strategies at the Pew Center on Global Climate Change.
San Francisco Chronicle
August 5, 2001
“None of this suggests that we are on the verge of meeting the greatest environmental challenge of our time. Confronting climate change demands sustained effort over decades to gradually wean industrialized nations from fossil fuels, and to keep the booming developing world from becoming ever more dependent.
Kyoto, even once up and running, would be only a modest start. It promises just a fraction of the reduction in greenhouse gases that ultimately is needed to avert climatic disaster, and offers no real strategy to bring developing countries on board.
But it gets the rest of the world on the right path. And if the United States can start putting its own house in order, it should be possible to merge the parallel efforts in due time.
Former Chronicle reporter Elliot Diringer, an environmental adviser and , is now director of international strategies at the Pew Center on Global Climate Change.”
“the largest experiment in directed change ever undertaken.”
Golly; Larger than communism, Mister deputy press secretary in the Clinton White House???
Jose: “…got to learn about evolution…”
Nice straw man, Jose, but a slimey way to debate.
You’re not the first one to take similar shots at those of us who practice hard science and aren’t devotees to the Apocalyptic Church of Climatology. I wouldn’t be surprised if some goofball suggested that we don’t believe in gravity.
Fifty years ago, when I graduated as a geologist, geologists, glaciologists and paleontologists (i.e., earth scientists)were the only scientists who paid any attention to, or had any understanding of, climate cycles. Climatology didn’t appear as a distinct discipline until a until a couple of decades later, and the hocus pocus of feeding dubious data into super computers to produce moonshine only started about 20 years ago.
(Garbage in, garbage out, no matter how sophisticated the calculation)
I suppose that there are a few creationist geologists, but I’ve yet to meet one, nor have I ever met one who believes in AGM. Belief in either fantasy by anyone with any appreciation of the complexity of our constantly-changing earth would require a two-compartment mind.
“I wouldn’t be surprised if some goofball suggested that we don’t believe in gravity.”
But gravity is only a theory!
“Nice straw man, Jose, but a slimey way to debate.”
SDAers opened the door by stating that climate science is a religion. If it’s ok for you to lay into me for the supposed “religious” dimensions of my thinking then return fire along those lines is fair game. It is a bit dirty and I don’t like roasting people’s religious beliefs (two of my cousins are Catholic priests and a lot of my good friends are creationists). I return fire along those lines not to attack anyone’s religion (because believe it or not I do respect it) but to attack the line of argument.
“Climatology didn’t appear as a distinct discipline until a until a couple of decades later, and the hocus pocus of feeding dubious data into super computers to produce moonshine only started about 20 years ago.”
But to be fair you couldn’t play a decent first person shooter on a supercomputer 30 years ago never mind model something as complex as the world’s climate. Even now climatologists who believe in AGW openly admit that the limited computing capacity they have available to them seriously constrains the accuracy of their projections.
“But it gets the rest of the world on the right path. And if the United States can start putting its own house in order, it should be possible to merge the parallel efforts in due time.”
I’ll give credit where credit is due. I believe the USA has done more to advance the theory of AGW than any other country (especially the NASA scientists) and I think they’ll do more to combat the problem than any other country (especially in the alternative energy front). George Bush doesn’t get the credit for that, he’s an idiot, but hard working and industrious American scientists and technological entrepeneurs.
“Jose… don’t let the truth get in the way of making everyone feel guilty. ”
I’m not trying to make you feel guilty. Heck I don’t feel guilty. There is no “blame” in my view with AGW . I’d only lay blame at the feet of people who are trying to exploit the issue to further some larger agenda (and yes I do believe there are people on *both* sides of the debate who are in fact doing so).
I would hope that through debate I could at least convince you that there are people who believe AGW who aren’t communists, hippies, new agey neopagan greens, greenpeace activists (a group that I most definitely *don’t* support), etc.
Most of the people who constantly fall back on the Bush is an Idiot comment are in fact not nearly as smart as he is….If GW Bush is an idiot Jose then you are subpar for the category!
IDIOT!
Gee!!! What a shock. Thanks for connecting the dots Kate.
Well said William Lyon Mckenzie.
From slashdot.org:
“Most believe that the ice ages are the result of subtle changes in Earth’s orbit, known as the Milankovitch cycles. According to one scientist, that is not the case. Robert Ehrlich of George Mason University in Fairfax, Virginia, has developed a model which hypothesizes a dimmer switch inside the sun that causes its brightness to rise and fall on timescales of around 100,000 or 41,000 years, exactly the same period as between ice ages on Earth. The main problem with Milankovitch cycles is that they can’t explain how the ice ages go from 100,000 year cycle to 41,000 year cycle. The cycles predicted by Ehlrich’s model line up with the observations.”
Go to slashdot for a link to the article.
The question the anthropogenic climate change people can’t or won’t answer is “why are the polar ice caps on Mars shrinking too?”. The explanation above gives a reason that human-caused change can’t.
“The question the anthropogenic climate change people can’t or won’t answer is “why are the polar ice caps on Mars shrinking too?”. The explanation above gives a reason that human-caused change can’t.”
They have answered that. We’re currently at solar max. They would maintain that solar max doesn’t explain all the warming we’ve been seeing lately. If you’re curious check out realclimate dot org.
“If GW Bush is an idiot Jose then you are subpar for the category!”
Goodness man, have you no decency! Would you stoop so low as to accuse a man of being a bigger idiot than George Bush?
Jose, picture yourself in this chair….
http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/archives/004934.html
Kate- It’s encouraging to know that while Bush was sitting Vietnam out he was confronted with lots of buttons and knobs back home.
I see – so confronted with hard evidence that he isn’t stupid, your answer is to shift the goalposts?
Because flying one of the most dangerous fighter planes in the US military, during the cold war, is the sign of a coward.
I see.
You must have been really bent out of shape over Bill Clinton even presuming to run against a bona fide WW2 war hero by the name of Bob Dole.