tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7612793.post5470322818118596772..comments2024-03-27T23:59:49.801+00:00Comments on Stoat: Alsup: the Graun steps up to the plateWilliam M. Connolleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05836299130680534926noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7612793.post-62127193394549309832018-03-23T00:45:16.305+00:002018-03-23T00:45:16.305+00:00They don't pay well.
We have seen how little m...They don't pay well.<br />We have seen how little money is actually required to skew public opinion.<br />For fun I just had a look at Hartland institutes list of advisers. <br />https://www.heartland.org/about-us/who-we-are/?page=13&type=policy-experts&q= <br />How many of those familiar names are on retainers?<br />How many get retainers from their other affiliations?<br />120 million is SFA over eight years among the hundred or so at the center of global climate denial.<br />Especially when you add in conferences, travel,publications,lobbying,campaign contributions. <br />Its an industry.KiwiGriffnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7612793.post-24544489852550839742018-03-22T11:21:36.497+00:002018-03-22T11:21:36.497+00:00> Donors Trust and...
I think you need to be m...> Donors Trust and...<br /><br />I think you need to be more careful. The source for that is <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/feb/14/funding-climate-change-denial-thinktanks-network" rel="nofollow">https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/feb/14/funding-climate-change-denial-thinktanks-network</a> but I'm doubtful of its reliability. It says for example "The funds, doled out between 2002 and 2010, helped build a vast network of thinktanks and activist groups working to a single purpose: to redefine climate change from..." but I don't think that's true.<br /><br />They are counting funds supplied to "think tanks" which had any number of purposes, from GW to tax reform and regulatory matters. I think Suzanne Goldenberg has been lazy here, in which she is echoing many others. I don't think you can tell how much of the $120 million went to GW, or even if it was a significant fraction.William M. Connolleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05836299130680534926noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7612793.post-52252071979004289672018-03-22T11:04:04.547+00:002018-03-22T11:04:04.547+00:00"I think the rumours of individual "scie..."I think the rumours of individual "scientists" getting vast payoffs are just wrong."<br /><br /><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donors_Trust" rel="nofollow">Donors Trust and Donors Capital Fund distributed nearly $120 million to 102 think tanks and action groups skeptical of the science behind climate change between 2002 and 2010.</a><br /><br />That's just one funding route. And organisations active in hindering prevention of climate change disaster seem to draw from the same small list of people for their scientific advisers.Millicentnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7612793.post-29743454586727061282018-03-22T09:52:49.839+00:002018-03-22T09:52:49.839+00:00Yesterday I swear I found a convenient source for ...Yesterday I swear I found a convenient source for all the dox, http://climatecasechart.com/case/people-state-california-v-bp-plc-oakland/. But today that <a href="http://archive.is/Ln6vl" rel="nofollow">seems to have turned into junk</a>. Odd.<br /><br />I read the responses. Oh, but Monckers prose is prolix. Set him to digging holes in the ground.<br /><br />Millicent: maybe, but if you read the dox you'll see they are quite open. But that's no surprise: no-one would pay Monckers anyway; L has been Emeritus for ages, and so on. I think the rumours of individual "scientists" getting vast payoffs are just wrong.William M. Connolleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05836299130680534926noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7612793.post-66877635090897570892018-03-22T07:25:45.072+00:002018-03-22T07:25:45.072+00:00I was under the impression that funding arrives vi...I was under the impression that funding arrives via third parties so that links to the fossil fuel industry can be denied.Millicentnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7612793.post-84977267641976558282018-03-22T00:00:10.810+00:002018-03-22T00:00:10.810+00:00
The questions Alsup asked shows a reasonable le... <br />The questions Alsup asked shows a reasonable level of knowledge about the science behind climate change.<br />It was bait to expose the defendants methods. <br /><br /><br />Both denial groups who submitted were asked by the court to supply details of links or funding to industry groups. <br />http://blogs2.law.columbia.edu/climate-change-litigation/wp-content/uploads/sites/16/case-documents/2018/20180319_docket-317-cv-06011_request.pdf<br /><br />Replies<br />https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/4417034-Soon-Et-Al-Respond-to-Judges-Question-3-20-2018.html<br />https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/4417035-Lindzen-Koonin-Happer-Respond-to-Judges-Question.html<br /><br /><br /><br /> KiwiGriffnoreply@blogger.com